e e e e e e e e e e
e e e e e e e e e like to call this meeting the order good evening and welcome to the February
20 2025 meeting of the city of summit Zoning Board of adjustment my name is Scott lits and I am the chair of the Zoning Board of adjustment please rise and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance Al to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic
for which it stands one nation andice thank you in accordance with New Jersey New Jersey statute 10 col 4-10 adequate notice of the special meeting has been provided to a newspaper of record it's been posted here in City Hall this meeting is a Judicial
proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to the issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and decorum appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at all times for the benefit of the interested public this meeting is being live streamed on
the city's YouTube page and also broadcast on summit's government Channel which is Comcast channel 34 and Verizon channel 30 a transcript of this meeting is also being taken using video and audio so we need all speakers to utilize one of the microphones in the room
please note that the fire exits are to my right your left and at the back of the room where you entered the city has a listening system to assist the hearing impaired if anyone needs hearing assistance please obtain the system at the de and return it there after uh Mr
ball would you please call the role certainly Mr Steiner here chairman Lins here Mr Yuko here uh Mr Nelson here Vice chair Zan here Mr Kieran here Mr Malay
is excused miss chfo here Mr feskin here Mr Chuli uh not here and Mr ning here you have a for you may proceed thank you Andy ball is the zoning board's attorney Mr ball
advises the board members on matters of law is the key interface with the applicants attorney Mr ball do not vote on the applications U Stephanie suos who's was our longtime board secretary has decided
to retire from this prestigious post so we wish her well in her next Endeavor um and then for tonight Mr ball is going to pull double duty for us so he will act as board secretary uh and Zoning attorney for us
tonight also present are experts who are hired annually by the board to provide input to us tonight we have Marie rafay from cers Engineering also present is Ed snikes from Burgess Associates and he is our board planner these experts are are seated at the table to the right of the
board The public's left they also do not vote on the applications our board consists of seven regular members and up to four alternates all members can participate in the hearings tonight but a maximum of seven can vote most applications require a simple majority to be approved before we enter executive
session to vote on the application you will be advised how many votes are required each case will begin with the applicants or their attorney giving an overview of the application uh and the expan es that are required we then hear from any additional expert witnesses
that the applicant may have to help explain the application and why the variances are needed the board experts followed by the board members may ask questions of the applicant their attorney and the expert Witnesses uh due to recent cases running excessively long we strongly encourage
applicants and their experts to give brief and concise testimony so that we may get to as many cases as possible in a given evening once the board members the board professionals have completed their questioning the public will have an opportunity to ask questions this is not the time to tell us what you think
about the case that opportunity comes at the end of the hearing please be careful as how to phrase your questions they should not be proceeded with a statement about the case but should be a direct question to the witness also before you ask questions please clearly state your name spell your last name and provide
your address is important that our court reporter be able to keep a clear and accurate public record after all Witnesses have been heard members MERS of the audience have their second opportunity to speak at that time you may express your opinion positive or negative about the application then the public hearing is
closed and we enter into executive session where the board members will discuss the case and then vote you will be able to listen into our executive session but normally will not be able to participate I ask that each applicant and their attorney if present come up and give a brief synopsis of their
anticipated testimony tonight including the number of witnesses and whether or not they can finish their presentation within 30 minutes all right and to go through that process we will start with uh 83 West End Avenue I I believe that's going to be
carried yes yes so there they did have a request to carry until May 5th um is it anyone here for this application Denise bonfilio 83 Westend Avenue either for the applicants or in the members of the
public guess not so we get a motion yeah so we would ask for a motion to carry without further notice until May 5th did there request provide the appropriate time to act I didn't see it myself so I assume the city dealt with
that but I imagine they would have so we include that in the motion that they're waving the time frame to act until and if they don't it would come back to us next meeting right yes some moved second Mr
Steiner yes chairman oh sorry Mr Yuko yes Mr Nelson yes Vice chair Zan yes Mr Kieran yes and Miss Cho yes chairman Lin yes thank
you all right Hillary can you come up and just give us a brief on Oak and then run for the other two sure Hillary El from Dempsey Dy and Sheen representing ool school um so it should be 5 to 10 minutes just to introduce the two
exhibits um and then for can Brook um I'm thinking probably like a half hour 45 minutes okay great thank you so much and finally uh any representatives for 162 oakd Avenue there I'm Elizabeth cly I'm the
owner of 162 o ja and I'm accompanied by my architect David Rosen okay great you think you'll be able to absolutely will be far under half an hour all right perfect thank you so much all right thank you all right Hillary you're back
up thank you H good evening Hillary Al from Dy Dy and Shen representing the applicant oal School of the holy Child Inc regarding property located at 44 Blackburn Road and 72 Prospect Street block 3103 Lots 2
and three in the R15 Zone um after comments and concerns raised at the last hearing the applicant uh seeks to bifurcate the application to separate out and defer the proposed parking behind 76 Prospect Street from
the rest of the proposed improvements so that the proposed parking um can be revised to address the comments and concerns of the board and the neighbors um I would like to introduce exhibit A1 which everybody should have
titled the overall site plan exhibit 3 which is the proposal that the applicant is asking the board to vote on tonight which removes the parking area from the prop from The Proposal and restores that area of the site to existing conditions
it also reflects an updated zoning chart specifically the lot coverage is now proposed at 44.4% where 46 was previously proposed um and there is a 600t reduction in the disturbance of steep slopes it also
eliminates the variances related to the parking area and revises the number of parking spaces proposed on site um second exhibit which um everybody has is a12 titled overall
landscape exhibit 3 um that's the updated Landscaping plan that reflects the existing conditions where the parking area had been proposed and it incorporates the additional Landscaping by Tisdale and increases the calber
um size of the trees in the detention Basin as agreed to at the last hearing this plan has been shared with the Forester um who said that he's reviewing it um and if the board was to approve the
application it could be subject to his review and approval the improvements that are reflected in the revised exhibit and the proposal that the board is being asked to vote on tonight are related to enhanced safy accessibility and the provision of educational programmatic
space that is currently lacking to meet the needs of the current ool students these improvements are of critical importance in the furtherance of the school's Mission the proposed building additions and incorporation of 72 Prospect Street will not have any effect or change in
existing conditions to enrollment trip generation or off street parking and will in no way cause a substantial negative impact on the surrounding Neighbors or impair the intent and purpose of the master plan or zoning ordinance the constantly evolving nature
of Education requires a fluid development of schools themselves in order to continue to advance the education of children based on all of the testimony that's been provided the inherently beneficial nature of the use and the absence of substantial negative impact on the neighbors I would ask that
the board vote to approve the application as revised great thank you so since you introduced new exhibits we're going to open this back up to possible questions from our board experts and then from the
board itself and then the public and I just wanted to say the applicant and and the experts are here tonight if there's any questions thank you Miss s board experts do you have any questions or comments regarding this updated site plan so
um me just talk about and maybe this is something um can you talk about any changes in circulation now that we're going back to the way it was before there any it'll all be existing the way it is now yep
um and this won't change anything about any of the parking that is the student parking that's on the road that's going to it's going to remain as is yeah um has there been any reduction in any of the storm water
design that I probably would ask Danielle to come up and speak so she has not been previously sworn okay great if you please raise your right hand do you swear from the testimony about to given this matter is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do please state your name
spell your last name Danielle lrer l s c r i n i e r with Dynamic engineering thank you can you briefly describe your background and experience for the board sure I have a Bachelor of Science in civil engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology I am a licensed professional engineer in the state of
New Jersey and I have about seven years of experience in the industry and any boards you've appeared before recently yes I have in the state of New Jersey not this one yet though can you just name one or two briefly for the record uh Springfield thank you any questions from the board or would you like to uh
accept their credentials we will welcome thank you thank you appreciate it so my my question is that you're are because you're reducing some of your impervious coverage the storm water is the storm water staying the same right so the only
difference in the storm water design um the previous plan revision showed a previous pavement Basin within that parking area that is now no longer there so because the parking area is there that Basin is no longer there however um that was only designed to accommodate the increase in impervious coverage that
was generated just by that parking area itself uh so we don't anticipate a negative impact by the removal of that Basin overall in the design since that Park area is also removed uh the other basins that are proposed on site the above ground bio retention uh in the South and the other prvious payment
Basin between bonaventura and Conelly I believe uh those are going to remain the same they have not been reduced even though the impervious coverage has been reduced yeah I think that's all I had great thank you and chairman thank you um just
regarding uh the variances so what I'm seeing here is that there's an adjustment now to the steep slope correct um 600 ft less is that what you said yes okay and then also the um now the parking is no longer in the front
yard or at least correct is not the pre-existing condition exactly right okay so therefore the rest of the variances regarding height and so on so forth are all still in play right the and the lot coverage is also reduced was reduced but still a VAR correct correct
okay do we have the percentage on lot coverage is now reduced to 44.4% thank you thank you for thank you now I will open up to questions from the board for this witness no
no okay can we ask other other members questions or um if I think we want to try and keep it related to the changes in the site plan but if there's another aspect of this that another witness could shed some light for you
then yeah I think think we should go for it my my only question is um and I don't really know who to ask this of um what's the purpose of changing the Zoning for a 70 I guess it's 72 Prospect they own it already correct they're right but we're
asking to use it for school purposes so it could could conceivably become offices that was the testimony okay I I just don't remember okay thank you right thank you uh we will now open this up to questions
from the public of this witness sure come come on up Bix Allen Becker 92 Prospect uh Mr ball when I I understand the gist of the B for the motion to BU for Kate do they have to reapply for the variants or does that just get tabled and they can kind
of bring it back to they to re notify neighbors and any of the like now that they want to bring because they will come back at the parking lot and we'll have to fight it we'll have to do this whole song and dance again is it we haven't haven't gotten to that point yet it will be a motion of the board and those details will be ironed out in the motion for example you know the board
can bucate and you know if it is bifurcated and carried to another meeting for the parking portion that would be either with or without notice to the residents but we would either set a meeting date tonight or new notice would be required to be sent to the resident thank very much
sure anyone else seeing none all right thank you that's it okay great uh and then we will also reopen this to public comment but I would strongly encourage you to
give your comments based on the new exhibit that was um put in tonight with their testimony everything that you've said previously regarding this project is on the record and we have that so please try not to be repetitive if
possible thank you none okay anything to wrap up M are you okay great um we will now go into executive session Mr ball could you please tell us
how many votes we need sure uh you know there are de VAR is involved so five votes are required to approve the application um and I imagine you'd like me to go through the conditions of the ask as well uh so first we have our usual compliance with those conditions
noted in the board Engineers memorandum second um I did have a note here and I just want to confirm that we are retaining drainage jurisdiction for a period of two years after completion of construction okay um now I know we
had previously discussed as a potential condition entertaining A change in the 76 Prospect driveway but I believe we are not proceeding with that yes okay so that is not condition I will remove that all
right so our third condition is that the applicant shall comply with the fire chief's report um and now uh a fourth we didn't finalize the language but I know Miss s had proposed some language about the
lighting uh Miss do you happen to have that language um handy that you can propose here that I do um okay applicant in an effort to minimize light spillage off site will turn off interior building lighting by
10:30 p.m. except for emergency stairwell or other safety lighting exterior lighting is set on timers from Sunset to Sunrise which is necessary for Safety and Security of people and property as well as any essential Services during these hours any dim able
exterior LED lighting will be set at the lowest Lumen level setting allowable to maintain the security and safety of persons and property thank you so that would be our fourth condition fifth the applicant shall consult with the city Forester
regarding the revised Landscaping plan and the location of the proposed plantings for review and approval and um sixth I know we had discussed uh that the board shall retain drainage uh sorry not drainage Landscaping jurisdiction for a period of two years after the final fin
installation of landscaping yes okay Mr I a question are we voting on whether or not they're going to be able to whatever we're doing that and this is what this is this is that's what this is we're about to get right there so this that's okay it's two parts you beat them by
about 30 seconds okay okay sorry it's okay all right so those are the conditions and then we do have the applicant's request to bifurcate you know the parking reled aspect of this application to a separate hearing and
approve the remaining plans site plan with variance requests there um so at this point I would move the bifurcation with notice to the neighbors when they decide to come back okay can I get a second
I'll second that and just bear with me here because I'm on two separate pages sorry yes Mr Steiner yes Mr Yuko
yes Mr Nelson yes Vice chair Z yes Mr Kieran yes Miss Cho no and chairman Lin yes okay motion
carries so now since uh that motion carried we will go into uh executive session and have a debate conversation about um everything except the parking okay so keep that in mind that's what
we'll be voting on uh up or down so with that I'll open it up to commentary I'm happy to start it thank you sir um let me say first what I said at the start of this case Oak School is
a very important inherently beneficial use to the city of summit however sometimes even good uses grow too large for their property limits and this isn't the first time we as a board have seen this oakn made a good
case for the expansion of its buildings and the neighbors apparently are in support of that building request they have in my opinion reached the maximum that they will be able to accommodate on this site they've indicated that they will not be increasing enrollment and therefore
should not need additional space in the future while that may be true today education policy whether controlled at the federal or state level I am sure will change in the future I doubt that many of those changes will reduce the amount of space
required per student I believe they will be mandating additional space for the education of children and the private schools will be included in those requirements we'll be facing that in the public school system as well as here in the private CST again I would urge the
leadership of oakn to start planning for the future a future that includes a dynamic and modern Summit Campus which I think we're providing today but perhaps a satellite campus possibly here in Summit or in one of our
very good neighbors therefore I'm going to vote in favor of this application with the hope that the future of oakn is one that will not get more intense on this sub thank you Mr s Tom yeah I support the application as well I the
schools have been here for over 100 years so they've amply demonstrated that the property is suitable for its use and the neighborhood can accommodate it uh the proposed building improvements are positive in the sense they improve access for those with physical limitations and the new classrooms provide the school with needed
flexibility and scheduling classes and as Mr s noted the applic testified the additions will not be used in increase the size of the student population although the testimony also indicated it does fluctuate from year to year but no there's no intent to increase that uh many of the building improvements and
the variances are interior to the property largely and well screened and hard to notice from off the property we've heard uh expert testimony that storm water management proposed to deal with the building and lock coverage variances is such that the impact of surrounding areas will not increase uh
whatever problems exist now this will not exacerbate those and May in fact decrease them the signage variances are reasonable and will not be readily visible from offsite and I also uh accept the planning testimony that the property can accommodate the relatively minor increase in F and the tide variances
will not have a significant adverse impact on any of the joining properties so I can enthusiastically support the application and I'm also very happy it was bated Alison hi um for similar reasons that Mr um Steiner said um I agree with
a lot of the stuff says but I cannot support this application um I think that the school has um definitely um it seems like they've outgrown their space and it's just not right for this property it's a it's a it's um within a
neighborhood um and from the public comments um it's you know there's a lot of stuff that um affects the neighbors the lighting the you know the the whole atmosphere so I think um you know a suggestion is maybe take the lower
school put it in another campus which is a lot of private schools in the area have done um so it's I think it's obvious they're outgrown the space so maybe there should be some other thought so I cannot support this application okay and I'd just like to chime in for a second remind everyone um the school is
an inherently beneficial use and Our obligation as a board under those standards are if we don't believe that the application can be accommodated is first to impose reasonable conditions where it can be brought into an acceptable application uh so if any
members believe that those conditions are not possible to be imposed and it would be acceptable just keep that in mind in your deliberations and if there's anything further you think that that's not possible here um I just ask that those thoughts be placed on the
record um well I have um I have something to say about that as well I think I think all of the plans look great I think that the Landscaping the building this it makes sense from a a conversation right about the use and
functionality of the school but similar to what Miss chfo said has the school outgrown its space my my severe like strong reservation has to do with the drilling that is probably going to have to happen
because of the Bedrock on site I do not think that the experts testified to that very well said oh probably just a little bit of drilling and you know lower Conelly but we're not really sure I believe that for this type of application for what you're proposing to
do here that answer needs to be known um we have neighborhoods in Summit where people are struggling because we don't allow blasting in Summit as you know um and so people have had jackhammering in
their backyards their houses their Foundation shaking for for 46 weeks straight with maybe like a break a week break here and there um that is a severe impact to the neighbors it has been uh I think it's a tremendous issue we know
there's Bedrock on this site we know there's Bedrock on Manor Hill Road I think there's a house up on the street where they had drilling years ago so I think this needs to be explored before I could consider approving this
can she well this is executive session so I think no we're we're no there's no no further public discussion at this point I think that you know the the question was posed and it wasn't answered during the meeting so I think I do think this is very important there
are a lot of neighbors um I would not want to be the person who's there listening to the drilling and for and feeling it if that's what's going to happen so I feel like boring should have happened something we should have had more
information on that for all engineer can respond directly to your concerns now would that help you in terms of your decision making I don't know because I have I have to say that in the testimony this question was brought up about
bedrock and it wasn't it wasn't answered um and I it's it's stuck in my head that I know what's I know what other neighborhoods are dealing with and I want to make sure that this this would be something that would be a negative impact to the neighbors and unless there
are actual borings it's happening sorry if it's happening Mr chair is there precedence Mr B to suspend executive session to reopen questions we've done it before we have we have done it I would recommend that to the board given that we do have civil
Eng would it be possible to add a condition to your list that there be no drilling without specific testimony back to this board that's certainly a possibility now conditions we would have to ask Ms if
that's acceptable Mr Steiner before we go that route I would recommend that we open this pack up to ask the engineer because I will tell you if m misson is correct here that's something they're not going to be able to answer and I would rather get to An Answer here than have to come back to another
meeting before we open up but I probably would like to hear from the original engineer who apparently has significant more experience with this than our current part of you but one one testimony at one one
board can I ask a silly question um so someone has a no blasting ordinance or whatever it's called um is that their fault I mean are you going to tell someone they can't do something because there's an ordinance if if they hit bedrock and they have to drill well then
you don't make that addition the same way you do that's what you have well you don't have to you know that your other option is to not build I think that's the point if you're it is a I don't know if you're aware of of the issues going
on without you know you know calling specific neighborhoods into play but in that situation this was a case where you know there would be told oh it's going to be a week or a week and a half and it is much obviously much longer in
duration and it has had a tremendous impact on the neighbors and so that you know hearing that testimony about the Bedrock is something that I'm very um and and and I do appreciate the people from the neighborhood who all came up to speak and they know the dayto day that
we don't know and um that was one of the questions also provided by the neighbors for for reason so missan since you've made it clear that um your decision- making basically hinges upon this point
of contention I would like to suspend executive session so we can allow their civil engineer to testify and at least if possible address your concerns can I ask a question before we open it up the last um
meeting when when we knew they were coming back just and we were just going to do executive session I think I feel like somebody asked if the they'll be able to a chance for the public to have um comments and we were told no because it's just executive session is that right that was before they bifurcated
and so there was no additional um drawings or testimony at that point that needed to be opened up to the public to either ask questions to or respond with comments so but that changed when they
made their request and that's why we opened it back up after the new site plan and Landscape plan were submitted as exhibits but the any neighbors that we hear were when they were never told that this was they they were told when they left this meeting there will be no
more comments at this on this date because and but then something changed and we have now we have new plans that's correct because we didn't there wasn't an extra notice what's my point is that those neighbors were basically told you you you said your part you cannot say
anym because the next one we're not going to be able to say anything now we're having this meeting here and we're opening up the comments and I just think that is that fair that those neighbors were basically told you're not going to be able to say anything and maybe they decided not to come like it's almost like they didn't
get another announcement that this is well we we didn't know that the agenda was still here we could still come the case was still on the agenda but it was a very it's been a very robust neighborhood um conversation
ation and for them to be able to be told I mean I know I I think the neighborhoods had ample opportunity to make their feelings known about this case so I I don't see any reason why we would U Move This to another date to allow another comment session but we
have another testimony that's going to answer a question that there I mean I I just feel like you know we want to be I'm just to build on that I'm a little torn it's it's a great Point yes I don't know if there's an opportunity like I we need data to I
think satisfy some questions and we have someone here who can probably provide us with some information right if she were to testify yes there's bedrock and we're going to be drilling for 52 weeks I would think the neighbors probably want to have we probably want we can
certainly open this back up right now to um public questions and comments that's fine um before we reclose executive session you hear me out for a moment I would suggest that we open back up to hear the
testimony and if there is precedent for this and Mr Paul correct me you know if this is not possible I would actually ask that we defer based on whatever if if the testimony comes back that they may want the community may want to respond to ladder in the evening to give
the communication amongst the neighbors for them to attend if need be that's always a possibility so that way depending on the results if we do open this up to these to the engineer who is a licensed engineer in the the state yes if she can testify to answer Miss's
questions uh and of course the board's questions and if it's satisfactory if there's concern then I would recommend that we do that to give opportunity should and change the order of the cases so all right so there's opportunity for additional people to attend okay well
why don't we hear some testimony the executive yeah we need a motion for uh no okay have motion to go in so all right asked and answered okay please go ahead all right
so regarding uh the Geotech testing we actually did perform soil borns and they were submitted as a part of this application um I assume that was a part of the board Engineers review um so we're open to comments if there are any concerns about those uh the testimony that Mr Chanel provided at the last
hearing was that um the boring data showed that the Bedrock is lower than where we actually have to dig for the building foundations the reason he cannot guarantee that there will be no drilling or anything like that is because we have not dug up the entire site for the entire footprint of the building and due to natural conditions
of Bedrock we can't guarantee that there is no spot that is higher other than where we tested in the borings which is provided in the Geotech report I'm not sure we have a copy of the Geotech report can you outline where those Geotech borings were done um I don't have the map in front of me and I'd have
to show you visually but that is within the report um I'm not sure if this mcra it do you recall how many borings were taken this is for Connelly right it's for both buildings uh we we do that for every building Foundation designed so the testimony that their
Foundation is going to be higher than anticipated Bedrock Mr schnall did that he said it he phrased it differently so so um he he said something like probably very little we have a clarification now right but we don't know where the borings are so as
somebody who is an engineer and who has looked at plans I do think that it's important to know how many borings um were done and where were they where were the borings sure um I'd also just like to add that there are State Standards regarding the number of borings and the data that it provides based off of the
foundation design and all of this would also be reviewed by the engineering team and any construction officials a uh preconstruction meeting but do we have information on where the borings are Marie are you trying to pull that up
all right while we're looking um we're going to open this back up now to you don't have an answer quite all right I unfortunately don't have the appendix of the geoch report but I do have the geoch report which has the data in it uh we did nine borings it's important where
they are of course yeah does it tell you geographically where they are or is that in the appendix only that's in the appendix yeah it's a map it it should be a part of the application materials um it's a separate report right do the boring results tell you the
average that their Bedrock was discovered I'm sorry does the Geotech report the body of it tell you the depth of the rock discovered on average or at least the range would what they're looking for be on the city's website that's I look in
sh my computer with me I'm trying to look at my phone small for to I know be zooming out um it is a wide range depending on the location and I know that only means so much when we don't know where the locations are but it ranges uh 11 ft
deep 17 ft deep are there are there standards for you're going to make nine holes that how far you would spread them out is it over the entire um we definitely spread them out just to get a better idea of um of
the overall condition like I said we don't dig up the entire uh footprint area that's uh not really practical but we do spread them out to get um a good average this site is 124 Acres right so how many
um you know is there a standard it's not just I I wouldn't look at this as a per acre how many borings per acre because it's really in your work area that we're interested in um do you even know how many are around Connelly versus um T is
it Tisdale is the one with the gym or was that yes that's the one gy um the the overall site is only 10 acres oh 10 acres yeah I thought I and thank you I just got a photo of where the borings are located
oh it looks like there was two taken um in the T Southern Edition the larger Edition another one for the northern tll Edition two near the location of the larger Connelly Edition another two located in
the smaller Conelly Edition and there's a couple more located throughout the site just to get a feel for the entire area so when you say larger and smaller is that how does that which one's upper and lower and this oh oh right okay so
of the addition right okay and so you did two two borings in each of these locations that's correct and the depth to bedrock in the I guess what you're calling the larger
addition for to con actually I mean for all of them but 11 ft was the lowest depth uh no that was not the lowest um in the larger Connelly Edition um
near the parking lot area that test went to 25 ft deep and Bedrock was not encountered okay okay so where was where was Bedrock encountered at 11 ft and is there going to be Foundation there and you know what
is the see B4 is our lowest and that was located in an area where there are no building imprs so you did you tried to do like a toppo of Bedrock is that why you were doing like where you think how essentially um this happens very early
on in the process so sometimes we don't know how the application is going to develop maybe the client wants to uh change the design at some point so we like to get an overall idea so can you tell us where the where the highest bed rock you know the lowest point but the closest to the ground elevation is right
yeah that that is in the location I just described it's located in the parking lot near Grace Hall which is it's acoss okay so it's close it's close to Connelly okay it's uh it's actually on the
Northern side of Grace Hall okay and what is the what's the excavation depth in these areas of addition the maximum excavation depth I'd have to defer to the architect on that question including yes and you're still under
oath yes you repeat the question question um I I'm just wondering what the maximum depth of excavation is going to be to build the foundations for these additions and and I don't remember if there were basement areas any in any of these as well and well let's um you want
to start with um tisdall the further south building it is almost like a triangular excavation so the front of the building closest to Ashland would almost be at grade of the finished floor so the only thing below that grade is just the footings of that addition and
as you approach um up the hill it's is you know this digging out of a triangle Topo to get a flat floor plate so that maximum height of depth I think it's something like half of a story or 8 feet
so from 8 ft to almost zero adding to the footing depth so it's relatively from 3 feet up to maybe 10 11 ft as as a triangle approaches that side of tis doll front of sorry the north
side of tis doll um there is no basement so that finished floor of that new elevator stair core is really just the slab finish floor at the elevation of the existing grade so that depth again would only be FO 3 feet plus a little
extra to keep you know that Frost down so those footings is only like your residential home 3 feet 3 and 1/2 ft okay on low Conelly the same condition exists where the basement or the lower level comes out of the ground almost 6
feet and we have a 9t seiling so that depth would be maybe another 5T from grade down to the Finish slab of that low level slash basement again is is a triangle excavation as we approach upper Connelly so that depth would approach
closer to a full story of like 12 ft coming down to the triangle of like 5 ft again it's not uncommon to ask for additional borings not for zoning or Municipal approval just for Value engineering um and really we want to do
the best foundation possible the minimum amount of borings identified up front is really based on the size of the footprint and I believe it's something like 5,000 squ ft per boring and we just do a general probing just to get comfortable with
what conditions would exist again it's not uncommon for engineering to ask for additional board Bings so their Foundation designed is not overdesigned and obviously we don't want to be underd designed so the first initial boring attempt is really just a feeling of what
could lie ahead um what I testified earlier was we have not um taken that next step to actually sit down with engineering to design concrete Steel Etc to figure out how to hold up these buildings again just because we hit Bedrock doesn't mean the Bedrock cannot
be removed by an excavator you know where is just kind of clawed out and sort of nonivasive that Bedrock does exist as well as a Bedrock that you have to be more aggressive to to uh to remove it again the Bedrock is really only a
problem where we have columns obviously so you know the span of the length of the building you have a column every 32 feet so the 32 feet grid on top of the Shaded Footprints is really where that excavation needs to take place it's not a
continuous you know a aggessive gring out of grooving out of of the site on upper Conelly it's simply everything is above ground anyway so the only footings would be almost small isolated conditions to take columns to hold up to
hold up the building so I'm not saying it's not a good conversation to have I'm just saying more information is needed and I think from the initial round of borings there was nothing to deter us from changing
strategy about the severe uh soil conditions everything seemed to be pretty standard and pretty uh normal to give us a green light to keep going so again I don't have the answer about how disruptive this will be but again
nothing was discovered to make us change course can I jump in for a second there's a lot of technical testimony here about depths and yeah samplings and everything are there any areas where we have specifically identified that we will have to drill into bedrock at this point
okay um with that being the understanding currently I would recommend that the board considers a condition remember it's Our obligation to impose reasonable conditions here that if any bedrock drilling is encountered as part of this construction
process that extends Beyond a period that you deem reasonable that they come back to the board and seek further approvals at that point can we make it a condition that um additional borings are performed
before that because I think before you start drill like construction and you know the chances that you're going to find fractured bedrock and scoop it up with a excavators it it we keep our fing possible but you know it's also possible
that it's not going to be that so it would be better to have the information before you start construction I think again it's not uncommon to go with more borrowings to get a better Foundation plan I I think that would be that's kind of where I was going with my
question like it's not their fault they can't blast if they do find something that has to require more we could put some sort of requirement that they come back or notify somebody that's kind of where I going right so what is the requirement that we want to see here as far as additional revised Geotech report
submitted to the city engineer I think I think now that you know what the footprint of the building is maybe I mean and and Marie could probably give better guidance on that but just some especially where if near grece Hall that's where you had the highest levels
of Bedrock so maybe it's Connelly but maybe there's um more you know a few more borings around that building before any construction can begin and if bedrock is encountered then then there's another conversation
and that you know it's not proceed with construction until this has been and you know discuss like how is this going to impact the public go back we there's never going to be a blasting scenario I don't mean no no no I I didn't mean it that way my
point was my point was if if there was a way for us to get you to do and the more boring is the way to go right my point was let's find a way so you can do what you have to do but let's make it reasonable for the neighborhood as well yes thank
you all right um so we're asking for a revised Geotech Report with that'll detail additional borings and whether any bedrock drilling is necessary yes and are we asking for a limit if you
know one day of Bedrock drilling is identified do they need to come back to the board one week one month what is it that you know you want to see as a cut off well I mean right now the testimony is that there's no Bedrock drilling so I think if there's Bedrock drilling it
comes back back to the board and then we discuss the extent yeah Miss s is that acceptable yes okay thank you great all right so added that now as a seventh condition to the application okay um at this point we should open it
to the public for any questions on that testim so questions for this witness based on their added testimony only any questions from the sir please come up to the microphone please do that the
microphone Ellen Becker 92 Prospect I don't have a Geotech report do we know the blow count on that rock just to clarify it's probably not shist you know that you can just easily excavate could could you repeat the question we know the what about the rock
the blow count how hard is it two ton rock is it 10 ton rock is it 30 ton Rock do we know what kind of rock you're not that the board numbers we should be able to get the Geotech report added to the public documents right on the website it was
filed with the city so it should be I don't see it on there it's not it might be in there it's not shown as separate but we'll we'll get that updated so it's a separate link that stage Geotech so you can review I think for the for the would would you guys be open to like a
cubic foot limit of of of rock removal and then you be open to adjusting your foundations as such you may have to lose some Foundation because it's not just where the columns go if you need to excavate in order to get to where your seller is going I I think that's probably appropriate conversation for
when this the revised Geotech comes back and then we can and if they have to come back here then I think that's probably the right Forum to start asking those questions and having that conversation thank you thank you all right and then
public comments based on this testimony only seeing none all right now we're going to go back reclose go into executive session and continue and ask any board members that have previously
commented they want to revise their comments or add to their comments please feel free to do so I will add to my comments so yes um so I appreciate the you know the willingness to to find the
answers to this because as everybody as all the neighbors said ool has been a good neighbor you want to continue being a good neighbor and and I think the you know that's important so I appreciate that um with the addition of borings
that could be worked out with um our engineer we can I I would approve this application thank you Mary yeah um I can support this application um you know Oak's been in town for a long time uh some of the the
interior construction of these additions is really not going to affect the neighborhood that much um uh the lighting uh that they talked about earlier not having not not being able to turn it off for safety reasons causes me a little concern for the neighbors but uh maybe there's some workarounds for
that U but I think overall you know O is a good neighbor we've had some good good comments from the neighborhood they seem to be uh working things out so I can hardly support this great so again I think this is a good example of where this board and the applicants and the community are working
together to identify potential problematic concerns and working on solutions to find offsetting reasons where the the detriment is being mitigated which is exactly the point of having these these board meetings and
having the applicant go through this process the step we're just taking for the Geotech is exactly what I like to see in the willingness to work together to find Solutions because it is very clear to me the beneficial use and needing to
modernize and you have to make these kind of decisions but doing it with balance and with restraint and with cooperation is where I think we all work together into the future so while I may not be voting on this application I would certainly be supporting it thank
you Jay I agree completely with Jay it's a good a good process that we we've seen here where people are working together on all sides of the of the equation and uh I think the uh schools done a great job in their presentation and addressed all the problems that the neighbors and
the township just raised so I think it's really good example of the zoning board working with the community working with the customer thank you sneering um it's unfortunate that uh schools especially
private schools have um been dragged into an arms race where they're absolutely uh competing uh terms of campus and amenities and classroom space and so I'm sure uh the school and the board were
very tempted to uh try and do something very dramatic and bold and I I applaud them on their restraint I feel like they've they've struck a nice balance between trying to to make uh marked um serious improvements to their
campus that has obviously grown organically over the years wasn't planned at one time uh and for them to be able to uh present to us this very constrained and thoughtful approach to their future and their growth is greatly
appreciated um so I applaud them for that but I especially applaud them for hearing the community understanding in their concerns and trying to address them uh as much as they could so I think
Jay said it best if the board can facilitate that kind of conversation between the community and an applicant then we're doing our jobs uh so uh and if if you add um inherent beneficial use
to this I think for me this application as it's been bifurcated uh the improvements that they're asking for now makes all the sense in the world to me and I will fully support this so with that can I get a motion to
approve so moved with the conditions as noted second Mr ball Mr Steiner yes Mr Yuko yes Mr Nelson yes missan yes
Mr Kieran yes M Cho yes and chairman Lyin yes motion carries congratul thank you so much appreciate it and now just before everyone leaves I do want to just note it looks like the earliest that we would be hearing um any return on this
application would be June 2nd uh but again the applicants are required to provide notice once again so you will be getting a new notice of that application when it is officially returned long the earliest they can come back is
June 2nd 10 days before the hearing is when no noce is minimally required I'm sure they'll try to get it out as early as possible that's if you're coming back for parking for parking that's if you're coming back you don't necessarily we going to see what it may be next
November if you make that decision right correct but they'll be noticed regardless okay thank you thank you so we get to keep all of this stuff yeah I know I think it's GNA be new plans for
sure Joe yeah you can throw those yeah I think we can throw them Joe I think we can throw them out honestly I got to keep the building we're going to be back for growing what's the next would it make sense to do an easier
one or going to be EAS one that's up to Chairman I'm just trying to be cogn of some of the other yeah I mean I'm sorry that took a long but I felt like it had to be especially because the
I'm back Hillary take two all right uh small change to the order of the agenda tonight in order to not rush uh Canoe Brook we're going to ask 162
Oakridge to uh present their case right now really what whatever that good call 162 we can sare
while you can raise your right hand do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth please state your name spell your last name my name is Elizabeth cly my last name is c u l l e y thank you would you
like to present an opening statement or you gonna let Mr R allely talk right into here um so like I said I'm Elizabeth Cully I've been a member of the Summit Community for 12 years now um since my
husband and I my husband by the way wanted to be here but he came home from a business Tre very sick so rather than spreading his illness we thought he should stay at home with the kids uh but so we've been here for 12 years and since being here we've had three children and a dog
recently added to our household um we moved into our house about six years ago David Rosen was the architect of our house at that time we fell in love with the privacy of the property in the neighborhood on oakd we're only two
blocks away from Memorial Field my kids can ride their bikes to town we absolutely love where we are um our backyard is wung reservation we see occasional deer and foxes and we've seen
two bears since we've been here but we really love our home we love our neighborhood we love Summit we have no plans to leave Summit anytime soon and we are just looking to amend our household told to kind of fit within the
new covid rules where my husband does get to work from home when we purchased our home we he never did work from home previously he was either in the city or on the road he put an office during covid into our guest Suite on our third
floor um and he unfortunately has to be on camera from 7:30 A.M for his job and so having three young kids running around the house becomes a little bit difficult from a noise perspective or using our guest Suite when we have his
family staying with us which they often do um so that just kind of gives you a little bit of background what we're kind of looking to do this project and hopefully our wonderful neighbors have no issues with it we can't even see their houses we have a 50ft easement on
one side of our property and a massive hedge of large uh Green Giant AR provides that we planted when we built the house so we don't even see our neighbor and we can't see any other homes from this floor currently and with this new plan we shouldn't be able to see any other
homes either so hopefully the board will be okay with the plan great thank you so much do you s from the testimony you're about to give in this matters the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do pleas state your name spell your last name David Rosen Ren we
partner of Rosen Kelly Conway architecture and design in Summit thank you and for the record you've appeared before us quite a few times including very recently any changes to your credentials since the last time you were here no everything is good imagine the board would like to accept you once again very much welcome back Mr Rosen
thank you um I'm not sure whether I pluged things in properly or the connection do these work are they even turned on doesn't appear so don't ask me do we have the remotes they should be there with you here is this a remote for
these that's what they are that's the remotes and's really getting things done today there they go you got one wearing Three Hats I just hope Stephan left detailed instructions how to work everything uh that keep going I could press a power button we got one now try it over here
this will get in one over here don't press your left just give me the remote I'll do it over here they'll all be the same it's not that easy I've done this for years shall I begin while we're lights okay um this is a picture of the
front of the house uh this was submitted along with the documents in the application and the plan here is to add onto the back left corner which is not visible from the front I'll show you in just a moment where that is um and there
is a single variance for floor area ratio as we add this area in the back and then there's a question that has come up about roof lines uh which we'll discuss in a moment so in the back left of
the of the house we are adding uh a little bit more space about 120 square ft in order to be able to expand the primary closet um I'm just going to move as from the side the area that
we're looking at is the area um all right over here uh you can see how extens of the plant things are on the side of the house but in the area just beyond the chimney would be the um where
the new addition is and in order to do that we would um take the roof line that's that's coming out to the side expanding it back and then it comes up about 3 feet higher than it currently is uh moving around um to the back it's in
this back corner uh where it's a one-story piece with the sloped roof that would go up and we initially considered having a roof line that was relatively flat and that would have a 7ot or just
under a 7ot ceiling and that would avoid the flary ratio variance uh but we decided that it didn't look quite right and so so adding into that uh second floor corner that's closest to us between the main body of the house and the chimney we decided to bring it up to
8 ft High have the ceiling the same as the rest of the house have the roof line continuous so it all looked like it was meant to be that way uh in doing this we gain about 120 square ft it's actually 199 on the second floor and 61 squ ft on
the in in the attic space that's created as we extend that roof line up uh as Beth mentioned there are no neighbors behind you can see the property um that has the 50 it's a
little over 50 ft uh to the right of the house which is part of the Wong reservation Union County uh Park commission and then I don't have a map that shows it but I I was wondering how far the next neighbor is to the back and it's a little little over a mile because
you have to go uh sort of the reservation Route 78 the soccer fields more uh more reservation The Stables and by the time you get up to a house straight back on um in mountain side
it's over a mile away and so then looking even sort of a little bit more out the back and to the left it's still uh over a half mile away because of this area where it's just uh the reservation
and since the addition is at the back of the house it means to me that no neighbors are affected and with the height of the Landscaping on both sides that that's uh reinforced so the view of the front of the house the existing is on the top the
proposed is on the bottom and you can see a little bit of a dark area on the left uh at the top of the roof there that's the new piece that would be visible just as that roof continues up it's about 3 ft High we're continuing the existing slope up and so that Ridge
goes up in there and when it does we gain that uh we gain that 61 Square ft of additional floor area although it's barely perceptible um from the from the street uh going around to the
side uh sorry uh there is you can see the triangle has that roof it's a little hard to see but it gets up a little bit higher we also added a dormer and on the left side and there's some discussion about that and the roof line and the
issue there is whether there was a comment um about whether that roof line ought to be the same pitch as the rest of the roof or not um it was it was asked whether we
were trying to circumvent the uh floor area ratio statistic circumvent is not the word I would use but are we avoiding it absolutely that was the um the intent was to just not add an additional 46
Square ft up there uh it would not be visible from inside the attic and so we just thought that if we could have more of a flatter roof up there it would mean that the total variance is 1.1% instead of
1.4% but we're glad to do it um with the peak if that's the preference of the board it would be my preference but we had not submitted it that way in order to not have more floor area that um that
we didn't need the reason that there's more floor area is that even though the ceiling would remain at just under 7 ft High um floor area is measured from the floor to the underside of the roof
structure so as we go up higher there is that whole Dormer uh the inside of that Dormer would become floor area um let me just continue the staff comments the main one uh was this that the bottom
number two where it says the attic Dormer on the east side of the dwelling has a very shallow almost flat shed roof which is visible from the street and seems to vary from the other front Dormers and so on that's what we uh what we just covered the other comments are
all either sort of no comment or they're they're favorable John Linson says that the property is extremely well screened um we don't usually see that from him so that was nice and uh and no additional
Landscaping is needed he has no objections and then the historic preservation commission the representative said that the majority of the proposed addition is in the rear of the building so the front or Street facing elevation has not changed the facade
materials and fenestration that's that's the windows and so on Match the existing structure and are in keeping with the city's design guidelines the HPC takes no exception to this so then the kind of the last piece is that there was um
Stephanie suos uh sent an email uh that indicating that the planner had had a question and said it is questioned if additional variance relief is required for the proposed flat roof attic
Dormers uh pursuant to the relevant portion of the ordinance the applicant should be prepared to address compliance with this uh ordinance section and so here is that ordinance section
um where it talks about third line down design and performance requirements single and two family dwellings uh most of this in the beginning is not so relevant but then it gets to roofs and I'm just going to come down here they have pictures and the intent of this
ordinance I guess is to say flat roofs should be limited uh on houses and so they can there can be flat roofs or low pitch roofs and it doesn't I didn't see where the where it fully distinguished
between the two but in any case they indicate that on the the house at the top there that has a flat roof on the the wing on the right this next one um I'm pretty sure is not in Summit but it's a photo of what I assume was
considered undesirable uh for a summit and the one down here I I think is less desirable because of what it says in number two it says all single and two family dwellings shall have a minimum roof pitch of six
on 12 for a minimum of 80% of the dwellings total roof coverage so that means a 6 on 12 means it goes up 6 in for every horizontal distance of 12 and
that's a 30° slope a lot of houses in the 50s 60s and 7s were built with these lower pitch roofs it was easier for the roofers to work on because you could walk on them and not have the the risk of going off but they're not considered to be as
traditional as houses that might be from the 1920s or uh other eras and so this ordinance is limiting the amount that uh of how much a house can have of those
roofs that are less than 6 on2 now I'm just going to go back for a second to the photo of the front of the house Mr Rosen can we just go back to the ordinance I'm I'm reading through it can go the first page of the text the
one above the pictures y paragraph one uh yes so it does say yeah I'm reading it on my screen here flat roofs are prohibited on single and two family dwellings except on Lower tier roofs and shall not occupy more than 20% of the
dwellings total roof coverage uh so that this provision shall not prohibit the Reconstruction of flat roofs on existing dwellings to me it sounds like if it's on the top story it would be prohibit and it would need a variance and I'm
looking at Ed who's nodding his head here and so then my question and I have drawings um we had sent we had sent the drawing to Stephanie before she uh moved on to some other position um uh and so
she recommended that I bring the drawing they're signed and sealed and that I hand them out to everybody can I do that now those drawings are to be in compliance or not to be they are to give the the statistics as to what's what the
the reason that I can't give you exactly that answer is because I'm not sure how the ordinance is interpreted whether low slope roofs count so whether that front porch whether that front porch which has
a less than 6 on 12 pitch in a part coming toward the front right but going back to the zoning text it says lower roof right the lower tier roof would be covered by that you know the front porch would constitute a lower tier roof where it's not necessarily prohibited as long as it doesn't exceed the area but this
one being on the top tier of the roof would be prohibited outright right I'm reading this as it's up top or you should be asking forance right what do you want to do I want to ask for the variance for for the Dormer
that goes out to the back okay and there is a dormer that goes out to the back um which you have on yours and let me just so the variant would be for the flat yeah CLE you're asking for two
variances one is the F 1.1% and two would be for a lower slope roove on the yes the way that I actually uh read that flat roofs are prohibited except on
Lower tier roofs and shall occupy no more than 20% of the dwellings total coverage so does that mean that they're prohibited completely up above yes so even on ders so the lower if you have it on the lower portion you can only have that as 20% okay total roofe all right
Mr Rosen just just a quick question because I thought you said in your introduction that as an alternative you were also thinking about just asking for potentially more more F relief to eliminate the need for a flat roof Dormer you decided not to
because for the one that goes to the to the left side correct right that's the one we're talking about but that adds well there's that and there's one in the back there's one in the back that has a low roof got it okay yeah and and the reason I'm I'm not sure about the ordinance and how to interpret is
because they make a distinction it seems the flat roofs which I would think was that middle picture of that sort of boxy house versus low pitch and I don't know where the distinction is I'm not sure what goes from Flat if it's if it's one
on 12 is that flat or is that just a low pitch that kind of thing and so I I the ordinance I have never um really encountered this before this ordinance apparently was passed about four five years ago I don't mean to cut you off
walk us through what you want and if we're clear I'm now clear than so you're a question you've got a low pitch on the upper door on the side dmer you're in compliance with a pitch and you're asking for square footage there's two places where they're expanding both of
them have L is there any way to not have low pitch GRS on I know there is on the doorm right do you have the other sign so I'll just note that we'll be marking
this as A1 Mr Rosen thank you Mr Rosen if the board was willing to entertain it would you consider a a redesign where both instances of the low pitched group
are uh changed or updated even though it means increase of F and the board will take that into consideration it works on the side one it doesn't work in the back okay you're okay so the Dormer cannot
have a 6 to 12 because it's relative relationship to the very top of the roof there's a dormer in the back on the top level there that's already there it's already there yes you're you're matching that we were matching that by
extending that in the photo to the right the ordinance also talks about matching roof lines and so we were just matching that going across so that existing Dormer there would be considered a low a non 612 correct and was a a
variance granted for that when this was built so we probably would have to include no no it because it wasn't the ordinance wasn't a new ordinance that was permitted got it got it okay so so what we were doing was extending that in
order to provide more space for the office that has a an area of low pitch that's 180 sare ft the new piece would add 190 squ ft to that um and so that the I'm sorry that it looks like
these didn't print well let me just tell you the numbers 20% of the building coverage um or this what's allowed here is 514 Square ft the total counting the front porch
and the the Dormer at the back and the Dormer to the left side is 700 711 the part that's on the upper roof is 425 so the upper roof portion if that's
considered a low pitched um roof rather than flat and I have no idea what what the difference is in this because it doesn't say um but the 425 on the upper roof would be compliant with being less less than
25% but if we're counting the the front porch as well then it's not because the front porch is 286 even if we change the little Dormer that's going off to the left side um that 46 Square ft would still leave us
with um 6 roughly 660 or 655 Square ft of less than 6 on 12 roof so since we're incorporating this
and touching the existing Dormer we should apply to all of it to Grant the variance of a not because it's modifying a non-conforming use apparently the first Dormer was conforming but now it's not right correct but you're modifying it by expanding it but not it's not like
you're adding a separate Dormer no it's the modification that's being most likely Vance condition so the preexisting is staying and it's not changing in any way it's just being expanded correct yeah we were just matching that coming across so the variance is related to the expansion of
of the and in the photos one of the things to notice is that it would not be visible I don't think from anywhere and that the neighbor to the back it's not visible from the front because it's on the back roof and that the next neighbor
is way in is in mountain side on the other side of Route 78 and the Wong reservation so the only visible one would be the side door correct and and that one I thought it was an interesting point that the planner brought up of could that be the the have the same
pitch as the rest of the roof so yes okay architecturally desirable yes okay I would prefer it we were just doing prefer but then that goes back to the attic what result the it it it doesn't get a variance to
do that it just may it just changes 1.1% F over to 1.4 correct changes so F would go from 1.1 to 1.4 yes by just this one side dmer correct and then it would match the one it's a little hard to see
but on the far right there's a little sliver of white and so the Dormers would look U essentially the same on both sides all right so just to be 100% sure that I have everything noted correctly very for floor area ratio at 1.4% over
what's permitted yes and then a variance for the flat roof on the Dormer to the rear of the property is what correct so is it low pitch or FL I think there is a pitch so I would say low pitch it is not defined in the code our code says flat right our code
says flat roof is prohibited it doesn't tell you what flat is whether one less than 6 over 12 right so I think for the purposes of you know arguably I think they could get away with it by calling it a low pitch roof but let's be safe
and just I thought low pitches were prohibited up top no is prohibited up top so out of an abundance of caution let's just say we're considering it as a variance from the flat roof pitch flat
pitch roof provision and say we're going to be incorporating that into the application that would be great so long as the it doesn't come back that flat and low pitch you can have one and not the other I think that you've you've said it properly that's fine thank you
Mr roosen do you have any pictures with the um the side Dormer the way which that you proposed that originally like if it was with the with the um Pitch through uh I don't have um sorry let me
just see I don't have that but I have this is the Dormer that's on the right side of the house I can make it bigger if you'd like but you can you can see it and so it would have although the one that
we're adding is a little bit narrower it has two windows not three but it's the same shape you're going to replicate or try and design same picture the addition In The Same Spirit yes okay great um I hate to be a stick in the mud but aren't we kind of designing a house on a
fly we do that sometimes yes what we're doing is we're changing that little piece of I mean these are comments right that came back from yeah we're making it more aesthetically pleasing from the street yes right as I've been writing in
the annual report we improve obligations okay we improve the reason why it may not been done from the beginning was because it was our add as a that's probably all right so um and just one
more question for Mr Rosen now knowing that that is the plan for the 1.4 over can the site accommodate that proposed increase in floor area ratio you're asking if I'm okay with it in your opinion can accommodate absolutely yeah I think it's better looking with that
roof and it was it was it was in order to avoid the an expansion of a more complex variance uh with the F the floor are ratio is a d variance requires five votes and I didn't want to make that one bigger
that's why we uh that's why we did it that way thank you Mr Rosen questions from our board Professionals for this witness um I just want to confirm that there's no additional coverage added to the property that's correct so as a result there
station that's re thank you just another quick question with regard to that rear you're trying to match the pitch and the form of that rear space today you're not be doing anything other than that and that the visibility of that I think as you
testified was really from the rear of the property and would that form be visible to the neighbor I don't think that it's visible from the neighbor um at any time of year because the arbide are not deciduous
trees I think and and with the height of those um you can see in the this photo how far back they go and if we look on the side in the they get actually a little bit taller as it goes towards a chimney it's it's it's back behind there
it's not on really this part of the roof so I think that it's it's it's essentially invisible about as invisible as something can be you know to a nextdoor neighbor and the fact that there's only one other neighbor to this
to the left side there's nobody beyond that um where the reservation is on that side of Oakridge Avenue so again the site yes definitely yeah and it doesn't pose any adverse impact on anybody else doesn't change the streetcape the the
feeling of of this property in this neighborhood and I think that it's uh for the reasons that are mentioned in the project narrative I think that it works I I think it works really well and provides the the office space uh that
John Coy is uh would use thank you thank you questions from the board for this witness right seeing none questions from the public for this witness seeing none
any public comments about this case being n anything you'd like to say in conclusion this would make my husband very happy well said he works very very hard
and he puts in a lot of hours and he it and thank you to can Brook for allowing us to stay yes thank you all right with that Mr ball can we get the number of votes and the conditions so there is a
floor area ratio variance involved so five votes are required to approve the application um I don't believe there's an engineering memorandum is that right okay so I do not have any conditions noted for this application excellent thank you um with that we will go to
closed executive session just to be clear we're go he's going to match the Dormer on okay without without plant we're fine with that okay yes okay yeah or or maybe you're not fine no no I am F I think I didn't I didn't like the
way it looked in the pictures I thought it looked horrible looked like a wall but I'm I'm glad that we came to a good compromise you know I think this it's a great better solution if anyone can fix it Mr Rosen can yeah so so you will be just basically increasing the roof all the way
across from the this is a discreet area in the back in the back the dmer the Dormer in the back would go the dmer in the back will extend farther across but then there a side Dormer yeah so we went from was it 119 Square F feet to now 10
what let's go this one the floor area ratio variance was was 180 Square ft Al together 119 on the second 61 on the in the Attic um that big Dormer in the Attic does not have floor area because
it's less than the height uh that would require it to be counted and So within that side Dormer on the left which we had had we had positioned so that it did not have floor area when we raised the roof up we add 46 Square ft so we're
going from a total of 180 to 226 Mr Ros would you say that the uh as you improve uh the roof line to accommodate this addition would you say that uh if you left the current Dormer
where it was that it would be off center and make sort of that back facade the rear Dormer would definitely be off center yes as we extend the house to the side are we in an executive session or we or we back out of it again no we
didn't start now we're we're in okay because I I thought no I thought I thought Alison started it sort of was she yes we make it official I can start well you to start I I okay
I'll I'll start it it's fine once again David has given us an excellent presentation uh and we have tough time we had a t tough time spending a half hour trying to improve it uh but we found one little thing to do that with and uh I think everything is absolutely
in order and I hope Mr kly enjoys his new space thank you Mr CER anyone else I oh sorry I can support it just for the reasons I said before when we were lot lot better um visually on the
street I was going to say similarly I um I'm actually surprised that the plan came in looking like that because it it almost seems like it was meant for the board to say put a roof on this right because I
mean 1.1 versus 1.4% of FL area is not that big a deal but I mean everybody looking at that that would it's sort of like an eyes sore that one Dormer was so I'm glad the roof is is going to be extended but it
probably would have saved some time to just come in with it really could have been 10 minutes if you just came in with the roof looking 1.1 1.4 if it's a compelling reason right um so I just figured you know it it didn't look right I'm glad that that part is being
addressed and I can support it with the roof extended I can support this I just was trying to figure out how we got there that's all that's all so my concern um in conclusion I can understand why Mr Rosen
was showing constraint considering that even though this the roof line was relatively low pitched it was also almost 30 feet in the air and um not really visible to anyone um but I appreciate uh Mr
Rosen his client uh hearing the board willing to make these accommodations for what we believe is a better project um and with the improvements made to the interior use of the house I think it's it's easy to support this application
and with that can we get a motion to approve make a so move second second just one Mr Steiner yes Mr Yuko yes Mr Nelson yes
Vice chairwoman Don yes Mr Kieran yes M Cho yes and chairman Lin yes motion carries congratulations thank you very much thank you for your time everybody thank you you guys one time for Break 5 minute
break yes all right we going to take a five minute break e e e e e e
e e e e Shing all the time when I here depending on where you sit can be a little bit but my snuggy that's next time I'm
coming with you're snuggy wow all right can you get us up to speed on canra Country Club yes hello again I'm Hillary ol from Dy Dy and Sheen representing applicant new Brook Country
Club the owner of property located at 30 Wallace Road Block 901 lot one in Summit and um 1108 Mars Turnpike block 5304 lot one in Milburn Township I want to thank the board for allowing the applicant to revise the proposal to address the
concerns from the neighbors and the board at the last hearing the applicant has reduced the proposed number of bedrooms by 25% and has increased the size of the proposed bedrooms Wayne Jax and Kyle Smith are here to highlight the changes
to the plans and the planner McKinley MZ is also here to provide some additional planning testimony so with that unless there's any questions I can call the first witness please okay uh Wayne Jax and just confirming you were
previously sworn at the last hearing yes all right so you remain under Ro go ahead okay thank you um can you describe for the board the changes that have been made to the architectural plans in response to the comments by the neighbors and board members of the last
hearing yes um the exhibit that is up is sd2 which should be part of your package that shows the the ground floor plan which is not changed it just notes the existing maintenance part of the building the three existing bedrooms with a single bed each in them and the
new stair that was the same as was proposed in the previous previous meeting um Square footages were updated a little bit they were just um to coincide with what was on the Civil civil drawings so there's
some minor modifications to the square footages the next exhibit is SD 3 which is the SEC second floor plan this has the modifications that we um reviewed U we reviewed with the club after the previous meeting with the concerns from the board and the public so this is
where we produce the bedrooms on this floor from 12 to 9 so there's now 18 beds on this level as opposed to um 24 so we reduced the overall number of beds the rooms increased um small numbers
between 10 10 and 20 squ ft per room and the restrooms increased in size a little a little bit and additionally also um the square footages um overall square footage on this floor went down 222
Square ft um based on the revisions of two losing two bedrooms and some gain in square footage from the other nine remaining so now we in in the previous example we had total of 27 beds now we
have a total of 21 beds um the the the next next sheet is a rendering which was not part of your package um would this be exhibit one um no A7 A7 okay so this is a rendering
from kind of the north east corner so this shows what it would look like the main Dormer off to the front um in the previous example we had uh smaller roof changes to the right and left of that which were the additional bedrooms so those have been modified so you just
have your main body of the roof on the North side with one Dormer with the three bedrooms in it I just want to jump in briefly I am looking at an exhibit list that the city has it looks like we have A7 already okay s was at the uh November 4th hearing so we'll mark this
as A8 okay I apologize um the overall height of the building remains um what it was in the last last meeting um it's 4 in lower than the existing roof so it's basically the same as as existing um it's not easily
perceived um doesn't exceed the height um it's difficult to see this from most of the neighbors um just juming can you just tell the board what the height is oh sorry um 34 .1 ft and the existing is
34.419584 lighting so that is a single light fixture and that would be um per per ordinance what's Allowed by the by the town for that and it would be um 3500k for color range or less so it' be
more of a daylighting bulb and and uh bright so that light will comply with the ordinance yes it will perfect um and have you had an opportunity to review the administrative comments based on the revised plans and if so can you address those comments yes
I believe we addressed the um the comments that were made we reviewed it with um with canra Country Club to review the comments and make sure that they're good with the 25% reduction in rooms and um I believe we address the comments that were made in the previous
meeting and with regard to the construction officials comments uh does the applicant agree to um comply with those comments as a condition of approval yes that's it thank you can I confirm the
proposed height you said 34.1 yes so it's being reduced from its current 34414 point1 correct thank you great and it's also obviously an existing two-story building thank you U with regard to the
uh the roof itself as you had just clarified 34.1 is it's the the highest point on the roof yes okay than and so the total number of
yes okay thank you great Mar do you have anything for this Witness I don't think I have any questions for this witness great thank you so much questions from our board for this witness um yeah I've one and I probably should have asked Miss s could you
summarize just so we're clear what all the variances are again or you want to do that at the end whenever no sure I can do that so they need a use variance to permit um the employee housing and then they need a variance for the height
and number of stories of an accessory structure 15 feet and two and one story is uh permitted and they are seeking 34.1 and two stories um and then they also need a modification of a condition
of approval from the 2005 approval which limited this building to only having three employees so then the only change from prior state of the application is um a lessening of the variance of the number
of rooms or right on the the height um is 34.1 Ft anyone else questions for this witness yeah one of the things that troubles me is this is basically a dormatory you call a room dormitories um going back uh you know
dormatory fires are an issue is this building sprinkler fully sprinkler it would need to be based on based on on the design I mean on the the use okay good um is there going to be a fire department connection somewhere I assume there would be yes sir all
right and then um what do we what do you so right now there's no one housed in this building at all right this is no there is there's three employees there's three on the first floor it's only the first Flor okay all right thank you I other a question so was that the three employee
housing that we have was that a a Dev variance that was the previous app prly approved in 2005 and there's also other employee housing on this yeah there's another the I used to call it the yellow house I don't know if it's still yellow still there
okay okay that's it um I have I do have a question about the the plans so um I I understand that in 2005 uh they there was some stipulation that there not be a
kitchen or something like that I I think that this is obviously asking us to overlook that 2005 said you're not going to have any more employees on the site this is the cap and so now we're trying to change the cap and we're trying to
incre that that was stated right and um in addition to changing the cap we're we're having an actual dorm now cuz that's not three people living there with no facilities for these people I mean I realize that there's a kitchen in
the country club but it's not like it's not necessarily accessible why wasn't why wasn't that part of the plan I mean even a college dorm has a kitchen you know I'm just I'm surprised that wasn't included for that many people that would be I don't think the applicant is
opposed to that if that's something that the board I along those lines um can you answer like how long how many hours do these workers work I'm I'm actually looking trying to find out they
off hours like what like okay see work obviously we don't work and just go to bed I mean where where are you between your work hours and where are you doing your Recreation where is is there I mean there's no common I mean this is there a common area it doesn't seem like there common area there's no outside space
there's two lounge areas but I can yeah so generally uh the hours Change Daily based on the business level of the club normal hours uh of our restaurant are uh 11 11:30 to 3: and then 5:30 till
whenever 9 or 10:00 at night we do have Banquets that run different hours we have events that start earlier um but the you know the staff is generally on property for the entire day uh some split shifts some single shifts
per day uh we do have a a employee break room in the main Clubhouse on on the north side of the property where they get two hot meals a day lunch and dinner excuse me if there is an early morning function that they have to work then a breakfast is served as well there's two
um common areas that are in this um renovation or in this structure uh and then as I said there's the employee lounge which does have beverage service and TV service in the main Clubhouse on the side and how many days a week are they
working um depends again on business levels uh we we try to you know have people work 45 50 hour work weeks it depends on them whether they want to work more or less we you know we given
that these are generally um as we stated in in the in the first uh go around uh h2b and J1 Visa employees uh so they are here to work uh and generally want to work as many hours as possible while
they're here uh but we you know we we allocate time for time off for for sick time for um personal time off we you know we accommod seven days a week I mean they'll have days off during the week sure sure so then those on those
days are they still um able to have the two meals yes a day if anybody that lives on property gets the two meals a day whether they're working a shift or not so then where's breakfast I mean know you said two meals I mean if you're if you have no cooking facility um and you're not you're not providing
breakfast what are they what's the option well again if we have an early morning function that breakfast is supplied but if not then no breakfast is not part of the dining dining program for the club so where I mean they don't would like to well there's public transportation there's there's bus
service there's isn't there a refrigerator yeah there's a refrigerator in the common area there there's a refrigerator that you know where they can keep you know cold food there's cabinets where they can keep dry storage food um you know there there's the ability to keep keep products there I
was not under the impression that a kitchen was allowed in this structure um we could certainly take a look at it to make those amendments if this is something that this board would would want us to look at but um yeah we you it's
it's it's something that we you know we we can look at yeah I'm yeah I'm just I'm just confused I'm just wondering like I said if you even if you do have the refrigerator in the cabinets and you're not stocking it the kind book's not stocking it with you know Staples packets of oatmeal be on their own just
like if they lived in an apartment offsite and when most you said we you stated that they won't be having cars because a lot of them are um International um employees and won't be coming with cars and we know that there's no public transportation here where how they how
they get into shop right well there is public transportation that they could get to from the north side there's a bus stop at at the corner of our property in the Short Hills Mall uh there's Ubers there's lifts we intend to supply every employee living on that side with a
bicycle that they could ride back and forth to the north side because we want to eliminate as much as possible any traffic going out the gate onto Wallace Road um that will be a stipulation to anybody living there uh certainly the
staff that works on on a grounds maintenance staff that currently go in and out of that that gate will still be allowed to do so so they will have access to public transportation and private transportation from the north side should they decide they want to
leave the property okay and all deliveries are going to all all deliveries come to the main clubhous okay other than again Grounds Maintenance deliveries that have historically come through the gate on Wallace Road okay and do you now have
shortterm or in the last couple of years have had any employees commit on visas no we haven't okay this this program is designed specifically due to the difficulties in in hiring Hospitality staff all in our area and around the
country and the expansion of the h2b and J1 V have you had any shortterm employees like seasonal though like six mon we have so where do they live they live we have housing on the North side and the yellow house I think it was mentioned uh we do have some employees
that are there just for the season we have some locker room attendance so when the golf course closes down for the season they travel back to their homes as well as some of the grounds maintenance staff that lives in the yellow house and are any of them housed off of canoe Brook's
property a number of our employees don't live on property so yes they have their own they have their own residences or I mean the ones that are shortterm seasonal yeah some of some of again we we have SE some seasonal employees that
live in homes and live in apartments not supplied by the club um I have a question do you have rooms in the main Clubhouse for like members if they need have eight guest rooms uh in the main clubhouse that we
rent out to members and guests okay was that considered maybe using those instead for no no it's just just because it's a it's a member amenity that that we wanted to keep that way and are they
used all the time those we we run again given the limited number of them we we run I believe in 2024 we ran an 85% occupancy for the year of those rooms and those are customary for most clubs right yes are there going to be any um Prov um
I don't know what the word I'm looking for no microwaves no there is a microwave there is only one so none in the none in the rooms just one in the comment area is that going to work correct we would prefer not to have them in the rooms but are you going to are you going to um make it an a rule that they can't do that in the rooms we do
regular room inspections our security department uh does regular room inspections to make sure that our our our employees are abiding by the by those policies and you get inspected by the fire department once a year yes we do at least well hopefully at least once a year
yes okay um board professionals do you have any questions for this witness no all right um Mr chairman did we um ever finish with the parking issue last time where we were talking about uh
event parking and Wallace Road and whether or not there was a possibility of sharing that with uh our your sister municipality in Milbourne we do you do so sometimes sometimes you don't allow
parking in Summit and allow it only in on major events it really depends on how much of the staff we need to offsite if it's just a few cars then yeah we will go back and forth uh with with the different municipalities but we're not talking about the employees now we're talking about the guests cuz getting
tons of people understand You' been asking the police department for permission to park on Wallace Road are you asking the Milbourne Police Department for permission to park on other areas and getting giving Summit some relief for various
Events first of all sir we don't offsite parking for any members or guests as staff only is when if we have major events where we need to utilize the entire parking lot of the clubhouse for an event only staff is asked to park off site and yes we do work with both
municipalities where we ask for permission for our staff to park on the on the streets in the neighboring areas all right sure that was clear last time not to me anyway I thought yeah I did think that last time there was talk about uh that excess overflow was on
certain events was on the streets and it happens all the time because they can't you know have a big event doesn't happen so your testimony is that the excess overflow is for the employees employees only open up the parking lot for correct okay and I would not say it's all the
time I I would say 12 to 15 times a year we talking about major events yes and and it's it's in Milburn and in Summit and and in Summit yes okay did we have um you mentioned bicycles that all the um workers were going to get bicycles I think that was
new to me I didn't know I didn't know that that that was uh I don't know recall hearing that um did we were we talking about bike storage did we ever resolve that so there is a bike rack that's proposed which the engineer will talk about okay so and um let me just
finish that and in climate weather we have what we call a people mover van we're not going to make them ride back and forth in the rain um to to the other side of the property we would move them with uh with a van okay so where so there's 27 people live um 27 beds
correct 21 21 oh 21 I'm sorry 21 instead of 27 so 21 bites correct okay how many occupant I'm sorry 14 14 um storage areas for bikes but every
beds get bik we we would have 14 bicycles available for the residents of of of that building okay so everyone's not getting their own bike cor just bike shares yes if I may how many occupants are in the yellow house six do you see that increasing or
just staying the same actually so we're we're still at the 27 just well in this building we're talking about just this total there's 27 possible and you said that the the the your employees these International employees will not
drive correct they they could though they could bring their own vehicle if they I I would find that highly highly unlikely um given that it's shortterm 9 to 12 month stints with these visas they could but we do have um enough parking
on the summit site to allow that and we're not seeing seeking a parking variance okay uh questions questions only from the public for these two witnesses please can you come up please state your name spell your last name and give us your
address hi thank you Barbara V vi v is in Victor I TTI 38 Cano Brook Parkway I've lived there for 31 years so I know what's going on um my question is you just I have plenty of comments for after
but my question is if some people do have cars um and they they get cars from however um and they you have plenty of parking in that area where all those car are how do they leave the facility so at the last hearing the
applicant agreed to a a condition of approval that they would have to enter and exit from the mbour side their cars can go through to the mil burn side how is that policed how is that monitored how will that be monitored it
would be monitored by my security staff and what can you walk me through the process of that like how how often are they on duty 247365 and they are constantly going around the property making the rounds they have to keep punches so that we can
track you're going to need to use a microphone we're not picking you up at that so we our security department uh is uh 247365 uh we have regular uh monitoring of all of our property um we've actually
had to recently increase that monitoring due to some uh vandalism on the south on the south course so uh they are there it we have an employment agreement that every employee needs to sign uh that if they are found to be violating any of our policies uh they could be subject to
termination um in h2b or J1 does not want that to happen because then they would be forced to to go back home so pretty significant ramifications if they didn't abide but do you have any experience
with this didn't you say didn't you say that you don't have any experience with these with these this is the first time you're doing this this is this is our first time using h2b j1's we have experience with employe on the property both on the
North and the South uh that do sign the same emplo uh housing agreements that we do monitor so we do have experience with on-site employees with these policies and the policing of the policies uh as
as stated earlier this is our first for a into the h2b and j1s but in Communications I've had with over 25 clubs that do have these programs I have been educated as to you know what the
policies and procedures should be and how how they are enforced will you be increasing your security because you're going from six I don't even know how many people you have living there now I thought it was only three but six to n people to your plus
your additional 21 to 27 people um will you be adding to your security teams no at this point we don't feel there's any need to increase the amount of security staff on site my comment will be thank
you can I ask a question about what was just discussed or should I wait I just have a question sure regarding this go ahead the the people the um workers that you're hiring are any them going to be security or there all no no they would they would no our our security is all
either current or retired law enforcement and First Responders okay thank you hello Paul Dean uh 61 uh Wallace Road Summit New Jersey um I'm sorry you have to give me your name I didn't catch
it okay and you're the general manager okay um I know that the application The Memo from kier's engineering caus this application for proposed staff housing uh item 13 of his report he said the applicant should provide testimony
of the intensity of the staff housing use will it be uh yearround use question mark will the rooms be rental out for members use other on-site functions were used as short-term rental he after that initial comment
after the last meeting he added the applicant provided testimony on the November 24th 2024 public hearing the applicant is proposing to utilize internet National staff in the hospitality industry with work visas the
applicant testified that if the applicant cannot fill the beds with International staff then they will fill them with local workers April through October is when all beds should be filled so what's your testimony in terms
of using local workers if you don't don't get these International staff especially given the problems with visas are ongoing right now for H1 visas and everything else I I should have used the term
rather than local in country workers because we do uh there are programs throughout the United States where clubs share staff seasonal clubs share staffs there so clubs down in Florida that have staff during their busy times that don't
necessarily need them during the slow time in the summer they would be able to come up and work with us and then they would be filling any beds that we haven't filled from the J1 and H2 BS okay um that you only talked about
October April through October isn't it reasonable to assume that there'll be occupancy of these units between the time of October to March and it won't be with International staff and we don't know who it will be no the the we would hope that the
rooms would be able to be occupied the club is open 46 weeks of the year so we we do have Peak periods between April and October but we do have we do have need for staff throughout the course of those 46 weeks which are mid no
mid-February through the end of December the way the programs work whether it's J1 or h2b is you can stagger the staff as they come in uh but it would certainly be our effort to have every Bed full for those entire 46 weeks
okay from October to March so it's more likely it won't be International students the other workers yes it could be well you you testified earlier April through October so that's your testimony and so oober he's revising I'm revising my testimonies because
I reason we'll expect that these uh workers will have guests coming to see them U delivery friends coming over driving into the clubhouse to visit them at their new occupancies so I think that there was
testimony at the last hearing about this um I'm listening to my attorney because we did I did I did test well and I did testify to that earlier that we have stated that we have visiting hours of
when people can be there everybody that is visiting will be subject to the same policies and rules that the residents are if they're driving a car on property they're coming over to the Milburn side and they're being transported over to the South side and Summit any sort of
deliveries I did just testify that earlier deliveries get made to the main Clubhouse on the Milburn side nothing gets delivered to that to those residents on the southide in Summit anyone who has that code to that gate on wace road can enter as long as they have
that code is that correct that is correct okay and at night they can leave whatever time they want because the sensored gate when they hit that the laser whatever the gate will let people go out that is correct that's that's code it it has to be that way so while we're saying that
this is for international people if you don't fill the spots which we have no experience ever doing you're going to use this for staff workers for Onsite there is a possibility of that yes thank you that's all I have for now thank
you any other questions from the public for this for these Witnesses okay see n shair can I ask one more question yes I might have asked this the last hearing it might be good to hear the answer again um what is your knowledge of other clubs in the area do
they have this much housing on site or are you going to be an outlier in terms of the number of rooms if we approve this there there are other clubs in our area that have both on property and off-site housing for for employees you know how many rooms how many um off the
top of my head I I I don't know um I know that balst R and Springfield had a l significant number of of on-site rooms I but I couldn't tell you exactly what that number was okay all right thank you I can I ask
a question sir need three minutes to get there no rush thank I'm Gil Orin live at 45 Wallace Road I'm not clear on the what have
been who can go in and go out uh of the driveway from Wallace Road to the hotel to the hotel I think you mean the dormatory we don't have a hotel the
dorm so for the residents living in that space none of them will have access through through through the Wallace Road gate the only the only the only access through that gate is what it is today it's deliveries of products that we need
for the golf courses in our Grounds Maintenance area that that is located there and any the grounds maintenance staff that travels to the club on a daily basis to work that that is who has access in and out of that gate and you
said there were six now three beds no no no there's six in one building and three in another right now how many live there nine nine nine currently there'll be 18 more correct correct okay and if guests
come they they can't use that no right they have to come to the main then take a bicycle over or something or or our people move a van we we get them access over to the South thank you yes sir thank you sir um Alison ask your question I had a
question so um your experience with these other clubs that have on-site housing is the housing near the clubhouse or is it like where this is where it's out in the golf course and part of you know the other part of the um both that they're you know I know
balol has a separate facility at their Grounds Maintenance buildings for grounds maintenance staff but they also adjacent to their Clubhouse uh have uh Hospitality staff house right there next to the clubhouse have you considered
putting the hospitality staff close in a building close to the clubhouse we currently don't have the ability to do that this is this is a building we identified with available space um I I also have a question just I
I recall from the last testimony that um it was stated I'm not sure if you stated it that actually not that many local clubs have housing on site and it was because they didn't have the the space for it um someone testified that in the
previous um meeting I don't if anybody else remembers that but that remember the testimony I'm not sure I think it was him um I I don't remember yeah so I don't remember who said it so and that Canoe Brook was you know uniquely set up and maybe be felt they
had the space to be able to accommodate this where other clubs necessarily don't sounds like the testimony is a little bit different today in response to Mr Yo's question so I'm just trying to understand like how many you know it sounded last time like most
clubs didn't have housing on site and today it sounds like more clubs do I'm just trying to figure out like locally not Across The two clubs I didn't say I know of two clubs that have on-site housing in our area so Bol and what I
believe Mars County but that doesn't mean that's the only Club just the two that you know two that I know of I also know that we are one of the larger clubs in the area and our staffing needs are a lot different than some of the smaller clubs in our area so there are clubs
that may not need housing moris county is a a county owned facility or is it public private it's a private club there could be other clubs that have employee housing you're just not aware of correct so before you sit down
yes sir um so um how are you handling the workload now without these extra employees that will be using this occupancy um two ways we're using um uh what we call contracted Labor uh there are there are companies out there that
will supply temporary staff to us uh as needed uh and quite honestly we've made some reductions to our our programming for the members to be able to provide the service levels we want with a reduced number of staff and and if if
this were to be approved that these these uh occupants of the dorm um how many times do you anticipate this person mover van moving back and forth across the golf course while your your members are playing golf twice a day so only we
would we would SK we would make sure we schedule the staff you know based on the hours of the of the business uh it's a van that moves uh also moves golfers back and forth onto the golf course so it's it's something that all of our golfers are are quite familiar with seeing on on a regular basis so if the
oddball occupant of this um dormatory wanted to go out for the day and and he would just they would just either bicycle or or request the van just you
still um you may have already testified to this but so what what is the curfew for in the housing and are like can guest stay overnight are there roles around that yes there are uh there's no
overnight guests allowed uh we have an 11:00 curfew uh you know adults we figure we have adults uh working for us so uh we want to you know make it reasonable uh but there is uh there is an 11:00 p.m.
curfew I I have a question what where is the outside space for these workers you want to sit out sit out you know it's your your you have a break from work you want to sit out get some sun get some fresh air where is that there's a a lawn
area on the the yellow house there's kind of a backyard area there that that they can that they can use for for sitting outside and how far is the yellow house from this building 15 20 ft that's pretty close it's it's it's across a
driveway any other questions from the public for these well I do have I'm sorry are the nine people that are there now allowed to go out of the Wallace gate six of the nine are because they are the part of the grounds maintenance
St the three uh in this building that we're looking for the variant uh they're golf interns and they are not allowed to do that they go out through the through the M side is there video camera of the gate on all
the time we do have CCTV I'm not comfortable at this point telling you exactly where those cameras are and what they're watching so the the security people Patrol both courses all the time so if
people are coming in and out past curfew and the security person just went to the other side and they had the code could they theoretically go out the Wallace entrance theoretically anything's possible but I'm going to reiterate
these people are coming from overseas only if they're s well or they're coming from Florida Arizona Southern California clubs that this is their livelihood
and you know I I would venture to say that they are you know for something as simple as an extra two minutes to go out on the mbird side versus The Summit side they're not going to risk their employment with us and any other club that they might be working for but again
this is is this a guess of yours or is your is it your experience again these these are new rooms I don't have that experience that I can give you what about the three the three that are there the three that are there we've had we've had in and I've
been at the club 14 years I've never had to discipline one of those employees for violating any of our policies com yes ask question Sher of course come up there yes
okay I'm still okay or really thank you Joe what if you can't fill us with this uh process that you never
had and your staff the staff says look I got a house I'm not going down there what are you going to who can will you fil this with other people I I he just answered that what I think he just answered that that's been answered that
they will hire more local or in country employees to fill those spaces no I say if there's nobody in that category or the other category they have or this project would there be any anyone else
are you asking if he can rent out the rooms to non-employees yeah okay the answer to that is no these rooms won't be rented to members I previously testified that talking to any anyone anyone they won't be rented out to
anybody other than an employee of the club that would need housing on campus okay yes lender gigantino 49 Wallace Road um do I understand it correctly that regardless of what you're putting
in in terms of bedrooms whether it's nine editional or whatever that the gate and drive that exits onto Wallace Road will not be used by anymore any
more than it is right now that has been my testimony all along I've I've answered that several times good thank you next okay uh Kyle Smith I'm trying to plug in here and
I'll just note again for the record you previously sworn your credentials were accepted and you remain under oath that's correct okay and then can you just go through your revised site plan and explain to the board the changes that you've made to address representations and comments made at the last
hearing yes I can so I'll just go over what what we revised um so we added two bike racks as previously discussed um each bike rack stores seven bikes for a total of 14 bikes we updated the lot coverage um so that includes the lck
coverage includes the new stairway the sidewalk bike racks and concrete for that and the above ground storage tank from the other project um so this increased from the last plan due to the inclusion of the bike racks so total
square footage of lot coverage is 10 the prior that was the prior plan which was 1.96% coverage that was an increase of 458 Square ft from the existing conditions this revised plan now is it's
a total of 10 15,999 square ft that's 1.96% an increase of 542 Square ft from existing conditions um you also see on the plans here we revise the parking uh requirements and we show the hair pin
striping which is in accordance with and in compliance with the ordinance um I'll show you where the parking is maybe it's easier to zoom in here so the this is the the building and the proposed parking is right here right across the driveway we have a total of
eight spaces proposed here seven are standard spots one 88 spot um and we also this is on the maintenance building plan um which is approximate to the uh proposed employee housing building this
has a total of 18 spots so eight spots right across from the um proposed building plus the 18 that's a total of 26 spaces um the prior plan uh based on the number of rooms and and that we had
previously uh there was 21 spaces that were required again we were proposing 20 26 total so we're in compliance and our revised plan um based on the requirements there's 18 spaces required and we're providing 26 um so given that this proposed use uh
requires less than 25 parking spaces it's our interpretation uh based on the regulations that EV parking is not triggered at the site um we've also showed the limit of disturbance on the site plan um that's what's hatched in this this St hatch
here um so that was requested to be included and we showed the total limit of disturbance on the plan um for storm water management that's something that came up previously um we are increasing the impervious Surface by 542 Square ft as noted that's from the stairway the
sidewalk bike racks and the above ground storage tanks um so what we plan to do is proposed to divert approximately 1,130 Square ft of the proposed building um roof area to a drywall system which is on the north side of the building and
that's shown here on the site plan um and we have a detail of that shown on sheet six of the construction details we also included a sidewalk detail on sheet six of the construction details um as it relates to Landscaping um this plan was slightly
modified from the original plan just to to um relocate the proposed landscaping around the bike rack everything else Remains the Same so we're covering the you know just relocating this slightly just around the bike rack concrete um we will also add a note to sheet
five of the maintenance building as previously requested um that the landscaping around the storage tank will be in accordance with the storage tank approval and then as uh previously noted by The Architects testimony we will revise our plan to show the height of the proposed building to be
34.1 ft uh based on the average grade whereas 34.419584 um the only thing I was going to ask you to clarify was the storm water and it looks like you have um taking care of that um we reviewed those calculations
and um we find they're collecting more than was necessary so we take no exception to those um I don't think we had anything else here that needed to be addressed the lighting was already discussed by the
architect so I think we're good thank you uh just regarding the number of spaces the there's eight spaces posed adjacent to this uh structure this maintenance facility and Bs and the 18 are provided in the building that's nearby correct
the maintenance building to the east of the proposed employee housing that's about 240 ft away that's correct y thank you nother questions thank you questions from the board for this witness just have a question it may be for you or the general manager but have you just
listening to some of the public comments or questions or just around the cars would would the club be open to having no one park in these spots even though they're You' put the spots in there they would park in the main parking lot and provide
them with Transportation back and forth to the to the dorm I would defer Albert here um I'm I'm just trying to understand I don't know if the neighbors have a problem with the cars parking on the site I think their concern is the cars going in
and out of the site yep but if they're in the main lot I think that probably takes that concern down a bit versus having them there being able to leave censor just a thought and then you could use those spots for overflow for big events or what right so I I think that
probably the maintenance workers still need to park on site still there are some Grounds Maintenance staff that live in the yellow house that do Park cars there there three though right no that's the six oh six sorry okay and then there's also the people that work on that site yeah
so so how many spaces are actually in how many do you have any parking there now like where do the people Park they park by the main so it's just the striping you're fixing on that so what are what are the Extra Spaces going to be used for um and how frequently are
they going to be used well the I think we we were trying to comply with with code for the number of spots given the original plan for the for the property um they're they're used on a
daily basis as as we've said from the grounds maintenance staff and from the grounds mainten and staff that live in the yellow house uh we also do use it as overflow parking for staff when we do have the major events so parking being used at its maximum is
intermittent um um but parking the majority of the parking spots are used almost on a daily basis by the staff that works down there but that's eight Spots I'm talking about the I'm talking about all all of the spots spots the existing spots by The Grounds Maintenance building and these eight
spots but your question is I'm talking about the new spots that are being so that's in the event that somebody did have a car right so then I understand but they're seeing as the testimony is that they're not going to have cars I just when you when you have parking it tends to get used
and so I'm just trying to figure out where the you know who's and they'll leave tooing they're existing right here so this is the proposed building this is that yellow house that was referenced earlier these are these are already parking spots we rest strien them to
be conr and also Prov so we're not you're not adding any you're just re we're just restri all of them okay yes Mr chairman yes sir we are talking about a building that has no parking but
we're providing parking for the building that has no parking these are existing SP these are existing spaces for existing staff that use that but but you're doing it because the building that you're renovating requires or expanding requires parking why is that
parking not where it should be which is where the people that are going to live there if they indeed they do have cars be in Milbourne and the Milbourne side on the north side in the regular parking lots that's where they should be because that's where if anybody has a parking uh
license or rents a car or whatever you're telling me they have to park there so are you asking so these are all but but you would like for the any employee that's housed in this building any additional employee that's housed in
this building if they have a car that their car has to be parked in mbour is that that's what you told us no I'm just trying to clarify that's exactly what you testimony not what I want the testimony is and let me finish what I'm saying is you're saying that none of these 18
people are going to be having a car on this side of the course well if they do have a car where is their car going to be on the other side of the course is your testimony correct so why are we adding additional
parking on this side of the facility all all of which will go in and out of the Wallace Road gate we're not adding anything Mr Steiner we haven't added any we just changed the stri what are these 18 spaces that I keep hearing about that are new they're exist no they're not new
they're existing spaces at the ground being restriped to conform with the ordinance so they're being allocated now they were there and now they're being reallocated house they right because the no for the what's required for the
dormatory right required to comply yes it is being reallocated because to comply with the uh regulation the ordinance to have the dormatory you have to have a certain amount of parking for the people there so the spaces that maybe they're being used Now for
Something Else by someone else are now dedicated supposedly they're they're for the purpose of the people who are living in that building who probably won't be using those spaces but it is a reallocation of the use of the space CU
before they were just of some of of some of the spaces only the ones right that are and now they're going to be in and out on the wallers road gate no sir Joe Joe we had a condition last time that employees living in the newly proposed units Must ALL use the Milburn entrance
and exit so if we want to clarify that and also say no no employees will park any no new employees in these new units will park in this parking lot it sounds like the applicants are saying that's what's going to happen I imagine they'd be amendable to that condition right
correct that would be a condition of the residency let amend do but don't don't we're th this expansion of this building requires a certain number of parking spaces reallocation is not the way you supply those they meet it with the
existing parking lot they're just restriping and the employees have to park in the other lot but they don't there but those parking spaces are there for another purpose to that correct how can they be then just oh
sorry we don't use them for that anymore we use them for this we they are supposed to supply parking for this building where is the new asphalt going we don't need it because we have we have I'm Sor you extra parking I think you
do and I am going to continue to state that what what I understand is you have excess capacity today striping non- striping you should stripe it right you have to stripe it call reallocation but it just happens
that you have the availability the parking available and now so and therefore you're compliant as soon as you stripe them you're compliant right that's what you're doing right yeah okay so there's no extra parking spaces you're fully compliant you are compliant and you'll continue to be compliant
correct right and none of the new people that will live in those rooms will be allowed to use the Wallace entrance or exit what can I ask a question because you know I'm just not recalling it from the testimony that I've watched why does
anybody other than deliveries use the Wallace entrance why aren't we using the main entrance for all staff this a total all staff including maintenance crew well proximity to where they work
primarily um and from you're you're not talking about deliveries or anything like that you're just talking about I understand you know your utility trucks that need to come in to deliver your product for to maintain the course I get that you don't want that driving through your course that's why we have service entrances correct but from an employee
point of view these ground crew tend to arrive very early right correct so I can only imagine the inconvenience of that noise of that gate opening and closing at 5:30 in the morning when they can easily come in the primary entrance and
not be detrimental to the club's constituents members um would you be open to that condition pardon would you be open to that condition I I would have to consult with with the with the club to to see if we would be okay with that condition that's
it's a lot of Staff it's a lot of people to bring across the golf course to to get please we we understand your to get home this is a we have not had in my 14 years at the club I have not once heard from a neighbor on Wallace Road that the
traffic in the morning and when they leave early afternoon has been an issue um I'm sure I'm going to hear about that now but um you know so it's never been something that the club has contemplated to change the uh direction of the staff
of that particular staff coming in and out of of the property to work well I I think you could base those if there were no no complaints on the number of people now we're let's face reality if I can go when we come to parking we always complain about parking in Summit because
there's no parking there's no parking because you want to park next to the place you're going so if I'm an employee even coming here tonight you want to park as close to the door as you can because it's more convenient it's cold out so if I'm an employee and if I know the code to the gate what am I going to do you can do the same thing so no I
wouldn't not if my not if my livelihood depended on it I'm not going to you know I I believe you I believe you I'm an honest person I'm GNA answer all your questions honestly I don't appreciate that I really don't we've been a good neighbor to Wallace Road we really had
we've done a lot of we okay so for um my my concern is that um the enforcement of not using Wallace Road um the reason why I know the yellow house is because I used to go to the yellow house through the Wallace Road
gate when I was younger and that was the way we went so it happened and back then there was a different era I get it but you know people human humans are humans they're going to want to do their thing so I have a question about um so there's
a um handicap parking spot that was there before or it wasn't striped before that was not striped before okay so who's are you planning to hire um people that are limited have limited mobility in these positions who's going to be using that parking I I know like you're
supposed to put it in there it's a requirement so so somebody gets hired they have limited Mobility they bring their own car because they you know they for the because they can't ride a bike they will be using that they could use that
handicap walking spot to go from the employee housing to the clubhouse throughout the day correct whenever they have to work there yes okay so there is so there is there is there is there is possibility that
somebody could be driving yep but yeah uh questions from the public for this W witness please questions only I'm civil engineer okay know you with the drawings of the rooms and everything that yes but mostly for the
civil engineering aspect around the building not the familiar with the square footage and things like that yeah the yeah overall square footage the square of the rooms would be the architect square footage of the building so that would be the architect okay and the architect is he
just testified so do you have a question for him I will yes no no he already testified so if you want to ask him a question you can okay I don't have any for you right now you you can ask him now sir you can ask the architect if you yes please um
so I just had a question and when we were here last time I I expressed that we were troubled uh about intensification of use and the fact that this is a d variance let's keep it to questions um so but we express that we
had great difficulty with the size of this trying to get to it just ask the question you're interlaying it with your opinion which is for later okay so at that time you said you'd come back and make a good faith effort to reduce
the size of the project so the original total square 82 12 sare ft and your good faith effort comes back at how many square ft 869 oh so that's what less than 150
ft but you had asked them to increase the size of the rooms so they reduce the number of bedrooms by 25% and then incre room 2011 how many square feet did you increase that room I can tell you it's right on your chart okay 20 square ft 202 how many
square fet yeah the most was 20 sare ft that was to be clear from your own documentation so again the square fet to buildings insignificant if you know what's the average square size of a uh College
dormatory room I do not know that uh 180 ft and that's about what we're looking at here um the size of the beds you know what size the beds are in the rooms they're shown as twin size okay isn't that like the smallest size bed you can possibly have yes have you ever seen
bunk beds in a dormatory room yes okay so you could have two bunk beds so we could actually have double this number of occupants here if these people decide to throw own bunk bed that's not the testimony that's not what we're asking for okay but it could happen after it's
been approved and uh and I'll look for the record uh the fire department has not submitted any yes they have as a Friday on the I have't it says build to code but for the record who
furnishes these the club does and you're certifying that there will be no bunk beds is that correct asking for any additional questions from the public for the engineer or the
architect um McKinley Martz the planner and noting once again M MZ was previously sworn remains under oath and her credentials as a plan were accepted at that hearing thank you and and if I could just interrupt sorry
um the I have an email from Stephanie dated December 18th and that is the fire department's review says build to code in other words no objections no concerns thank you hi everyone it's good
to be back just quickly I mean uh our council did just reiterate but we are reducing the as a as a summary of some of the testimony that's already been given we are reducing the quote intensity of this development um really by 25% a 25% reduction in the number of
rooms and a 25% in the number of beds and testimony was literally just given by the general manager that those will be individual twins siiz beds there will not be bunk beds doubling up in the individual rooms uh we did in response to the
resident who just spoke he did have a comment at the last hearing about he was concerned the size of the rooms were too small we did increase the size as was testified to by 10 to 20 square feet per room so while the overall square footage has not reduced substantially that's because we were balancing the needs of
reducing the number of rooms with adding square footage to some to to some of the rooms to to all of the new rooms I should say the existing rooms are what they are those are not changing uh we have spoken about parking as well we are providing the required parking spaces per uh the number of
rooms we are providing um as a reminder the existing building is being added onto the existing building is over 425 ft away from any of the nearest uh property lines just to put that in perspective because it can be really hard for people to gauge how far that is
that's 65 ft longer than a football field if you include the end zones so that that is a considerable distance we're not moving the building we're not expanding the uh outside of the building in terms of uh East West setbacks we're expanding the Second Story to maintain the
foundation basically just going up to meet the peak that exists today as was already testified or sorry indicated by our Council we are requesting a D1 use variance uh for the successory use of the employee housing in the golf Zone uh we also need the
bulk variance for the height 15 ft and one story is permitted two stories and 34.1 ft exist we are maintaining the two stories and reducing the height by 4 in to 34.1 Ft S 34.4 one exist just to
clarify that was the existing right and we're going to 34.1 that's correct thanks um okay so I'm here to reiterate the planning proofs I am the planner so I need to talk to you about why um our proposal in front of you meets the proofs as put forth in the municipal
land use law and then further clarified by the courts so the D1 use Varian is are job to provide both positive and negative criteria in support of this variance positive criteria as is negative criteria they each have two prongs that we have to adequately show to you for our positive criteria we have
to demonstrate to you that in particular cases and for special reasons and that is a quote from the municipal landuse law the variance requested is Justified uh case law has advised us and the board that those special reasons take uh their definition from the purposes of zoning that are listed in the municipal land
use law I identified a few last time I'm going to expand on that testimony this time to make sure that uh the point is is clear uh the courts have also noted that the benefit to the general welfare for a D1 variants derives not from the use itself but from the development of the site that is particularly suited for
such a use uh this demonstration of site suitability is what we call the second prong so I'm going to touch on that as well uh when I go into the negative criteria uh we have to demonstrate that granting the relief will not be a substantial detriment to the public good nor will it substantially uh impair the
intent of your zoning ordinance and your Zone plan and I'm uh emphasizing that word substantially because the courts have noted that that substantial is what really needs to be proven here so uh that substantial detriment is driven by the impact of a variance on neighboring
properties so you as the board have to determine if what we're proposing here would cause such damage to the character of the neighborhood to elevate any uh any potential uh detriment to substantial all development is going to have some kind of an impact whether or not it's
substantial that's for you to decide based on our testimony and the focus of the second prong of the negative criteria uh is to ensure that granting a variance will not override the jurisdiction and authority of your planning board and your governing body we can't go against uh something that
has been specifically laid out in your master plan or set forth in policy by your governing body uh everything that we're talking about here tonight is specifically tied to this property and this particular use a use that was not necessarily anticipated or contemplated when the golf Zone was originally
established uh we need to show that granting this variance is not uh going to be something that would have a broader reaching negative effect on the Zone the gulf Zone Beyond this which I think this might be the only section but generally speaking uh and the neighborhood Beyond this in the general
region of summit so with laye the groundwork of what I'm supposed to prove to you tonight because I do think it's important to reiterate what is required in Municipal Landes law and by case law uh I will start by touching on the site suitability and expand on my testimony
from last time uh just as a summary of what we've already said uh there was an approval in 2005 to Grant the variance for the three staff members to live in this building there are six additional staff members that live in what we call the yellow house just across the driveway there are is additional
employee housing for I believe it's 12 employees on the Milburn side on the north side of Campus uh as the general manager Albert testified to there have been no complaints or uh disciplinary issues associated with these employees I'm going to focus on the three in our building because that's what we're
expanding there has been no disciplinary uh actions on his behalf for the last 14 years uh they've been there for almost 20 years so we have 20 years experience of having this type of employment housing in this building at this site on this golf course so that has proved that
the site can accommodate generally employee housing where it is being proposed uh the site the building itself is already two stories we are not increasing the height we're adding excuse me adding some square footage it will still be well over 400 ft from any
neighboring property uh the changes aesthetically to it will not be visible I do believe they are uh improved changes to the building I think it's going to make the building look nicer but if if they're visible at all from um Wallace Road it would be very minimal there's existing mature Landscaping we
are adding additional landscaping and the golf course itself is going to obscure continue to obscure the view from from the increase in uh in the massing to the second floor um this is a accessory use to the principal use the employee housing would not function on
its own without without the golf course without the club itself for them to support uh it is not apartment living we have talked about it being dormatory style to meet the needs of the workers most of whom I think all of whom of the new workers will be seasonal uh who will be here for a year
at top uh it would not be appropriate or really feasible to find uh a lease in an apartment in or around Summit for less than a year uh month-by-month leases are not common um speaking of somebody who is a long-term renter but also just
looking at the market uh yesterday and today I took a look at Zillow in Summit in the area not a single apartment that I found was available for less than a year lease uh I did find one furnished one-bedroom apartment that was $3,400 a month but not not not for less than a
year um because these are anticipated to be employees coming from uh Hospitality schools so students most of whom this was testified to at the previous hearing most of whom are coming here to get school credit through experience uh at the at the golf course um they're not
going to be bringing furniture with them for a 6 to 12 months stay those who have the ability to do that may want to seek housing outside of the club so that they can have their own Furniture but it's especially if we're talking International students it's not likely that they're going to be bringing a
whole set of furniture to furnish an excuse me an apartment offsite um the apartment that I cited earlier the 3,400 a month is for a one-bedroom apartment I would argue not affordable for a typical employee uh who is going to be filling
one of these positions uh it's expected these employees will make in the range of $18 to $20 an hour that's what employees who do similar work at Cano are making today uh Cano Brook will charge the employees $300 uh and this is what they do today for their existing
on-site residents $300 a day for housing which is their rent and it includes the two daily meals we have already spoken about I think it's clear that that is considerably cheaper and more attainable than a $3,400 a month apartment for six to 12 uh for 6 to 12 months sorry $300 a
month that's going to ask apologies yes a day a month was right yeah sorry that's what she meant that is what I meant I did I say day that's okay sorry a month I was on a roll I just kept going $300 a month yes um we have talked
a little bit about whether this use is prevalent in clubs and Resorts um it there is an established precedent for employee housing um we did talk about two um uh bolar I always have a problem saying
that I always want to say Bazar um in Springfield they and Morris County golf Club both of those are private clubs that do provide on-site housing for their employees many of which are seasonal uh I did find through research the Hack and Sack Golf Club in
Emerson which is in Bergen County they are approved by their board in 2022 to increase their on-site staff housing from 8 to 18 units in dorm style housing no cooking facilities provided and the club does provide meals so the exact same thing that we are proposing here
tonight this other club in Bergen County did approve um just about three years ago so there are examples of this in New Jersey uh that are happening I believe more frequently um I do think and from what I'm going to touch on in a second there is a demonstrated increasing need
for this I think nationally if we're just talking about golf clubs and Resorts generally speaking uh I and this this does point to the evolving needs of the industry which I'll touch on also with the the uh consistency with the the master plan and
the zoning ordinance where when a lot of these zones were originally uh contemplated on-site housing wasn't wasn't a need by these industries um there was a survey completed in 2024 with the results that came out in January 2025 by a company called the
denh club thinking Partners they surveyed 180 club members across the US 61% of them provide house on provide housing for their staff um with a majority of these being double rooms in dormatory style housing the same survey found that these general managers quoted
that employee housing is the number one challenge that they face in recruiting and maintaining uh talented staff um there's additional evidence of this through the National Golf Course Owners Association who released an article last
year about how the national housing crisis has become one of the biggest challenges for clubs to attract talent that being both full-time and seasonal with one of the managers quoted saying it's going to be absolute requirement for resorts to have their own housing it's the cost of doing business um
there's another organization called dormy house who specializes in developing Workforce housing for golf courses around the world to quote solve the market labor issues so there these are National examples but there is a growing need and demand for this uh for
this type of housing to be provided for Resorts specifically golf clubs or what the the data that I have found I do think it broadens Beyond probably we probably see that with um beach resorts as well I would assume but but focusing on golf clubs um so all of
this speaks to the site suitability of why it makes sense to have these onsite instead of uh instead of offsite to support to support the golf club itself uh we don't have to prove that there are not other locations that are suitable for this use but I do think in our
instance on site and where we're proposing it is 100% suitable for the use especially given that the employees are going to be serving the golf club itself that this is on uh it is the most suitable location because these positions are more likely compared to
internships than long-term placements like we said individuals are not expected to have vehicles if they do we have talked about we do have parking on site that they can meet I'm going to touch on the special reasons that we said before these are dried from the purposes of the municipal
land use law um purpose a to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in a manner which is which will promote and enhance Public Safety and promote the general welfare uh the national low-income housing Coalition has indicated that New
Jersey is deficient by 214,000 affordable housing units I don't bring that up to talk about Mount Laurel or the current fourth round just generally to discuss and highlight the broader housing crisis that is happening across the state um we are not talking about
affordable housing here these units are not going to qualify for your fourth round obligation um but they do provide what we call attainable housing on-site affordable options for the employees um we can provide these housing we can provide them with needed housing while
helping to alleviate pressure on the city and The regional's Limited housing stock we will take these individuals out of the tenant pool for those who are seeking uh The Limited number of of available units within summit summit is a desirable place to live I think when
these especially rental but for sale also when they go on the market they're not on for long leases fill up quickly so by uh the employees intended for these dorms don't require long-term housing they don't need to take up your valuable housing stock we can provide them what they need right on site and we
leave the rest of the housing stock in the city available to Residents or or other new newcomers coming to town that directly supports the general welfare of the town and the region not to mention providing employees with an affordable option Within walking and biking distance supports the general welfare of
the employment pool and those who are coming to work here uh quickly we do uh provide adequate light space and open light space air and open space to reiterate we are 400 plus feet away from our neighbors we don't have any issues with
overcrowding here um to e to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that will contribute to the well-being of persons neighborhoods communities and regions and preservation of the the environment uh we are proposing to concentrate our
Workforce population on site both on the Northern side and the southern side uh again these employees will serve the site where they're literally living and located uh contributes to the well-being of the employees is they will not have to rely on cars to get around if we put this off site they have to rely on cars
regardless whether that's Uber lift maybe a bust or public transportation but they're going to have to figure out how to get to work by putting them on site they don't have to do that they don't they can take that out of the equation they're already here uh density is controlled not just by units per acre
which I think we talked about last time but it's also through setbacks and coverage we meet the coverage we far exceed the setbacks uh and we do not in again infringe on any neighbors if density is a problem our density is 096 dwelling units per acre if we're looking
at the number of bedrooms uh to compare that your R5 Zone which is a 5,000 foot minimum MoDOT size is 0.11 dwelling units per acre so we if we're looking at at density as a concern we are far below what exists in the
town I to promote a desirable visual environment uh we are improving the Aesthetics of the building while they won't be seen by the residents in the neighborhood it is a substantial Improvement to what the building is today I I believe it improves the the quality of of the
architecture and finally P to enable municipalities the flexibility to offer alternatives to to traditional development through the use of Equitable and effective planning Tools in order to concentrate development areas where growth can best be accommodated and
maximized um this is a prime example of an alternative to traditional development and an appropriate planning tool by putting housing that's going to meet a very specific need for a very discrete population in the exact location where they need it and offering
it to them as an option when the employment is is offered uh it allows us to fill our specific need and concentrate the development within the boundaries of the existing Golf Course the surrounding Rosen neighborhoods will continue to function just as they do today uh by
planning for on-site development in an already Disturbed and already developed area we are uh essentially um accommodating maximum growth without uh broadening development into the broader Community we we can accommodate this growth here without any detriment and we
believe that is the most appropriate way to do so quickly before I move on to the negative criteria the C variances that we require are the uh proposed height that is exceeds your accessory dwelling
by feet um I I do believe that this would be wrapped into the D1 use variant since the accessory building standards are not intended for a building that would be considered this dormatory style you would not essentially Grant the C variance without granting the D variant
um however it's my opinion that the the the building is already there the height is already there we're expanding the floor print uh slightly but it's it's or in order to meet the existing height that's that's really where we're going so it's not adding additional height to this
um what was also indicated before is that we have an accessory building where no principal building exists this was approved during the 2005 um application when this was first brought to your attention but uh this is a function of the site being split between two municipalities if everything
was in one municipality the it would be one lot and the golf club would be on the same site as this all right stay with me guys negative criteria and then I'm done I promise uh again we have to prove that this granting this relief will not be a
substantial detriment to the public good or impair your uh the intent of your Zone plan and M master plan sorry I'm losing my voice now uh it's our opinion that it will not be a substantial detriment um nothing that our
presentation has indicated tonight will damage the character of the neighborhood enough to elevate the impact to substantial again everything that exists today and I know there's been some questions about whether or not we can change existing conditions and that's that's a different discussion but we're not changing any of the existing
conditions onto Wallace Road or that access everything we have testified to says all of the any impact from the new 18 residents will be pushed through to the Milburn side and the main entrance uh the physical changes will not be visible but they will be Improvement um
the city's 2000 master plan recognizes can Cano Brook um as an existing golf course and as an existing asset and golf course which the city aims to preserve with appropriate buffers we do have those again with the especially with the
specific use here the over 400 ft away from the neighboring property owners uh I believe there was some concern last time that we hadn't touched on the the feeling was that our testimony did not support the master plan enough um I'm going to go into a
little more detailed of that because we do feel like it supports both your 2,000 master plan and your 2016 master plan re-exam your planner cited several goals and objectives from both Master plans in his original Memo from this fall um I agree with the ones that he cited one
being to preserve exist ing residential neighborhoods and offer diversity of housing types uh we uh the employees will not need to occupy valuable housing within the city we are proposing we don't need to propose a new building we don't need to disturb existing neighborhoods to accomplish what we're
trying to do tonight uh to balance the growth and development opportunities with the established pattern of development we are not disturbing any established pattern of development we're not infringing into the neighborhoods we're building on site where an existing building is um three encourage balanced
development to protect the long-term economic and social interests of present and future residents um by allowing Cano Brook Cano Brook to grow in this way through seasonal employment programs it's going to enhance the long-term economic and social interests by supporting this long established highly
regarded historic over 120 year old commercial establishment recreational establishment really within the city um we're promoting a desirable visual environment number four which I've already testified to through the beautification of the building and additional Landscaping encourage residential
development in locations and densities which are compatible with existing development again it's it's my opinion it's compatible with existing development because we're not disrupting existing development and it's expanding a use that already exists on site and has proven to exist in a successful manner for 20 years at this
point uh to provide adequate parking and adequate loading facilities we do meet the parking requirements and we are willing to work with the board in terms of where you prefer the new the new uh employees to park it is still Our Testimony we do not believe they will be bringing in many if any cars to the site
to identify as open space and Recreation certain public and private lands that serve as open space uh we're supporting this is the supporting the growth of an established Recreational facility that is again been here for over 120 years uh the last one
from the 2000 master plan is to the city will encourage and provide for review of development proposals of uses which promotes the social welf welfare cultural recreational and service activities within Summit to serve present and future residents I think everything I've already said tonight
supports that that one there are a few from the 2016 re-exam report that I would like to reiterate I did note them last time um but to promote a city that is welcoming to residents of all ages races ethnicities abilities and income
ranges this will allow for a diversity of new individuals to come into the city uh they will be likely leaving the site on the weekends we've already t on their off days they will be patronizing the city they will be bringing in a different diverse group of people to the
city um promote the development of a variety of housing types this is an alternative to traditional development and an effective planning tool to accomplish uh multiple goals and objectives tonight uh
finally we have to prove that it will not cause a substantial impairment to your zoning ordinance uh staff housing is an accessory use to a golf course I believe based on the data that I've read to prepare for tonight is becoming more prevalent and more common at golf courses and results
across the country including New Jersey we've mentioned three tonight that three other courses that do have this type of development um it's a way to support staff when nearby housing proves too expensive or unavailable and a way to support seasonal workers that may or may
not be able to find less than onee leases uh within the immediate vicinity uh it will it was a use that was not likely considered when the golf Zone was first developed um the only accessory use is permitted in the golf zone are quote buildings and structures used for
maintenance and storage associated with Golf Course operations my colleague joked that this could be considered storage of employees but I won't go as far as putting that on the record as my opinion um and we are not intrinsically changing the nature of the golf Zone but supporting the growth and sustainability
of the establishment um uh the uh purpose of the permitted accessory uses in the golf zone is to support quote golf oper operations and we do believe that is what our proposal does tonight so with that I think I have talked enough and I will gladly answer your
questions you can wake up now if you have fallen asleep very much board professionals do you have questions for this witness I don't have any questions for this okay just regarding um very thorough presentation thank you um the issue at hand that
you've heard the board discuss is the amount of parking that's being proposed and where they have access to adjacent residential areas um under the public welfare public good uh discussion how do you feel that's being addressed uh it's
not a substantial impact uh to the adjacent uh single family residential area as a result of that parking being directly accessed off of the adjacent Street sure so I'm I'm speaking purely to our proposal and not the existing conditions and the way that the existing
employees have been using it um but in terms of our proposed 20 or a total well total of 21 bedrooms 12 uh 21 beds 15 bedrooms uh the parking as has been established exists on our site however
the only uh access to the parking from Wallace Road will maintain as has been for I don't know how many years but only to the maintenance staff that needs to access that directly and more regularly uh we have met the parking requirement I think I've I've heard conflicting concerns tonight from some of the board
members whether we maybe need some more parking spaces in this area versus they would prefer not to have any we are amenable to work with the board with what would make you most comfortable in this in this region uh however given the sufficiency and intensity of the
security staff on site uh I I believe from the testimony we previously heard that there is a robust and very uh very adequate security force that can um monitor the site and ensure that the I'm
sorry not the applicants the employees are going in and out with their cars if they have cars from the appropriate locations on the Milburn side uh there should not be and we do not anticipate there being any change to the neighborhood and therefore any detriment
to the general welfare of those neighbors happening there uh I believe Albert pre previously testified that if anybody uh violates these requirements which they do have to sign an agreement when they are hired it would result in in termination so that is a that is a
significant not just a slap on the wrist but that is a significant repercussion for violating that uh so it is my opinion that the uh Golf Course is doing everything in their ability to ensure that employees do follow this rule not just through the security not just through the condition that employees
will park on the side if they do have uh cars they have to access it um and the repercussions for violating it are are severe so I don't see any reason why Wallace Road in the surrounding neighborhoods will function any differently than they do today you mentioned in your testimony you looked
at Zillow standpoint of available apartments how far did you search the whole city the whole city did you look at any adjacent Community uh I plugged in Summit a few popped up from the adjacent but my focus is really on
Summit um the sources you had referenced for the uh the trend for the golf course industry you had identified in 2024 there was a study by the d d Ney club uh the Denny Club Thinking Partners they
are an executive Search and management consulting firm they uh partner with private clubs and boutique resorts to help them with uh with their marketing with recruitment um they do these types of studies to help Resorts uh uh figure out what the best next steps are to
improve their operations you see where I'm going I'm trying to qualify yes sour of that information yes um I can expand just to follow your your line train of thought here the next article I sourced was from a May June 2024 article that was posted uh on the National Golf
Course Owners Association which is a resource it's in the title it's a resource for owners of golf courses um that article I should mention was also posted in golf business m magazine which is in the title they focus on articles to help golf businesses the third uh
resource that I cited was a company called dormy house they are somebody I found through uh just through Googling these types of uses and the um amenity or not amenes but the support that's available to them they are relatively new I think within
the past 5 to 10 years the person who founded them uh grew up working on golf courses and was an economics and development major who uh work to develop golf courses noticed through working at them and developing them that this was a
need worth filling okay and you know that from reading that that study in order to understand who who was the author for that information that yes correct that was all taken from their website about who they are I think that's all the questions I have thank you thank you all right uh questions
from the board for this witness yes I do um you seem to have done a little more research on the out the other clubs that have the local clubs that have um employee housing on on on site can you um give me a number like baso how many
do you know how many I tried very hard for both Bazar and um basur off on you I apologize I'm saying I I don't know what Bazar is but that's what's in my head yeah um I'm gonna call the
Springfield course um and Morris County I they have not they they are very tight lipped about how much they have on site um for both courses that one and the Morris County Country Club though I found numerous job postings on indeed as well as the P the PGA has golf um job
postings for golf courses um I found probably six to 10 for each Golf Course for seasonal employees that advertise housing provided I believe both courses have more more than that um but they were they were very tight lipped there
was no six to 10 beds you said I'm sorry the the jobes I found were for six to 10 positions for each uh each course which each of them each opening advertised housing provided so that would be that would be beds um because it's for
individuals so unfortunately I couldn't get any more information there wasn't there wasn't much out there if that's for seasonal then that would be the those so we have no reason to believe that there's other people currently living in that housing well both of those have had
housing for several years I know so I would imagine this is me uh inferring based on the information that I have found and based on my knowledge of the industry through working with Albert is that it's it's going to be very similar where there's turnover so they're consistently ask they're consistently
searching for employment um the postings I found happen to be seasonal I think we're at it's February right now and we are getting into that High season so it makes sense that a lot of their postings would be a seasonal posting that was so we don't know how much house onsite housing these places have and also um
Hack and Sack it's interesting mentioned that CU my um brother-in-law actually belongs to that and that was the only one I did find numbers for and I know that they did have a h they did have um either rented or purchased a plot property offsite for their um employees I know that for a fact so um have you
run across any of those um different clubs that you know said okay we we need housing we're going to either rent a house and rent rent you know furnish a house and rent it do with that or buy a house and and in terms of surrounding towns um I'm not sure where you're from
but like Summit is in Union County uh Milburn um Milburn TR different County we have we have surrounding towns that the um the rental prices are less um so you don't yeah you're right there right down the block we are the we we we are
right now we're in there's three counties right here so there are different housing options so taking it as just in Summit is is really limiting it so did do you know did you have find anyone who did any of these clubs that did find housing off site say in
Springfield so none of the New Jersey ones that I found advertised offsite when I was doing my broader research for the the broader Regional and National Trends I did find one of the the article that I cited from um the National Golf Course Owners Association uh talked to
somebody from a manager from Arizona who said that club had about 10 years ago again this was written in 2024 so in uh 2015 or so um that club had sought out add housing offsite in addition to their on-site housing they had purchased land
and built an apartment building to provide off-site housing um that was not finding that particular instance was not finding existing housing they literally built the housing that they would need and they owned it and and operated it um but I I didn't find reference to it for any New Jersey ones
thank you I have a question um would you would the applicant consider a positive criteria if they were willing to change existing use um and to limit that one entrance to
service only no employees service only I'm not it wasn't offered wasn't consider you're asking just for like the delivery of the maintenance yeah I'll have to defer to I think I think the testimony is that Albert would have to check with the broader board um so I'll have to defer to him and and his
colleagues on that got it and then and then you had mentioned you know it's considered a cost of doing business I totally understand the difficulty that is trying to find help in why this makes a lot of sense for the club um to your point
though there's multif family housing there's there's it's out a cost right so if you you know if this were not approved I'd have to imagine the club would have a plan B um in mind haven't really heard what that might be but you know I'll I'll defer to Albert on that
one but just in response to yes there there is certainly a range of of housing in the area I would agree with that I think my point was also not just that it's uh more in aordable than what the on-site housing would be but it also triggers the need to provide
transportation so a lot of we we really do anticipate a lot of these people coming will not have vehicles even well I'll put that aside but they would have to find Transportation whether that's bringing their vehicle or providing public transportation every day so it's an added level of of cost
there and of effort um the city does have I didn't cite this but there is other master plan goals about providing more walkability and pedestrian connections being able to walk to your place of business is the ultimate pedestrian connection and from a planning perspective is one of the the
old ultimate planning tools so I think the point of bringing that up was more from the the positive criteria of allowing these people to be on site and and being close to their place of business without the added expenses also for short-term uh occupancy I they really
are not going to be bringing Furniture um if they are it's minimal so if they could potentially find and it's not required that they live here they do have the option of finding their own housing um they would have to furnish it or or live folding chairs so I think the
practicality is that this is providing them with all of that so they they do not have to worry about it when they come here and it eases the process and makes it a more um viable and attractive employment opportunity thanks when yeah um question
so I'm I'll be honest I'm struggling with the uh justifying the uh the the d d variant and I wonder if you could expand on how this would serve the public good I see how it would help the country club you know they have on-site employee housing and you I think you
mentioned something that you think it might reduce Demand on on inexpensive apartments whatever in the area but I mean I'm not even convinced by that so is there anything else you can say that would justify the public goods served by granting this well I do think all of the
purposes of the municipal land use law that I cited do support the general welfare there there is case law that says they all go to contribute if if it supports them they do go to contribute the general welfare of the public good I think being able to to um to uh provide
the opportunity to expand the growth in an appropriate way that supports the economic benefits of summit of the residents of the of the outside residents that use that are members of the country club it allows a already flourishing uh and established facility
to continue to grow bring people to Summit who may stay here and continue to to patronize the area um it's going to allow them to grow in that in that way I I do think it's significant that any employees that are coming here would not have to pay for affordable house or for
for housing or they have to pay minimal I I do think that is a contribution to the general welfare I think that is the employees who are coming they are part of the general welfare um it was testified that a lot are intended to be International but they do expect some to be from the US who are coming here who
are going to come here to fill the need when the international visas can't or don't or don't fill that so I I think providing that opportunity and providing the affordable opportunity supports the broader general welfare for both the community and the employees
that are coming in thank you um I well I have a follow-up question to that because um Cano Brook is proposing on-site housing and obviously Cano Brook is paying to construct the housing they're subsidizing the housing they're
only charging the employees $300 a month in rent so it is possible correct for Cano Brook to subsidize housing somewhere else in another town it is for Canoe Brook to
provide transportation to and from work like if you have a van on site it could drive five minutes away and pick people up at 6:00 a.m. and they come in a shift and then take them at the end of the day that's possible as well is that right I do but I believe with the short-term
stays of six-month leases to 9 months to 10 months the only only way for them to do that would be to acquire a building or build a building and then manage it themselves there there there's not going to be my experience is is it's going to be very difficult if at all to find a landlord who would be willing to to rent
for a short period of time like that landlords do not like month to months six months they want stability so the option would be providing their own facility offsite you are correct that that hasn't been looked into because this is the facility that we had available and it
made the most sense to uh expand on an existing building that's already providing this use instead of trying to build a new building elsewhere in town or in the region um that we would have to have to pursue a completely different set of approvals and as I said that has
the potential to disrupt existing development patterns in neighborhoods where this this is this exists already with it's an expansion to where it already is um two more questions thank you for that um one is uh you made a
reference to allowing the club to grow and that implies to me more members and so you know that's the intent um is there I know we're spending a lot of time talking about parking but when I hear grow I think now we're we're
hearing from The Neighbors about parking and you know where um if that's a goal then then then I feel like there should be more in this proposal right and that's a good point and let me clarify when I say grow I did not mean increase the number of memberships there was testimony last time that the club does
not anticipate increasing the number of memberships offered but what was testified to again tonight was that they have reducing the amenities that they have they're offering to their members because they do not have the employees to support that so this adding these employees allows them to grow in terms
of the services they're offering to their existing members there is no plan to increase the number of memberships and Albert correct me if I'm wrong with that correct okay can you give examples of what those services are looking to grow so it's the number of reservations
we can take uh in our restaurants in any given period based on the number of people we have on the floor to service the size of uh special events that we can do uh the number of special events that we can provide to our members um going back to the growth area we are bylaw restricted in the number of
members we can have and we are at that capacity so we are currently just replacing attrition on an annual basis we are not increasing the number of members that we have thank you and then the last question is is probably for you but I'm bring it up because you both
made reference to this disciplinary action and the first time I heard three people were're only going to talk about the three people in this house because this is where we're expanding it I didn't think that much of it but then the second time that came up it sort of because you brought it up as well it
sort of begged the question well what about the other uh 18 people in 12 in Milburn and six in the yellow house any disciplinary action over the years there no okay no then they're all under the same employ uh housing agreements thank
you Mr St gonna ask one question uh and I hope you can answer it uh you've obviously done a lot of research in a lot of other areas um have you looked into this this whole thing comes because of this Visa program did you in look at
that Visa program and see what the potential is for these actually to happen I believe that there has been a shift in policy about visas period across the United States um my understanding though from this program
is that it's very successful for Resorts I do know that Jersey Shore resort towns use this program as well and it and it's been suspended for two years and they haven't been able to get the people in and there's there's I can't speak to that but yeah but yeah know
that there are maximum uh number of visas that are allocated every year and the request for those vas visas far exceed the amount given but they have not you know that's where you're getting the the unfulfilled visas that
they they haven't reduced the number of them they just limit it from year to year so um just like every every good program I'm not going to argue the point with you so we we can clarify though this is not just for the Visas if you cannot fill it with that it's going to
be filled I understand that but this is what began the process was the fact that the you're trying to start a Visa program in a program that's cutting itself back and I don't understand that well I think respectfully disagree Albert did this start because of that or
because the club needs additional employees and that was just one of the ways that you could that need correct correct having on campus housing all right as as as our planner testified people put that in ads um only
because it's getting light um there's a major difference in my mind between three people and 21 people you seem to think there isn't tell me why I think in the overall scheme of what's happening on the site
the size of the site where this building is located in relation to the neighbors I do not think it is when you look at the numbers yes it is an increase from the three people who live in this building the nine people if you include the the red the sorry the yellow house um they will the new the new employees
come in will continue to use the site as the existing employees do through the Milbourne side um given the number of people that Traverse a golf course especially during the high season I do not think this additional 18 people are going to be noticeable with on within within the site itself they're not going
to use the Wallace Avenue as the Wallace Road side so there will be no recognition of the existing people there the existing of the new people there the existing people also are not supposed to be using that site so there is no there should be no um recognition of them I think when you look at the overall
number of employees that already exist which I don't have the number but I'm sure Albert could testify to that it's a drop in the bucket compared to one of what what's already happening on the site so I think the intent of adding this this additional housing was to provide as we've already testified to
additional support to enhance the amenities that are already offered but in the overall scheme of what is happening already on this site I do not believe they are going to be uh noticeable from an outside perspective thank you one more question
get back to the the seasonality of employees I believe you testified that why it wouldn't be practical for house these people off site is because minimum one-year leases and season employees can't fill a one-year lease obviously the the seasonality I get the seasonality of the golf course
it's not open well certainly not all year round right now but is is the seasonality could does the seasonality of the golf course is that an at all balance and maybe Mr C you wants address to is the seasonality of the golf course employees at all bounced off by seasonality of Clubhouse employees for
lack of a better way to describe it and could the combination of that yield the possibility of getting off-site rentals for a year if that makes any sense hope that made sense does I think I understand the question the seasonality of the let's say the grounds maintenance
staff is let's say March to November um that's when the majority of the staff is is employed by the club the nature of those employees and the jobs they do don't necessarily translate to what we would need in the hospitality side on a more year round
basis other than the six weeks uh in the winter that we close down for for club projects so I don't I there there's not really a way to mesh the seasonality of the two teams to be able to take advantage of that so the
season seasonal is really just a grounds crewp predominantly as I as I said earlier the clubhouse is is a 46 week a year operation um olart dining and special events so yeah that's more year round okay so back to this I'm sorry I'm keep
I'm get you're getting your exercise I want to hear the stories about you you go to the yellow house when you were I knew a couple of the golf pros there so it was a good time but anyway um you made me change my Thro um the this seasonality employee um
can you explain to us like okay so the golf season starts March so if you if you don't get enough people like are you hiring seasonal people all could you conceivably have a seasonal employee from June to November
certainly certainly so we when I when I say seasonal um it's because we do bring in yearr round staff um when the colleg is let out um we start to bring in college students and that's generally in May June when high school's let out we
start bringing in June the college kids generally leave in August the high school kids leave in September so there's you know there there's seasonality that runs throughout the year especially on the hospitality side like the the most I guess what you might say strict scheduling
seasonality wise is are the grounds maintenance teams because when there's snowing on the ground or when it's cold no golfers they really can't be doing the work but the seasonality that I talk about is you know throughout the year and you know you like we have to play
replace member attrition we have to play replace staff attrition so um so we are we're in hiring mode all year round you know but it's tough when you when you have to rely on College college kids that you only get for say two months two and a half months or high school kids
you know that you get them work a couple weeks then their families go on vacation then they come back then they go to school so you know we're we're looking to try to generate a larger full-time yearr round staff that can assist with the seasonality of of the other so have
you looked into the possibility of outside agencies like landscaping companies we use those now pool management companies that Supply Personnel instead of you doing it yeah well the pool um you know that's it's the one area where we allow where we're
allowed to hire children of members so we generally don't have an issue with with pool staff um it's more you know it's more the restaurant staff and when we you know say for our larger Banquets where our full-time staff we don't have enough bodies to run the restaurant and
the event we do bring in outside contract all so those contractors drop the people off or do they drive no they're mostly driving uh driving themselves so we're where would they Park pardon and where would they Park well if they if if if the parking lot is full if we're if we're having our staff
Park offsite then they would have to park offsite but like I said we only do that 12 15 times a year so they're parking in the parking lot but we're you know as a result of that with a lot of those agencies you're paying for travel time and you're paying a premium more
than you're paying your full-time staff because they're providing that service but the person that's renting the the place pays that premium you charge that no they don't we have to be we even though we're a private club we do need to you know maintain a competitiveness with our pricing structure so um no we
don't generally pass that additional cost so your goal when you were talking about growth uh your plan is to have more of those functions moving forward if you can if you can if this if these seasonal workers or other employees can
be available you plan to have more of those functions well we plan to to be able to increase our our reservation times our our maximum reservation seatings uh for our times we're planning on having more member events we're having planning on having being able to
open up those member events for more people so yes we're that's that's where that growth is coming so that could theoretically result in more off-site parking for staff the allart side no because it's it's an in andout um so you know your
early SE seating is leaving when your later seatings are coming in you know if we have a party that say right now we have to limit to 200 people uh generally we're thinking that's 100 cars because they're coming in couples if we increase that to 300 we're only going to 150
spots of cars that we would need we currently have 360 spots parking places on property so you know it's it's really the you know the massive events when we do say a national paddle tournament or we do uh maybe the US Open qualifier
that we do you know uh for three years period periods you know they're the type of events where you know we can have 4 500 people you know mostly in their own cars coming on the property and we need to we need to offset that with our staff but but none of those events are you
know hinging on these 18 additional employees right I have a question you touched on um sorry you touched on members um children are only allowed to work in the pool areas not in the restaurant correct
is there have you considered like you know is there a reason why have you considered you know you staff there's a great reason why there's a great reason why because it's very difficult to reprimand um have tough conversations if
some you know I hire I hire a child of a member and they're not working out now I'm in a position where I either need to discipline that individual or terminate that individual and it's not you know they're they're the child of a member and they let pool they can be
doing well they're they're lifeguards and they're certified lifeguards and that's that seems to be something you know several of our local high schools that have swim teams the children on the teams they're they're members of the club so they they
work as lifeguards for it but that's really that that's the only maybe some caddies but they're they're independent contractors they're not employ you think you have a better you know if if you know the parent and the kids having a problem I think it's you're in a better position there that is something you you talk to 100 Club managers aund of them
will'll tell you the same thing we we won't hire children of members that's not specific to you not specific I'm sorry makes sense you don't ever want to be in that position it's it's a very different I've been there thank you um do we have questions
from the public questions only for this we yes hello again Paul Dean 6 to1 Wallace Road Summit New Jersey uh you talked about the general welfare um everybody over here and everyone surrounding that club
bought across across from a golf club not from a dormatory do you know any other dormitories in the city of summit I do not have any knowledge okay um you know what the zoning of the golf course was before the
golf is was put in no but the golf course has been here for almost 120 years I can tell you what it was it was an r43 single family residential which would mean a lot area minimum square ft of 43,000 square ft and that would be the
highest size minimum square feet Lots in all of sum uh so clearly um we wanted to preserve the golf course that wasn't a question but I'm going to respond to it the town the city did recognize that that was inappropriate
zoning because it was a golf course that had long been established and they changed the zone to the golf Zone in order for the golf course to flourish I don't believe the previous underlying zoning is relevant because the city made the decision to eliminate it they determined it to be
inappropriate okay I was on the planning board at the time they did that I was also on master plan let's make sure we keep it to questions only at this point your comment comes at the end try osure I was also on the master plan reexamination Committee in
2006 it says non residential Zone the caner golf course was removed from the r43 zone and placed in a new G golf land use designation um do you know what the surrounding zones for the entire Golf Course course are I do know they're
residential but I apologize I forget which ones they are it's okay they're all residential the entire site do you know the nearest multif family use I don't know the distance no okay you probably have to go all the way up Woodland Avenue now now is the time
already multif family use on let let's be clear now is the time for questions you can supplement with your commentary at the end during the public comment session but we need you to stick to just questions at this point please and I agree I don't know about the offsite but
this use and employee housing exists on site I I don't believe there in the technical sense of a multif family definition defition but we could put it under that umbrella so do you know what the uh permitted uses are under the golf Zone golf courses existing golf courses
you know what accessory uses are uses that support the golf courses buildings and structures used for maintenance and storage associated with Golf Course operations I quoted that earlier yes okay what are conditional uses I don't believe there are any that's the extent of the golf
course um that's why we're here for a D1 variance I'm just going to note that even though that wasn't a question okay and if you don't get the D1 vars tonight you could go back to the planning board and ask them to actually flesh out a zone that would permit pered
questions question no it's not that's just said she can go back to the planning that's a stat ask your questions now your comments come later if you don't have any more questions you can sit down um sir I'll sit down thank
you any other questions for this witness seeing none oh one one one question come up to the microphone please up to the microphone please I'm sorry will be the hacken sack Club was the only one you please say your name oh I'm sorry
Barbara v38 canberg Parkway the hackin the hackin sack Club was the only one that you found in your search of New Jersey that went that went from 8 to 18 recently uh that was through yes that was through a Google search trying to find recent
resolutions I would say that that's not an exhaustive search that was what was available publicly so it was one but B tool and the other course do have on-site housing so there's three there so you we've only found three others in New Jersey is that
correct in your searching those are the ones I know of and did you try to find more than okay I'm done that's made and nav also thank
you okay you have a super super quick thank you okay so the plan revisions reducing the number of employees to occupy the building and the increase in the room size address the comments raised by the neighbors and by the board at the last hearing those changes
coupled with the conditions agreed to by the applicant specifically that the employees will need to use the Milburn entrance and exit and the fact that nobody in addition to what's already existing is going to use that entrance and exit and all of the planning
testimony that was just provided demonstrates the site suitability of the use the many purposes of zonings and objectives of the master plan being Advanced and the lack of substantial negative impact on the surrounding neighbors and therefore I would ask the board to approve the application as
revised thank you very much Mr ball can we get um public comment public comments how could I forget um we now open up this hearing to are there any
bladders that are floating other than mine get this over um we'll Now open up this hearing to public comments please if you come up to the days state your name spell your last
name we'll SAR you win oh please raise your right hand do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes and can you just spell your last name please Dian d h a n thank you so there's been a lot of testimony about the use of that prior Baron from 2003 that approval
was given before the golf court uh golf5 2005 that was given before the golf Zone was created so had the planning board wanted to put housing in that golf Zone they would have done so at the time uh I
do commend can you have been a good neighbor uh whenever there's a major event they warn us they come out and say there's we have don't have concerns about parking on that uh on the course when they have an event they do Park along uh uh Wallace Road they give us
lots of notice uh a lot of uh players do Park on our street but they do retain Country Club services to move uh to move those people Bel on to the course expeditiously um the only thing I would say is I don't know how they come up
with 21 units you certainly can't Pig you back off that three unit approval number one and this is just too many units for that building Square uh you know too Square too many square foot too little square footage it's foreseeable
that they're going to have friends girl friends significant others and maybe even kids and then we're going to have to deal with that even though they've made a lot of promises we can't rely upon that thank you thank you other
comments Barbara VD 38 can Brook Parkway if you could raise your right hand do you swear from the testimony you're about to give in this matters the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do and could you just spell your last name please V is in Victor I TTI thank you thank
you what what is being proposed by can Brook Country Club in my opinion is going to fundamentally alter the character of Wallace there is been um and fundamentally and significantly may
impact the home values on Wallace um I know there's been testimony that it's 400 feet away and you can't see it but I took a picture from my house from my backyard right there it's an existing building which you already see though right I
don't see college dorms my concern well you're not going to see the college dorm because it's inside the existing building that you already see I'm going to finish my testimony my my statements there
is this is never before anywhere in Summit have to we've ever requested this type of dor dorm style housing three is not multif family I believe it's five that goes to multif family so maybe that's why they
put in three in the first place in 2005 but this is bringing a multi this is bringing it into a multi family commercial housing right on in view of our properties I mean I live on canberg I don't live on Wallace but my backyard
sees sees this while I know it's well I believe it's your intent to make sure that Nobody Breaks the Rules um when you're talking about young seasonal people from other countries I
find it very difficult to believe that that's not going to be the case but it's also been the testimony that um there can be visitors my another concern of mine is you know since they don't have you know
their right they're right outside you know there could be parties I mean I don't know this is after 10 o'clock after 11 o'clock you know I don't know the the the point is we don't know we haven't done this before you know nowhere in Summit this
is you know we heard a lot of testimony before about Oakridge about a roof line and impacting people's sight View and it's important but this is this is really important this is really important too
um in my opinion there are other there are other ways to handle it I understand that we need seasonal you might need seasonal employees but there are there are other options um you don't Cano Brook Parkway does not
have a hardship I I think to to provide a variance you have to prove that there's a hardship no that correct the the planner testified to the standards of proof required for the variances that are yeah I do I do have all of those I'm not I'm really
not I I looked at all those today and I'm not going to I'm not going to start with that except except that I disagree with her wholeheartedly on a lot of them number one being that she testified many times that you can't see from any of
people's residences and it's it's right there and that's just simply not true so if that's not true all she had to do is drive down Wallace and she you know that that's that's a false statement so
um since this is such a major my my biggest issue when there probably would have been more people here if the town if this variant request was highlighted more than the certified mail for things that we get in mail get
all the time and if the postman is not there and you don't go to the post office to pick it up you don't you don't see it I didn't see the November one I never went to the post office to pick to pick it up this is this is a major thing a major commercial multif family use
thing going up going up right right there and I I really would have appreciated it if the town made a a bigger deal about about sending it out to the neighbors my neighbors across the street didn't get it they didn't get the
notice so I I I think that well you guys have heard from me enough but I I request I request that you vote no on this um or at least a delay or or reduce it significantly 3 to
21 is huge and um we already have a false statement about about the impact of of the site thank you so if I could just say there's nine people who live on that site right now nine and there have not
been any issues that have come up with the neighbors with those nine people that live on that site um also this was noticed in accordance with the municipal land use law all of the neighbors within 200 feet did receive a notice and it was also published in the
newspaper I I am not saying that it wasn't clar I am suggesting that 200 ft for this type of project is not is not enough in any case we were notified by by email by all sorts of things by phone calls when when the town wanted to make
changes to Canoe Brook new Brook Parkway um when the town wants to notify people you know of something major happening there is a there is a way to do it besides a certified letter the same old way that we get we get all of these um variance requests and most of them are
of course do whatever you want to do to your own house um but these are not the the nine people that live there now are full-time they are not seasonal people this is this is a different this is a different category you know the college students foreigners it's it's a different category
thank you thank you yes Brian Orin 45 Wallace Road and if you could please raise your right hand do you swear airm the testimony you're about to give in this matters the truth the I have trouble hearing do you swear orir testimony you're about to give in
this matter is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth and can you just uh spell your last name please for the record spell your last name please o w r n thank you it seems to me that with the
addition of living space for 18 more people the area is becoming a village over there and or residential space I would never have
guessed that an area adjacent to a golf course would become an apartment are a dwelling and we already have three uh flood lights directly across from us
that are on From Dusk Till Dawn every single night and there's nothing to filter the I called a few years ago I called can brup to ask about maybe uh planting some
trees but they said that it uh was up to the city that they didn't like foing around with the trees but I do think that I'm against this plan because I
think that development on canoebrook property to this extent uh is going to be very detrimental to our neighborhood thank you thank you God bless
I'm still Kil War if you could please raise your right hand do you sarir the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do thank you first I agree with my wife smart
man o take an example man it works the public is damaged by this the public is here it would be more if it wasn't School weekend we are damaged by
this it's if you know canob Brook where the where this is it there's golf uh all around it when when the golf season is
going and to put 18 people there unless they're going to do crossw word puzzles it's going to they're going to get get out and especially in the nice weather there's nowhere to go there might be a backyard of the house or
something but when you have 18 21 people and it's nice they're going to go out they're not going to stay in there in that and there's nowhere to go because there's oh excuse me sorry it's
there's no there's people playing golf they're not going to go out and throw the ball around and stuff like that they're they're going to have to stay in there it's not realistic and I'm sorry that I that I laughed but you're not
you're going to have people coming in everybody knows the code and they're going to be coming in and out with with the cars I can see that that three people should be there it shouldn't be empty cuz it's a major complex in there
it's big go by drive by and see the three lights that my wife mentioned and you'll see a complex it's it's it's unrealistic to think that that won't that they they
won't use that road back and forth unrealistic and the it's unrealistic to me I was at the other meeting I didn't come away with a think that well there might be a little compromise here or a big one 3 three is
not a compromise it's just a way of getting back on the on the uh schedule for tonight and that's what it is um the on the legal end of it this is a
variance uh for staff housing in an expans an existing accessory structure whereas the use is not permitted accessory use pursuant to the statute it it and the public we are the
public because we're the other ones there and we are greatly affected by this and will be so the legal part of it was well prod well
presented but correct in terms of the public being affected we are and we are not in favor of it and we weren't then I think we got that point down there with far more people here
then but a compromise of three is not not enough the answer is I think oh no thank you so just to clarify it's six total beds three bedrooms which
is a 25% reduction excuse me I said it's six beds six people six total is the reduction that are there no six is the reduction not three it's three bedrooms six they previously proposed 27 beds they're now
proposing 21 beds it's a six bed reduction six bed yeah I just clarify okay no problem thank you thank you any other comments from the public okay seeing none Mr ball can you run us through how
many votes we need and conditions for this yes with a D1 use variance we need five votes in order to appr approve the application I have quite a few conditions though I think some of them it sounds like have been resolved since the last hearing yes and I think some were also I don't know if you still have
them were related to these storage tank so yes um so I'll rattle through them but I think we'll be striking a few of these at least first is compliance with those conditions noted in the board Engineers memorandum correct um second have we gotten a lighting
plan so we are only proposing one light the lighting plan was for the storage okay uh and just to confirm Marie no need for an additional lighting plan for this portion of the application then no that's correct okay um it's sounds
sounds like they've submitted the storm water management plan that you required correct okay um this one is for fuel storage we did previously indicate the applicant will submit the proposed plans to the fire chief for review and
approval and he commented on both of the applications okay um employees living sorry he had no objection employees living in the newly proposed units Must ALL use the Milburn
entrance and exit and shall not be permitted to park vehicles in the nearest parking lot uh third um was addressing bike rcks which has been resolved and we did also have a
condition about traffic flow including emergency apparatus has that been provided that was for the storage tanks and and it was provide yes okay so then we only have two conditions um has noted right there and compliance
with the construction officials comments which all right we have to do anyway three conditions okay we'll now go into executive session who would like to kick it off all right I didn't I didn't want to
go first but okay sorry um so I I honestly I've changed my mind a couple times about this application I probably should admit that that but I have I try not to make up my mind till towards the end but I went back and forth um and I could spend some time talking about the SE variances I think the SE
variances especially in terms of the building height and and the building itself aren't aren't difficult to approve I the building will be better it'll be you know it'll be a better building it's you know think any question about that the concern I still have is the number of beds and the
number of people that are going to go in this that are proposed to go in this building um I I see this potentially having a significant negative impact um due to some of the which are unknown because we don't know the impact for sure what it's
going to be but I I don't see how it's going to serve the public good um and I think it might harm the public good um it's it's the site is obviously suitable for for golf it's a golf course but I'm unconvinced that it's suitable for this large of a of a housing you know I not
sure I like the word dormatory but I guess that's a good way to think of it think of it as a dormatory um and I'm unconvinced that they that they need the dormatory in order to function as a country club they're functioning as a country club now um and there are certainly other country clubs that function without this
kind of on-site housing so I don't I don't think the applicant needs it um it might be a better way to function but I'm you I'm not sure it's necessary but I'm I'm hung up on the public good interest and I'm open to being convinced that you know if any of my colleagues
want to try to point out what the public good is and how we're serving the general welfare I'd happy to listen but that's where I stand right now can you just elaborate a little bit on the harms that you do perceive as a result of the application yeah I I I think it's
inevitable that there will be a greater amount of activity because of the additional people living there it'll have an impact on the residents um H you know coming coming in and out of the property I mean I know you try to keep it secure you try to you know keep the code secret I'm sure you try to do that
but I'm I'm sure it's inevitable that that gate will be used there'll be activity um on the grounds which may cause a disturbance again I'm saying some of this is unknown but I think the potential of this many people living there um has potential to to disturb the
neighborhood um create create additional additional traffic at you know theoretically I mean get they follow the rules not out hours but potential for the traffic to be at odd hours and to disturb the the Peace of the neighborhood Don
um Doo I'm not convinced that the this is a this is a dormatory out in the middle basically of a field uh I don't know how that benefits the public um I am concerned um with the amount of um we could have all the rules in the world
but uh there's just a convenience factor that's thrown into this um I'm just not 100% convinced that this is u a needed project I think it's um I think there might be alternatives to it to this um
so I'm not uh right now I cannot support this this uh project I'll just add to that I think I honestly think there's a missed opportunity to create positive criteria in a public good here just around I've mentioned it twice but if
you have 247 security turn this into a service entrance you could limit that code to security only they're the only ones who know about it and anytime a service truck comes in they can they can like be there um and I think that would probably help from um the public from a
Wallace perspective I don't know if 3 six 21 I don't know what the right number of people there um I'm open to having it more than what it is today but um like one of the comments when brought
this idea up was it seemed like it was more it would more of an inconvenience for the club um than it than it would be for the public and it you know again I think it's missed opportunity I think there's you know you potentially
position a little bit differently or get creative around you know how you're working with the neighbors but I'm not there I'm in a similar spot here um I'm
having a hard time seeing how it advances the public good there that there's a public benefit there is clearly a benefit to canra Country Club I recognize that I I could see why that would be you know easier um probably
less expensive in terms of a cost of doing business but that's really not that part the cost of doing business is not really what we're here for right um I do um appreciate all the public that's been here for these last two Mee
meetings because it's long and thank you for staying and sharing your your input um uh Mr Dean mentioned about the approval for the employees in 2005 that was before the master plan was revised
in 2006 and I think that's also a very important point that needs to be reiterated here that master plan when that was put into place and Cano Brook was made a golf Zone um they already knew that there were three people living in that building and then and they said
we're going to make this non-residential it not allow residential which says to me that this was reviewed discussed and you know they they they set the rule here right and we're we're here deciding
whether to break that rule and I think there was a lot of deliberation put into that that didn't just you know wasn't just oh it's a golf Zone non-residential this was made very very um if intently and I just haven't I don't see
why we would not hold to that in deference to the hour I'll make this brief parking hasn't been resolved to my satisfaction yet I also wonder whether or not they have explored other areas on
their property to do this I don't know well I haven't heard anything uh is there a potential to perhaps do it somewhere else on the other side of the course in other areas of their property this is a private club
it is not a public benefit the Visa program we don't know how what its future is and we also don't do know that it's being cut back so we're going to have to rely on our
relation ships with other states we opened this box in 2005 maybe it's time we close it in 2025 um there is a major difference in my mind between three people eight people
whatever and 27 people um I know a lot of uh I've dealt with hospitality for a long time hotels diners uh you know all kinds of places and a lot of the people that have have
careers there um I mean you said that these people would only be here for a year um I remember at the Grand Summit Hotel where we celebrated anniversaries of people who had been there 20 30 40 families that had been working there in
hospitality jobs um for all those years uh I wonder whether or not there would be the possibility for some of those folks to be there at Canoe Brook too
um it just doesn't add up to me and I'm just not able to support it can I can I ask the board is is go ahead J I just want to speak because I feel like there's one important thing that we're all missing here is that business
evolves employment evolves hospitality and employment in it it's not a new thing this has been a problem and every business that is in this industry whether it's a golf course a ski resort a restaurant it is a critical
issue for housing everywhere so while I'm not sold one way or another on this application I think we're missing a point that we have to understand understand that the public good is
addressing housing in general whether we can modify it to make the wallish traffic and that gate which I do find is a big concern more palatable the benefit is we are providing housing for that would not be taken from our community or
any other community in the market building a multif family building is still building a multif family building and then they're going to use it for their people so it doesn't address the public benefit so again I don't think 21 is the right
number I don't know but I think missing the idea of a public benefit here and that they're providing housing that is not taken from our housing stock is a public benefit and I I can just little add a little bit to that I and I realize it's probably not realistic I think I would
agree with it everything you said I agree with most what you said and I think if this application were maybe a little bit smaller and I know they can't take a a wall gate but if the wall gate weren't there and they had to leave you know through the the main entrance of the country club that would be a better
solution you know if if if if there was some confidence that that would happen but I agree with what you say about housing that's what I'm saying it's not the building I object to it's the potential impact of you know coming in and out of Wallace or you know whatever else might happen with with noise but
maybe that's so far why the noise is not an issue but it's the traffic that's the concern all right so is there a scenario where the board would more favorably consider a a further reduced scheme I think it's not just a a further
reduced scheme I think it's not uncommon for applicants to hear a lot of what we say and try to address it and it's not necessarily just the density right but it's also the traffic and the patterns that traffic will inevitably follow you know what are always flow is the easiest
path and that's going to go through the Wallace entrance and to add to that for the Wallace entrance if you do want to go to a store or you want to go to the 7-Eleven everything the closest retail stores are closer to
Wallace you're not going to get to it from um the service Ro on the other side there's nothing there's nothing there there's a shills mall so it's it's just natural that's the that's where you go you want to go to Deli you want to go anywhere you go Wallace to getmit so what what if this applicant were able to
produce a convincing solution to the board's concerns about access and traffic I I don't think so and uh I at this point think it would be appropriate to have a motion to
decline or whatever the appropriate term is to reject this application and I would sove I'm I'd be open to it I mean just if you're asking yeah I mean if there were some really secure whether it's a a card or something I don't know what it
would be well you know the concern is as you said water flows the easiest path so if you take away that path well that's what I'm I'm thinking you know if if I if I live in that building and I want to go out at 7:30 in the morning to go get
breakfast and I don't have a car what am I going to tag along with a maintenance maybe I mean you could or am I going to walk what if you can't get out that way that's but what jump the fence that goes but that makes it even more complicated now I got to go all the
way over to the Milburn side get an Uber I mean it it's it sounds like a plan I just don't know how logical of a plan it is maybe if we could you can't eliminate that gate CU they need it for um you know for for the materials to run the
golf course so the options always going to be there I just think it's a question of how do you how do you control it um you I that's and the other thing that I'm struggling with and I said this a little
bit but I didn't elaborate so much is I it's an apartment building in the middle of a field so I'm not it serves the golf course but the people that are in that that building can't go anywhere else unless they go to that other side to Milburn then they have to go wherever they're going to go
it's just I don't know if there's I don't know how to express there's other than working it's an offset for significantly reduced cost of living of course of course so respectfully this sounds like a project for the uh City's
Economic Development Committee that they have put together makes a whole lot of sense for them to start looking to see how to help can Brook meet its employment issues W it's not our problem because this doesn't fit this
property I understand that's why I made the motion M do you want to so Albert would you be willing to look at the Wallace gate and see how you can make security improvements so that
way these additional 18 people cannot access the gate is that basically the concern I mean they have I think I'm hearing concerns about access and sounds like density too so I know you've already viewed that I would say that the
density cannot be lowered based on the cost of the project and it just it it doesn't make sense to continue to keep reducing the number understood I just uh the the access on
Wallace yes I I think I understand the neighbors concerns but my concern is I I agree you don't want that to be the access point but you really need to have some kind of emergency egress and you
can't have you can't have your employees living someplace that's like a half a mile from the way to get off the property if there's an emergency I don't know what the emergency is that you know we don't need to think about what all the possibilities are but then you're really stuck there right I think the
test was is automatic if you're exiting it autom but we're talking about changing it so that it's not right I don't mind well if you I I think again I'm not an expert if you require that you can't get in without some higher security I'm less concerned about
getting out without some higher security but how does the emergency vehicles get inergen vehicles we'll have they'll have it they'll have access break yeah because they can't go through the tunnel so they have to go that way right I have a problem with the density
of the whole the whole project the Wallace Avenue is just another thing but I just have a problem with the whole thing the whole I think it's there's I think the size it's at now is is really I I can't go beyond that I just it's just too big and I think even
like I said I think I think I believe Mr you go Mr ster feel the same way I I as well do you all right um thought I'm voting but to that end then I think M we're probably gonna hold on just one
if we could get an idea of what the number the density number is I you know you're ask you're asking us if we'd be amenable to changing the density we've changed it what I don't want to do is keep coming back and spinning your wheels you know if I come
from 18 down to 14 is it 18 down to 12 you know is is there a density number that would make this Bo amendable to the project my thought at this point is there is a master plan review going on
right now at the planning board to be followed shortly thereafter by a new master plan it may be time that that's the venue where you need to go and let the municipality on the
hearings that it's going to have ongoing for what's going to happen with the gzone the golf Zone and uh the that decision gets made over the next uh I think they have about a they have till
the end of this year for the for the master plan review and then they've got another number of years to do the full one but they're going to be doing that because this is not going to fly here so I'm sorry just one second so since we're
still in executive session yes does that could that open the door to making it more um being larger yes sure certain but
again that's uh that's where Cano Brook Country Club and uh the entire city of summit will need to put its two cents in and just for the record foot notice for the planning board
everybody like the point of you like one of the uh residents the notification that that's something that needs to be discussed there too and then we can decide they can decide whether or not they opened the door in 2005 and want to close in 2026
whatever just for the record I would be open I don't know what that number is yet to a more secure entrance and a reduced density I don't know what number to make me comfortable I am I am open to that I know how many other people are but you might be sounds like me and you may be the lone people no I'm with you
all right three strong so I mean let's be realistic here they could buy a house and can work on Wallace and put two people in every bedroom put four people in every bedroom and unless somebody gets caught for a violation of SE even then you know so whether it's eight or
12 I mean 21 seems to be the hangup but you know I I get the economics of it it becomes not feasible and I would think probably if there's existing is it six today six beds there's three beds in there now and six in the other
building right with the six in the other building aren't counting for this right now right they it's just three it's just three in this building and again if we could have some direction then I think that we could try to make a reduced
density work I'm thinking half literally half like 10 I mean because you haven't you haven't done this before you could see where it goes and if it's I I I just it's a it's a lot I think it's a lot I don't know
um and and even then I'm still still concerned about overriding the master plan which says non-residential for a reason after which and it was put in place after those that three was were approved sorry can I just say one thing
the gzone was rezoned in 2001 not in 2006 the nonresidential part of was that yes that was before the application yes that was a misstatement and
yeah and I also would hear their planner and our planner didn't contradict this the whole point is to guide us to evolve it's supposed to stay within reason this is a need business in the world is changing our housing is an issue we
fight all the time about to put in density in where we don't want it because it doesn't make sense this is a wide openen field I see the need that it's going to continue to benefit more constituents in the area more diversity in the area more paying
people for all the small businesses here so I don't want to miss that opportunity to address a need not taken from our housing stock that other residents and other employees are going to need in in this market so I'm afraid at this point even
if we ask them to go back and revise that we're still not going to get the consensus for approval that we need with this board my hangup is the the impact on the neighborhood you know what I've learned
in the last year is every neighborhood has its own issues and um here's an ability for us to control something in the neighborhood to help the neighborhood control an issue that they have um it's going to be you know they have a problem now currently with what's
going on there with the delivery and trucks and they they've learned to live with it over the years um it's G to it could possibly increase more um with the number of people on there but if there was for lack of a better word if there was a guarantee that
uh Wallace Road would just be used at the current volume that it is now you know that house in the middle of the field is something you know maybe if it's a little small we we could deal with but I'm I'm right now I'm not
convinced um and it is referenced in the 2006 master plan reexamination that Canoe Brook Golf Course was removed from r43 and placed in a new G golf land use designation so I understand it may have passed in 2001
but in the reexamination of 2006 they mentioned it again for under non-residential zones specifically in there's a resol ution from November of 2001 that establishes the The Zone the
golf Zone and the that in the 2006 it was basically just reiterating what they had done in 2001 so in 2001 it was established as a non-residential Zone correct and in 200
they sort of reexamined yes and and in 2005 can Brook got their approval to employee housing on the site plus it already pre-existed I I know for a fact it existed that but but then they needed further approval for the three the
building with the three bedrooms in 2005 so after it was put into the golf Zone in 2001 then in 2005 can bro came in and asked for before this before this board yes all right
can I get a motion to approve no my motion was to reject I understand which means if you vote Yes it means no so okay so then I think we're going to withdraw the application understood
okay do we need to accept that at all nope okay it's been withdrawn sorry all right you have a resolution minutes just one I don't think we have minutes what I don't think we have minutes I don't think they came but that
it's on the agenda was on the agenda I had okay but you have a resolution for uh Johnson ohy yes resolution of approval do we have a motion
motion who are the who are the authorized voters uh let me get there let me see if I have it on the last page of eligible voting members are chairman lyit Vice chair Zan Mr Steiner Mr Nelson miss chfo Mr huskins Mr Chuli I'll SEC
so move I'll second all right just give me one second here sorry Mr Steiner and Mr and roll call Mr Steiner yes uh chairman Lyin yes Mr Yuko
yes I'm sorry I think I might be reading the wrong yeah I'm not even sure what I said yes too but I you called my name I said yes was I not at the meeting it's you're voting on the Johnson resolution sorry Mr Yuko you're not eligible here uh Mr Nelson yes Vice chair on
yes Miss Cho yes and Mr feskin yes thank you uh I don't believe we have any I am going to take one second of personal privilege and move the resolution which I think you all were handed when you
walked in uh thanking Stephanie for her work over the last couple of years uh which I have to tell you as a chairman she was invaluable with on the day-to-day stuff and uh never mind all the changes in the forms and the uh getting everything together when we
needed it and I would move that resolution as presented so move second and Mr Steiner yes uh Mr yo yes Mr
Nelson yes Vice chair Zan yes Mr Kieran yes Miss Chapo yes and chairman Lin yes good luck to Stephanie yes and by the way you can tell her we passed it on our last day which is
today Friday oh my gosh last Friday is our last day right today is our last day and it is now today can we get a motion to adjourn just really fast Saturday what's the how many people are attending is the thing
on Saturday we don't even know additional training yeah what a training from what zoning and planning okay whatever Burgess wanted te people are we um do we have to motion I know it's your he's not
my favorite guy for training florid hours e