time. order. Welcome to the reorganization public meeting of January 7th, 2026 of the Township of Washington Planning Board. Adequate notice of the meeting was given in accordance with the open public meetings act by the board secretary to at least two newspapers on
December 18th, 2025. And this meeting has been posted on the Township Bolton board, electronic message board, WCTV, and on the township website. Please stand for the salute to the flag. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. So, we're going to have a recognition of our retiring board member, Brian Mur.
>> Retiring. >> When did that happen? He's He's here. He's ready to go. >> You know, he dyes his hair gray, right? >> You said rose to recognition. >> Yeah. >> Would you join me? Thanks.
So Brian, I want to thank you for your many years of service to the board. I know a lot of the residents who applications you've heard want to thank you also, although they're not here in person this evening to do it. Uh but you know, you heard a lot of applications. I know you judged each one on its merits and you know, did a good job on your
time on the board and you know, I greatly appreciate it. you serving under my tenure and even before that. Uh so you know congratulations on your retirement from the board and Lenny I hope you have a few words to add also. >> Yeah again thank you for your mentorship
and coaching since 2010 because you and I both came on the board at the same time >> and again I wish you all the best and uh always welcome back. >> Keep the seat open. >> We'll keep the light on this. >> Exactly.
I'll just read this plaque. Uh, of Washington, presented to Brian Murphy in appreciation for your many years of outstanding service. Planning board member 2010 to 2025 and chairman 2018 through 2020.
>> That's right. I didn't even notice that typo. >> All right. Well, absolutely. So, I'm going to hold it. But it's another way to get you back to another meeting. We plan that.
>> Well, I apologize for the error, but we will get it fixed. Yeah. Okay. Well, best of luck with everything. Enjoy retiring from the board and, you know, do the traveling that I know you want to do. Okay. >> Thanks for coming.
>> Thanks. Appreciate it. It was a pleasure, gentlemen. >> It was fun working with you. >> Likewise. >> Okay, I'm going to read the uh members who are appointed by Mayor Komari. Um January 5th, 2026. We have Vladimir
Weranski, who's a class 2 member. His term will be January 1st, 2026 through December 31st, 2026. Then we have Say Toro. He's a class 4 member. His term is January 1st, 2026 through December 31st,
2029. Then we have Michael Toledo, who's also a class 4 member. His term is January 1st, 2026 through December 31st, 2021. 2029. I I apologize, Mayor. You were going to swear them at one time.
>> Yes. Yes. Um so say you happen to be up first if you'll join me down below. Um >> great. Thank you. >> Want to go down there? >> Yes, please. >> Why don't you come down and hold the Bible? We'll make this a person thing.
left hand on the Bible, your right hand. Um, any chance you because the cameras are catching up. I want to make sure that I'm blocking you, especially the man of the moment. I >> I say so Toro >> do solemnly swear or affirm >> do solemnly swear or affirm
>> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and that I will bear true faith >> and I that I will bear true faith >> and allegiance >> and allegiance >> to the same >> to the same >> and to the governments established
>> and to the governments established >> in the United States >> in the United States >> and in this state >> and in this state >> under the authority of the people >> under the authority your people >> and that I do solemnly swear >> and that I do solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully >> impartially >> impartially >> and justly perform
>> and justly perform >> all the duties of >> all the duties of >> up board member >> in the township of Washington >> township of Washington >> in the county of Bergen >> in the county of Bergen >> in the state of New Jersey >> the state of New Jersey >> according to the best of my ability >> according to the best of my abilities >> so help me God
>> so help me God >> thank you and congratulations >> Mr. Mr. Po, your left. >> Yep. >> Except for your name. So, I hope you memorized any of that. I >> I Michael >> do solemnly swear or affirm
>> do solemnly swear or affirm >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. >> And I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. and to the
governments established in the United States. >> And to the governments established in the United States >> and and in the state >> and in the state >> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people. >> And that I do solemnly swear >> and that I do solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully >> impartially >> impartially >> and justly perform
>> and justly perform >> all the duties of a >> all the duties of a planning board member >> in the township of Washington >> township of Washington >> the county of Bergen >> the county of Bergen >> in the state of New Jersey >> state of New Jersey >> according to the best of my abilities >> according to the best of my abilities. So helping God.
>> Thank you. Congrats. >> You want to stay down there? Yeah. I'm just going to unfe him into the record. >> So we have one member appointed by the town council on January 5th, 2026. It's Councilman Michael Alman who is a class 3 member and his term is January 1st,
2026 through December 31st, 2026. I >> I Michael Alman >> do solemnly swear or affirm >> do solemnly swear or affirm >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New
Jersey >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and that I will bear true faith and allegiance >> and that I will bear true faith and allegiance >> to the same >> to the same >> and to the governments established >> to the governments established >> in the United States >> in the United States >> and in this state >> and in this state
>> under the authority the people >> under the authority of the people >> and that I do solemnly swear >> that >> that I do solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully >> impartially >> impartially >> and justly perform >> and justly perform >> all the duties of the >> all the duties of a planning board
member >> in the township of Washington >> in the township of Washington >> in the county of Bergen >> in the county of Bergen >> in the state of New Jersey >> in the state of New Jersey >> according to the best of my abilities >> according to the best of my abilities >> so help me God >> so help me God >> thank you congratulations >> all right thank you very
Thank you. >> That ends this round. Okay. I'm going to take the roll call of the 2026 planning board of the township of Washington. Mr. Carol >> here. >> Mr. Pledo >> here. >> Mr. Sabino >> here. >> Mr. Tulle
>> here. >> Mr. Toro >> here. >> Mr. Rogeransky is absent. Councilman Alman >> here. >> Mayor Palomari >> here. >> Let the record reflect. Also in attendance are attorney Lu Lamatina, engineer Paul Aelina, and secretary Grace Dish. Okay. I will take
nominations for planning board chairman. >> I'm proud to nominate my friend uh Lenny Sabo. I'll second that. Any other nominations? >> Okay, Mr. Carol, >> we can do all in favor. >> Yes.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Okay. I will now hand over the meeting to the planning board chairman who will continue the agenda. He's got to get sworn in first. Yeah. Do the honor? >> Y.
>> Yeah. Um, who wants to hold the Bible for a bloody? >> I'll do it. >> Great. >> Iardino. >> Do solemnly swear or affirm. Do you solemnly swear or affirm >> that I will support >> And I will support >> the Constitution of the United States
>> the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey. >> And I will bear true faith >> And I will bear true faith >> and allegiance >> and allegiance >> to the same >> to the same. and to the governments established in the United States. >> and to the governments established in the United States.
>> And in the state >> and in the state >> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people. and that I do solemnly swear >> and and that I do solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully >> impartially >> impartially >> and justly perform >> and justly perform >> all the duties of the office of
>> all the duties of the office of chairman of the planning board >> in the county of Washington >> in the county of Washington >> in the county of Bergen >> in the county of Bergen >> in the state of New Jersey >> in the state of New Jersey >> according to the best of my abilities >> according to the best of my abilities >> to a healthy God to a healthy God congrats
>> thank you thank Okay. Uh, nomination and election of planning board vice chair. Do we have a nomination for the planning board vice chair? I nominate Bill Carroll. >> I'll second that.
All in favor? >> I I think call for any other nominations. I think >> Oh, I'm sorry. Any other nominations besides Carol? >> Okay. >> All in favor? >> I
>> go down and do it again. >> Yeah. >> Get more exercise. >> Yeah. Back. We didn't do such a great >> I >> I Bill Carol >> do solemnly swear or affirm >> do solemnly swear or affirm >> that I will support the Constitution of
the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and that I will bear true faith >> that I will bear true faith and allegiance >> and allegiance >> to the same >> to the same >> and to the governments established
>> and to the governments established >> in the United States >> the United States >> and in this state >> under the authority of the people >> the authority of one people >> and that I do solemnly swear >> that I do solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully >> impartially >> partially >> and justly perform
>> justly perform >> all the duties of the office of >> all the duties of the office of vice chair >> the Washington from Washington to >> the county of Bergen. >> County of Bergen >> in the state of New Jersey >> of New Jersey. >> According to the best of my abilities to
the best of my abilities. >> Thanks. Congratulations. Congratulations. Okay, now on to new visits. Resolution PB26-01, appointment of Lewis J. Lamontina, Esquire as planning board attorney for
the year 2026. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Also, yep. There's an objection. Just favor. >> Any objections? Okay. All in favor? I
>> resolution PB26-02 appointment of Coral Aelina Vaselina and Furry Engineering Inc. as planning board engineer for year 2026. Do we have a motion? >> So move. >> I'll second. >> Any uh anyone else? Any other
nominations? >> All in favor? >> I thank you everybody. Uh resolution PB26-03 appointment of Joe Burgess of Burgess Associates Inc. as planning board planner for year 2026. Do we have a
motion? >> Motion second. >> Any all favor? Fine. >> All in favor? I >> I >> resolution PB26-04
appointment of Grace Kish as planning board secretary for year 2026. Do I have a motion? >> So move. >> Sorry. Approve. >> Bill. I'll second it. >> Okay. All in favor?
>> Thank you. >> Resolution PB26-05, approval of 2026 planning board meeting dates for year 2026. We have a motion. >> Motion. >> Second. >> All in favor? I
>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Lou. Look forward to working with you. You and Paul, >> thank you. >> My fellow board members, I should point out compensations do get raised. I got a raise. >> I think I think they thought I was going
to resign when you left. >> So, they bumped me up a little bit. So, I appreciate >> a little bit. And notice he said that after he's appointed. >> Yeah, exactly. >> If you see my partner read at my first >> that's per minute you get what I get for the meeting.
>> No. Uh after the public portion, Grace, please read the uh public statement. >> To participate in the general public portion of the meeting, please click the link below to join the webinar. You will be asked to state your name and address for the record and we ask that only one person speak at a time. This public
comment portion is only for non-aggenda items. Time is set aside later in the meeting to address questions or comments about current agenda items. If you are participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star six to unmute. At the end of the general public
portion, no further general questions or comments will be accepted. >> Thank you, Grace. Do I have a motion to open the public portion? >> So moved. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I. Anyone in the audience want to
uh discuss a topic with the board other than what's on the agenda for this evening? >> No one. Anyone on video? >> Okay. Do I have a motion to close the public portion? >> So moved. >> I'll second. >> All in favor?
>> I. >> Okay. Now on to uh new business. First application application of RNC prime properties for 680 McKinley Avenue block 3103 block one.02
for demolition major soil movement and tree removal with the applicant uh here this evening. >> Yes. >> Yes. His attorney is >> the attorney by Zoom. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Great. The first question before
you start your presentation to have has the applicant and you council received a copy of the >> Please let me know when you're uh you're ready. Sure. >> Oh, good enough.
>> This right here. Yeah. Yeah. Pull it up from here. >> Nothing. Peter, you're up. That's our attorney in the picture. Okay. >> Can you hear us? >> Maybe he's muted.
>> Mrs. Council, can you hear? >> Perfect. >> Would you like to kick off the application? >> Yeah. Yeah. So, so um for the record, my name is Peter Z and Associates. I represent RNS Prime Properties. The owner of the property is located 680
McKinley A and 683 Pasco Road, block 3103, lots 1.02 and 1.01. Uh the the applications are before uh the board because they together because they arise from a previously approved minor
subdivision granted by this board um which created two lawful buildable residential lots. Uh, tonight's applications are the implementation of that approval. And just to clarify, it's not a reconsideration of or anything like that. Um, to to just for the
record, these are not use variances. They're they're not density variances. They're not requests for intensified development. Uh, they're simply for one uh for each lot, one single family home uh permitted in the class B residential zone consistent with the uh surrounding
development. And with that, I will uh kick it off to Mr. Mr. Doolittle. >> Hey, Mr. Doolittle, please uh provide. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> You get your oath and then your qualifications. >> Yes. We're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, I help you God. >> I do. Doug W. Dittle. I'm a licensed
professional engineer land surveyor in the state of New Jersey. I've been practicing for over 50 years in Northern New Jersey. I have been qualified in front of Florida many years ago. And pretty much that's what keeps me busy. >> Okay. Great. Uh, does the board accept
uh, Mr. Dittle's qualifications? >> Yes. >> Yes. Thank you. >> We also, you also have a copy of the engineers report? >> I do. Yes. I received them today. >> Okay. Great. >> In order to expediate expediate the uh, application be great if you could
address the engineers comments as you >> do. We want to do one at a time. >> Yes. >> Uh, just to go through a little quick history. This is the subdivision. It was approved. Um it was approved by one resolution September 25th 2024. It was
amended with an extension to July 2nd 2025 and deeds were recorded for the two lots on August 25th 2025. So these are two actually independent lots at one time that this was one big lot that we subdivided into. Uh we originally
planned a new home on this lot over here which was the vacant portion of the property. It was an existing home over here on the original subdivision. we were going to add addition to that. We've since changed our mind and we've gone to a new structure over here as well. So that just wanted to bring the
board up to speed new familiar. Uh just refresh my memory which application was first. >> The uh McKinley McKinley >> uh 680 McKinley. This is a site land
erosion set control. It's a corner lot on the corner and the north side of McKinley and the east side of Pasc Valley Road. We have originally had existing dwelling here which we decided to remove instead of put an addition onto. We're going to put a new dwelling
in here. Now, uh this actually had two variances for the pling board. We had a rear yard set back here where we were about at about 10 ft. We moved it now double to 20.5 ft. and we had a setback requirement of now 26.25 ft which we're
back at 26.7. Uh it's basically a clean soil moving application. Uh new structure 14 and 1/2t wide driveway, a front porch and a walk. You got some window wells and a platform in the back.
Uh we proposed the cage spin in the front and has picked up all the roof drains and that has been approved by a whole bass. Um the soil moving to be removed is on this particular we're cutting a total of 563 yards. We're
replacing 341 with a total removal of 222 cubic yards uh which is breaking about 15 can of load which is not a lot of soil and we are on a county road. We're limited by the town load so there's very
little impact on the town right. Um, outside of that, there was I believe Paul your letter said we can now get a 20 foot setback off of McKenley. We don't plan on moving the home at all. We're going to leave it right where it is now. And there is a question as to the building height. That has changed
from 25 to 28. We're going to raise the ridge 2 ft to 27 basically. Um, outside of that, I have no issues with Paul's comments. I have gone through review letters. and they just see how he had a
question. If he has questions, he's ser minor waivers on the original subdivision. The one was for a walkway along McKinley Avenue which were also carrying that waiver over and the other waiver was for deposit within 100 ft of the site. We omitted the topography
because everything is basically draining towards Pascrow and Akinley. So, we're picking all that far up. By the way, I'm just see fitting into a municipal right away. It's not giving you any problems. Uh, with that, I think I've pretty well
covered anything. Again, we make no exceptions to any revisions that Paul's letter requests uh that we're comfortable with moving forward as is. >> Thank you, Paul. Any additional uh comments? >> Yes. the the only uh
conflict with was testimony over by Mr. Doolittle. I recognize that the setback uh is 20 ft always was 20 ft. Uh but then when the subdivision was uh created, you had to consider the uh
setbacks within within the block. >> Correct. >> For your calculation, it was 26 and 1/2 ft. >> Correct. So, your subdivision, I believe, locked you into that 26 and 1/2 ft. >> And we're holding that regardless. >> Yes, but I thought you stated during your testimony that you were going to go
down to 20. >> No, we were going to go down. I think your letter said something about it being 20 and that gets a little tangled. That's why I just wanted us to clear that up. The structure is not moving. It's staying at 26.7, which is from four to the minus. >> Okay. So then the other other thing
about this so the board will notice that the uh front porch uh covered porch extends uh projects within that front yard setback but the way the ordinance was revised that is a permissible
projection. Uh it's less than it used to be. It used to be allowed up to 10 ft. Uh it was modified such that it's 5t off the home and 30 square ft. Um, so the porch as it's presented complies with that new standard. So, um, from a zoning
perspective, uh, I I don't believe any variances are required. Um, the only other thing that Mr. Doolittle did not touch upon was the tree removal on on this property. I'll let you uh apprise the board as to what the proposal. >> We did mitigate the trees on here
originally. I think we proposed Total total of 44 trees. >> 44 trees which I believe were down. >> No, what 22 to come down. Uh 44 was the proposed replanting >> which was it. Well, in excess your
letter reports that we needed. We didn't know that at the time. Um and what we'd like to do is cut that 44 in half if that's okay with the board. Well, that's that's what so we're taking 22 down. We're basically going to add 22 instead of the 4.
>> The reason is because the 6 in everything was below want to go back and just uh reduce this slightly but still 22 trees on here is >> okay. Yeah. We'll we'll go get to the board
comments. >> Okay. >> Afterwards, >> once you're done with your presentation, >> Paul, do you have any additional questions? >> So then I'll just I'll just go through the u I agree with the quantities cited in in Mr. Dittle's testimony. There are
some additional fees that are due and payable uh prior to the construction permits being issued. Those are set forth at page five of 14, Roman numeral 4 under items uh four, five, and
six. Um so those are all as per code 6, seven, and eight. Uh zoning we just spoke about. Um there are there is an easement that was established for the subdivision that is not depicted on the plan that needs to be added to the plan. So
>> just for clarity that has been reported. Yep. observation. Uh as Mr. Doolittle stated, there are number of trees uh that are less than 6 in uh in caliper. So those do not really count to the mitigation requirement. So
I take no exception to the 22 trees. I thought perhaps you might want to keep the the 28 arms that you have along the perimeter to create a screen, but certainly up to We'll keep that option open, but our goal right now is to reduce it to 22 and we certainly are capable to go higher if need be.
>> Okay. Just uh for your reference, uh board I believe uh likes to have a variety of trees. So I would discourage from 28 arriving or 22 arborite. If you could keep some of the deciduous that you have proposed as well, I think that would be uh something that this board
would want to see. >> We can do that. >> Okay. Uh stormwater management. I agree with the calculations provided. The design will uh work. We spoke about the height restrictions. So, you're going to be raising the ridge
2 feet. Uh so, um perhaps the architect will be testifying as to how that change will be uh implemented within the structure. >> Uh he's here if you need him to. We can merely just probably put testify that that will be in the roof. Uh, >> so you're not going to adjust any
ceiling heights in? >> No ceiling heights to my knowledge, but I'll leave that up to the builder and the RC. >> Yes, I would I would uh I like to uh do the floor floor heights uh based on 8 in increments. So, I'll I'll likely
raise the first floor 8 in and the second floor 8 inches as well. Uh the basement itself would stay at the level that it is. It's not going to go any further down. >> Yeah. So the reason I thought you would probably want to change the ceiling heights, you know, typically 9 foot ceiling is a kind of state of equipment
these days. I don't believe the plans currently reflect that. So >> it'll make for a better space. >> That's why I made the uh made you aware of that code change that I think works to to your favor. >> Um other So there's an existing sewer for for this property. Uh I'll provide
Mr. Doolittle with the asbuilt drawing. He'll be able to locate the existing cleanout. So then, uh, typically you want to reuse the existing sewer that's in the street so you don't have to dig it up. Um, which is acceptable as long
as you do a video inspection of it, send me a copy of it, and we'll confirm that the sewer is in good condition and can be reused at this time. Um, other utilities, you obviously have gas and water to the home. Do you know if they're large enough to support the the
new home or >> No, most likely the water's going to be upgraded. Yeah, we're gonna probably have to upgrade the water line from the main. >> Okay, so I think that not such a big deal, right? The water is on your side of the street, so that'll be a short excavation. Gas is on the other side of the street, so if that needs to be
upgraded, then so the utility companies will will have to get road opening permits through the township clerk's office. Uh plans do not reflect a standby emergency generator. Um, okay. So, if you do change your mind or your buyer ch uh wants it, there is a section
of the code that needs to be complied with if that were to be provided. Uh, Mr. Dittle spoke of the waiverss. I agree with no objection to the granting of them. There is no sidewalk along McKinley. Uh, there is a sidewalk along Pascac that was installed uh as part of
the intersection improvement. Um, hearing is being held right now. Development fees will be due and payable uh as calculated by the tax assessor and then um other outside approvals once should the board grant its approval uh
as set forth under item uh Roman rule 10. And then there are certain cleanup uh items on the plans uh that need to be addressed which are set forth at appendix A. Uh mostly related to the new zoning uh things that need to be
incorporated into into the uh into the uh zoning table as well as the issues that we discussed relative to the road permits, utilities, etc. So that would conclude my report, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Paul. Uh, any questions of
the applicant for any of my fellow board members? >> Um, I think Paul and the applicant explained it, but right now it's designed for 24.9 and you're proposing adding two feet. Does that mean all of these documents
need to be revised? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, as part of the approval and resolution, we would need to receive these prior to uh approval based on our discussions.
>> I wouldn't think so, Paul. >> Typically, you offer it the approval in a conditional fashion, which would then be subject to my further review and approval, which I would then forward uh that information to the construction official that permits could be released.
So >> we'll indicate that the height is going to be 27 and the plans will be revised accordingly. >> 28 if I'm hearing it. I say perhaps it makes sense for the architect to offer some testimony so that everybody's clear as to what's happening. >> Is it 27 or 28?
>> I think 27 is enough. U the code is 28. So I don't I don't know if there's any any issue if we wanted to go to 28, but I think 27 is is enough. But in the resolution can we say maximum
of 28 or in accordance with >> say maximum 28 in accordance with the ordinance. >> Yeah. And that will be reapped by the zoning officer. >> Y >> and in that regard, we would require a a ridge certification, you know, prior to putting the roofing on that, okay,
you're where you're supposed to be and that would confirm that that's what's actually >> I just need clarification on the trees. So you had 28, four red maples, 12 service berries. Uh what do you want to
do with the four and 12? is again the board likes to see deciduous as opposed to all green giant arborites. So how would you want that breakdown? If the board approves 22, do we want to do two red maples, six
service barriers, or just let me know what uh your thoughts are. Page eight of the report. We'll take whatever is acceptable for the board. >> So any any from the board? Do we want to do we want to keep the four red maples
and 12 service berries and just stay at six up to six? At least six. >> That's a good idea. >> Yeah, I'm okay with that. >> Yes. >> So you can do as many as you want. If you decide you want to put the 28 up, that's fine. >> Okay. So four, 12, and at least six.
>> Yep. >> Okay. That's all I have. Any further questions? Do we have a motion to open the public portion? >> Motion. >> I'll second. >> All in favor?
>> I. >> Anyone in the audience uh like to comment on this application? No one in the audience? Anyone on video? >> Do we have a motion to close the public comment? >> Motion. I'll second.
>> All in favor? >> I >> Okay, we have a motion to approve. >> And B, just to be clear, so the the 22 is not a waiver. It's it's what the ordinance requires. >> It's in excess of what the ordinance requires actually.
>> So can can we just clarify? Uh towards the end of last year, there was a discussion and uh Mr. W Jeransky uh you know raised the issue of us doing
resolutions that aren't uh supported by updates that were discussed and memorialized in the uh resolution. meaning that we didn't
the board didn't receive revised plans and uh you know for their review and I I was under the impression and perhaps I am not remembering it properly but that we as a board wanted to see the revised
plans or at least understand that they had been received and been reviewed. I think there was a discussion that we didn't want the applicant to go through the expense of copying another,
>> you know, 14 sets or whatever it is, but that we needed to understand that they had been reviewed and that they align with the resolution. And if that's not the case, that's fine. But I thought that was the discussion. >> Yeah. >> Well, Paul's the gatekeeper. So, it goes
to Paul and he makes sure that the revised plans are in accordance with the resolution. So, he's the gatekeeper. I don't think this board ever got revised plans unless he unless the applicant was coming back for another another session. >> Yeah, I thought we had agreed that to your point the gatekeeper was Paul but
also uh the zoning officer or the construction official and we would we would indicate in the resolution the request or the need for updated plans, >> right? Schedule a whatever Paul request we put that the applicant will update the plans
in accordance with the letter. So then Paul gets it, construction official and then go from there. So I don't think this board ever got got plans. >> Yeah, correct. I I can add the planning board as a CC to to the letter that I do to the construction official that says
I'm in receipt of you know these plans revised to this date. >> Um and that's what the letter states basically that they've revised it in accordance with the comments of my review letter, comments uh of the public if any the board. Um, so
it really would just be CC in the board on on that report that I do for all all these types of applications. If that's something you want to see in this, not a problem. >> Is that typically done within the two week? >> No, typically it's, you know, it's it's
really uh dependent on how quick an applicant's professional is able to turn it around and then how quick we're able to turn it around. So typically it's it's not going to be, you know, two weeks. It's going to be, you know, a month, six weeks, something something like that. >> Yeah. We'll need a resolution signed
first before we can go to the building department. At that time, we'll make all the revisions to the site plan and the architectural plans that will go for review at based on tonight's meeting and it'll go to the building department and the zoning officer to follow the
resolution as well as any false comments. That's routinely how I've seen it done. So, so what I do is called the resolution compliance review. So, that that's the function is to tell the construction official that from the site
uh and site and drainage things everything is in accordance with the approved plans. >> Okay. >> Any other comments, thoughts from the board members? No. Do we have a motion to approve?
>> Motion. I'll second. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Mr. Toledo, >> yes. >> Mr. Tulle, >> yes. >> Mr. Toro, >> yes. >> Councilman Alman, >> yes. >> Mayor Kamari,
>> yes. >> Chairman Sino, >> yes. >> First applications approved. Now on to the second. for application of RNS prime properties for 683 Pasc Road block 3103 block one.01
for major school um yeah this is again going back to the subdivision that was priorly approved by this board. Uh this is the lot to the north farms on PC road which is a county road with no structures here to be removed
conforming structure. There are no barriers required for zoning. Uh we've got some window wells and a platform in the back. We got platform in the front. We have a driveway ingress off of past road with on-site turnaround which was required by the county. We've got a
couple of air conditioners. We proposed a seepage pit in the rear of the property for all the roof runoff and we spilled water out to the street in the front. Uh soil to be moved here is 514 cubic yards total, 140 go back and 374
get removed which equates to about uh probably 3010 truckloads which will go out onto the county road. So there's the tremendous movement as far as the town goes as far as the soil and it's very small amount as well. Um
we can get to the trees. This lot has substantially less trees on it. Um, we have four tree existing number of trees to be removed. Two required four. We're proposing four to be planted.
Again, if we can cut that in half because I don't think it'd be any sign of site, we'll do that. If not, it's not the end of the world. Uh there was a question in Paul's report about a uh a a clean out or an access to a
underground storage tank. I don't know if you know anything about that, >> but we will. >> Yeah. >> You want to address that? >> We're going to remove that. >> It's going to be removed. Okay. That'll be removed and taken care of through the legal account and process uh through the building as far.
>> Is that the ground level fill cap that? It is. Okay. >> Yeah. Uh we went through this dirty truckload of soil. Uh again, building height, we're going to add 2 ft. From the 24.9, we're going
to go up 2 ft. So the maximum 28 per your zoning orders. It's been revised. We have no objection to um the setbacks and side nothing's going to change because we are conforming in the house move. Uh and we go back to the design waiver
again of the 100 topography around the site which we omitted again because everything is either going into the Cit from the structure itself or it's going at the Pascat Valley Road. So there is no impact on any Jordan properties. I think that pretty well wraps it up.
Anything? We would have no objection to all his appendix A revisions to the plan as well. >> So, it's a pretty clean application. We're not looking for any major no variances for zoning, no major waiverss, just a a waiver with the topography
around it and not a lot of soil to be moved and what is moving off site is going on with county road. >> Thank you, Paul. Additional comments. >> Uh agree with Mr. Dittle's uh comments, testimony. Uh just uh clarification. So
the plan shows a tank and there's an above ground storage tank in the back corner of that property. Is is that for the building next door or you have any knowledge of of no >> what that is? And then I only discovered
the other day the ground level Phil captain is actually sort of a depression there. So >> do you have any knowledge of of any >> No, we'll have to confirm if that's for next door or not. >> Yeah. So as >> I believe it's on Yeah. on the property,
but we'll properly uh remove it. Yes. So that that is a a process that's done through the building department. Uh so um as said it the existing above ground storage tank does not look like it's
active to me but >> but certainly it needs to be investigated and as I say the underground storage tank if there is one would need to be removed in accordance with the applicable law and that's all done through the through the building department. Um, so, uh, the plans also
depict, uh, as per the original county approval, a a turnaround area in in the front of the front yard area, uh, off the driveway so that vehicles don't have to back out on onto Pasc Road. Uh, other requirement of the county was that the,
uh, drainage system be, uh, the seage fit rather be installed in the rear yard, which it is. Um, so I agree with Mr. Doolittle. uh per the township ordinance, the the two trees that are on this property are 3 in in in diameter,
so they're not considered to to be trees. Um so, regarding the proposal to cut the four arborites that they have in half, I don't know. I think if I'm buying this property next to a a used
car dealership, I would want, you know, a whole row of arbories along that uh common boundary. But, you know, it's not in the code that I could force somebody to do that. But if something the board would like to see as part of the process, I I believe that that would be
uh something that could be accomplished. Uh similar to the other application, there's a development fee associated with with the application and then other uh approvals as required for for the uh issuance of construction permits. That
would uh conclude my report. >> Okay. >> So, I'm sorry. The the other thing I forgot to mention was so this property unlike the McKinley property I do not believe has a sewer connection. So, >> it does not. You're right. And the sewer out on the street is deep. The other
thing you said about 12 ft, which I agree on. What we'll do to do the proper permitting is we'll probably put a riser on that and bring it up to about seven or eight foot and bring it over. >> Yes. So there there's a road opening permit required, but that's not through the town. That's through the county
operations division. So that would be for the sewer and then uh assumably no gas service, no water service exists for for this property. So, the opportunity will have to coordinate with the utility companies to to make that happen. Um, just a little bit of a challenge in that
Pasc Road was resurfaced a couple years ago. >> So, not sure what the county is going to require as far as the restoration goes. And as I say, going down 12 ft is is, you know, little Bur County Planning Board. We do need roading permits with
the DBW, but I think we're exempt from the planning board itself. >> Yes. I agree. >> And we have Bergen County soils already on both lots. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Just wanted to bring that to the attention of the >> Thank you. >> So Paul, the county's
law supersedes the town when it comes to road opening. >> They have their own set of laws. >> Yes. Pass is their road. >> They have their own set of permits similar to what you would have on McKinley, which is a town road. >> Got it. because our our our town orders
is what three years once it's been >> most towns have a moratorum which yes I think ours is three years after a road has been paved um but realistically I I don't know that the county can deny or even the municipality can
theoretically deny if you um bring it back to equal or better condition so >> okay and Paul I think your report states that they need to coordinate also with that police department. >> Yes, >> cuz closing out Pasc road dig a 12ft
hole. >> Yeah, we're definitely going to need police traffic control there, which probably is standard anyway. >> Okay. >> I know they watch just about everybody. Verizon public service. So, like this is going to need
control there. >> Okay. Thank you. Comments, questions from the board members. So I realize that there are individual applications but to Paul's point you know if we have to put on the
neighboring lot uh that number of arborites you know could we or would we we consider you know pushing more of the arrivites to this property to create that screen that we're looking for or
requested um to create the separation from you know the uh neighboring lot. That would be my only question. >> Yeah, I'm open to whatever the board uh feels comfortable with. >> Okay. >> I'm sure we're we're putting these on the site plans and then as the process
goes we can adjust accordingly. You know, I'm sure we're going to do more landscaping than what's on this besides the trees. >> Okay. So, you're open to adding additional abroades? So right now they're saying none. So we have to make an application to make an approval
condition upon x amount of our providing. So do we know how many would be screened on this property? Um five 10. >> We could screen the rear yard probably six to eight and over time they'll row and left behind church.
>> So should you say not less than 600 items? >> I would go with eight. >> Okay. But that's you okay with that? >> That's good. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Any further questions? No. Okay. Uh, do I have a motion to open
public comments? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> No one in the audience. Anyone on video? >> Do I have a motion to close public comments? >> So move.
>> Councilman. >> I'll second. >> Good second. >> Second. Okay. >> All in favor? >> I >> do have a motion to approve this application as amended. >> Motion. >> Second.
>> Roll call, please. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Mr. Pledo, >> yes. >> Mr. Tulle, >> yes. >> Mr. Toro, >> yes. >> Councilman Alman, >> yes. >> Mayor Kamari, >> yes. >> Chairman Spino, >> yes. >> Thank you. Application approved. Thank
you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you everyone. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Have a good night. Have a good night. >> Good night. >> Okay. On to old business. Resolution PB26-06
to approve the application of Charles Mina for my subdivision on 44 Pascal Road 3501 block 18 and 19. Any comments on that resolution? Your comments?
Do >> I have a motion to approve? >> Motion. >> I'll second. >> Roll. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Mr. Pledo, >> yes. >> Mr. Tulle, >> yes.
>> Mr. Toro, >> yes. Councilman Almond. >> Yes. >> Chairman Sino. >> Yes. >> He recused himself. >> Yes. >> Oh, that's right. >> Yes. Okay. Uh, resolution PB26-07
to approve the application of Washington State Holdings LLC for major soul permit at 89 Hor Place block 1202.1.02. Any comments on the resolution? No. Do we have a motion to approve?
>> Motion. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Carol, >> yes. >> Mr. Pledo, >> yes. >> Mr. Tulle, >> yes. >> Mr. Toro, >> yes. >> Councilman Alman, >> yes. >> Mayor Kari, >> yes. >> Chairman Sabino,
>> yes. No minutes before we adjourn. Any board member have any comments or thoughts they would like to share with the fellow board members? I just have one comment on the master
plan. The subcommittee will be meeting uh here within the next couple weeks with Joel Burgess, our town planner. uh now that all of the fair share housing is is behind us or behind our town.
>> I wouldn't go that far just yet, but uh >> we're we're close, but we're close. >> Yes. >> Uh Mr. Burgess mentioned that uh it will be full court press on finalizing the master plan. I know it's been a long time, almost 15 months, but uh Burgess
Associates got sidetracked with co-fisher housing requirements. So >> yeah, no, no one could expect what happened with this round. >> Y >> exactly. >> Yeah, mayor, we need those ordinances to be introduced on the settlement of 660, >> right?
>> Supposed to report to the television one January, February, March. >> Okay. Yes. Right. >> I saw that Burgess is working with Whitaker's office. >> Yes, I saw that. >> Soft. That's one of the problems. It wasn't working. >> Of course. Yeah. Just Whitaker. >> Whitaker. I don't know if Joe.
Yeah. Whitaker is off. So he has the easement documents from NJ Transit. He's reviewing them with the engineer, >> right? Yeah. >> That's all going forward. >> Well, let me know if you need me to speed anything up on >> speed everything up.
>> But that be filed to stay by March 15th. >> Yes. Correct. >> Okay. >> It's much longer. >> Yeah, that'll go quickly. >> So what happens after March 15 if we don't? If we don't what? I'm sorry. >> If if if we don't meet the meet the March 15 deadline, what happens?
>> Um I don't even want to go there to be honest with you. Say uh do we lose our remedy Lou in that case or >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Beyond my rage >> even at the higher level.
>> But I I want to say we're fully on target to meet that date. But I just wanted to correct to say we're not done yet until that date comes. It's a matter of document. >> Yes. >> And that is just for the housing element, correct? Not the full master plan.
>> That's correct. >> Correct. Yes. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> And the way the process works, I think council has to approve the ordinance, the draft ordinance. It comes to the planning board >> without review and approval. Then it goes back to the council for their final approval and submission.
>> I believe that's correct. Yes. So I'm saying >> for that whole process to work and we only have two months. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So I'm cur tailing all my international travel. >> So no call from Thailand or India, UK,
Poland. Maybe >> maybe I do want to share a story though. I have to. So, we had two applications and he really didn't have to say anything. The second one, right, it was so I was a councilman in the 90s and it was police
promotions. Gentleman who I'm not going to use names, but who should have gotten promoted was not getting promoted. So, I did a three-page speech. I still have it if you want to read it. Council chambers was packed, rousing applause. I said, but I'm voting yes.
My fellow minority councilman says one word ditto. That's all he said. >> So I was forget about say Mr. Little. Can you just say ditto? Because everything is the same. Why are we going to waste the time?
>> I'll never forget that moment where he >> very simple. >> Good for him. >> And by the way did not get promotion. >> Okay. >> And then my fellow Bob Paul remember Paul. You're embarrassed. I said, "But Buff, I voted with you." I just had to make a point. >> Of course. Right.
>> The wrong people are getting promoted in my opinion. >> They don't use it. I use it like in in texts when people say, you know, happy birthday, you know, like this. >> Right. Right. So, >> great. >> Y. >> Okay. So, motion to let just before we
adjourn, uh, again, I try to remember first meeting of the year. Uh, in addition to the the sworn in people, I want to thank everyone for their service to this board. uh you know none of us earn it for the compensation or anything like that. Uh we do it as a well you're you're not a board member but I'm
thanking the board members uh you know uh so again I appreciate it the residents appreciate what we bring to the table and you know I'm very happy with you know the way this board is very professional and you know handles applications very well. So thank you all
for serving appreciate it. May I agree? Even the stability, consistency of board members. >> Yeah. >> I mean, all of us have been here a while. George, Phil, >> Bill, Sed. >> Yeah. >> Versus the zoning board where >> Mhm. >> seems like >> Yeah. It's a rotating door.
>> Hey, when did Brian leave by the way? Any >> way out of here? >> By the way, I was thinking 2022 is correct. is it just didn't You've been chairperson since that just didn't seem correct to me. >> That's right. >> Well, now I have to home deliver his plaque as is.
>> There you go. >> Well, we'll bring him back for another meeting. >> I'll tell him I did that just to get him back. >> Wait, so this is your first term as chairman? >> No, second 24 256 if that's right.
>> Oh, I'm I'm sorry. I I'm thinking of four years, but it's every year. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. >> All right. Yeah. 20 2020. >> Time just goes by so quickly that when I'm reading it, I'm like, there's no way you've been doing this already four years. But it is. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Yeah. Okay.