same bike every morning. It was a vicious cycle >> regular now. Okay, let's start again. Good evening everyone. With the power vested in me as chairperson, I call this special meeting of the West Iron Zoning
Board of Adjustment to order. It is January 22, 2026, 8:00m, and this meeting is being conducted virtually on the Zoom platform. Notice of this meeting was given to the township clerk, the West Orange Chronicle, and the Star
Ledger, posted on the township bulletin board, all in accordance with the Senator Byron M. Bayer open public meetings act. Kindly rise as we pledge allegiance to our flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag to the
flag of the United States of America >> and to the republic for which it stands one nation. under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Please be seated.
>> Uh, Miss a little bit later on in the meeting, I'm going to formally introduce Kelly Carrie, uh, who is serving as our attorney tonight. Miss Carrie, kind enough to read the opening statement.
>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The zoning board of adjustment is a quasi quasi judicial body. It hears evidence from sworn witnesses and makes decisions as would a court of law. The applicants are here because the projects they propose do not meet the requirements of the West Orange zoning code or they have been
denied permits by the building inspector. We are their first avenue of appeal. Board members have a twofold responsibility. First to see that the applicant is treated as fairly as possible since no zoning code can foresee all possible inequities and
second to protect the welfare of the community as a whole which is the basic purpose of the municipal zoning. Our procedures are simple. The applicant presents his case. Objectors then present their case. Citizens in the audience are given an opportunity to speak both for or against the
application. We expect the conduct of these proceedings to be dignified and orderly so that all parties may obtain a fair and impartial hearing. As our proceedings are public, so is our decision-m which usually takes place the same evening. Because appeals from
decisions of the board can be made to the courts and in some cases to the township council solely on the basis of the record before this body. And since the rules of evidence and case law are technical, we would like to advise all persons of their right to legal counsel in these proceedings. And we the board
will consider an adjournment to anyone who wishes additional time to obtain counsel. >> Chandler, kindly call the role. >> Mr. Barbie, >> here. >> Dr. Benz, >> present. >> Mr. Cohen,
>> here. >> Mr. Dana Miller >> excused absent. >> Mr. Daui >> here. >> Miss Miller >> present. >> Mr. Schwarzbound >> here.
>> Mr. Scott, did he make it back in? >> No, not yet. Mr. Susman, >> excused. Absent. >> Mrs. Weiss >> here. >> Let's try Mr. Scott one more time.
No chairperson Neuer. >> I'm present. Um, Miss Carrie, based upon the role, it appears to me that we have a quorum and can proceed. >> I appreci >> Thank you so much. >> Announcements. Future meetings of this
board. regular meetings on February 19, 2026, March 19, 2026, starting at 8:00 PM. Merry, would you be so kind as to swear in our town professional?
>> You please raise your right hand. >> Mr. um Patrick. No, that's I've got I've got Ryan McNeel. and uh >> and Miles. >> Yeah.
>> Oh, I'm sorry, Miles. I forgot you were No worries. >> I got you. Okay. Please. >> Do you do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you very much. There's they're sworn
uh Mr. Mr. Chairperson, can Miss Carrie hold these responsibilities of the opening statement and swearing in of the professionals without being first appointed uh officially? >> I'm about to I'm about to do that
>> because I think we reversed the order. >> These are procedural issues. I I don't think there's any problem with anybody doing them. >> No. Uh, I'm going to present a motion based upon the fact that at our last meeting when we approved the Savo Shack
and let the record reflect that Mr. Scott is present. >> Uh, at our last meeting, we approved the Savo Shack law firm as our attorneys for calendar year 2026. And in an abundance of caution, we we identified Messers
Warner and Fiser as the attorneys who would be providing the services. We were in I was informed that uh the law firm was able to retain the services of Kelly Carrie. Uh I uh reviewed Miss Car's CV and I
circulated it to all members of the board. I invited requests for anyone who wished to interview Miss Carry and nobody responded. I interviewed Miss Carrie at some length and I am satisfied that she is competent, capable, and
equipped to serve as one of the three attorneys from the Savo Shack Law Firm to represent this board. Therefore, I move that our approval in be amended to include Miss Carry as one of the three attorneys. Is there a second?
>> I'll second. >> Second. >> Thank you, Mr. Schwarzbound. Miss Chandler, please call the role. >> Mr. Barbie, >> yes. >> Mr. Cohen, >> yes. >> Miss Miller, >> yes.
>> Mr. Schwarzbomb, >> yes. >> Mr. Scott, >> yes. >> Mrs. Weiss, >> yes. And welcome. >> Dr. Benzay, >> yes. >> Mr. Dovi, >> yes. Chairperson Neuer.
>> Yes. Thank you, members of the board. I think you're going to enjoy working with Miss Carrie. And yes, Kelly, welcome to the board. >> Thank you very much. >> You passed your first vote. >> This is a special meeting.
The agenda is limited to one application and that is application ZB22-13 MPB realy for property at 470 Eagle Rock Avenue council your appearance for the record please.
>> Good evening chairman and members of the board. My name is Danielle Kimach. I'm an attorney at the law firm of prime tollumi here on behalf of the applicant MPB Realy. >> Thank you. According to my notes and records, this application has been
before the board uh on March 20th, 2025, July 31st, 2025, September 18, 2025, and October 23, 2025. There were other
appearances strictly for scheduling purposes, but those were the nights that we heard testimony with presentation of evidence. >> Thank you, chairman. I concur. And and to that point, I just want to confirm
because we may come to a vote tonight um that all the members present um that may vote tonight have been present at all four of those hearings or have listened to our recording. >> Correct. >> Thank you. our our secretary has confirmed that and uh we can proceed.
>> Thank you. Um so as the board is aware prior to this hearing we submitted a revised site plan taking into account some of the comments and recommendations from the board at the last hearing. Uh we submitted an updated traffic report due to the uh comments at the last
hearing gathering some additional data and doing additional analysis um and an updated planning report. So, our uh plan tonight for the presentation is to um have our civil engineer Matt Bur testify as to those plan revisions. Uh then we
will call our traffic engineer and our last witness will be our professional planner. >> Bear with me one second. There was also a supplemental submission from the town forester. Have you reviewed that?
I have not seen that. Um, this was a a review letter from the town forester. What is the date? >> Bear with me one second. I have to go through my papers here. It's a memorandum addressed to zoning
board from Walt Kip Township Forester dated December 17, 2025. >> I have not seen it and I don't have it in my file. I don't know if uh Mr. Burch received it. I do not have it either.
>> Um would Diana or someone be able to email it to us? Um and maybe we can take a break and review it. >> It's on It's linked on the agenda. >> It's linked on the agenda. Okay. >> Plus three exhibits
right below the report or the memo. >> In any event, please proceed. So you you intend to present traffic planning and in engineering with regard to the plan revisions. >> Yeah, we were going to start with the plan revisions. >> Okay.
>> Um so Mr. Bur, you were previously sworn previously qualified. >> Then the the we need to have him sworn again. It's been a while. >> Sure. >> Please administer the oath. >> You would raise your right hand. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> Your >> Thank you, >> Mr. Bur. Are all of your licenses current and the same as when you were last qualified? >> Yes, they are. >> Then you continue to be recognized as an expert in the field of civil
engineering. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Bur. Did your office uh prepare a revised site plan in support of this application? >> Yes, we did. Um, and for the benefit of the board, um, perhaps you can pull up the plan and
and walk them through those revisions that we made. >> Certainly. >> Is everyone able to see my screen? >> I can. We trust everyone else. can as well. >> Sure. Um, so this is this exhibit is
called the site I'm sorry. >> No, this was the one submitted as part of your application. Correct. >> This is an exhibit, a new exhibit. Um, it is a colorized version of our site plan rendering and or I'm sorry, of our site plan and our landscape plan from
our most recently submitted site plan set. >> And it's sheet number what? >> Um, this is a one of one. Uh this is a site plan rendering prepared by my office dated 122 20226. Uh it is a colorized version of uh the site plan
which is sheet five and the landscape plan which is sheet nine from our most recent site plan set. >> Then then it's actually a new exhibit. Let's give it a number. Uh >> I think we're up to A5. >> Correct. >> A5. So the the document just described by
Mr. Bur is exhibit A5 for identification. >> Thank you. All right, I'm going to to zoom in uh to focus on the actual site. Uh so for orientation purposes, north is
to the the bottom of the page. Eagle Rock Avenue uh goes across the the page from east to west. Um so as Miss Kimach mentioned at pre some of the previous hearings um there was discussion with regards to uh the activity in the the rear portion of the
site uh behind the building specifically near the uh drive-through ordering station. Um so we heard those comments uh we we regrouped as a team and we decided to make some modifications to the rear. Um, so what we did was shift
the entire drive-thru lane and uh rear bypass lane 3 ft closer to the building. Um, so we were able to increase the the buffer uh between the outside curb line and the rear property line uh by 3 ft. So that increased from 8.8 ft to 11.8
ft. Uh, and this actually improved a variance condition that we were requesting. Uh, although we're still requesting the variance, it is improved from uh 8.8 8 ft to 11.8 ft for a residential buffer. Um this also um in turn allowed us to
reduce the impervious coverage on site from 75.7% to 75%. Uh this also improved a uh variance condition that we were requesting. However, we are still uh requesting a variance from the uh maximum allowable
imperous coverage requirements. Um and then some additional changes that were made as a result of this uh this shift included shifting the the trash enclosure uh further to the north away from the rear property line uh for
circulation purposes. So the setback to the rear property line is now 33.4 ft uh whereas uh it was previously 28.9 ft. So a 4 1/2 ft um increase. Um we also shifted two of the proposed freestanding
light fixtures in the rear of the property uh that same three feet uh to follow the curb line. Uh this had a a dimminimous impact to the the overall uh lighting design and light levels on site.
Uh and we were also able to uh provide some additional plantings uh in that rear buffer. So the the additional 3 ft allowed us to provide 10 additional evergreen trees as well as three shade trees uh in the rear of the property.
Um and adding those shade trees allowed for a multi-level uh landscape design as well. Um so that is a summary of the the changes on our most recent site plan set. Um and the the remainder of the site remains the same.
>> Thank you Mr. Burch. Um, so Mr. Chairman, as we have only just seen this forestry memo, I would just ask that uh before we conclude Mr. Burch's testimony. Um, whether at this
point or or later in the evening, we just have an opportunity to review and then I can bring Mr. Burch back. >> Let's continue in at a break. Uh, discuss it with him and then come back with him. >> Okay. Thank you. So, do you have any further questions at
this time for Mr. Bur? >> Uh, I do not. >> Uh, Mr. Bur, with respect to the drive up lane, uh, according to our ordinance, it's supposed to be separate and distinct
from the parking aisles and driveways. Will you define for me where there is curbing that separates the drive-thru from the parking lot? >> So, there is curbing on the the inside of the the drive-through lane uh between
the drive-through lane and the building. Um that curbing continues around and follows the uh east side of the building. Um on the the east side, uh there's also curb on the the outside of the drive-through lane, uh which ultimately stops as you get towards the
the south side of the property. And then there's striping, uh that continues that separates the bypass lane from the drive-through lane. >> So there's no curbing where you have striped where you have a line painted.
>> Correct. Um adding a a small curb there is is probably more harm than than good. uh in this situation uh just due to the the direct adjacent nature of the bypass lane to the drive-through lane. >> Please demonstrate to us the landscaping
that separates the drive-thru from the drive aisles and parking. um from the there's uh very few places where there's um landscaping between drive aisles and
parking. Uh, as far as separation of uh, parking and drive aisles from the drive-through lane, uh, on the east side of the building, there's a 4 and 1/2t landscaped island uh, between the the parking bay that contains seven stalls and the drive-through lane. Um, it is a
landscaped island. It allows that separation. It allows some uh, vehicle overhang uh, without interfering with the actual drive-through lane. >> And there's no landscaping to the rear. Is that correct? Uh, not between the the drive-through lane and any drive aisle
or or bypass lane. Uh, there is landscaping between the building and the drive-through lane. >> That's not what the ordinance requires. Um, Miss Kinbeck referring to ordinance section 25-11.14
A. Uh, are you requesting relief from compliance with that provision of our ordinance? >> Um, let me take a second to review, >> please. >> Okay. 114. What letter?
>> A. >> Okay. So, it asks for separation from parking lot aisles and driveways. That means curbing, landscaping, and striping from the stacking lanes. Uh I believe we provide that. Um on the on
the left side, um there's a landscaped island with curb that separates the parking from the drive up stacking lane. A and to the rear of that is the only other stacking lane. Uh we have a bypass
lane. um which functionally you wouldn't want to put curb or landscape separation there. Um I if your interpretation um we do have striping there is a stripe correct um Mr. Burch. >> Yes, there is striping which I believe
is an acceptable practice. >> Yeah. As for curbing landscaping or striping, I think we have that along the entire drive up stacking lane. >> Then you're not requesting relief from the ordinance? I don't believe it's it's necessary based on the design we're
presenting. If >> your position your position is that you comply if we find that you don't comply uh then you will not be given the variance. >> Do you understand that? >> I understand. So um
when will we be found if we're compliant or not? >> When we make our decision. >> Well to the extent relief may be required. We we can put the proofs on the record as Mr. Burch already started to explain. So if we were not compliant,
your position would be that it would be at the rear. Um because I I think on the side we clearly have a landscaped curved separation. >> No argument here. I'm I'm referring primarily to the rear between the
drive-through lane and the bypass lane. >> So I I don't consider the bypass lane a drive aisle. Um, functionally it serves a different purpose than the drive aisles throughout the parking area and and there is a striping separation
to to guide the vehicles to the stacking lane. >> It's your case. I've given you the opportunity to make a an amendment. You've declined. Please continue with the rest of your presentation with Oh, never mind. Let's go back to members of
the board for questioning. Mr. Schwart, >> no questions. >> Thank you. Mr. Barbie, I don't see Mr. Barbie. Let's go to Mr. Cohen. >> Uh, no questions except did you guys see
the fireers report that uh, Chairman Neuer uh, alerted you to. I didn't understand if you saw it. >> They just got it and they need time to review it. >> Correct. >> Okay. Because it's important. Thank you. That's all. >> Miss Miller.
>> Yes, Mr. Do you have designated parking for um uh food delivery services like Uber Eats or uh Door Dash? >> Uh no, there's no specific parking for
for that operation. >> Do you think there should be? That seems to be a big component of uh today's fast food restaurant. >> Um there's in my opinion there's plenty of parking. um directly near the the
Popeye's building. Uh I don't think it's required to have um separate stalls distinguished for that operation. Uh while we're not against it, uh if that is the board preference, um I don't think it's necessary in this situation. >> But if if it is if it is your opinion
that they should be added, we um we agree to to do so. >> Thank you. No more questions. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. Scott, >> no questions. Thank you. Mrs. Weiss.
>> Mrs. Weiss. >> No questions. Sorry, I didn't hear that. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Dr. Benzy. >> Um, Mr. Bur, I think I heard you saying that you added some landscaping uh in the rear, although I'll defer to
you, Mr. chairperson if you wanted to be uh together with his testimony with regard to the forester later on. I'm I'm willing to wait with my questions about that. >> I think what the statement was is that they moved the facility 3 ft.
I don't >> Yeah, but I think I heard that they added some landscaping. So I I want to know what was added. >> So that's a good question. Mr. Burst, did you add any landscaping? >> Certainly. Uh we added in the rear we added 10 evergreen trees and and three shade trees. Um they are dispersed
throughout the the rear buffer. Um that's in addition to what was previously provided. >> Can can you point to them please? >> Sure. >> They're they're along the the back um of
the building in this 11.8T buffer and there's various types of evergreen trees. Um, and these specifically are uh three ornamental or I'm sorry, three shade trees. >> Okay. Thank you. No more questions.
>> Thank you. Uh, Mr. Doli. >> Yes. um with the uh added 3 ft distance from the property line uh for the drive-through lane as well as the plantings that you're adding. Um was any
further acoustical testing done to uh evaluate any impact on the noise that might reach the neighboring properties behind the property? To my knowledge, an additional
acoustical report was not submitted. Um, the change is is minor. Uh, it is a slight improvement. Uh, I don't know that it significantly changes the the previous testimony, but we do have our acoustic blue engineer. Um, if you do
have uh any specific questions, >> um, >> I mean, I'd be interested in hearing from him as to uh what impact, if any, that would be if being able to quantify that would be helpful, I think, um, to
assess the concerns that the neighboring properties owners have about noise. Um, that's that's all I've got as far as questions. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Miss Kimbeck, is is your acoustical engineer present? >> Uh, yes, he is.
>> Okay, let's we we'll deal with that as soon as we finish. Um, I had one other item that I neglected to ask. Mr. Bur, you mentioned that you've improved the rear buffer so that now
it's only 11.8 ft, >> Mr. Bur. Correct. The 3-foot shift allowed us to increase the buffer from 8.8 ft to 11.8 ft. >> And what is required? >> Uh based on uh your ordinance, I believe 20 ft is required.
>> And with respect to the impervious coverage, which you've reduced to 70.5%, what's the maximum permissible? >> Um it's it's 75.0%. Um, but the requirement is 60%.
>> I'm sorry. >> I I >> We're proposing 75% the retirement is 60. >> Then I'm corrected 75%. And you're allowed 60. >> Correct. and it was
>> it was provided uh on record previously but I would like to note that uh in existing conditions it is 80.9% so uh we are proposing an improvement um both from the previous plan as well as the existing conditions >> I understand I just wanted the
requirements to be in my notes next to uh what you're providing so it's easier to review thank you I have no further questions >> um Mr. Uh, Elgar, do you have any questions for the
witness? >> Uh, not at this time. Well, actually, when you're talking about the um the buffers, you're discussing the buffers to the rear. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Yes. >> I just wanted to note that the the
residencies actually that are to the rear are they're in a split zone. So half of it is in the B2 district and then the half is in the residential district. I just wanted to note that you know per it's section 20 5 11.3A of the
code says it's 50 ft but that's also for residential district residential use in a residential district and then these properties are uh in the B2 district and not in and also in a residential district but also in the business district as well. So, I just want to to
note that, but I don't have any other further questions. >> Mr. McNeel, questions for the witness. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Burch, just one quick question on really just I know you shifted that trash
enclosure to the south, I believe. Um, any issues with circulation to, I guess, that far south trash enclosure with that landscape island? >> No, we have no issues. Uh we provided a trash truck circulation plan within our
site plan set. Um we showed that uh the truck the truck can circulate into all of the enclosures. >> Okay, that's all I had. Thank you. >> Sorry, I did want to >> bring up something else in terms of loading uh there or the township's uh
code uh at least one space uh for loading is is required and this plan the site plan does not provide loading space. I'm wondering if that can be uh you know maybe a condition of approval or if there is maybe that I'm just missing at the moment a loading space.
Um certainly we had provided testimony uh on the the unloading operation uh in the past. Um you are right we are requesting um a variance from that requirement. Uh however we we feel that the loading or the unloading operation will occur in this front drive aisle uh
and it will occur outside of operating hours. So, uh, we don't feel that there's any impact to to customers or or employees or circulation. >> Got it. Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, Miss Carbio, is Zab here?
Miss Carbio, did you have any questions? Hearing none. Members of the public, this is your opportunity. >> Bill, Bill, may I just ask a question of Miles, what he just um referred to. You
can't ask a question to Miles. You need to ask questions of the witness. >> No, I want Miles to help me. >> Okay. >> Okay. Miles. >> Yes. >> So, are you saying that if it was the um
if it was in the business district only, it would be a 20ft buffer? the fact that it's partially in a residential district. It's a 50 foot buffer. So, which part is which?
>> So, I'm saying to the the rear of the property, um the res there's residential area within the rear of the property, though those parcels h are essentially split zones. So, they have two zoning codes. So, some of it is in the B2 district and then some of it is in the
residential district. So, it's basically whether that buffer is um >> 20 or 50 >> or if it's really applicable because those properties are in two zones. But I just wanted to note that and and just a
>> well wouldn't it make sense since those are residents and they're partially in the residential zone that the higher buffer would be applicable rather than the smaller buffer. Correct.
I could see how that that could be applicable. Uh but just just in the uh the way that those properties are zoned. Um it's there's some amigu ambiguity there. But yes, I can see how the uh the
larger buffer could be applicable. But that being said, there was a a restaurant currently or was on the site and I believe that it did not have that 50 foot buff buffer. Um, so I think that
there's there's some ambiguity there. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Phil. Sorry. >> Would would I be able to clarify? >> Sure. >> No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Mr. If you're saying that a portion of the
rear is zoned residential, wouldn't it follow that the buffer from those properties would have to be 50 ft? >> I I I Yes, I could see how that that could be interpreted that way. Yes.
>> Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Chairperson, would I be able to clarify um why we feel the buffer is 20 feet versus 50? >> Certainly. >> Okay. Um there is a provision in uh
ordinance section 25-11.3A um that allows for properties that have a width of less than 300 ft um to then apply a 10% calculation. um to define the buffer area. So it would be 10% of the lot width or the lot
depth. Um so in our situation because we have a lot width less than 300 ft. Um we can apply that 10% requirement um 10% of our lot depth would be 18.2 ft. Uh however there is also a minimum standard
in here of 20 ft. So uh we feel that we are in that um that lot with caveat uh and then we can apply the 10% requirement with a minimum of 20 ft. Uh and then uh ultimately we have a requirement of 20 ft versus 50.
>> Thank you. Miss >> if I can just I just want to just clarify the record. Um the provision that he's referring to is actually subsection B not subsection A in that just for the record. >> Sorry. Thank you, Miss Carrie.
>> Miss Weiss, did you want to question the witness based on what he just put onto the record? >> No, I I I semi understand what he said truthfully. Okay. >> But not >> but I will still keep in mind about the business about the residential being 50.
But I sort of understood what he said. But okay, thank you. >> I'm confident I'm confident that you fully understood it. >> No, I'm not. Members of the public, >> pardon me. I would like to ask a question based on what Mr. Burch just stated. >> Please go ahead, Mr. Scott.
>> You uh Mr. Bur, um does uh what you've just stated regarding the 50 and the 20, does that take into account that uh the previous restaurant did not have a drive-thru and this one is a proposal for?
Does that change the calculation? >> No, it's just it's simply a buffer requirement to um either a residential zone or a residential property. >> And Miss Carrie, is that your
understanding as well? >> The provision that we're talking about does not have any reference to drive-throughs. This is specifically regarding business properties versus residential. >> Thank you very much. Anything
else, Mr. Scott? >> Yes, I didn't hear. >> I have one question for Mr. Burch. >> Go ahead, Mr. Cohen. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Bur, uh, you keep on sometimes saying about how the existing
property is was, let's say, more uh, impervious uh, uh, material than than under your proposal. And but did you ever um think about that the previous restaurant hardly ever used the back of their uh restaurant at all? Not even for
parking. The cars were mostly parked in the front. So there was hardly any activity for the neighbors from that restaurant who were in the back of the restaurant. I think that should be taken into consideration, too. If you're looking at the previous use, do you look at the previous use that way, sir? Thank you.
Um I'm simply stating uh that the impervious coverage on site is and today existing out there today is more than what we're proposing. Uh it I wasn't really speaking with regards to operations or where people parked. It is
a parking lot. Uh if people choose not to park back there, um so be it. But u my my testimony was just that there's a a reduction in pvious coverage. >> Right. I'm just trying to say too if you take into account that there's an
extreme um uh use of the back of the restaurant now that you propose compared to the previous use. >> Um I mean there's an existing parking lot that goes around the back of the building today. Um I can't say whether
people use it or not. Um it's available for patrons uh and they they could uh potentially park back there. So I I don't know if I could speak to the operations of that use. It's been uh closed for a number of years now. >> Okay. Historically, >> just an observation.
>> I did ask people and and and they told me that uh >> No, Mr. M Mr. Col, please not testify. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm just trying to clarify that there was a >> No, no, no, no, no, no, no. >> Okay. Okay. I understand. Thank you. Thank you. >> Um Mr. Burge, I'm not going to burden
you with what I'm going to ask your planner, but I have some concerns about your reliance upon what you've described as prior non-conforming uses uh and whether or not they still are in effect. So, I'll discuss that with your planner.
One more time, I'd like to open the floor to members of the public. Members of the public, if you have any questions for Mr. Bur based upon his testimony, kindly raise your hand so that you may be recognized and admitted to the Moody.
>> Yes, we have Joseph B. I'm sorry, I'm not sure how to pronounce your last name, but you can state your name and address for the record. You need to unmute. >> Unmute. Okay, >> there you go. >> Okay.
>> Good evening, council. >> Yeah. Would you would you please pronounce your name and spell it for the record? >> Yes. Uh, Joseph Baaris. B O U T S I K A R I S. >> And your residence address?
>> Yes, it is 22 Blackburn Terrace, West Orange, New Jersey. >> 072. >> Your questions for the witness, please? >> I'm I don't have really questions. I I I've never been heard on this this topic, but uh I I just like to say a
couple of words. >> No, no, no, no, no, no. Let me explain it to you so that you're >> This is the time for questions. Your testimony, your presentation, your thoughts, your ideas will come at the end of the hearing. We will give you
ample opportunity to make whatever statements you want to make either in favor of or in opposition to the application. Okay, >> this is just a time to question the witness. >> All right, I do have a I do have a question too. >> Please go ahead then. >> Um, also like I did hear someone say
something about uh zoning for like parking or zoning for like uh Door Dash or Uber Eats. Uh I don't I don't see any kind of place. I mean, we have there's Uber Eats and Dash Door Dash with all
these other places, too, like Jersey Mike's and uh Chipotle. And >> Mr. Ba, you asked your question and it's a good question. So, Mr. Burch, kindly respond once again to whether or not I believe you said that uh you don't have
anything for Door Dash or Uber, but you'd consider it. >> That is correct. There's there's no designated spaces shown uh on the site plant today. Uh there's I feel there's adequate parking around the entire building. Um so people can come uh and
go and park close to the building uh no matter where they are. Um I'm not against adding signage if that's the preference of the board, but uh it's not proposed right now. >> Okay. Uh will I be able to will I be able to speak at the end of this? You're saying?
>> Absolutely correct, sir. >> Thank you very much. Okay, we have Ishmail. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Hussein, you need to unmute. Hussein is and the
neighbor to that restaurant in the back. >> Oh, your your name and address for the record, please. >> Yeah. 6 Raznas, West Orange, New Jersey 07052. Hussein Husse E I N Ishma I S M A I L. >> Thank you.
>> I hear um the discussion about the buffer zone is 50 for residential and 20 for uh mixed use, I guess. I don't know what
what it was. Uh but in any event um the engineer I believe he said like eight or in and most of it of of it uh is a distance of the buffer and on the side there is
increased 11 where they have these um dumpsters but in an event um there's still two tanks um even if it's not a function of uh of of uh
of whether is residential or others minimum is 20. He didn't meet >> Mr. Mr. Ismmail is there a question? >> Yeah, I mean he one have to acknowledge that he does not meet the code or the zoning requirement
for at least 20 uh buffer which >> that's their application. They're conceding that they only have 11.8 8 ft. >> Okay. >> The requirement is at least 20 if not 50 regardless. >> Does he My question is does he need the
board to look into waiver from that requirement because he could not provide? >> Yes sir. He's requesting a variance and we get to decide whether or not to grant it based upon what he's presented as his case. >> Okay. and the the noise that going to be
created by the trucks at night. Did he take that into consideration? Sir, we've had testimony from an acoustical engineer uh two meetings ago or three meetings ago. I'm sorry if you weren't here, but that's already part of
the record. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I have no further question. >> Thank you, Mr. Megan, any other hands? >> Um, we did. Hang on. Oh, yes, we have uh Dante Spagnolo. Please state your name
and address for the record. >> Hello, my name is Dante Spagnolo uh 20 Blackburn Terrace, West Orange, New Jersey 07052. At approximately what time of the operation uh will these businesses be running? Uh is it going to be a 24-hour
IHOP? Is it going to be uh 11 to 8 for the Popeye's? If we could get some clarification on that, that would be uh greatly appreciated. >> Um >> I'm going to I'm going to I'm going I'm going to direct the witness to answer even though it wasn't part of his
testimony and it was placed into the record also a couple of meetings ago, but Mr. Burst, kindly answer the gentleman's question. >> Certainly. Um, so the IHOP will be open from 6:00 am to midnight, uh, seven days
a week, and the Popeyes will be open from 10:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. Friday and Saturday, >> sir. Do you have any additional questions, Mr. Spangola? Any further questions?
>> No. Thank you. I yield my time. >> Thank you, M. Brill. Any further hands up? >> We have uh Emry. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Good evening, Mr. President and the members of the board. My name is Emra
Halimaya and I live at 15 Fondus Road. >> I live at what? >> 15 Fundus Road. spell that >> uh Frank umbrella uh nurse David Umbrella uh Sierra >> thank you
>> uh Mr. Burge. Uh if I understood correctly, uh the some of the uh properties behind the uh the restaurant uh is um partially in um a business zone and partially in residential zone. And if it was a residential zone, it would
be a 50 uh ft buffer zone and now it's uh by some calculations 20 ft. Is that correct? >> Um that's not actually correct. uh the the two properties directly to the south of our property are entirely within the
commercial zone. They are not partially within a commercial zone or partially within a residential zone. Uh those two lots are entirely within a commercial zone. >> Um >> which which properties are in residential? >> Um so can I let him finish his answer? >> Okay.
>> Um and the the requirement that I mentioned earlier uh is in relation to residential zones or uses. So it it really doesn't matter whether it's in a commercial zone or or residential zone, but I I would like to clarify that those two lots are within commercial zones.
>> Okay. So um then which side of the property is in uh uh in 100% in a residential zone. There is the u urgent care to the uh east and I believe that's also commercial zone. Is that right? Uh
that property is split uh between the commercial zone and the uh residential zone. >> And how about the Rosnney uh uh terrace um side which is the west side. >> Um properties on the opposite side of Rosnney Terrace are in the residential
or six. >> Okay. So uh my question would be just to understand the law. If it was a commercial zone it's 20 feet and if it's residential it's 50 feet. Why would the you know uh the uh requirements for a residential zone require 50 feet uh
rather than uh 20 feet? Uh is that you know trying to protect the residents from noise or traffic? What is the main concern to bring that buffer to 50 feet instead of 20 uh if there was uh you know residents around the property that you are trying to get the variance for?
>> So the requirement is 50 feet. However, if you have a lot that's less than 40 square 40,000 square feet or has a width less than 300 linear feet, you can apply um a calculation that um
reduces the buffer by yeah it's 10% of your lot width or depth. My interpretation is it's depending upon which uh property you need that buffer or you have to apply that buffer to. In our situation uh we were looking at lot depth. So we calculate 182
um it's approximately 182 feet in lot depth times 10% it gives you 18.2 feet. >> Uh there is a minimum requirement of 20 ft. So we're applying the 20 20 foot minimum requirement buffer. >> 50 ft does not apply in our situation.
It's it's 20T. >> Yeah. I'm just trying to understand was the extra 30 ft you know for residential uh you know zoning is to atonate the noise levels for comfortable levels for residents uh but if it was a commercial zone it doesn't really matter because everybody's you know there for business
is that extra distance if it if there was you know you had enough uh land and if this was purely you know uh residential zone is that extra 30 feet trying to you know help the residents you know um you know uh hear less noise is that the major concern um if it was a
residential zone. I'm just trying to understand the the requirements the law. Um why is that extra 30 ft? Um if there was a residential zone, >> I don't know. >> I don't think this question relates to excuse me his testimony and it's asking for really a legal interpretation or
legislative intent. >> I'll agree with the latter part. The former part it was part of his testimony. Uh Mr. Alton Kaya, this gentleman didn't write the ordinance or approve it. He he's an engineer. and he tries to uh enforce or pro comply
with the provisions in the law. It's not his goal. It's not his role to interpret the law. I >> I understand that. I was just trying to see if it was um a residential zone. the the buffer zone is uh much longer and
and I believe that a couple of months ago there was a meeting where the sound level uh was an issue and I think the calculations were just on the border um at this you know uh borderline. So I'm just trying to say that they're trying to use the uh the loophole in the law
which you know allows them to go all the way to the minimum 20 feet but uh if you were to be you know good neighbor you don't want to uh you know uh your neighbors you know angry so that I'm just >> so this is this is commentary which you are invited to come back at the end of
the hearing and all the statements you want we'll give you your time. >> Thank you. >> Please limit Do you have any further questions? No, that that was it. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. >> Um >> Megan, any other hands up?
>> Yes, we have uh Hussein is back again if you want to let him in. >> Well, let's hold Hussein until we get anybody who hasn't spoken yet. >> Okay. Um I'm not seeing any other hands but his. >> Okay, then let Mr. Ismail in. >> Please state your name and address again.
>> Hosan Ishmail, 6 Rosen Terrace, Western New Jersey. And uh my other question is he has two two uh one restaurant and one fast food. What is the minimum requirement for
having mixed use of two uh one restaurant and >> I'm sorry Mr. Mr. Ism that's beyond his testimony. However, there will be a professional planner testifying in a little while and that witness will
address the use issues and the question you just asked. So, kindly hold your question for when the planner testifies. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Is that it, Megan? >> Yes, that's it.
>> Members of the public, any further questions? Going once, going twice. Thank you. Um, Miss Kinbeck, can any resurrect? >> Um, yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Um, Mr. Bur, with respect to section 25-11.14A
that the chair raised, which reads, "Drive up window stacking lanes shall be separate and distinct from parking lot aisles and driveways by means of defined separation, including curbing, landscaping, striping so as to meet the required circulation isle standards."
exclusive of the drive-thru window lane. Um so at the rear of the property um where there is appearingly no separation between the bypass lane and the drive up stacking lane. Um can you explain and
and if you want to defer to the traffic engineer uh you can also do that um the functionality the purpose and functionality of the bypass lane versus the drive aisles and parking areas that you see on the other three sides of the building.
>> Sure. So the the drive aisles on three sides of the building uh the east, north, and west sides are minimum of 24 ft. It allows for two-way circulation and cars to park in uh perpendicular parking stalls. Uh along the the rear of
the building, um you have the 10-ft drive-thru lane uh separated uh by striping um to the 12T bypass lane. The 12 12T bypass lane is a one-way uh operating
aisle. Uh it is 12 feet. It allows for cars to simply bypass the drive-through lane or circulate around the building. There's no other activity uh that takes place off of the bypass lane. There's no parking back here. Um it's simply just for cars to um go past the drive-through
lane. I hope that answered your question. >> And it would also be used by vehicles that maybe are in the queue and decide they don't want to wait anymore and and want to leave the the line they're waiting in. >> Certainly. >> Okay. Um, and there's a lot less activity there typically than the drive
aisles where cars are entering and exiting parking stalls. >> Yes, there's a a lot less movements. >> So, well, the ordinance reads it could be separated by curbing, comma, landscaping, striping. And we do have striping. Um, would the placement of
landscaping or curbing in that area inhibit the the purpose and functionality of that lane? >> Yes. And if we added curbing and landscaping on where that striping is shown, um how would that benefit uh the
use of the bypass lane? >> Um it it wouldn't allow cars to exit the drive-through lane if they chose to either not order um or if there was some sort of emergency case to to pull off. Um yeah, the a curb uh in this situation
would not allow for that operation. And if you had a small curb directly adjacent uh to a drive-through lane, separating a a drive-through lane and a bypass lane, uh it it's really an encumbrance. It it creates a a bit of a hazard um as cars some cars don't
realize it's there. Uh and if there's um too much activity in a a 22 foot wide um area, uh it could be um a nuisance and and cause damage to cars. So we feel striping is a better alternative.
>> Thank you. I don't have any further questions of Mr. Burch. Um I with respect to the forestry memo uh that we were alerted to tonight. >> No, let's hold off for just a moment. Mr. Bur, >> as I look at it, the the number of cars
that would exit the U queue is two. seven and eight. The other two have already placed their orders and they're in in line waiting for their food. Is that correct? >> Um I can't say the car number four wouldn't turn out of the drive-through
lane. Um it it gives somebody the opportunity to >> Is it fair to say that the bypass lane is actually a drive aisle? >> Yeah. Um, it's not a drive aisle that serves
parking. >> That wasn't my No, no, no, sir. That wasn't my question. Let's be direct. Does it qualify as a drive aisle? >> Sure. It's a drive aisle. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Good.
>> Any other member of the board have a question for based on Mr. Burch's testimony? >> I do. Go right ahead. Okay. So, I'm just looking at the picture. So, just to be um just want to make sure I'm reading
understanding the drawing. So, to the rear of the box, that orange box is where you would place the order. >> Mhm. >> Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. So, if you placed if you attempted to place
an order and they didn't have your product, the the fact that it's striped would allow you to exit and if it was curbed, you would have to wait. >> Yes, you could say that.
>> Okay, that's it. That's okay. Any other member of the board? >> Yes, I have one question. >> Go right ahead, Mr. Cole. Question, please. >> Thank you. Question is uh the the the
small lot requirement that you mentioned that gives you the uh a smaller demands of 20 feet, I guess, less than 300 feet or something like that. Wouldn't that be designed for a property that's small and considered to be not that much of an u
encumbrance or uh nuisance to neighbors because it's small but your property is very highly intensive. Do you think the that special rule that you want to invoke it really has the has the uh theme of a small place that doesn't
bother many people very small and that's why you're allowed a smaller uh buffer that that just doesn't make sense because you have an intensive use of a smaller property. >> This isn't a special rule we're invoking. It's an express language in the code. And again, this question is
going to a legislative intent. >> Mr. Kinbeck, I'm allowing the question. Please let the witness answer. >> I was going to respond similarly. Um, it's not a special rule. It's directly in the ordinance requirement that properties less that have a width less
than 300 ft can apply this calculation. Um, and that's that's simply what we've done. Um, you could have a a property that's 299 ft wide and 1,000 ft deep and you can still apply this calculation. So
I I don't I don't know that it uh is simply for a a small lot property as you mentioned. >> Anything else, Mr. Con? >> No, thank you very much. >> Thank you. Any other members of the board with f final questions for Mr.
Bur? Okay, Miss Kimbeck, next witness. >> Um just at this time, I would like to um reserve the right to allow Mr. Burge to review the forestry memo and then we bring him back briefly to address those comments if the
>> we discussed that. We've discussed that. >> Okay. Thank you. I I didn't hear an affirmative answer. So >> then you didn't hear I I definitely gave you an affirmative answer. >> Okay. >> Please continue. >> Okay. The next witness is our traffic engineer. Um which tonight the board has
not seen him. It's Mr. Patrick Downey from Dynamic Traffic. Uh Kevin Savage who testified at the last hearing is out on paternity leave. Um so Mr. Downey is his colleague. Um if Miss Carrie wants to swear Mr. Downey in >> you do. Is he admitted? Do we see him?
>> He's here. >> Yep. I'm right here. >> Okay. Can you raise your right hand? >> Yes. >> Do you swear or affirm the testimony about this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> And give your credentials, please. >> Sure. Um, I have a bachelor of science
degree in civil engineering from Rowan University. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey, as well as two other states. All those licenses are current and in good standing. I hold a supplemental certification as a professional traffic operations engineer. I've been practicing for over 10 years. I've
previously testified regarding traffic engineering before the West Orange Planning Board, first time here at your zoning board, uh, as well as dozens of other planning and zoning boards throughout the state of New Jersey. Um, and Mr. Downey, your license is current and in good standing. >> Yes, it is.
>> Um, can you explain to the board um your role? Yes. >> Don't you think we need to accept him as an expert? >> Uh, yeah, sure. I was just going to get into some of his preparation before tonight, but um, yes. Does the board accept Mr. Downy's qualifications?
>> Well, we have question any members of the board questions as to qualifications? Mr. Downey, has your license ever been suspended? >> No, it has not. >> Thank you. Then you are accepted as what what did you say your field of expertise is? Traffic engineering.
>> That's correct. >> You're accepted as an expert in traffic engineering. Now continuous. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Downey. Uh can you describe to the board um your preparation for the hearing tonight and your role in the
data that has been provided to the board in the um updated traffic report? >> Sure. Um so in preparation for tonight, I've reviewed the latest traffic study that was submitted to the board uh the latest site plans, the property location both from the office and also field
visit to the site myself. I've listened to Mr. Savage's prior traffic engineering testimony from the October meeting as well as his questioning portion. So, I familiarized with myself with all the traffic information submitted thus far. I believe at the last meeting, Mr. Savage's traffic testimony was for the most part
completed, including his questioning. Uh, my role here tonight is really to present some supplemental information that we've gathered since that October meeting in response to some unresolved questions and comments that were raised at that meeting. For the record, when you talk about the report, is it the
report dated October 21, 2022, revised December 4, 2025? >> That is correct. >> Thank you. Please continue, Miss Ket. >> Sure. Um, so just to provide a quick overview,
um, there were a few unresolved items or questions that were raised that we didn't have immediate answers to that I'll be summarizing and which have been incorporated into our revised report. >> First one, uh, in terms of the study locations for the traffic study. Um, and actually just to orient everybody, I'm
going to put up that same A5 exhibit that Mr. Bur was sharing previously. Uh, let's see. Let me know if anyone can't see that. Um so in terms of the study intersections included within our traffic >> included within our traffic study uh the
previously submitted report analyzed the two sight driveways which you see on the screen as well as the adjacent intersection with Rosney Terrace to the west of the property or plan right uh that's a typical level of you know scope of a study for a project that generates this volume of traffic which isn't
really significant um as was mentioned by Mr. Savage in the last meeting. New Jersey DOT uh identifies quote unquote study locations for a traffic study as being those impacted by 100 or more new peak hour trips. There's actually no off-site intersections impacted by more
than 100 peak hour trips. Uh so I think we were even going a bit above and beyond including the Rosney Terrace intersection at the beginning, but I think it was important due to the proximity. Uh but there were some questions raised about further intersections to the east. So, plan left uh specifically the signalized
intersections along Eagle Rock A with the Whole Foods Driveway and Wood Hole Avenue and with Prospect Avenue. So, between the last meeting and tonight, we've uh performed new traffic counts at both of those intersections, incorporated them into the traffic study, and uh you know, prepared a pre
and postdevelopment analysis. Uh, additionally, there were questions raised about the approval. that's under construction for the expansion of the West Orange Plaza, including Target and some miscellaneous other uses. Uh we've obtained a copy of the traffic study that went together with that application
uh prepared by another firm and incorporated the approved traffic volumes of that expansion uh into the background traffic growth for this revised traffic study. So, with both of those two new pieces of information, the new counts at the new intersections as well as that area
development, um I have some revised uh capacity analysis results to present. First off, uh at the site driveways, uh substantially similar to what was submitted in the prior report, they continue to operate at good levels of service, uh particularly for traffic entering the site.
uh at Eel Rock a and Rosny Terrace uh when you compare pre and postdevelopment conditions there's little to no discernable change in delays or level of service. Uh similarly at the first adjacent signalized intersection to the east that being the Whole Foods driveway and Wood Hole Avenue uh it's a busier
intersection but that busyiness is really attributable to existing conditions. The change in delay from pre and post development is again minimal. Uh when you move to the next intersection to the east at Prospect Avenue, this intersection's obviously, as I'm sure the board's well aware, got
the highest delays and levels of service of any of these intersections we've reviewed. Um in the, you know, pre-development condition uh on the level of service scale from A to F, there's uh five different movements among the various peak hours that operate at level of service F to begin
with. So really any additional traffic could potentially exacerbate that. So what we've done is we've analyzed that intersection uh pre and post development and also reviewed its traffic signal timing. Uh we've identified traffic signal timing improvements that can be made there. Basically a more efficient
allocation of the green time at the signal which can offset and even more than offset the impact of any additional traffic from from this development. So as I mentioned there's five uh you know no build F conditions with these timing improvements. even considering some additional traffic from this property.
Three of those FS can be eliminated, improved to ease. The remaining two uh remain in the F range, but with reduced delays to the no build condition. So my opinion would be >> I'm sorry, could you slow down a little bit? >> Sure. >> Thank you. Uh the remaining the two
remaining in the F range. >> Yeah. So there's five movements that are F in the no build condition. Three of those can be eliminated and improved to E. The remaining two while they remain in the F range are actually improved still from the no build condition in
terms of the average delay for those movements. So when you consider the timing improvements that the applicant would be agreeable to performing subject to the county's approval obviously uh even with additional traffic from this property that intersection would operate
more efficiently than it does today. Uh moving on, there were some questions uh about queuing along Eagle Rock Avenue, specifically at the site driveways. Um the question was raised a few times uh about cues for vehicles turning left into the site uh either of
the driveways from Eagle Rock Avenue. The traffic impact study includes uh Q results, essentially 95th percentile or close to peak Q's expected uh at an intersection given the traffic volumes. Uh looking at those results, the projected queue for the left turn
movement in, essentially the vehicles waiting to turn left into the site is less than one vehicle in each peak hour, which means it's the majority of the time there's no one waiting to turn left in. And during the times where there is, it's one vehicle. The delay for someone looking to turn left into the site is
simply so short that that person doesn't persist long enough for a large queue to build up behind them within the street. Uh moving on, there was in the prior testimony some research data mentioned from Popeye's uh in other locations throughout New Jersey uh in terms of
observed parking demand and drive-thru queuing. Um there were three sites presented uh and aggregated. There were some concerns raised about the locations of those site in regard to this one. Specifically, the three study sites previously mentioned weren't in uh the same county. So, what we've done is
we've conducted new research counts at two more closely located uh Popeye's locations um 372 Central Avenue in East Orange and 929 South Orange Avenue in East Orange. Um and aggregated that new data to compare to what's proposed in this
location terms of the parking demand. Looking at the two study sites aggregated together, the typical peak demand uh was nine vehicles for parking. Again, that's lower than what we've already provided to comply with the ordinance requirement. The max at either location
was 11 vehicles, whereas again the proposed plan provides 15 to satisfy the ordinance requirement of 15. So based on that research data, at the more closely located sites the board was interested in u I think it corroborates that the parking supply provided for the use is
more than sufficient. Similarly, moving on to drive-through stacking. Uh the proposed plan provides stacking for eight vehicles which you can see on the screen. The max Q observed at either location uh in Essex County at either time was five vehicles. So again, the proposed site plan's
capacity of eight is more than sufficient to accommodate both the ordinance requirement which is six and the max we observed at the local Popeyes which was five. So just to summarize, u the traffic study remains the conclusions of the
traffic study remain similar to what they were previously essentially that there's no significant traffic impact from this property. The new traffic volumes added are simply not that dramatic from these proposed uses of these sizes. Um that holds true at the adjacent intersections to the east and
in fact at the Prospect Avenue signal, we can actually leave it a little more efficient than we found it uh with those signal timing improvements that we would agree to perform. Oh, actually I apologize. I forgot one piece of information I wanted to provide. Uh there was questions about the sight lines at the driveway,
specifically the western driveway, which is that closer to Rosny Terrace. Um as was mentioned in the previous testimony, there's a crest vertical curve located in Eagle Rock Avenue, uh essentially in the vicinity of our eastern driveway.
When the project was initially being designed, we identified that as an issue for someone exiting the western driveway looking to their right, which is something you need to do to make a left turn out. So, uh, it's always been proposed to restrict that left turn out movement and restrict that driveway to
right out only. So, the only remaining driveway sight triangle pertinent to that vehicle exiting the site would be the sight line looking left. So, that's looking west past Rosny Terrace and down the hill. Uh we've reviewed that both in the field and with some uh GIS grading information to basically map out a rough
profile of the road. Uh based on both of those pieces of info, we're confident the site line available is at least in excess of 350 ft. Uh to put that in perspective, it exceeds both what the Ashtto stopping site distance requirement would be and what Essex County's sighteline requirement would be
for this county road of this existing speed limit. Uh so all that to say, we're again confident in corroborating the prior testimony that these site driveways as designed uh are designed to provide safe and efficient access to the site. And that's really all I have in the way
of direct testimony. I'd like to certainly have to answer questions. >> Thank you. I I have no questions on Mr. Downey at this time. >> Let's start with Mr. Devoli this time. >> Uh okay. Thank you. Um, wanted to
clarify, uh, I may not have heard you correctly. Um, you were referring to making a left turn, uh, I believe off of Eagle Rock Avenue into the property. Um, I think that's what you were saying. Um, and that that
wouldn't be problematic, uh, based on your studies that you've done. Is that what you were saying? >> Correct. That was in reference to the queueing information I provided at that intersection. >> Okay. So my question really is um during
peak hours I've seen the the traffic backed up at that light um pretty far back to the to this restaurant. So a car making a left turn off of Eagle Rock into uh into the site with traffic backed up
all the way back that far. I suspect that somebody could be waiting there a bit while the light is red at prospect. Um, has that been considered and factored into what you've determined? >> So, that left turn movement in. The main
thing we've reviewed is the sight line. Um, I will say we do have queuing information for the eastbound approach to the prospect signal um or really to the Whole Foods driveway signal. The projected cues don't reach the site driveway location. So, I wouldn't expect that queue to be an issue. Um, there is
the potential if that did happen on a particularly high day or something, um, that someone could provide a courtesy gap or someone can decide, you know, it's it's more trouble than it's worth to turn in here, but that's not what we're seeing on typical conditions based on the counts. >> Okay. Thank you. No, no further
questions for me. >> Thank you, Dr. Benz. >> Yes. Uh, thank you. Um just um building on the question of the left turn into the property. Um so in your professional opinion
there's no problem making a left turn crossing a double yellow line the median and another double yellow line into the property and that's perfectly fine and safe. Right. >> Correct. That's what you say. >> Okay. Um, you collected data I see in the report
on uh, November 18, 2025. Is that correct? Was it Tuesday? >> Yes. Tuesday, November 18th, Saturday, November 8th. And that's at the two new intersections that were added. >> Okay. Okay, I see that you collected data at uh starting at the afternoon
data at 400 p.m. till 6:30 p.m. Um, is one of the reasons to start at 4 is to catch maybe traffic related to kids coming out of school, school buses, parents picking up kids. The typical window in the industry, if you look at,
you know, it guidance is 4 to 6 p.m. That's typically when the evening peak hour occurs. We um have lately started picking up a little bit extra to 6:30 just in case it lags a little longer, but four to six is the industry standard. >> Okay. Would that again I'll repeat.
Would that consider also um um data of uh students coming from school? Would that consider would that include that? >> I'm not sure the timing of exactly when the township schools let out. So I'm not sure I can answer that appropriately.
>> All right. Okay. I have no more questions. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mrs. Weiss. >> None. Thank you, >> Mr. Scott. >> No questions. >> Miss Miller, >> no questions. Thank you for your
testimony, Mr. Downey. >> Mr. Cohen, questions. >> Uh, Mr. Downey, I have a question I just thought about. Um, would there be an internal queue uh inside the property for that lane
that runs um counterclockwise? Uh, people leaving their parking spaces and also people that are are finishing up with uh with with uh with the drive-thru and people who decide not to go to the drive-thru. So, it would be an
internal queue all the way going to the uh eastern exit. Could there be an internal queue that there would be uh like a parking jam up inside the inside the um your facility, your whole your your property? >> I was trying my best to follow the
question. I might just need a little help identifying the area you're referring to. The southern >> eastern most exit. >> Okay. >> Would that jam up from all people exiting? That seems to be the major exit for the property.
Will that jam up? >> Oh, understood. Yeah. So that carries the majority of the exiting traffic simply because it's the one that allows people to turn left. So both provide the opportunity to turn right, but that's the only one that provides the left out. So it does uh accommodate more of the
site exiting traffic, which is factored in and the levels of service results are still positive at that driveway. >> So do you think that will have like a constant stream of traffic that that could could uh affect Eagle Rock?
um not something that would affect Eagle Rock. I mean, the vehicles exiting the driveway need to yield to traffic on Eagle Rock. So, they only get the opportunity to go when there's a gap. >> Okay. And then also empirically, I did some tests this afternoon making going
on Eagle Rock uh west and then making that left turn. Um I'm asking, did you did you anybody do that sort of a test? It was scary. I was scared people would hit me from behind
and also people were going fast going east on Eagle Rock trying to make the light. That's a problem with the traffic. What do you think about that? Those issues. >> So the traffic heading eastbound that the left turn in must yield to. That's
exactly what the analysis in the report analyzes. So that's certainly included. Um not sure if that answers your question. What happened is, you know, we're worried about traffic and usually you think, okay, in traffic people go slow, but no, it seemed like people were going fast to try to make the light. U
just prior to CVS, they wanted to make that light so they can make the other light. People were speeding up. I felt like people were speeding in this area. Um well, what I can say is when we look at sight lines, um it is dependent upon the speed of the road. So, as you would
think, faster roads need a longer sight line because vehicles move more distance per second. Uh, in this case, uh, or really in all cases, you don't look at the actual speed limit of the road, you add a buffer, what we call a design speed. So, while it's, uh, a posted
speed limit of 35, the sight line requirements it is beholden to in terms of ashtto stopping site distance is based upon a design speed, which would be 40. So, it essentially accounts for the fact that some number of vehicles are traveling above that speed limit. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Cole. Mr. Barbie. >> No questions. Thank you, >> Mr. Schwarz. in the um the Q line. How many cars
can queue be in the order line before it uh goes into the the left turn on the counterclockwise? >> So the southern section of the property you're referring to like plan top right this corner here
>> correct? How many how many cars can be in that in that queue? >> So, as shown, I mean, at least cars 6, seven, eight. So, that would be three. I think you could easily fit one more before it would impact somebody's ability to circulate around the back of that vehicle to the bypass lane. So,
one, if not two, so I'll say it's somewhere in the four to five range. >> Wait, hold on. So, six is ordering, correct? >> Yeah. So vehicle number six in this line is the one at the menu board. So you're
referring to from that point back. >> Okay. So seven seven is in the queue is is is waiting to order. >> Correct. As is eight. >> Okay. So nine nine would block the drive aisle.
>> Well, there's really no one in this aisle going in the northbound direction. I guess only potentially vehicles exiting these last handful of spaces. So this vehic uh aisle is primarily functioning in this direction toward the back of the property. So I think you
could at least at a bare minimum hit one additional vehicle prior to that being blocked so to speak uh if not two. So I mean we could play it safe and I'll say the answer is at least four. Your assumption is that anyone who's parked on the western side on the hot IHOP side
would exit south and then go into the front of the building. Is that your assumption? If I'm understanding your question correctly, it's regarding vehicles circulating the site being
>> I'm just saying I'm I'm saying if you have if you have three if you have four vehicle four people waiting to order, right? You have four people come in. So the first one orders which would be six,
seven, eight, nine could potentially block the drive vial the bypass. >> Uh I would say nine would not to say whether or not 10 would I would need to review it in more detail. >> Okay.
And where can you just show me where the 10th car would be? Uh, I'm not sure I can do that live. I mean, essentially anyone entering this drive-thru is coming from this aisle. >> So, it's somewhere traveling this aisle to getting into the back of the line.
>> Well, I'm saying nine. Would nine protrude? I I don't know the distance. What's Let me ask the question differently. From the rear of number six. So, each car you are assuming is how long?
So the what we look at here is basically the spacing from front bumper to front bumper. It's basically the space in the line occupied per vehicle when you consider both the length of the vehicle and the length of the gap between those. Um we've done research counts for other drive-through uses to confirm that number. >> Could you slow down a little bit?
>> Sure. I apologize. Uh so the distance from car to car, it's 20 feet per car including the length of it. >> So 20 feet. 20 ft and assuming that's the total length of the car and assuming the driver is
is is ordering. So it so you pretty much have three quarters of the car going back, right? So that's is is that a good assumption? >> Which which vehicle would that be? >> The first the >> so vehicle six here.
>> Vehicle six, right? In other words, you don't get you don't have it at 10 feet. you have it further back it because they're because the driver is ordering. I'm just trying to get an idea of how much space there is from. Well, let me
ask the question from the order window from the order board back to the where you have the stripe line on the where you would go into the queue. How many feet is that?
I don't have an exact measurement, but at 20 per vehicle, it's 50 something. 50 to 60. >> So, so it's 4050. Okay. But you have some space in between vehicles, don't you?
>> Right. That's built into the 20. >> Okay. So, you So, you're saying it's like 30, it's 20, 40, 50 feet. So, car number nine would be where? you can imagine. >> I'm asking the question, is car number
nine going to block the potential drive the the drive around? >> In the hypothetical situation where we've got car number nine, I think they essentially be diagonal in this general area, I would imagine, because they're being they're coming from this drive
aisle and entering this drive-through lane. So, this is kind of their desire line, so to speak. That's where they're trying to go. >> Okay. So you're saying it would only impact only impact the one two three the
four spaces on the western side the northwest side. >> Yeah to to the extent it's even an impact because they could just they have another way to to go out. So >> okay the first one does. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. That's true. What
the first and second would have. Okay. Thank you. >> Hi Mr. Downing >> evening. >> With respect to your uh updated report, you used two Popeye's locations in Essex
County as comparable. Is that correct? >> Correct. My understanding is that's what the board was looking for from the last meeting. >> Central Avenue in East Orange, what type of a roadway is it compared to Eagle Rock Avenue?
So, in terms of, you know, size, jurisdiction, etc., it's another four-lane county road. Um, the traffic volumes, we don't have, you know, a count conducted by us in that location, but just looking at New Jerseys DOT's published data for various roads. Uh,
it's actually a bit higher than what we have here on Eagle Rock Avenue. So, similar design of the road, but slightly higher volumes. Uh, don't they allow parking uh on the street on east on Central Avenue?
>> Uh, I don't have an image in in front of me, but I think they may in certain locations. >> You consider that to be comparable >> uh in terms of the movement of vehicles along the road? Yes. I mean, one has parking and one doesn't, but the volume
that it carries is similar to higher. How about South Orange Avenue? >> Uh, similar. That's actually got the highest volume of the three, but it's another four-lane county road. >> Is there parking allowed on the street there?
>> Uh, I can't say truthfully. >> Tell us about the line of sight for vehicles exiting this property. My question has to do with line of sight for vehicles
traveling east on Eagle Rock Avenue coming up that hill and curve. Did you do a measurement as to how many feet from the driveway where people could be
exiting to a vehicle coming up the hill? >> Yes. So that sight line I referred to before um I stated it as the drive the sight line for the vehicle in the driveway but it is actually reciprocal. It is the same in both directions. So
that number I stated before implies in either direction. >> And so you're thinking it's 350 ft. >> Yes. Correct. Or greater. >> Uh at what point coming up Eagle Rock Avenue heading toward Prospect do you
reach the crest of the hill? What's the measurement from the driveway? >> So the crest of the the road is along our frontage closer to the eastern driveway. >> I'm sorry. How could it be closer to the eastern driveway if people are coming
from the west? >> So that the apex like the top highest elevation point uh is along the frontage. So that's the crest of the vertical curve and then it slopes downward in both directions. >> There is a there is a crest.
I think it's a Robertson, but I I didn't I didn't write down the name. Coming up that hill, by the time you can see the driveway, it's less than 350 ft. >> The slope of the road isn't constant, if that's what you mean. So, there's a
location where it it gets steeper further west of the property. Um, I wouldn't consider that a crest. A crest is where it reaches its its apex. But, um, I believe I know the area you're referring to. I don't exactly know the
distance, but the that profile of the road up to the point of 350 ft is is what we've reviewed. Well, when you say you reviewed it, but you didn't drive it. Observe at what point in time you could see the driveway as you're coming around
the curve and up the hill on Eagle Rock Avenue from the west. >> No, we've reviewed that both in the field and with grading data. That was my prior testimony.
>> That's how we determined the 350 ft. Did you do a measurement? >> Um, I didn't do a field measurement with a wheel, but I observed uh both approaching the driveway as a driver and standing in the driveway, how far I could see approaching vehicles. We've
also looked at essentially grading information available from online GIS services to actually cut a sighteline profile of the road uh to corroborate that. >> Heading west, you go to Razn. The next intersection that you come to heading
west on Eagle Rock, >> uh, Robertson Road, I believe. >> Oh, I'm sorry. No, excuse me. Blackburn Terrace, excuse me. And then >> Blackburn Terrace, right? And which and then and then you come to Robertson. Correct. >> Correct.
>> So, as between Rosny, Robertson, and Blackburn, which one is 350 ft from the exiting driveway? 350 ft lands roughly between Blackburn and Robertson
from the driveway location and Robertson. >> So that a car going 40 miles an hour would not be seeing that driveway until they were passing Robertson. Well, my testimony was it's at least 350 ft. I have the level of confidence to
claim it's that. I think it's a bit more. I just couldn't quantify it with, you know, more detail than that, but that 350 is more than sufficient compared to industry standards. Uh, it's more than Ashtto's stopping site distance. It's far more than what Essex County actually requires.
>> Did you did you do a study of accident reports in that area? Uh we've reviewed crash data um both that we obtained directly via OPRA and then uh what was published in the West Orange Vision Zero plan.
>> And what did that tell you? >> So um the Vision Zero plan had significantly more data to go off of. Um the highlights based on my review, they looked at crash data for about seven years if I'm not mistaken.
um and the existing crash history along Elo Avenue. It was ranked, they added essentially ranked fourth in the township uh in terms of their high injury networks and they list a number of essentially recommended improvements along that roadway to be considered.
>> Did you consider those improvements? >> Well, this applicant doesn't control the road and what's done with it. Uh ultimately, that would fall to the county. Ha, have you discussed with the county offtrack improvements to be funded by your client in order to comply with the
vision zero recommendations? >> I certainly have not. I I'm not aware if anyone on the town has or excuse me, anyone else on our project team has, but I personally have not. And you're saying this area has the fourth highest
incident of accidents in Essex County? >> Uh in the township. >> In the township. Okay. And do you know for how many years the restaurant on the site has been closed? >> Uh I personally do not know. So that the
numbers that you looked at would not include traffic in and out of this property, which would certainly contribute to the number of accidents. Is that correct? >> Again, I'm not sure when it closed, so I don't know where it falls in the range that they reviewed. >> Well, you did a seven-year study, you
said, right? You looked >> Well, I didn't. The vision plan did >> look back seven years. Do you know whether or not the restaurant that was there has been closed for more than seven years? I personally do not. If anyone on my team wants to jump in and knows the
answer, let me know. But I it's not information I have right now. >> Well, but your study, your analysis did not take into consideration the rate of accidents that occur despite the fact that the restaurant was closed and there was no traffic in and out of that
restaurant. >> Um, you're asking me to confirm something that I don't know. I don't know when it closed relative to the study that was done by the township. >> Don't you think it was incumbent upon you to find that out? >> It this is not an analysis I prepared.
This is the township's analysis that I reviewed. >> You reviewed it in order to give us an opinion as to the safe and efficient ingress and egress to and from this site in your professional opinion. And when you were there observing, you saw that the restaurant was closed. Correct. Yes.
>> And you didn't inquire as to how long it had been closed and what impact it would have on the study of accidents in that area. Is that correct? >> I did not. >> I have no further questions of the witness at this time.
>> Mr. Downey. Oh, no. You're Mr. Death. Um, Mr. I don't have any further questions. I did I looked quickly on Google map street view uh in October 2020 there was a for sale uh or slashfor lease sign for uh that the previous China gourmet. So
for the past I guess six years has assumably been >> Mr. Mr. Mr. I appreciate what you want to do but you're supposed to be asking questions. Uh yes. Um for uh Mr. Downey, I don't have any questions.
>> Thank you so much, Mr. McNeel. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh just one quick question similar to one of the chairman's questions about the county. Um Mr. Downey, just to clarify, are you're not aware of the if the applicant submitted for
county review yet? And I guess specifically related to if they had any feedback on the proposed signal timing improvements. >> The I know that at least there was a pre-application meeting. I'm not sure if an application's been made. I'm sure someone on my team can confirm that one
way or the other. In terms of the signal timing adjustments, that has not yet been presented to them. So my testimony here is that we think it's an improvement uh and we subject to their review and approval would be agreeable to implementing it. All right.
All right, that that's all I had. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh me members of the public, now is your opportunity to question the witness based upon the testimony presented this evening. Kindly raise your hand so that you can be recognized.
Remembering that this is for questions, not for statements, testimony, or presentation of your own evidence. Kindly raise your hand so that you can be recognized. Hello. >> I see Mr. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I hit the audio. I'm sorry. Can we take down the
sheriff screen? >> Yes. >> And uh Joseph B, you're uh able to speak now. State your name and address for the record. >> Yes. Joseph Bha Caris, 22 Blackburn Terrace, West Arms, New Jersey 07052.
Great. >> And your question, sir? >> Yes. My question for Mr. Downey. Um, coming coming from Prospect at the first light coming down Eagle Rock, there's a there's a left. It's there's no left turns when they turn
into CVS. And now going further down past CVS where this property is going to be with this Popeye's and IHOP. Are you saying that if they make a left that there's not going to be any kind of problem? I mean, I travel that every
single day and the traffic. >> Okay. So, you've asked your you've asked your question. >> Yeah. But I'm just saying that I travel it every day and I >> Yeah, but that's for the end of the hearing when you understand that. I I want to hear what he's saying that you can make a left.
>> You think that there's not going to be a problem of of making a left? >> Good question, Mr. Downey. answer. >> Your microphone's off, Mr. Downey. >> My mistake. Sorry. Um, yeah. So, both of those driveways currently permit the
left turn in movement. That would remain and that would continue to remain uh based on the available sight lines. There's enough sight distance for that turning movement to operate efficiently and safely. >> But with the traffic coming up Eagle Rock Avenue, all right, I I noticed that
there's many buses that come up that way. Uh, I've seen sometimes maybe 10 to 11 buses coming up and it's definitely blocking the lefthand turn. It's going to cause, don't you think that's going to cause a lot of traffic?
I mean, there's a lot of traffic coming up Eagle Rock Avenue, too, at certain times. >> Yeah. So, the existing traffic volumes on Eagle Rock Avenue is kind of the foundation of our whole study. So, that's that's included in my prior testimony.
and the China gu uh the China place that was there all the while u it's approximately 18 years so the traffic is no longer we don't we don't have any info on that on that traffic what was caused before when that was there so
I don't know I did there's so much traffic now I know it's not a question but at the end I will I will address it >> thank you sir >> thank you >> Megan any other hands up. >> Yes, we have several. Lawrence, please
state your name and address for the record. >> Go ahead, Lawrence. You're need to unmute. Okay, maybe we can come back to Lawrence. We'll go to Kevin Malanga. Kevin, state your name and address for
the record. >> Uh, thank you, Megan. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Good evening, members of the board. Good evening, Mr. Downey. Good evening, Kevin Malanga, Bridge Road, West Orange. >> Welcome back, Mr. Manga. >> Thank you, Mr. Downey. May we see that
screen again, please? That same screen that you had earlier. Sure. >> I assume that's acceptable to the board. >> Yes. A5. Here you go. Um,
>> Mr. D, when someone has picked up their meal from Popeye's and they're going to be exiting, do you have one vehicle there at the the pickup window? Which direction
must that vehicle turn? Left or right? So, just to make sure I understand, you're saying the vehicle within the site leaving the drive-thru. >> Yes. Someone is there at you have you show a vehicle there at the >> pickup window and that then proceeds to
the stop sign there, the stop line. Which direction can or must that vehicle turn? Left or right? >> They can turn either direction. So if that vehicle turns right, they will be turning into the
line of traffic entering this property. Is that correct? >> Um, no. So this is a two-way 25t aisle in the front of the site here. So they would be on the they'd be turning into the side going in the eastbound
direction to then make a subsequent left to head to the the driveway to leave the site. >> All right. But they have to they have to travel past a vehicle coming in. So if a vehicle coming into the site decides to
proceed straight, that vehicle could potentially t-bone a car that's passing in front of them. That fair to say. Well, if the vehicle entering is going essentially straight to to back in this aisle, >> yes, >> they have the right of way, so to speak.
So, someone who turned right out of the drive-thru would need to yield to that person just like, you know, any other T intersection. >> Mhm. >> And you feel that most drivers understand that? >> Yes. When you do an analysis of traffic
within the site, do you take into account the size of the site? >> I I think inherently yes, because that size informs what the design is being reviewed. >> Are you aware that the township of West Orange has an ordinance that governs the
size of sites for restaurants that have drive up windows? I believe that's more of a question that I think our civil engineer testified to and our planner will also testify to. >> No, no, no. M Kinbeck, this is a question relating to the impact of the
size of the property on his traffic testimony. It's a perfectly acceptable question. >> Please continue. Mr. Mao. >> Yes. Mr. D, would you be able to answer that question? you take into account the size of the site and are you aware of
that township ordinance? >> So I am aware of the ordinance in terms of does it inform our study. Um I'll just kind of bring that to a more maybe specific that I can answer is the traffic generation of the proposed uses
is based upon the nature of the uses and their size. So for you know these two sizes of restaurants whether it's on a 1 acre site or a thousand acre site if this is the use and size built upon it it's the same traffic generation. Does that answer
your question? >> No. So what is the philosophy behind a township ordinance that has a minimum lot size of 5 acres for a restaurant that has a drive-through window? >> Mr.
That one's not going to fly. That's getting into legislation interpretation and that's not this witness's expertise. >> Well, I think uh Mr. Chairman, that goes to whether or not a site that is less than 5 acres considered safe for the
operation of a restaurant with a drive-through window. That's where I'm going with that question, sir. >> Well, go there instead of the question you asked. >> Okay. All right. So then, uh, Mr. Downey. Would it be accurate to say that the
township of West Orange has considered it appropriate and safe for a restaurant with a drive-thru window to have a lot size of 5 acres? >> I I would agree that is the requirement. Why they have set that as their requirement, I don't think I can opine
on. >> I have no other questions. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mango. >> We have I'm sorry. We have uh Emra. >> Welcome back. State your name. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Yes, this is
Emra Halen Kaya 15 Fundus Road. >> I'm sorry. 15 >> Frank Yeah. Frank Umbrella nurse David Umbrella Sierra. Thank you. >> Ask your question,
>> Mr. Dominique. If uh if it's acceptable, if he could put that uh drawing. >> Sure. >> Um >> Thank you. >> Oh god. >> Yes. Many of the members and the president actually uh brought that up about you know the traffic uh on the
Eagle Rock you know and the making turns left turns into the property. Before I ask the question I need to know uh what is the safe speed that you can enter into those parking lots? Uh and the reason I'm asking is is there any ramp um like an angle that will prevent uh a
car like a not like a sedan that will not make that car going into that parking lot you know um at a you know reasonable speed so they will you know slow down so that they don't hit their uh underneath their cars and while doing that uh being uh perpendicular to the
eagle rock and almost being potential t-bone uh on either side. Um, so is there any ramplike entrance uh because it's very hard to see from that two-dimensional uh top view? >> Yeah, I would need to review the grading
plan submitted in more detail to answer your question. I know at a minimum the the portion that is the continuation of the sidewalk is required to be very flat, less than 2% simply to meet ADA requirements. The rest of the driveway, I'm not certain. Um, I'd have to get back to you on that.
>> Yeah. Uh the reason I'm asking is you know uh mo most of the members and also the uh the public as mentioned uh you are at the crescent uh I mean pretty much there at the crescent of Eagle Rock and there is actually very limited site you know u line of sight coming from
either east or west and if a car was you know either using either of those uh entrances uh and trying to get in at a slow speed so that they don't want to hit their cars would be actually sitting duck you know to be t-boned because there even headlights would be u you
know not useful because they will be heading in the opp you know perpendicular direction to the road so you you could be actually um you know um like a invisible barrier >> you've asked the question sir yes can you answer this question Mr. down,
please. >> I'm not positive if there was a follow-up question what it was exactly. Could you repeat? >> Um, so what will be like the safe speed uh for a sedan, not an SUV? Um, you know, entering those, uh, parking, you know, uh, entrances. Um, and how long
would a car making a left turn will take safely, you know, entering u while blocking, uh, the Eagle Rocket? Yeah, I'm not sure I can offer a specific number. It's certainly less than what the through travel speed is on Eagle Rock because someone needs to slow
down to turn in. Uh I'm not certain, like I mentioned before, what the driveway grading is and how it would impact that. Um certainly something we would work with the town's professionals on to make sure it's designed appropriately, but I don't have a specific answer to give you at this present time.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. No, no further questions. Thank you. Uh members of the public, those of you who have questions, please raise your hand now so that we can get a count. >> I have two so far.
>> Okay. >> Dropping the screen unless you want me to keep it up >> for right now. Leave it up. >> Okay. Uh, whoever get the names of the two people who have their hands up and we will limit the questioning to those two individuals before we take our break.
>> Okay, that sounds great. Uh, Dante Spagnulo, state your name and address for the record. >> Hello, my name is Dante Spagnolo, 20 Blackburn Terrace, West Orange, New Jersey 07052. >> Welcome back. >> Thank you. Uh my question follows up to
uh Joe Buddhiscaris' concern question making the left inside of uh the Popeyes and the IHOP during peak business hours if and this also touches upon the gentleman that was uh questioning about
car lengths. Um during peak business hours, including times when uh let's say 5:00 at night, don't you think that making the left would actually block off traffic into the drive-thru into the
entrance lane being if there was more than 10 cars in the parking lot at a time trying to order through that drive-through window? >> Um I I think I followed your question. If if the issue you're alluding to is the drive-through queuing, I think there's a lot of testimony already on
the record that that aid is more than is even necessary for this use. So I I don't expect it to be reaching 10. Certainly not on a regular basis. >> Yes, but you also have no historical data from the last seven years about
traffic patterns. And on record, you even testified saying that uh you have not conducted an uh field study. So my question again is are we certain that it will not block
two lanes of traffic? Because if a vehicle is making a left, he's now blocking three lanes of traffic. If you really think about it, the lane he's turning from and the two opposing lanes. Um, I guess I'd just note I don't I don't totally agree with the
characterization of my testimony that you provided on a few points, but the drive-thru provides more stacking capacity than the ordinance requires. It provides more than we've seen at local Popeye's, and it has a few hundred feet of, I'll say, internal overflow
available on the western drive aisle parallel to Rosny Terrace before it would even get close to the driveway. >> Mr. Mr. Danny, I don't think you understood the question. At one point he was talking about the drive aisle. His question now has to do with turning off
of Eagle Rock Avenue, making a left turn into the site. And his statement was that while he's doing that, he's effectively blocking three lanes of traffic. The one he's in and the two opposing lanes of traffic. Can you address that? >> Once there's a gap in the eastbound
traffic, he performs the turn. He doesn't like turn halfway and then stop. >> Right. But the thing is, if there was an excess amount of cars during peace peak business hours, there would be traffic buildup,
essentially gridlock is what I'm alluding to. Therefore, it would cause a massive traffic jam, making it unsafe for drivers. Don't if with that being the case, I think my prior answer was appropriate in response to this question, which is that
we have studied Popeyes at peak times and provided more than enough stacking to accommodate it fully within the site >> on Central Avenue is what you're alluding to, correct? >> Uh that was one of the study sites. Yes.
>> Okay. And approximately how many cars travel on Central Avenue dayto day, week over week, month to month? >> Yeah, the DOT rates uh historical counts from DOT, Central Avenue is about 16,000
vehicles per day. >> And that going to Eagle Rock Avenue, >> uh about 13,000 vehicles per day. Same source of information >> that's including school buses and public transportation. It yeah it would be all
daily traffic >> including peak business times. >> Yes the total for the full day. >> I have no further questions. I yield my time. >> Thank you. Miss Brill, do we have one more?
>> Yes, we do. Miss Mr. Ishmail is uh has another question. >> I'm sorry. Who's that? >> Just unmute. There you go. >> H Ishmail. uh six ro um
he addressed the traffic in Prospect Avenue and then he suggested improving the traffic signal to to help reduce
the traffic jam. And my question is did he did take that into consideration? Did he discuss that with the town? Uh obviously he's asking the town or he's considering that in his investment into
his development. >> I'm sorry. Any improvements to that intersection and the timing of the signals is subject to the jurisdiction of Essex County. Those are both county roads. The signals are the county signals. And based upon the testimony,
um, I'm going to discuss with Miss Kilbeck a condition that any approval that might be granted if the application is approved is conditioned upon resolving the timing of the signals with the county.
>> Okay. And and then um the issue was the uh crest uh coming uh an eagle rock before Rosny Terrace and my personal observation
you would not see the car coming up that crest. >> Mr. Mr. Mr. brings me a question please you can give us >> the >> question is he says 350 ft but I think it's uh a lot less from my personal observation so
I don't know how he >> I'm sorry Mr. Mr. Ismail, you're you're you're not helping yourself. You can give that testimony at the end of the hearing. He's already addressed it. I've asked the question. He's given the answers. He believes that 350 ft is what
it is. Uh we have to determine whether or not that's credible testimony. >> You have another question for him. >> Yes. Uh and then uh the parking uh uh requirement for both
development IHOB and uh and Popeye's uh there is no street parking um allowed in Eagle Rock nor Rosney.
And my my question is I how he determined uh the number of parking within his site will be enough for uh the activity during the day or night for his uh development
and if it is not adequate and how he can tell us if it is adequate or not where the rest of the car is going to go will be will the traffic uh overflow through
throughout the whole neighborhood. >> Mr. Israel, the application does not seek a variance with respect to the number of spaces. It complies with the ordinance and we have to honor what's in our ordinance. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. And then >> any other you have any information? Yeah, the the Central Avenue I'm familiar with was uh was that uh Popeye there. I think he got like over 20 um I didn't count him but I estimated over 20
barking stole and he still uh have cars could not get in that site and they wind up barking in the streets and he has like 13 of them over here for this development I believe. And >> Mr. Mr. One more time. It has to be a
question. Mr. Downey, are you familiar with any overflow parking issues at the Central Avenue location? >> I have not. >> Have you visited the site in connection with preparation of your reporting and your testimony?
>> I have not personally visited that site. We had essentially traffic count staff perform the counts at that location. >> So, you have no way of knowing whether or not there's a problem with overflow parking. Well, I have parking counts at the site showing that their own lot isn't full.
>> But you didn't observe whether or not there was any parking overflow. >> I didn't observe with my own eyes that site at all. No. >> Okay. Mr. Ismail, any further questions? >> Yeah. The the the last question I have is uh
is is did he take into consideration the new development and uh of target which is if you will come during the day. >> Okay, Mr. Ismmail, I'm going to have to stop you. The traffic report that was
submitted and that's attached to the agenda and available for you to review >> in the new report. They added in an analysis based upon the fact that the target has been approved. So they have analyzed that.
>> Do you analyze the traffic uh change uh and impact You did. Okay. >> It's in the report. If you if you go to the agenda and you click on the revised traffic report, it's all there. It's the It's the traffic report that was just submitted.
>> All right. Thank you very much. I'd look at it then. Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you. >> Okay. Um let's go. Let's go back to full screen, please. >> Sure. >> We are substantially past our 9:30 break
time. It is 10 o'clock. We are we are going to go into recess for 10 minutes. Everybody kindly turn off your videos and your audios and come back at 10. After 10, we will resume. We are in recess. Can we test the audio?
>> Everybody just say something. >> Okay. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Thank you. >> Order. >> It works. It works. >> Diana, could I please have um There's someone Megan who's speaking a lot. her
name. >> Yes, I'm the moderator. It's me Brill. I sent you the email. >> Could you spell >> Could you spell your last name, please? >> Sure. Be late boy. R I L L. >> And it's Meg.
>> Yes. >> Oh, thank you very much, Miss Burl. >> You're very welcome. Carry on, guys. >> We're almost all back. Let's Mr. Chandler kindly recess is over. We're back in session. Miss Chandler, kindly take the role.
>> Mr. Barbie, >> here. >> Dr. Kenzie, >> present. >> Mr. Cohen >> here. >> Mr. Deaui >> here.
>> Miss Miller, >> Mr. Schwarzbomb >> here. >> Mr. Scott, Mrs. Weiss here. Here. Let me try Mr. Scott again. Mr. Scott, >> present.
and chairperson Neuer. >> I'm here as well. Miss Carrie, we're back in with a quorum. Correct. >> Correct. >> Thank you so very much. Uh, Miss Kimbeck, do you have any uh
redirect for your witness? >> Um, yes, I do, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Um, so Mr. Downey, there are a lot of questions related to left turns into the property on Eagle Rock and as you said um when you began your testimony, you did visit the the area in the vicinity
of the project. >> That's correct. >> Um are there commercial properties to the east of us with driveways on Eagle Rock between our property and the Whole Foods traffic light? >> Yes. >> Do they have um any restrictions on left
turns into those driveways from Eagle Rock? Not that I'm aware of. >> Um, if there were to be a queue at the light at Whole Foods, are those driveways closer to the intersection than our driveways? >> Yes.
>> And their current operations permit the left turn in? >> Yep. To the best of my knowledge, they do. >> Okay. um and approaching the Whole Foods light um from the west where there are four lanes on Eagle Rock in front of our
property. Um does Eagle Rock expand when you get closer to the Whole Foods Light with respect to how many lanes there are? >> Yeah. So that striped center median that begins in front of our property frontage becomes a full lane basically from the center of the Whole Foods building, I'll
say, all the way to the east of Prospect Avenue. So from that location to the east, it's a fivelane road instead of a four-lane road. >> So if someone wanted to make a left into one of those commercial driveways to the east of us, they would need to cross three lanes of traffic. >> Several of them. Yes.
>> Okay. And to your knowledge, there's no restriction on that movement. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um there were some questions regarding the grading of the aprons. Um the access driveways really the driveway aprons. Um
you testified that uh at the sidewalk crossing it would have to meet ADA requirements. Um does the county go through a level of review and have additional requirements to meet for driveways that um enter their roads? >> They do. Yeah. So we'll need to meet their driveway design criteria including
the grading of that driveway. Okay. Um and both uh the original traffic report and the updated report um took queuing counts at the drive-thru at various Popeye's locations, including in the new
report, two of them in Essex County, >> correct? >> Yeah. >> Um when your firm does those queuing analysis and counts at existing locations, are they taken from the ordering board or from the pickup window? pickup. So that number the
numbers I've stated is essentially the total number of vehicles in the drive-thru. >> And what was the maximum number you saw in the Essex County locations? >> So the most we saw at any given time was five, whereas we provide stacking for eight. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I don't have any
further questions of Mr. Downey. Uh >> members of the board, any questions based upon this supplemental testimony? Please raise your hand. Seeing none. Miss, >> by the way, all of your questions
revolved around one, just Popeye's, not having IHOP and Popeye's. Am I correct? >> The research counts were conducted at Popeye's for the parking demand and queuing demand of the Popeyes portion of
the proposal. >> Right. So are when all of this conversation has gone on, what about where does IHOP come into the picture? >> Well, I have customers aren't able to use the drive-thru to to do what they need to do. It's only Popeye's demand
using the drive-thru. >> No, I know that. But in terms of traffic, all was that also included? >> Yes, the traffic study includes projections for the full building, including both uses. >> Okay. And with the parking, when you went to look at Popeye's or some of the
um uh audience members asked about were there not enough parking and you had a park on the street that was only one Popeye that did not include Popey and a
second restaurant. Correct. >> Yeah. So the study sites, the two I mentioned today and the three that were mentioned previously are just Popeye sites singularly, right? >> So the data we get there is specifically for the parking demand for the Popeye's portion and that demand is less than
what the ordinance requires, which we have satisfied, >> but you you didn't answer what I just asked you. So you you didn't no you didn't mean any harm. you then um include for the parking all your
questions have not included the IHOP I haven't heard that word mentioned once tonight and there are now there are two projects on this one property >> so we have not done any research counts
at other IHOPS like we have for Popeye's but the parking provided on this proposed site plan is sufficient to satisfy the total parking requirement for both the Popeyes and the IHOP. >> But you've never looked at any other IHOPs, correct? >> I'm I'm not aware of Yeah. research
conducted. >> Thank you. Thank you very much, >> Mr. Cohen. Question. >> Yes. Just following up on the great question of Alice Weiss. Uh do you have any comparable statistics for a joint uh operation of Popeye's with any other
restaurant combined in one? >> Uh not that I'm personally aware of. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Schwarzman, did I see your hand go up? >> Yes. Okay. Just quick question. Um Mr.
the Downey. If there was one restaurant, would there be half the traffic? >> So the rates published by it are based upon the use of the building and the size. So it would depend what the use
and size of that building are. So if you used the same building area and devoted the whole thing to a single restaurant, it would depend which type of restaurant it was. So if it was an let's stick to the two proposed uh restaurants an IHOP
and a Popey. So if it was only an IHOP, what would the impact be on the traffic flow and parking the traffic flow? So if it was the same building area but the whole space was IHOP, the traffic lines would be lower. The whole space was
Popeyes, it would be higher. Um, the fast food use generates more per square footage essentially in the it rates than the IHOP does. >> Okay. So, if it was only a Popeye's, there would be more traffic. Is that
what you're saying? Uh, if it was only Popeye's with the full building area, that would be a very large Popeyes. And because the rates are based on that size, the projection would be higher. But to the the question I'm asking is
really just going down just understanding two restaurants versus one rest one large restaurant versus two small restaurants the impact on the traffic flow.
>> Yeah. So the the rates are based on the use and the size. So really, so to speak, the number of restaurants is sort of irrelevant to the calculation. It's how much square footage is devoted to a sitdown restaurant use and how much is devoted to a fast food use. So it could
be two uses with that total square footage each or it could be a 100 with that total square footage each. It's based on the use and the size. >> That's it. Fair enough. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Dr. Ben.
>> Um, thank you. Um, Miss Kambeck just asked you about the left turn about the properties east to the property. Don't they have a painted um median created by two sets of double yellow lines? >> So the
the nearest >> which is like a barrier um median. So looking east from our property, there's a looks like an entering driveway first that has a striped median in front of it and then the driveways beyond that are within the left turn
lane at the signal. So it's basically a third lane instead of two lanes and the stripe median >> but also with the property there's a continuous uh painted median right without an opening without any break.
>> Correct. There's an existing stripe center median along the road. >> Okay. And and you claim that you are permitted to drive over it in order to make the left turn. >> That's correct. That's New Jersey Title 39 motor vehicle law.
>> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. D. I want to make sure my note is correct. When Mr. Schwarzman, I asked you about one restaurant. If it was only an IHOP in the same size building, I thought I heard you say that the impact on traffic would be less. Is that
correct? >> Yeah. So, the key factor would be the size of whatever hypothetical restaurant you're speaking about. If it was all the IHOP use, I believe it would be less. And if it was all the Popeyes, it would be more. >> The projections in the traffic study are for this combination.
>> Thank you. Any other member of the board? Okay, these were very brief questions. Uh there's a hand going up. >> Is Ken back witness with you?
>> I'm sorry. What? Mr. Chair, >> what are you finished with the witness? Um, if I could, I'd just like to ask a few questions. Um, following Mrs. Weiss's questions on the parking, which really wasn't what we addressed on this. >> I'll give you one I'll give you one more redirect.
>> Okay. Um, Mr. Downey, you were asked about uh parking analysis as we conducted counts at um Popeye locations and not IHOP locations. And as we previously testified, the parking complies. There's
no parking variance associated with this application. What is the parking demand for the IHOP portion of the application? How many spaces? >> So the total requirement for the IHOP portion is 34 spaces
>> and what's the total requirement for the Popeyes portion? >> 15 for a total of 49 for the site. And the maximum we've observed at um any Popeye's location is how many spaces being utilized?
>> So at the nearest locations um the new two the peak parking demand was 11 noted at any time. So that 15 which we satisfy is conservative in and of itself. >> So based on the studies we conducted at Popeye's there should be excess parking
available um that could supplement the IHOP parking if needed. Correct. To the extent that is even needed. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Are you going to call your next? >> Yeah. I think that concludes uh my questioning for Mr. Downey.
Um so at this point uh due to some questioning of the board, we'd like to bring our sound expert up, Mr. Dick. >> It's >> your case. Call whoever you want. >> Um, do do you want Mr. Dick sworn in
again as he did with the other witnesses? >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Miss Carrie, please. Is Michael Dick, please swear on it. >> Um, are you there? Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter of truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
>> I do. >> Okay, you're sworn. Uh, Mr. Dick, did you review the revised plans that we submitted that enhanced some of the buffering, distance, and landscaping um from the drive-through operations to the property line that you studied in your report?
>> Yes. >> Um, and you previously testified as to, you know, the the sounds generated from the operations and as well as the mechanisms we use to buffer that sound and the impact it has on the sound level
on adjoining properties. Correct. >> Um, so in your professional opinion, the additional space and landscaping that were provided to the rear, how does that impact your prior testimony and conclusions with respect to the noise
impacts on adjoining properties? >> There's essentially no impact to the conclusions from our study or my prior testimony. Um, no changes to the total calculated sound levels. Um there will be a marginal improvement to the nearest
property line of the loudspeaker from for the noise from the loudspeaker itself. But as that was a relatively low contributor compared to the other sound sources on site um the overall impact wouldn't change. The the calculated
total sound levels would remain unchanged. >> Thank you. Uh that that's my only questions for Mr. Dick. Okay, members of the board, let's start with uh Mr. Schwarzman. >> No questions.
>> No questions. >> Mr. Cohen, >> no questions. >> Miss Miller, >> no questions. >> Mr. Scott, >> no questions. >> Miss Weiss, >> no questions. >> Dr. V.
>> Uh just a quick question. The conclusions were we just um discussed are they based on actual calculations or measurement or just your uh prediction? >> Which conclusions are you referring to? >> But you said that there won't be any substantial impact. Is it based on
actual measure? Did you actually you know measure something? Did you do new measurements compared to last time? >> We didn't do any new measurements. Um but we did you know update our calculation based on that distance and while it would as I said it would provide a marginal improvement for the
sound from the loudspeaker itself um but the total including the HVAC and everything else would remain the same. >> Okay. Thank you >> Mr. Deovi. >> Yes. Um
the the measurements that were taken for the report um were decibb. Is that correct? >> In other words, you measured decibb as as >> the ambient sound level measurements. >> Any sound measurements?
>> We we did measurements on site for the ambient sound levels in the area. >> Okay. Um >> but that's different from the calc the sound levels we calculated for the proposed use. Okay. Um,
did your studies uh assess frequencies? Um, meaning uh the the level the the transmission of noise and sound um is more than just decibb. It's also frequency. Did
frequency come into play in your testing >> in in our evaluation? Yes. Um and so the because the All right. Um
All right. That's that's all I've got. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Dolby. Members of the public, this I'm sorry. Um Mr. Mr. Elgard, >> I don't have any uh questions. No. >> Thank you, Mr. McNeel.
>> No questions. Thank you, Chairman. >> Thank you. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to question the witness based only on the testimony he has just presented. Ask questions and you will be recognized. Please raise your hand if you have a question based upon what was
just presented. Yes, we have uh Dante Spagnolo. >> Hello, Dante Spagnolo. 20 Blackburn Terrace, West Orange, New Jersey. Uh my question is for Mr. Dick in regards to sound decimals uh when refrigeration
trucks are being delivered. Was that taken into account when your analysis was done? Alongside of that, the actual >> Mr. M sir, you've asked the question. Let the witness answer. Yes, that was in
my previous testimony. >> Before tonight, >> yes. >> So, my next follow-up question would be, what about the exhaust notes that are uh delivered from the tractor trailers or trailers being brought to the site and
unloading? Sir, all of that was testified to previously by Mr. Dick. It was just >> Was it linked in the uh thing? I did not see that. I apologize. I may have >> He was here. He was here on October 23rd
and presented testimony. >> Right. But I'm asking right now, is it linked inside of any sort of documentation linked? Right. Now >> his only testimony tonight is that based upon the relocation of the buffer, there have been no material changes in his
analysis of the acoustics. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else? >> I'm not seeing any hands yet. >> Okay. Once, twice.
Closed. >> Uh there you go. >> Miss Kenbeck, any redirect? No. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Uh, may I please have Mr. Bur back for one item, please? >> Welcome back, Mr.
>> You uh you are under oath. >> My question relates to the environmental impact statement dated June of 2024 that you prepared. You >> remember that? Yeah, it goes a ways back, but yes,
>> there's a section on odor and your your report states that the project proposes one 2500gallon grease trap for each of the proposed buildings. I guess that means each of the proposed restaurants. Is that correct?
>> That's correct. Yes. So that with the application as it's before us, there'll be 5,000galon capacity with regard to grease traps. >> Yes. >> Would you need more than one 2500 gallon
grease trap if it was only one restaurant? >> Um, this is typically something generated by the the MEP and the architect. Um, that's some direction that we are given by them. Um if it's one
just based on historical knowledge size of of buildings I would say one could be adequate. Um it may change the the number or frequency of maintenance. Um but one I would anticipate one could be
um could be adequate but ultimately I would I would defer to an MEP or the architect to make that confirmation. How long when you submit written reports you should refer to the source if it's not your own personal knowledge
>> can't hear you Mr. Chairman >> should be refer you should refer to whoever provided you with the information if it's not your own personal knowledge any other members of the board want a question Mr. Okay, please continue, Miss Ginbeck.
>> Thank you. Um, so my final witness would be our professional planner, but in light of the forestry memo, which questions uh whether a new ordinance um would apply, I would like the opportunity to review the memo and
ordinance with my team before we begin planning testimony and um present that at another meeting. >> It's your case. I certainly don't want to force you into providing testimony when you're not ready to do that.
>> Thank you. And I don't want to break up the planner's testimony either. So, I think if we just had some time to review and address this, um then we can come back and address everything. >> Okay. Um the I I can't put you on in February.
very tight. We have two lengthy applications. Diana, am I correct that March 19th, we have but one application? >> Correct. We only have one application. That's the continuation of 104 winding life.
>> Okay. Miss Kimbeck, do you need to check with anyone or are you prepared to proceed on March 19th? Um well I think everyone is on this call so if you can just give me um give us a minute to confirm and I see Miss Clark
is here >> um just while we have a little time uh that the the resident Dante I think he wanted to know if there's a place he can go for the audio tapes that he can review and I I guess it's in the the website the west zoning board. He can
review past meetings, right? >> You can contact Miss Chandler and she will be wonderfully helpful. >> Okay, that's that's how you can do it. Dante, you go back and you can >> I'm sorry. Why are you getting emails and contact from a member of the public?
>> Not be communicating with members of the public. >> He's not saying that, Phil. >> He asked He asked what uh what happened to last meeting. >> I'm sorry. He just said that he either spoke to or change exch you can't exchange emails, texts, or phone calls
with members of the public. Mr. Cohen, >> I'm not He just talked He just talked five minutes ago. I'm just trying to answer his question. He asked where he could see the testimony for the the noise uh of on the that happened the prior meeting. He wasn't, you know, he
wasn't uh aware of that testimony. He wanted to review it. >> It doesn't matter what it is. There were no communications permitted. There's just wanted to see the old meeting. Is he allowed to see prior meetings as a as a >> Of course he is. It's a public record. >> That's all. That's all I'm trying to tell.
>> They're all listed on west.org under the zoning board of adjustment. >> That's what I was saying. I was just trying to tell Dante where to go to get the the prior transcript. >> I don't understand. You're not supposed to be communicating with him. >> I'm not communicating with him other than just now in public with you and
with him. I'm not doing anything outside of the meeting. Miss Chandler, would you repeat it just to make sure that Dante has gotten the information? >> All recordings of zoning board of adjustment meetings are on west.org
under the zoning board of adjustment section of the planning and development department. >> Hopefully, he will understand that. >> And if not, I'm in the office tomorrow until 4:00. 973 3254108.
>> Correct. >> I was just trying to be helpful. I'm just trying to be helpful to every That's fine. >> I understand that you want to be helpful. You have to understand that while you're in a meeting, you can't communicate with members of the public. >> Bill, he was just trying to tell you the
man asked it out loud. >> He asked it publicly at the meeting. Mr. Cohen was asking for the information to be given to the >> president. That's it. You misunderstood. No problem, >> Mr. Cohen. Good job,
>> Miss Kenbeck. >> Yes, we're available on March 19th. >> Okay. Uh this application MPV uh application 22-13
is carried to our regular meeting of March 19th, 2026. No further notice will be provided. Those of you who have an interest in this application, kindly make appropriate notations for yourself and
come back and join us on March 19th for uh the continuation of this application. >> And can you place the time of the meeting on March 19th on the record, please? >> It's in our it's it's published. It's 8:00.
Everybody knows that. >> Okay. Just the the land use law requires the time, place, and location put on the record to carry 8:00 PM Eastern time via Zoom pursuant to the agenda.
Seeing nothing further to come before the board this evening, this meeting is adjourned. >> Good night. >> Hi. >> Very nice meeting. Thank you. >> Good night. >> Good night. >> There you go.
Let's go.