Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on October 27 2022

Note: Transcripts are generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Please listen to the recording (below) if you feel any text is inaccurate.

Speaker 0     00:00:03    Provided in the following ways. Notice published in the Courier News, a notice posted on the Bolton Board of the Municipal Building notice made available to the Township clerk Notice sent to the Courier News and the star ledger. Will the clerk please call the role?  
Speaker 1     00:00:17    Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 2     00:00:17    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:18    Mr. Tillery?  
Speaker 2     00:00:24    Here. Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:25    Mr. Patel. Kalpesh.  
Speaker 0     00:00:34    You here?  
Speaker 1     00:00:35    I saw he's here.  
Speaker 2     00:00:38    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:00:38    Thank you. Mr. Reggio.  
Speaker 2     00:00:42    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:00:43    Mr. Bla. Mr. Hay. Daca. Here. Mr. El  
Speaker 2     00:00:49    Uhrin  
Speaker 1     00:00:51    Chairman.  
Speaker 2     00:00:52    Here.  
Speaker 0     00:00:54    Will everyone please stand? Salute the flag.  
Speaker 2     00:01:03    Oh, nice. The United States of America, The Republic, it stands One Nation, Nation, Indivisible, Invisible and justice for all.  
Speaker 0     00:01:22    Mr. Kinneally, are there any changes to tonight's agenda?  
Speaker 1     00:01:38    I don't see, Jim, I'm going to mute myself and make a phone call.  
Speaker 0     00:01:44    Please do.  
Speaker 2     00:02:47    I think  
Speaker 0     00:03:37    I apologize to everyone. It's first time in the 15, 16 years I've been doing this, but we'll, we'll see what's going on with this situation.  
Speaker 1     00:03:58    He's logging on now. Chairman. It wasn't letting him log  
Speaker 0     00:04:01    On. Oh, okay.  
Speaker 1     00:04:02    Yeah. So one more minute please. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:04:04    Maybe thought he might have found a better gig.  
Speaker 1     00:04:35    All right. He's signing on as we speak.  
Speaker 0     00:04:38    Okay.  
Speaker 1     00:04:38    Yeah. I don't know why the invite went out, but it wasn't letting him open it, so I sent it again.  
Speaker 0     00:04:44    Okay.  
Speaker 2     00:04:45    Yeah.  
Speaker 0     00:04:45    Technical difficulties. Nobody's losing.  
Speaker 1     00:04:48    That's the worst that happens tonight.  
Speaker 0     00:04:50    There we go.  
Speaker 1     00:04:52    There you  
Speaker 0     00:04:52    Go. Can you hear me? I think you muted, Jim.  
Speaker 1     00:04:57    There we go. Sorry.  
Speaker 0     00:04:59    It's not a problem. Do you, do we have any changes to tonight's agenda?  
Speaker 3     00:05:03    I'm not aware of any changes to the agenda.  
Speaker 0     00:05:05    Good. Let's proceed. Let's move on to item number 5 22 ZB 79 V. Lil Fam.  
Speaker 3     00:05:13    Is Ms. Fam present?  
Speaker 4     00:05:18    Yes, I'm here.  
Speaker 3     00:05:20    Ms. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your, the testimony you're about to give should be the  
Speaker 4     00:05:26    Yes  
Speaker 3     00:05:27    And address, please.  
Speaker 4     00:05:29    Five 40 WO Street, Piscataway, New Jersey. 8 8 5 4.  
Speaker 3     00:05:35    Thank you. And could you to the board, what you would like to do here? You can hand  
Speaker 4     00:05:40    I, I'm here to request for the variance. The requires to propose is to 30 yard set for the  
Speaker 3     00:05:55    Mr. Chairman. You may wanna talk to Mr. Henderson. This?  
Speaker 0     00:05:57    Yeah. Henry, you have any comments on this? Your side impact?  
Speaker 5     00:06:01    No, this is strictly for a raised patio. It's a paper street that exists in the back of the house. It actually will have no impact on really anybody other than the Paper Street. And that Paper Street is encumbered by wetlands for the most part. So I don't anticipate it ever being developed into a road. So for that reason, I don't see any issues with this application.  
Speaker 0     00:06:25    Thank you, Henry. Any other members of the board have any questions for this applicant? This application? Hearing none. I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any comments or questions about this application? Ms. Buckley?  
Speaker 1     00:06:39    No. One Chairman.  
Speaker 0     00:06:40    Okay. Close the public portion. I make a motion to approve this application. Can I get a second?  
Speaker 6     00:06:44    Have a second.  
Speaker 0     00:06:46    Thank you.  
Speaker 1     00:06:49    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery?  
Speaker 6     00:06:52    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:06:53    Mr. Patel?  
Speaker 6     00:06:55    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:06:55    Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Hay daca? Yes. Mr. Ellie?  
Speaker 3     00:07:00    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:07:01    And Chairman cao?  
Speaker 0     00:07:02    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:07:04    Your application's been approved. We'll memorialize it at our next meeting in a written document and mail that document to you. Good luck.  
Speaker 1     00:07:10    Thank you  
Speaker 0     00:07:11    So much. Good luck, ma'am. Thank you. Waqar. Item number 6 22 dash ZB 81 v Mark and Danielle Quis.  
Speaker 3     00:07:20    Are Mark and Danielle s present?  
Speaker 6     00:07:22    Yes, we are. Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:07:23    We're okay. I need to swear you in. Could you each raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give be the truth so you  
Speaker 6     00:07:31    Yes, I do. I  
Speaker 3     00:07:32    Do. Okay. Your address, please?  
Speaker 6     00:07:34    Two Underwood Street, Piscataway, New Jersey 0 8 8 5 4.  
Speaker 3     00:07:39    And could you explain to the board what you would like to do here?  
Speaker 6     00:07:42    I'd like to install a shed in, in the back of my house.  
Speaker 3     00:07:49    Mr. Chairman, it appears that most of these variances are existing.  
Speaker 0     00:07:53    Existing, Yes. I  
Speaker 3     00:07:53    With Mr. Henderson.  
Speaker 0     00:07:54    Henry, do you have any comments on this application?  
Speaker 5     00:07:58    There's the only comment is, appears that the deck was constructed without a variance and a permit previously. The variance required for the, for the deck seems reasonable concerning. This is a corner property. That being said, for approvals given, I think it should be subject upon building permits being secured or proof that a building permit was ever taken out for the, for the deck. And this way we could confirm that the deck was built in accordance with building codes. Other than that, I don't see any issues with this application.  
Speaker 0     00:08:32    Thank you, Henry. Mr. Quida, are you okay with that?  
Speaker 6     00:08:36    Yes, I am. I do do have a question though. The deck was built, you know, around 30 years ago. We moved into the house in September of 19 92, 93. And then in 94 we had the deck built. I did have, you know, permits, we couldn't build the deck unless we had a, a permit from the Township. But unfortunately, I, I can't find that permit or even the contractor's name who did it 30 years ago. So what is the next step, you know, to secure, You know, the deck is reviewed again. Do we have to file for a permit for the deck or another variance?  
Speaker 5     00:09:16    Yeah, I believe you, you're gonna have, well you're getting the variance for the deck now. And the reason I'm saying I believe it was built without permits or variance is because if you would've went for a permit, what would've happened is it would've triggered a variance. You, your zoning permit would've got denied at that point, just like your shed permit got denied. Okay. And we would've said you needed a variance. So perhaps you took out, or your contractor said he took out the permits, Whatever happened, happened. I don't believe a permit was secured. You could always inquire with the building department whether or not that's the case or not, or if they have records for, for, for a permit. But if not, you would be required to just fill out the building permit. You may have to give them a sketch of what was constructed and pretty much just get the permit. They'll come out, do some inspections of the deck to see if it seems that it was constructed properly. But you, you could reach out to the building department once you have your resolution and they could, or even sooner. And, and they could sort of guide you on what you're gonna need. Just let 'em know as condition of your approval that you're required to get a building permit for a deck that was constructed quite some time ago.  
Speaker 6     00:10:26    Okay. Thank you, Henry.  
Speaker 7     00:10:28    So are we, are we on hold for the shed? We can't put the, we can't do the shed until we get the, the deck squared away.  
Speaker 5     00:10:36    Well, you need to at least apply for the permit so you could show us proof that you've applied to the permit for the permit for the deck, even if it takes a little while to get that permit and the inspection work. We'll, we'll, we'll allow for the shed zoning permit to be approved once we see that you applied for the deck and this resolution's been adopted. So that's gonna take, I believe, to the next meeting in November before you're gonna have an adopted resolution for the shed anyway. So in the meantime, you might want to get that in the works to try to get, see what you're gonna need for that building permit for the deck. This way, once you have your resolution, you might be ready to rock and roll with the shed.  
Speaker 7     00:11:18    Okay. So now when you said that the, that the permit would trigger the variance is, is that what's gonna happen? We, we apply first for a permit and then it triggers a variance for the deck.  
Speaker 5     00:11:28    Well, you're getting, you're, that's what normally would happen, but you're, you're getting the variance now.  
Speaker 7     00:11:33    Oh, with the shed  
Speaker 0     00:11:36    For Tuesday.  
Speaker 7     00:11:39    Okay. Thank  
Speaker 0     00:11:39    You. Thursday? Yeah, I think I think you're in good shape. Any other members of the board have any questions for this applicant? Hearing none, I'm gonna open to the public portion. Anyone in the public have any comments or questions for this application?  
Speaker 1     00:11:56    No. One  
Speaker 0     00:11:56    Chairman Okay. Close the public portion and I'll make a motion to approve this application. I'll thank you, sir. With the condition set aside by Mr. Henderson. Sorry. Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:12:10    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Regio? Yes. Mr. Hidaka? Yes. Mr. Ellie? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     00:12:26    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:12:27    Your application's been approved with some conditions. We'll memorialize it at our next meeting and mail a copy of that document to you. You'll need that to get your permits.  
Speaker 1     00:12:35    Okay, Great. Thank you. And thank you Laura for all your help. You're very welcome. A  
Speaker 0     00:12:39    Yeah, she's the best. She's Good luck guys. Let's move on to item number 7 22 dash zv dash 38 v. Laurie Sevi. Did I brun  
Speaker 1     00:12:50    That? Sevi  
Speaker 0     00:12:51    Sevi Mr.  
Speaker 8     00:12:54    Jan? Yes. I am John Sullivan from the offices of Bato and Sullivan representing the applicant.  
Speaker 3     00:13:02    Good  
Speaker 8     00:13:02    Evening. We were last here back on August 11th and at that time we had presented the testimony of Ms. Seve's husband Kevin, and we submitted a number of documents in support of the application, which is for a certificate of nonconformity for a two family dwelling. Just to quickly summarize what we had submitted, we had submitted the survey showing that there was attic parking for a two family home. We showed the floor plans, which showed the interior layout of the property. We introduced some site photographs showing that there were two units with separate entrances, mailbox utilities, and utility meters. We had submitted construction records indicating that permits for two water heaters and two air conditioning units were issued for the property. And we had some tax records showing that the property was built in 1990, or I'm sorry, 1919 and was listed as a two family dwelling.  
Speaker 8     00:14:03    Mr. Seva testified as to his background in construction and his opinion that this was a longstanding two family home based on the way it was constructed. Towards the end of the hearing, Mr. Hinterstein had suggested that we needed to get a little more, so we did go out in between last meeting and now we were able to obtain some additional property tax cards. We had five of those. 2021 is the most recent and 1956 was the earliest that we could find, Admit those cards. Each of those cards do show that the property was listed as a two family dwelling from 1956 to the present. So that, that's really the only additional evidence that we have in addition to what we spoke about at the last meeting.  
Speaker 3     00:14:58    And those property record cards have been distributed to the board members for your consideration. Mr. Chairman, if the board has any questions to the  
Speaker 0     00:15:11    Okay. And do any comments or questions had  
Speaker 5     00:15:17    I do not. I think the tax cards that were submitted that take this back to 1956 as a two family, I think it gets you close enough where I think you can make the reasonable assumption that this has been a longstanding two family property to the time probably before zoning took place. I think, I think we're close enough.  
Speaker 0     00:15:43    Okay. Any other members of the board have any questions for this application or comments? Hearing none, I'm gonna open the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments for this application? Buckley?  
Speaker 1     00:16:00    No one's raising their hand. Chairman.  
Speaker 0     00:16:01    Okay. Close the public portion and I'd make a motion to approve the application based on the new evidence that was put forth tonight.  
Speaker 1     00:16:10    A second.  
Speaker 0     00:16:11    Ms. Erroll?  
Speaker 1     00:16:13    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Bla? Yes. Mr. Octa? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     00:16:26    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:16:28    We resolution at our next meeting and mail a copy to you?  
Speaker 8     00:16:32    Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:16:34    Goodnight sirs. Move on to item number 8 22 dash ZB one v Calvin Summer  
Speaker 3     00:16:42    Is Calvin Samara present?  
Speaker 0     00:16:44    Calvin, you're muted. There you go buddy.  
Speaker 3     00:16:52    I'm here. Could you raise your right hand? You swear that testimony you're about to give the truth?  
Speaker 9     00:16:57    Yes sir.  
Speaker 3     00:16:59    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 9     00:17:01    Calvin Sumara. 1807 West fifth Street, Piscataway, New Jersey 0 8 8 5 4.  
Speaker 3     00:17:06    Thank you. Could you explain to the board what you'd like to do here?  
Speaker 9     00:17:09    Yes. My, I apply for a construct, a two-story addition and a roof over my fund coach, also a privacy fence.  
Speaker 3     00:17:22    Mr. Chairman, you may wanna talk to Mr. Henderson about his report.  
Speaker 0     00:17:24    Absolutely. Henry, any comments on this? You're muted.  
Speaker 5     00:17:31    Yeah, I know. Yeah, I mean this, the report talks about a couple of things. The, the first being that the, obviously the coverage variance that we're going for here is quite extreme. The, the variance request is for 28.15%, considering only 20% is allowed. So, you know, that I think is the, the main and the, the most extreme issue here that I think we need to discuss. I I also feel that defense, again, the fence is shown I think in the front yard setback. I think it needs to be adjusted and moved back a little bit. I think my suggestion is that the fence may move back so that it's about one section further back on the sides and moved eight feet further back from its existing location so it doesn't affect the site corridor of the street and impact the neighboring properties, driveways and visibility on the street.  
Speaker 5     00:18:37    The couple other items, I don't, I don't think the survey accurately depicts the existing front stoop and stairs. I don't know if it's been changed or if the permit was issued for that to be changed since the survey was done. But that doesn't, does, that's not what the stairs look like today. So I'm not sure how, how accurate this is. I think you may need to update the survey and then the existing shed appears larger than what's also depicted on the survey. So, I mean, there's a lot of issues. One, one of them is that, you know, the surveys not accurate. So with that being said, I I can't really, you know, I'm, I'm basing this, the zoning officers basing this off of certain things that may or may not be true. Again, that frame shed does not appear to be that size that, you know, the stairs don't seem to be completely correct right now.  
Speaker 5     00:19:35    There's a stupid stair. So again, I, I think what we need to do is update this survey and I, I think the applicant, you know, if you know, wants to work with the town, my suggestion would be is that they, they go back, they see perhaps if there's, there's, you know, a 10 by 10 canopies, there's the shed, there's a couple accessory structures on the property that they may be able to get rid of in order to get the, you know, the coverage variance to a manageable, a manageable amount. But, you know, at 28%, you know, as you know, Mr. Chairman, we, we usually don't look at coverage variances. You know, we usually like to try to keep them closer to, you know, 23% really two. I was gonna say even. Sure. So, you know, I think you need to try to figure out what's important to you.  
Speaker 5     00:20:29    Is it the addition, the living space in the home? Is it the shed? Is it the canopy out there that you have? I mean, but I think something's gotta be revised to get you down to a more manageable percentage of coverage that you have on this property. And, and I think you may need to figure out, and it could be something that you figure out is whether or not this survey is accurate. And if it's not accurate, provide us with the dimensions of the shed and the, the, the stoop and draw it in on a, on a revised plan so that we know exactly what the setbacks are and what the coverage variance is that exists out there now.  
Speaker 0     00:21:08    Okay, Mr. Samma, do you understand what we're, we're going with this?  
Speaker 9     00:21:13    Yes. Right. As of my knowledge, everything was updated recently. Everything's up to spec. The only thing that I was added was the fence set, which I could removed. So the canopies 10 by 10, I could remove that. That's not a problem. But a swing set, I have a swing set for the kids in the yard, which is like a 10 foot and I have, you know, three kids, I'm gonna keep it forever, you know, four or five years the kids get big, I'm gonna get rid of it, you know, but the only thing I will remove the fence, I'll put it back to the correct spot. And also if you guys want me to remove the the canopy, I will do that. But everything else is accurate as of now.  
Speaker 0     00:21:51    Well, what about the dimensions on the shed?  
Speaker 9     00:21:53    The said yes,  
Speaker 0     00:21:55    Mr. Scene said that the, the proposed information that you gave us is not accurate to what's currently out there.  
Speaker 9     00:22:05    Well, whatever, right there. That's why I measure, you know, bought the house. So whatever's there, that's why I mentioned for the plan, also for the survey. So everything was updated last month. I put new survey, I did everything over again. It's like the second time everything revis, the, the drawings, everything was revised and, and we submit it. So the only problem is if you guys want me to remove the canopy, I will do that. Also remove the fence as of tomorrow and I will set back everything and we can forward. As of now, my best interest is for the addition because I have three kids and the family and the only space I have is the two bedrooms.  
Speaker 0     00:22:51    Laura, you show anything that was submitted recently about this applicant? Anything, any changes of revisions? Sorry, that  
Speaker 1     00:23:00    Was when he was deemed complete. That was the last time he gave us revised.  
Speaker 0     00:23:04    Okay. Henry, Those are the same revised. Just one second, Henry. Those are the same revised that we're having a problem with.  
Speaker 5     00:23:10    Yeah, I don't have anything other than the plan that I think everybody has in front of them. Correct Lord. Correct. So  
Speaker 0     00:23:18    Mr. Summer, I think, I think we should regroup and you should resubmit new paperwork and, and call our, our zoning department. Call Henry or Dawn and, and they can work with you as to what we're looking for as the Township and what you're looking for as a resident. And we'll come to a, we'll come to some common ground. That's what we wanna do.  
Speaker 5     00:23:39    Mr. Summer, if I, if I may too. If you have a roof structure over, like on your survey it says there's some pavers next to the shed, I, if you put a roof connected to the shed and even if it's over the pavers, then it, it's sort of acting as a, a structure again. So you can't have, you know, a makeshift roof over, you know, a concrete surface or paver surface that you're storing stuff in because again, that is considered then a shed type structure and it'll, it needs to be depicted. So if you have a roof over anything, maybe that's what it is, maybe the shed is accurate, but perhaps you have other stuff connected to the shed that needs to be removed. But, you know, I'm just just looking at this, if you've removed the canopy that's, that's a hundred square feet, I'm, I'm looking at the size of your property, your property's 55 49 square feet.  
Speaker 5     00:24:35    So you know you're gonna still be shy of 2% that, that you're removing. Even if you took out that canopy, which is gonna bring you to, you know, you're still gonna be over 26%. So I, I still think you might have to look at the addition and you might have to tweak it a little bit. You know, I, you know, I really think you're gonna have to, I, I know it's a really undersized lot and you're sort of for space, but again, and the swing set I don't believe was even calculated into this calculation. We, we don't look at, I don't think the swing sets as building coverage. So we're really just looking at the structures that you have on your, your property. And again, with the canopy being removed, I still think you're gonna be over 26%. You might want to see if there's something you could do to maybe revise this to get this at least closer to 25 is, is my my opinion of where you, you're probably gonna have to be. So maybe look at the size and how the addition is laid out and see maybe if you could, you know, somehow pick up another, some other square footage to reduce this and get it at least into the 25 range.  
Speaker 9     00:25:56    Right. So that's not a problem. I have a share exist. She, which is is 10 by 14 is already existed when I bought a house 2016 that I could remove to a smaller amount. And that's the only option. That's only a last option I have.  
Speaker 5     00:26:14    I think what you need to do is work this out, revise your plan of what you're gonna propose so that we could see the numbers and what it comes to instead of trying to do this here at the meeting. All right. So submit a revised plan so we could calculate and, and confirm that you know, what your coverage is gonna be and that you're willing to relocate the fence and everything. And then I think maybe it's, you know, we like, like the Chairman said, Mr. Cale said we could regroup here perhaps at the next meeting and or the, the following meeting, whatever works. Cuz I know the next meeting is a little tight and then hopefully we can get you an approval that night if the revised plan looks good.  
Speaker 9     00:26:56    Okay, no problem. We'll do that. We'll do that.  
Speaker 0     00:26:59    Thank you Mr. Sam. Right. And quite honestly 25% is very generous as well. Like we said earlier, it's 22 to 23% normally when we, we work with our guidelines. But if Henry's comfortable with 25, that's great. And don't be afraid to pick up the phone and call Henry or Dawn or anybody down there to work with you to, so we can come up with some, you know, common ground. We have any rule on the next meeting. Yeah, I know. I'm the one who's gonna be here.  
Speaker 5     00:27:30    I don't think you could get revised plans in here.  
Speaker 1     00:27:33    Yeah, timewise it's not gonna work. It's, I mean the next one's December 8th, you'd have more time to get everything prepared for that one,  
Speaker 0     00:27:40    For that one. Are you okay Mr. Summer December 8th  
Speaker 1     00:27:43    And I'll email you all your zoom information and all that. Your notices are good, so,  
Speaker 0     00:27:48    Okay. Okay.  
Speaker 3     00:27:50    So anybody here on the Sora application, it's being adjourned to December 8th with no further notice?  
Speaker 1     00:27:58    Correct.  
Speaker 0     00:28:00    All right. Thank you Mr. So thank we'll see you in about a month.  
Speaker 9     00:28:03    Okay, no problem. You have a good,  
Speaker 0     00:28:05    Have a good night as well. Let's move on to item number 9 22 dash ZB 76 v Canberra Pharmaceuticals.  
Speaker 10    00:28:14    Yes. Demetri Chaill from Pergaman ceda, LP 0.5, Hanover Park, New Jersey 0 7 9 32 on behalf of Canberra from Pharmaceuticals. 800 Centennial Avenue, Suite one Pisca, Jersey 0 8 8 5 4. Good evening. Good evening.  
Speaker 3     00:28:38    Please proceed.  
Speaker 10    00:28:40    So we have application for variance, which calls for four signs on the sides of the commercial building, which is leased by Canberra Pharmaceuticals that occupy part of the building, but a substantial part. So the building is located at the address that I just named. I understand from the documents in front of me that there's a main objection from Mr. Hinterstein landscape architect and maybe if I can share the screen, we can all see it. Permission to share screen. I have a, I have letter on the screen. Please do. I can  
Speaker 1     00:29:21    Show you could share it.  
Speaker 10    00:29:22    Okay. Okay. Can you see it?  
Speaker 3     00:29:29    Yes, we can see it. And all of the members have that report as  
Speaker 10    00:29:32    Well. Oh, okay, great. So, so from this letter, we understand that the site impact has four points, but the first one, Ira is the first one, which basically says that we ask, we ask him for campers asking for four signs, and that seems to be excessive. And why do we need four signs where just maybe one or two could be sufficient. So I'll, I'll explain why. So this screen shows you where the signs are supposed to be placed and none of them are present, present right now. So we, we are looking to place four signs and they will be placed in different locations on the building. The ones which are placed at the corner of the building, they'll be placed above the doors, but they will be obscured from the road by the couple of pine trees here. The reason for the signs to begin with is so that the trucks which come in can quickly locate the building, pull up to the loading dock, unload or, or, or load and leave quickly.  
Speaker 10    00:30:52    And right now what they're doing is they're missing the building because they cannot see the sign. So these two signs will be obscured and that's why we need to, to additional signs and to additional signs are gonna look like this. Also on the side of the building. And I have a picture from the top. This is the building from the top. This is Google, yours view. So you see that how the signs are gonna be placed. So the two signs, which are gonna be obscured here at the corner and obscured by these trees. And the additional signs you want are right here and about the middle of the building on the side. Kaber does not occupy the whole building. So, but the placement, this sign is going to make sure that the, the drivers can clearly see from all adjacent trolls when I approach and they could see where the log docks are. And that's another picture, how it's gonna look. This, the sign is gonna be the can sign. Let me see if I have a bigger one. I can make it larger. It's just gonna be the name of the company. Can, from pharmaceuticals gonna look like this and the signs are gonna be placed above the doors.  
Speaker 10    00:32:09    One thing is that they have a sign, a plan above an emergency door or they have one already there. And this causes a confusion because people just come to that emergency door and they're not supposed to because the emergency door is supposed to be unblocked and with easy access to it. And so people get confused where's they're coming. They're supposed to be coming to the office and seeing reception is there and the truck drivers are supposed to be coming to the loading docks and unloading that stuff. So all in all, I think that that's why we argue that we need these four signs. They're not, I think they're appropriate size. And that's the, that's what you have to say about the, the first point. I can stop here and, and and, and hear what, what the board has to say about that.  
Speaker 0     00:33:05    Now why don't you go on through the rest of the report if you have any comment. Yeah,  
Speaker 10    00:33:08    That's, So the second point is multi-use path, which I understand to be sort of a, an access element. It's, it's a, it's a paved part with pedestrians as opposed to go, it may have some decorative elements. And the thing is that Camber pharmaceuticals are not owners of the building. They, they're deceased. So perhaps the owner of the building is the one who should, who should read it, take care of this multiuse path. But even aside from this, I understand that it's, this multiuse path seems to be something like a future old improvements. So it's not, it's not in in an immediate need, it's not what we really asking for. What we are asking for are signs on the side of the building, which, you know, have nothing to do either of his roadway or with this multi-use path. That's why we don't quite understand why, why is this site impact here?  
Speaker 10    00:34:15    Because, you know, signs on the side of the building cannot affect in any way the, the roads or pedestrians working on this multi-use path. So we are gonna seek some clarification here from the board as to this point number two, point number three, any that and missing landscaping from the site? Well, I understand the site is, is is fine is respect to what is adjacent to the building. But if, if some improvements I needed there to make it look better, then I suppose the owner of the building can do that. And number four is document required to be submitted. That I guess covers points 1 0 3.  
Speaker 0     00:35:00    Henry, you wanna take this on?  
Speaker 5     00:35:05    Well as go back to one since that's the, the first item and also I guess what the, the gist of the, the application is. But again, and, and I think his, his exhibit really sort of confirms the fact that I, I don't feel two signs are necessary on both facades. There's no doubt that there's a little bit of perhaps some visibility issues when you're going west on Centennial Avenue that perhaps you don't see, you know, a sign that may be, you know, smack up on each corner. But you know, I, I think on Plainfield Avenue North they could definitely suffice with one sign. Yeah, it could be centrally located on the building. It doesn't have to be on each corner. The majority of the traffic coming to the site is coming from Centennial Avenue. Plainfield Avenue North is more of a residential street that leads to residential development.  
Speaker 5     00:36:08    I don't believe it even allows for truck traffic to go down it beyond this, beyond this building. So again, I, I think if there was, I think a good compromise for the signage would be, I don't have really an issue with the two signs on Centennial Avenue cuz it's more of an industrial corridor. There's a little bit of a space between the two locations. Again, I still think there probably could be one centrally located sign here, but I mean, I think it's a case of how many signs is enough. I I really just don't think there's probably one door that gets used on that building. And I understand the, the signage is more for deliveries, but I think nowadays with gps, everybody knows exactly where they're going. Really one sign on each facade would be enough. But I'm willing to make a concession. And I think in the spirit of compromise, I think we could live with the two signs on Centennial Avenue and, and then they should, I think compromise and provide simply one side on Plainfield Avenue North.  
Speaker 5     00:37:19    That would be my recommendation. And as, as far as the mup and the landscaping, you know, I'm not in total disagreement that perhaps this, you know, I'm not saying who's responsible if it's the owner, but the owner is basically akin to this application. They own the building, they're giving you permission to put signs on the building. So Mr. Kinneally could probably have, you know, address that a little bit more. But you know, maybe you need to, you know, work that out with the owner or talk to the owner before we move forward to see if they're even be willing to take that on. But I, you know, again, they're somewhat akin to the application by signing off as the owner of this property to allow you to put the signs on the building. So in that regard, it, it is somewhat related, relatable.  
Speaker 3     00:38:12    And if the board is inclined to make those two items a condition of approval, I would recommend that you make the condition that either the owner or the applicant comply with paragraphs two and three of Henry's report.  
Speaker 0     00:38:29    Any other members of the board? I'm sorry.  
Speaker 5     00:38:32    Yeah, can the board please explain the  
Speaker 10    00:38:34    Connection between having signs on the side of the building and having the multi-use path which is outside of the building and has not much to do with the signs  
Speaker 11    00:38:47    There. There really is no connect, this is John Jud. There really is no connection. The multi-use pass is part of the planning process for this whole industrial area of which this lot is a part of. And was origin part of the original approval? So the, the improvement is part of the neighborhood or industrial scheme for development has nothing to do with your signs. You trigger it by making the application. That's it.  
Speaker 10    00:39:23    Okay. What about the fact that right now large trucks are missing the building, are missing the lodging docks and have to go past that inadvertently and then have to join around and make a large detour in the process basically doing all these gases, making noises. I mean, is it really good to have that?  
Speaker 11    00:39:51    Isn't that what your, isn't that what your signs are all about?  
Speaker 10    00:39:55    They are, but they, if, if you condition in the placement of the signs with the improvements, I'm just not sure when those landscaping improvements can be made and how long that's gonna take. In, in  
Speaker 11    00:40:11    You, you heard, you heard Mr. Kinneally, we have these types of applications with major tenant who does not own the building all the time and the actions of the board have been to either have the applicant do it or work with his landlord and get it done. If there's no compromise, it could be done, then you'll come back and discuss it with us.  
Speaker 10    00:40:40    So right now the compromise is two signs and this landscaping,  
Speaker 11    00:40:46    No two  
Speaker 0     00:40:47    Signs, three  
Speaker 10    00:40:47    Signs, signs. Signs. Okay. Signs  
Speaker 0     00:40:50    One Plainfield to un centennial the and the landscaping  
Speaker 10    00:40:58    All right is okay if I give a chance to the, to Mr. Ronald to, who is VP of commercial strategy and operations for caner to see if he has a couple of words to say he is present here.  
Speaker 3     00:41:16    Yeah, if you wanna call a witness you can certainly call a witness.  
Speaker 10    00:41:19    Yes. Colin, Mr. Ronald Seminar. Ron, do you wanna say a couple of words about this?  
Speaker 3     00:41:25    Okay, I need to swear him in. Is it Mr. Seminar?  
Speaker 10    00:41:30    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:41:31    Mr. Seminar, are you present?  
Speaker 12    00:41:33    I am.  
Speaker 3     00:41:34    I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand?  
Speaker 12    00:41:36    It's risen.  
Speaker 3     00:41:38    Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 12    00:41:41    Yes, I do. Your  
Speaker 3     00:41:42    Name and address please?  
Speaker 12    00:41:43    Yes, my name is Ron Cero. I live at seven Drive in Somerset, New Jersey. 0 8 8 7 3.  
Speaker 3     00:41:51    Thank you.  
Speaker 12    00:41:55    Okay, so just a couple of thoughts here. The, as far as the one sign on the Plainfield Avenue North side, the, the concern that we have with putting one sign in the middle is that there is a, an emergency exit door that is just a door and it set of stairs right there, right over that. So the sign work directs people once they're on the property to how they get into the building. And we have our main entrance is at the corner where we have a foyer and a and a receptionist. This emergency door is not, not manned. There's no one there. People are gonna be locking on the door. It's gonna disrupt our business. And, and you know, that's, I think a putting a sign directly in the middle is going to be counterproductive to what a sign is supposed to do as far as the road is concerned.  
Speaker 12    00:42:57    We have no neighbors that have visibility to that side of the building whatsoever. Plainfield Avenue North has a treeline there that totally obscures the other industrial building across the street and parking lot from our v our view and would obscure their view of our building as well. So I don't think there's any visual impact at the end of our building and one over our door so that the one on the end would actually direct people onto the property and the one, when they're looking for somebody to go to the office, they would see the sign over our, our doors so they know where to go to get into our building. I think it's, it's just what, you know, what we're looking to do as far as a smooth operation of our business. The other question that I had was not point number three. Do we know if there's any debt or missing landscaping? How would we find out what was agreed to in the redevelopment plan that our, that our landlords should be taken care of? That's the only other question I have right now.  
Speaker 5     00:44:03    Well, as far as the dead and missing landscape, I think it'd be pretty apparent because it's was in pretty good shape not that long ago. So anything that's dead is probably still there right now and it's dead. And to be honest with you, it's probably predominantly evergreen material if it's passed and I think it would be pretty, pretty obvious. But again, that's something you need to work out with the owner and the owner really, you know, between, if you're gonna take that on, I'd be more than happy to to work with you on that. Sure. But, you know, I don't know exactly what is dead at this current time, but I'm pretty sure that there's some dead evergreens from, from doing the inspection here that I did see some dead material on site. Again, I don't think it was anything substantial but it, there's probably some dead material, not so much missing unless the landscaper had had taken it out.  
Speaker 5     00:45:02    And in that case I think you would see the evidence of a, of a mulch bed or the, you know, mulch tree ring or something or stump or something that is evident that something was removed cuz it was dead and it wasn't replaced. So that would be the answer to the, to the landscaping question. Again, I still don't agree with you, your take on the sign issue, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that. You know, your whole point was is that you can't see the sign coming down from, from, from Centennial. Well you could see it if it's further down that building now a sign that's 40 feet up in the air in my opinion, doesn't direct you to any kind of doorways, especially if they're just on the corners or of the building. I don't think anybody's gonna mistake entrances. I think to, to handle that.  
Speaker 5     00:45:51    What you need to do is perhaps put the right signage or labels on the doors. Absolutely. Emergency exit, you know, main entrance, whatever that case may be. None of those signs say entrance. So if you have four signs, I just don't see how that directs you any better to your front door. Then, then the opposite, you know, having less signage or having a sign in the center of the, of the property that the trucks could still see coming down. Centennial, again, there's an ordinance for reason so that we're not inundated with unnecessary signage. Again, I think it may be more of a communication perhaps that you need to, or the company needs to communicate with the delivery drivers a little bit better. Stating that, hey, our entrance for deliveries is off of Plainfield Avenue North. I think it's as simple as that. You're the, you're on that corner once you turn on Plainfield Avenue North, which I would imagine is the way that anybody's coming, if they're coming from, you know, that side of Centennial Avenue, if they're coming from the opposite end of Centennial Avenue from the River road area, then the signs, both signs in Centennial Avenue would be visible.  
Speaker 5     00:47:05    So, I mean, you could also direct, you know, how, you know, what exit people used to get to your site. So I think a lot of that is, I think a little bit of communication and, and maybe, you know, letting the companies and the drivers know the best way to get to your site best, you know, where, where the loading docks are or for what, what entrance you want it to come into if there is a specific area. But again, just to, to over sign the building with, you know, these large signs. I I just think, you know, I I just don't see the, the hardship because, you know, maybe one driver who isn't paying attention can't find a, you know, eight hundreds Centennial avenue, which I find hard to believe.  
Speaker 12    00:47:55    Sure. So when they're, when they're coming up from exit nine off of 2 87 traveling looks like north to me, the one sign at downstream and one sign on the corner if they, if there's only a sign on the corner, they've gotta make that jug handle in, cause that's the truck entrance to get onto Plainfield North and then, and then make their turn into our, our plants so that, that sign downstream would, would be very helpful there to give them a little heads up to make sure they're in the right lane. They can make that jug handle. So I I we appreciate you you authorizing that coming the other way. I think most people would come off of 2 87, exit eight and then coming back towards it, it, it is nearly impossible to see now, you know, you said that signs are big and they're, and they're on the building, but there is an island of of land that is on that corner, which is where, what, what houses those, those trees and then there's additional land and, and it's a detention basin and then there's a parking lot and then there's the, the building.  
Speaker 12    00:49:06    So the building is set back quite a ways from the road. It's not like the building is right on the street and that these signs are gonna be, you know, blaring at people. You know, it's 18.5 feet by eight feet and you know, they're gonna be in people's faces, they're gonna be pretty well set back and pretty well, you know, melded into the entire environment. So, you know, I appreciate your position. You know, I I I, you know, respectfully disagree with it from what we have seen from operations. We've been there for, you know, operating our warehouse for over a year now at this point. And you know, we do have a warehouse down the street at 10 31 as well. So we do quite a bit of, you know, paying leases and taxes from that and, you know, we would, we would've hoped that we could get this through, but if that's your opinion that's, we have to respect that at this point.  
Speaker 0     00:50:01    Thank you sir. Any other members of the board have any questions or comments? Hearing none. Is there any other witnesses that you're all gonna put up tonight, sir? No, no. As a witnesses. Thank you. Okay, so Henry, just lay it out one more time exactly where we're at. We're at three signs, one on Plainfield, two on Centennial. The condition for of approval would include the, the multi-use path and then the, the replanting of missing a dead landscape. Is that correct? Yes. Yes,  
Speaker 5     00:50:40    I believe so,  
Speaker 0     00:50:41    Yes.  
Speaker 12    00:50:42    Okay. Let me, let me ask just one more question. Please have that multi-use path completed or is it, or is it something that they have to begin applying for a permit to do? And and what exactly does that entail? Is that, is the pavement, is it cement? What, what is the multipath? So I can speak with the, you know, the agent that manages the property so we can get that started. What, what is it that has to be done there?  
Speaker 5     00:51:09    My understanding is it's a nine foot paved path of my, from what my recollection is, it is probably two to three inches of blacktop. But I can't confirm that. I don't, I don't have the plans in front of me from what I recall seeing, but it's blacktop over a stone base approximately nine feet wide. That's really all I could, you know, speak of.  
Speaker 12    00:51:36    Okay. Can I come down to the Township municipal building and get the plans or, or requirements for that?  
Speaker 5     00:51:43    Yeah, I'm sure if you come down or if you email Laura, she could probably give you the proper email address for Joe Herrera who's the supervisor of engineering and he could probably get you the, the plan for that mop or the information that you need for  
Speaker 12    00:52:00    It. Okay. I'll, I'll call Laura. Okay, thank you very much.  
Speaker 11    00:52:06    Chairman, you might wanna clear up that one sign on on Plainfield North. They kind of objected to have it in the middle and it probably makes sense. Put it back on the back corner or you wanna leave it in the middle?  
Speaker 0     00:52:22    Yeah, Henry, I, the far left corner where  
Speaker 5     00:52:25    They, I I don't, yeah, I don't really care where they, where they put it on that side. I just think there's, you know, I think it should be placed where it could be seen again, put it in a corner and it can't be seen. Then what's the point of that sign anyway. So again, it should be slid back as if they wanna slide it all the way back to the back corner because that's where the deliveries are then maybe that's the, the, the location that makes the most sense. I was trying to move it to the middle so that it might be a little bit more visible from Centennial Avenue. And once they're directed, you know, again, you are allowed to have a directional signage on the property, which is small in nature, 10 square feet. So you could add small directional signage that's at least 10 feet off the right of way, line perhaps at that entrance way. So once a truck pulls into the, to the site, you could direct them with directional signage exactly where they need to go. That could be at, you know, both driveways at, on the property, you know, deliveries this way stray can deliveries and as long as that sign, I believe is 10 square feet or less, I think that might be a good solution to place them at the driveways. And you could direct them exactly, you know, within the site as to where the delivery should be taken.  
Speaker 0     00:53:47    Okay, thank you Henry. Any other members? Have any other members that have board of any questions? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public can you, Mr. Dimitri, can you take the site impact down off the screen please? Shared screen. Thank you. I'm gonna open this application up to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application?  
Speaker 1     00:54:15    No one Chairman.  
Speaker 0     00:54:16    Okay, I'm gonna close the public portion and I will make a motion to approve the,  
Speaker 13    00:54:20    I'm sorry. As a member of the public, I have a question. When is the,  
Speaker 3     00:54:24    Hold on sir. Hold on. You need to identify yourself  
Speaker 0     00:54:28    Please.  
Speaker 13    00:54:29    John Dahmer. I work at Camber.  
Speaker 3     00:54:31    Okay. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give me the truth.  
Speaker 13    00:54:38    Yes. I  
Speaker 0     00:54:39    Just wanna, Dennis, Mr. Aithal  
Speaker 13    00:54:41    Centennial Avenue. And when is the, when is that supposed to be repaid? And I know there's a lot of work planned on redoing that road. It's a, it's a really bad road at the existing time and I think that's when the the, the path is going to be installed. Could you update us on the redoing Centennial Avenue?  
Speaker 0     00:55:02    I believe it have to contact the Department of Public Works for the Township. I don't think anyone on the has that information  
Speaker 5     00:55:08    Engineering Mr. Kinneally  
Speaker 0     00:55:09    Engineering. Sorry.  
Speaker 1     00:55:10    Engineering. Yeah. And somebody asked a few months ago, it's on the list. They're waiting for different approvals. I don't, we don't have a timeframe yet, but it is on the list to get done. That, that's what I was told.  
Speaker 13    00:55:20    Okay. I mean that road's been in bad condition for years now.  
Speaker 1     00:55:23    You could call engineering tomorrow and ask for Joe Herrera.  
Speaker 13    00:55:26    Okay. But how does that affect the, that path that you're talking about? Cuz that won't be done until the road is done.  
Speaker 5     00:55:36    Not, not true.  
Speaker 13    00:55:38    Why'd you say that?  
Speaker 5     00:55:39    Because you could put the path in. If it's in the plan, then the path can go in before the road gets done. If the road's not gonna impact that location,  
Speaker 0     00:55:50    It's,  
Speaker 13    00:55:51    I'm not sure that  
Speaker 5     00:55:52    For the fact the death is off the roadway.  
Speaker 13    00:55:56    But they're, they're widening the road though is that  
Speaker 5     00:55:58    Is not, not not, I don't believe it's being widen in your location.  
Speaker 13    00:56:03    Okay. Okay. Very good. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:56:05    Thank you sir. Anyone else in the public? No. One,  
Speaker 1     00:56:12    One again. Thank  
Speaker 0     00:56:13    You. Okay, no problem. Close the public portion. I'd make a motion to approve this application with conditions set forth on site impact by Henry.  
Speaker 13    00:56:21    Have a  
Speaker 0     00:56:22    Second. Thank you. Can I get a call?  
Speaker 1     00:56:25    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery?  
Speaker 14    00:56:29    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:56:30    Mr. Patel? Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Mr. Bla  
Speaker 0     00:56:39    He's there. Yes. Good  
Speaker 1     00:56:41    Job. Yes. Well do Mr. Ali.  
Speaker 0     00:56:44    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:56:44    And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     00:56:46    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:56:48    Your application has been approved as amended by the board with conditions. We'll memorialize it at our next meeting and send a copy to you.  
Speaker 14    00:56:56    Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:56:57    Good luck. Thank you very much. Goodnight gentlemen. Goodnight. Let's, let's move on to item number 10 22 dash ZB dash 72 slash 73 v Skulls electric and communications.  
Speaker 14    00:57:11    Thank you members of the board and board professionals. My name is Tim Arch. I'm an attorney licensed in the state of New Jersey. I'm here representing Skulls Electric and Communications. We are here tonight looking for preliminary and final site plan with bulk and d variances for a modest expansion of the existing building. It's a approximately a 6,000 square foot expansion to the existing building, but that's not actually why we're in front of the zoning board. Cause if it was just that, I believe we would be in front of the planning board. We're also proposing some solar ground arrays and because of, because they don't meet all of the conditions of a conditional use standard. That's why we're in front of the zoning board. So it's actually the solar arrays that triggered us in front of you find folk, not the, not the expansion. I do have three witnesses tonight, which we'll go through probably in fairly quick fashion. But just for housekeeping purposes, I do want to indicate that we have Mr. Chadwick's report of October 13th, 2022 and Mr. Stein's report of October 26th, 2022, as well as the zoning letter from from Dawn indicating the requested variances. I would just ask, are there any other reports that we were not in possession of?  
Speaker 3     00:58:28    No, I don't think  
Speaker 14    00:58:30    So. Thank you so much. So I'm gonna call my first witness now, who would be Mr. Ed Welsh, who I believe is present,  
Speaker 0     00:58:39    Present.  
Speaker 3     00:58:41    Mr. Welsh, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear to the testimony you're about to be the truth?  
Speaker 15    00:58:46    I do.  
Speaker 3     00:58:47    Thank you.  
Speaker 14    00:58:49    Mr. Welsh, can you tell us what is your title or position with skulls?  
Speaker 15    00:58:54    Yep. I'm the president of Skulls. I'm the president and one of the owners.  
Speaker 14    00:58:58    Okay. How long has, has skulls been here in Piscataway?  
Speaker 15    00:59:02    Longer than my time. 20 plus years.  
Speaker 14    00:59:05    Okay. And just briefly, if you can tell us what is it that Skulls do does at that location? What's your business?  
Speaker 15    00:59:12    We're a commercial, electrical and low voltage contractor. We're a union contractor. We work throughout New Jersey. We do hospitals, data centers, schools, commercial work, all sorts of different like large electrical construction projects.  
Speaker 14    00:59:32    Excellent. Okay. So we're asking tonight, one of the things we're asking for is approximately a 6,000 square foot expansion. Can you let the board know what is it that you're gonna use that expansion for? Why is it that we're asking for?  
Speaker 15    00:59:45    A couple of years ago we started doing some light assembly in our warehouse and we're a little cramped in there. We're trying to do a little more, you know, we've, we've, we've made the best use of our existing warehouse as we can. We have a few guys working in there and basically what they're doing is putting things together, assembling things that we would often do out in the field. So it winds up being more efficient. It's a nicer place to work, you know, especially in the winter or the summer and depending on the conditions and, and it winds up being more efficient. So it's something that we're already doing, but, but having a little more space would let us be to do it a little bit better because now oftentimes, depending on what's required, they have to move things around and reroute things a little bit. So, you know, the added space would, would allow us that.  
Speaker 14    01:00:32    So, so, so basically if, if I can just paraphrase, you're doing some existing, I guess, assembly, but you're doing those sort of offsite or in the field that you'd now be able to do in the sort of more controlled environment, correct?  
Speaker 15    01:00:46    Yes. Yeah, we do a little bit in our warehouse now. This would allow us to do some more.  
Speaker 14    01:00:50    Perfect. Okay. Now, as part of the expansion, we're also asking for a, for a parking variance. And I believe we are, we're providing 87 spaces and I think the 125 is the, is the required amount. Can you, can you tell me on average, how many employees do you have on the site at any given time?  
Speaker 15    01:01:13    Probably on site, on a typical day there's probably 45 or so. I would say since we're a construction company, you know, most of the people, the people who are in the office are, you know, project managers, accounting department, estimators, superintendents. So since all our projects are all over the place, there's never everyone there on one day. And on a typical, if everyone showed up for a holiday party, were about 65 people let's say.  
Speaker 14    01:01:40    Okay. So would you say the 87 spaces that you have or that is being provided is more than adequate for your, for your uses?  
Speaker 15    01:01:47    Yes, it's more than enough.  
Speaker 14    01:01:49    Okay. And actually it even has a, a little bit of room to expand if your business grows in the future. Is that correct?  
Speaker 15    01:01:55    Yes. I, I don't think the business will, like office-wise will expand by a huge amount. I think the, the, the warehouse expansion would allow us to add a few guys, but even that work would, wouldn't be consistent. It depends on what's going on in the, with our projects in the field and there might be a little more, the guys there one day, a couple less another day, but typically we'd probably still be in about that 45 range.  
Speaker 14    01:02:19    Okay. And just cuz everybody, when they hear warehouse, there's certain bells that go off in their head. This isn't a distribution center of where like Amazon or FedEx where trucks are coming out or anything like that. Ok. Just wanted to make that clear for everybody.  
Speaker 15    01:02:32    No, I mean basically it's our, it's our, you know, tools, gang boxes, ladders, they kind of come in and then they go back out to the next project. I mean sure, sometimes we receive deliveries there and then they get sent out to projects. But most of, most of our work, most of the projects, most of our deliveries go directly to the projects.  
Speaker 14    01:02:51    Okay. And now we're also asking for, actually the majority of our variances are, are related to the solar arrays. And we'll get into some more technical stuff with the engineering, but just in general, why is it that you wanna put the solar arrays on the site?  
Speaker 15    01:03:04    We do some solar work, like solar installations, like really large scale commercial installations. And we just thought, you know, with, with doing this we would ask, you know, to look at a solar carport over a lot of the, like a couple, the main row of the parking. We thought that would be a nice benefit to the open space, a nice benefit for the employees. I used to work somewhere else that had that and those were the most desirable parking spaces. You're out of the sun and snow and rain and all that. So we thought that would be a good, a good use of the space. And, and that's why we're asking, I mean we thought, we thought while we were asking we would try to maximize what we could do on site and yeah, I mean that, that's really it. We thought it's a good green use and, and hopefully would make the site a little nicer and maybe a little more efficient.  
Speaker 14    01:03:54    Perfect. Okay, let's briefly go over the reports. I have Mr. Stein's report and Mr. Chadwick's report in general, I'm just gonna ask you a general question. Can we agree to comply with all of the comments that are in this report?  
Speaker 15    01:04:09    Yes, I think so.  
Speaker 14    01:04:10    Okay. Now just to get a little bit more on some of these specifics, I think one of the things that was asking is will we be putting in any make ready ev vehicle parking spaces and is it true that we're happy to work with the town to, to put in the spaces and and to figure out where they're gonna go on the site plan? Is that  
Speaker 15    01:04:30    Correct? Sure, yes, we would.  
Speaker 14    01:04:32    And I believe one of the other ones we were talking about is on four, on Mr. Hendrick's report. He indicates that there were two sheds located on the property. Can you shed some light? That's a bad pun. Can you please let us, let us know what those sheds are for, if they're there, if they're staying, or if they're even still there?  
Speaker 15    01:04:50    Oh, the two sheds, there's two, like small typical home sheds. Those are, those were just delivered to our property and they're going out to a job site. Those are gonna be used for, to kind of house a temporary electrical service. So it's out of the, the weather while we're doing, you know, often you have to provide tempo, temporary electrical service to a job site, and the, the temporary service will be in there just to keep it out of the weather. So both of those should be, they should be out of here soon.  
Speaker 14    01:05:16    Okay. So they're gonna be offsite and we're not, we're not proposing to keep them as permanent structures or anything.  
Speaker 15    01:05:22    Definitely  
Speaker 14    01:05:23    Not. There are multiple comments that refer to landscaping and screening. We have a, a fairly large area that's green right now, but really doesn't have very much landscaping. Would it be safe to say that we are happy to work with Mr. Hinterstein and the town to develop a comprehensive landscaping plan that addresses all those concerns instead of going through each one individually? We're perfectly happy to do that.  
Speaker 15    01:05:53    Sure. Yeah, we definitely work, We try to work with the town and figure it out. Absolutely.  
Speaker 14    01:05:57    And those, and, and we can certainly do that, that actually be a condition of the approval that we work with Henry to work out a comprehensive landscaping scheme.  
Speaker 15    01:06:05    Okay. Yes.  
Speaker 14    01:06:07    Okay. And I think those are the only ones that we really, Oh, and the, the last one that I think just to, for some clarification, there was some indication that there's a one way or a road that isn't wide enough for two-way traffic coming off of New England Avenue. And it's being suggested that we, that we, sorry, Stripe. Stripe or sign that as a one way. You have no issue with that, correct? No, and it's actually already a one way, and I think there's a,  
Speaker 15    01:06:40    I I think it is, I think there's a sign there now. I think maybe it's just turned around on one of the posts.  
Speaker 14    01:06:45    Perfect. I have no other direct questions of Mr. Welch. If any of the board members, do  
Speaker 0     01:06:52    Any members of the board have any questions? Well, Henry, let me ask you, having gone through the site impact and they're agreeing to mostly everything, any other issues barking?  
Speaker 5     01:07:02    The really only other issues and, and due to the fact that the severity of the parking variance is what it is, it is rather severe of a variance and there is quite a bit of, of excess space on the site that could accommodate parking if it were ever needed. I totally feel like the site, currently, I'm in agreement with Mr. Walsh, that the site has adequate parking, most likely for the, the current use and even the, the use with the addition. But since you have the space there, it'd be nice to see some of that, like parking land bank, just to show that you have the room, whether it be 20 spaces, 25 spaces, land bank it, and said, Hey, whatever. It becomes a problem. We're showing you that it, it can be done. Obviously they're land bank, they don't have to be constructed, but it just, it goes towards that variance and we could say, Hey, we're lane banking 2025 spaces. Now the variance is really only, you know, 1 25 versus, you know, 102 or whatever the case may be, or 112. It's, it's a much less variance and it, it shows that the site could accommodate more parking if it wherever necessary.  
Speaker 14    01:08:20    So  
Speaker 15    01:08:20    Yeah, I guess the, the, the first time I heard that term was today, so I guess we really just haven't considered it that well, like where it would go with, you know, the engineers and trying to figure it out and maybe what's underground and, and how  
Speaker 14    01:08:35    Mr. Welsh,  
Speaker 14    01:08:38    If I could interrupt you for a second. Sure, sure. And, and I think Henry, I think that that is, that certainly sounds like a reasonable request. The issue that I have is that if we, and especially, you know, obviously this is the first time today that, that we're hearing about the land banking. The issue is, is that you then have to, you then have to include that in the variance as in terms of the parking variance, but that also could trigger additional variances depending on where that land bank is on the site. And it, and I believe it puts us into a major category when it comes into to potential land disturbance. So I think that, I think that puts us, my, my fear is that it, it, it has a snowball effect that then would start a whole bunch of unanticipated issues. Which  
Speaker 5     01:09:23    I think, I think what we could do is we could say that we could, I think the note in area that land bank parking could potentially be added if necessary, but that it would require you to come back to the board for the, the approval of the psych plan aspect of it so that it's not right now looked upon I think as a major or, you know, you adding over, you know, a certain amount of impervious. I I think it could be done, maybe Mr. Kane can elaborate, Jim, if, if for, even though it would affect the variance to say it's land bank. We've done it in ways where people have come in here with the full blown design for land bank parking and said, Hey, if we need it, all we need to do is tell you we're gonna, we're gonna build it bond for it inspection fees and go because it was shown on the plant. But if it's strictly a dash line that says potential future space area, parking area, I think we could say that Yeah, it goes towards the variance, but we're not giving you, you know, if it were having have to be built, you would have to come back and this way there  
Speaker 3     01:10:35    Would be no site plan approval for the land bank parking. Correct. If that's ever necessary in the future, they would've to come back to the board with a site plan application. Right.  
Speaker 5     01:10:45    So your your variance would be, you know, less severe, but it wouldn't impact. Now  
Speaker 14    01:10:51    Can I make a suggestion and only because again, I'm just, I'm, I'm trying to think like a lawyer in a paranoid mode, can I make a suggestion that we will agree to work with the Township to designate a land banked parking area if it can be done without detriment to the existing, existing approvals. And again, the reason, the reason that I'm concerned about it is, is again, I think that technically we would have to know the number of, of parking spaces that we're land banking to then factor into what the variance is that the board is granting and then it, and we need to know where it's located to see if that triggers setback variances. And again, the bigger issue I think is that, is that if it triggers then it as a major application as opposed to staying un a minor application that is, that has I think, some real legal consequences behind it.  
Speaker 14    01:11:48    And if anybody were to ever challenge the approval on that basis, there might be a basis to challenge that. And that's what I'm concerned about. I, I'm, I certainly agree with you that I think there's enough, I think there, there might be ways to do it. And there is a large area, quite frankly, I think this board generally prefers to see not large expanses of parking, but likes to see, you know, landscaping and green space, which is what we are providing. And I I I, I just don't want to, and again, I don't think it's the intention of the board to, to cause a snowball effect to have us come back, but I will note that we, you know, I recently had an application where there was a request to place a, you know, place a shed or a garage on a property that then caused us to have to come back to the board again because there was coverage issues that were triggered by the placement of the garage so that we had to come back to the board for another application. Because you can't anticipate what the potential consequences of that are unless we actually see where it is. So again, it might be me being overly paranoid or overly cautious, but quite frankly, that's what my client is paying me to do.  
Speaker 3     01:13:01    I don't think any of those issues are going to arise until you come back for a site plan approval for that banked land bank parking, and then you have to evaluate that.  
Speaker 11    01:13:11    I thought suggesting that we simply write a note on the site plan so it's there as part of the town's record that if additional parking is required, land bank parking was, it was contemplated to this site and would be a site plan application, something like that, that isn't gonna trigger anything.  
Speaker 5     01:13:37    And Mr. Arch, I could be as little as, you know, I think if you got this to a hundred spaces, so Land Bank 13, you're, you're at a hundred versus 1 25. I think that gets you to, you know, the, a little bit more reasonable number with that variance. And again, I don't think it's, you see, you know how large this site is and there's a lot of space there. I I don't see any way that you wouldn't be able to fit 13 spaces somewhere on that site. And, and again, that could be figured out somewhere down the line. It would not  
Speaker 16    01:14:14    Be something that  
Speaker 5     01:14:15    Would have to be done now.  
Speaker 14    01:14:17    Correct. And and that's why maybe, maybe my suggestion, maybe this is something that maybe Mr. Cane and I can work out in terms of what the language would be after, after maybe having an opportunity to discuss the engineering, if there is any engineering consequences and then see if there is anything that's gonna be triggered. I just, I, I just don't know. It's a question mark in my mind and I'm hesitant to agree to more than just saying that we will make our best efforts to, to, to do that. But I I, I can't bind my client to something that might have unforeseen consequences. So I, I just wanna make sure that that, that that is noted,  
Speaker 0     01:14:55    Duly noted. Jim, we can work with the language you, you mentioned.  
Speaker 3     01:15:02    Yes, I'm sure Mr. Arch and I can work  
Speaker 0     01:15:04    It out. Okay, fair enough. Anyone have any questions for Mr. Welch? Any comments hearing put on your next witness? Mr. Arch?  
Speaker 14    01:15:14    Thank you. Our next witness is Mr. Robert Murray, who I believe is present.  
Speaker 3     01:15:20    Mr. Murray, are you present?  
Speaker 16    01:15:22    Yes.  
Speaker 3     01:15:23    Mr. Murray, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give to the truth?  
Speaker 16    01:15:30    I do.  
Speaker 3     01:15:31    Thank you.  
Speaker 14    01:15:34    So Mr. Murray, you are a licensed engineer, is that correct?  
Speaker 16    01:15:38    Correct. For a year and a half now.  
Speaker 14    01:15:40    Okay. And if you can, I don't believe you've ever been accepted by this board, so if you can, if you can please go through your, your education and your credentials.  
Speaker 16    01:15:49    Sure. I graduated in 2017 from Stevens Institute Technology. I've been a PE for a year and a half now, and I work for Menlo Engineering for about five years at 2 61 Cleveland Avenue. Highland Park.  
Speaker 0     01:16:07    Credentials are fine, please proceed.  
Speaker 14    01:16:11    Okay. So Mr. Murray, you are familiar with the, with the site and the proposed plans, correct?  
Speaker 16    01:16:18    Correct.  
Speaker 14    01:16:19    Okay. If you would, if you can please just take us through sort of a general overview of the site and if you're gonna touch upon the, the areas where we're requesting variances,  
Speaker 16    01:16:32    I would like to present exhibit A one existing conditions exhibit. The site the applicant is looking to develop is lot four of block 4 46 0 1 in the Township of Piscataway. It is located on the northwest corner of the intersection between New England Avenue and Centennial Avenue. The site has two existing access points, one which is a right in, right out on Centennial Avenue and one with which is full movement on New England Avenue. The site is approximately five acres is and is located in the I five zone. Surrounding the site to the northeast and west are all industrial properties and to the south past Centennial Avenue is Woodlands. The site today is a industrial manufacturing building, which is approximately 36,753 square feet. It has 89 parking spaces.  
Speaker 16    01:17:50    I would, it also has three births loading birth, two on the west or east side and one on the west side. I would like to move on to exhibit eight two to talk about the propose improvements. We are proposing a 5,985 square foot building edition along with sidewalk along the frontages of New England and Centennial Avenue, as well as some regrading and re striping along the west side of the building to improve the parking to be ADA compliant. The site also the proposed conditions in the site also ask for four solar arrays and two sets. One which is the carports as talked about, will be 14 and a half feet high. The other set in the grass areas will have a total height of eight foot four inches. The, in the proposed conditions, there are 87 parking spaces. The reduction in the parking spaces include one for the trash enclosure, trash enclosure, fenced in on the north side of the building, and two, one was lost to become ADA compliant on the west side of the building. Variances as discussed include the parking variance, which where we are at 87, where 125 is required. The height of the ground array, ground arrays at the carport at 14 and a half where 10 feet are required. The side yard setback, where the ground array to the north, which is 34.6 feet from the side yard where 50 is required. And landscaping the solar arrays, which we are willing to work with the board's professionals to satisfy, satisfy their comments. This concludes my testimony.  
Speaker 0     01:20:09    Okay,  
Speaker 14    01:20:10    Thank you. Mr. Murray, if I can just ask, you've looked over the reports, correct?  
Speaker 16    01:20:16    Yes.  
Speaker 14    01:20:16    And in regard to any of the engineering or any of the technical comments about revisions or notes, you agree that we will comply with all of those requests, is that correct?  
Speaker 16    01:20:26    That's correct.  
Speaker 14    01:20:27    Okay. I have no further questions. Oh, actually, wait, no, sorry. One question. You had indicated the, the ground arrays in the parking would be approximately 14 and a half feet, correct?  
Speaker 16    01:20:43    Correct.  
Speaker 14    01:20:44    Okay. And the reason is it, is it correct that the reason for that is because we need to provide enough clearance for vehicles, especially emergency vehicles, so that they can freely move amongst the, the, the parking areas without clipping solar panels essentially? Correct?  
Speaker 16    01:20:59    Correct.  
Speaker 14    01:21:00    Okay. So it's, it's really a, a safety concern is what we're asking for, for that, that height of variance of over 10 feet because that just wouldn't be adequate to clear all the vehicles, correct?  
Speaker 16    01:21:11    Correct.  
Speaker 14    01:21:12    Okay. That concludes my direct.  
Speaker 0     01:21:18    Any other members of the board have any questions for Mr. Murray Henry?  
Speaker 5     01:21:22    Yeah, Mr. Murray on the carport solar structure, you said 14 and a half, that's on the high end. I imagine there's a low end to that as well,  
Speaker 16    01:21:31    Correct? On the low end, it's about 10 feet towards the face of the car, parking towards the, the edge of pavement.  
Speaker 5     01:21:42    Right. So that's more on the, the law on sides. The high sides would be the sides that are, I guess facing south or west, correct?  
Speaker 16    01:21:52    The side, the high sides are on the north northern court port. It's to the south of it and the high side for the east west is on the alright. On the east side of it.  
Speaker 5     01:22:03    Okay.  
Speaker 0     01:22:05    Any other members of the board have any questions, any comments? Nothing. All right. Mr. Arch, having pretty much app appeased us with the site impact and agreeing to everything, I would hope to get the Reader's Digest version of your next witness and some closing statements.  
Speaker 14    01:22:24    I, I certainly understand our next witness, and if I can just ask Mr. Murray to stop sharing the screen. Our next witness is going to be our planner, which is John Leon Cavallo, who I believe is actually present there with Mr. Murray. So we'll just do a quick swap.  
Speaker 11    01:22:41    Can I interrupt one quickly  
Speaker 0     01:22:43    Please?  
Speaker 11    01:22:45    These, the non panels, are they reflect  
Speaker 16    01:22:51    Panels or are they reflecting?  
Speaker 17    01:22:55    I am not aware of either, either one, but we can comply with the comments that do not create glare to the neighboring comment neighboring site.  
Speaker 14    01:23:08    If I, if I remember the ordinance correctly, I believe the ordinance calls for non glare. If I remember reading that, I'm, I'm not sure  
Speaker 11    01:23:15    If I, I don't remember reading it and that's why I raised the question because we've had that discussion on other applications for so  
Speaker 14    01:23:23    Well, maybe the ordinance should say not glare,  
Speaker 5     01:23:27    Non glare for the non glare causing to the neighboring properties.  
Speaker 11    01:23:32    Is that what it says?  
Speaker 5     01:23:34    I'm pretty sure, yes.  
Speaker 11    01:23:36    Okay. We you'll go.  
Speaker 14    01:23:39    We certainly will.  
Speaker 3     01:23:40    Thank you John. Mr. Leon Cabela, could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth. I do. I believe Mr. Lee Conveo has been accepted by this board as a professional planner in prior applications. Agreed. Please proceed.  
Speaker 18    01:23:58    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Okay, I think I can do this quickly for the attorney. That's great news. We have a tax lot here of one tax lot. It's for Solar Electric. As we said, Solar Electric is a longstanding business in the community providing jobs and important electrical services. It's critical with clients such as PSEG and they're there to ensure no disruption in power and communications. The surrounding area, as our engineer has said, as industrial, it's three sides with one wooded side across from Centennial Avenue. There are no residential uses anywhere in the in close proximity and none within earshot of the facility. We will construct, as we said, a 6,000 square foot, approximately 6,000 square foot building and for new ground mounted solar arrays.  
Speaker 18    01:25:07    The zone that the property is in, is it a light industrial zone. Purpose of the zone is to reflect existing indu industries and promote non hazardous operations. Permitted uses or warehouses. Manufacturing uses research labs, government uses and public uses zone conformance. The existing uses permitted. And right on, on q and on on point with the, the zone intent for non-hazardous operations, the bulk requirements are substantially met, lot dimensions, height and coverage and all setbacks are met. The zone relief, as we talked about, is a D three conditional relief required for a few requirements related to the solar array and not the addition. There's nothing we need for the addition in terms of variance. It's sea relief for parking has been discussed and the supply, as I can see it, in my opinion, is well above the demand at peak shifts as the president of the company has talked about justifications of the D three conditional use relief are the D three satisfies the statutory criteria under the Coventry Square case in state, New Jersey state law, Coventry is more relaxed standard of proof than Mechi standard for prohibited use per Coventry.  
Speaker 18    01:26:41    The focus is not on the use per se, but rather on the intent of the conditions. The positive criteria in this application for the conditional use, the positive criteria are presumably met because the use itself is not an issue. It's been there for more than 20 years, not what's standing. The above solar array is an inherently beneficial use and promotes renewable energy. Also, the project enhance enhances the established businesses and the business on site and it's a permitted use committed to the community. The project also as a whole will result in improved operational efficiencies as the president have mentioned for a very important business, which is almost an essential business of sorts for safety and, and continuance of power throughout the the region. It's critical that this business pro provides timely service to ensure power, supply and communications. All the above municipal landus, municipal fundamental purposes of zoning include a C G H I M, and N under the municipal land use law.  
Speaker 18    01:27:59    Some of those are promote general welfare and the one that's to the point, right? To point again, is to promote renewable energy resources, the negative criteria and none of the conditional uses. The deviations of the uses will cause impact to the substantial a of a substantial adverse nature. Solar array setback is 34.6 degrees or feet versus 50 feet adjacent. Uses in is in the industrial. The building is about 80 feet away from this, and that building has no essential windows. Solar array high of 10 feet is well set back from the road, not overpowering and is necessary for clearance because of emergency vehicles that might use that element of the site. Solar race support structures, structures, height in the parking lot is over 10 feet. And again, it's not overpowering and it's needed for clearance for different emergency uses. Solar erase screening is, is none.  
Speaker 18    01:29:21    We will work, as you've heard from the both the, the president of the company and the engineer on, on the job, that it will work with your staff to come up with proper screening for that area. All potential impacts have been addressed, including glare, security, electric shock and fire and appropriate safeguards will be put in place in accordance with the, with New Jersey state law, such as signage and with the Township requirements. Justification for c vari seat parking variance is that it will be justified under the flexible C balancing test. And once that is done, it will show that there is no substantial detriment and the application, the benefits of the application will substantially outweigh any detriments in accordance with state law. Public benefits. All the project positives that were stated before will carry forth from here. And continuing parking relief is necessary to effectuate a good project.  
Speaker 18    01:30:40    Only 89 spaces now works fine. So the deletion of two will still work for the application for the foreseeable future potential detriments. There aren't very many. The real world proof of the parking is in the putting the ati and it is adequate. There is no problem with the current supply and it's a comfortable relationship with the site plan. The parking demand associates associated with the building edition is insignificant in the very small and don't amount to very much. The operational testimony is that the current parking supply is more adequate for a peak demand, which I concur with. Also, additional parking would be unnecessary. It would not serve any practical planning purpose. And we can work something out with the future bank parking with some leadership or by the attorneys that are involved with the case. In conclusion, our, the courts have found modernization of industrial facilities is a special reason to support such variances. The positive is a, the project is a positive investment in the established permitted business use use here with minimal, if any real impacts, statutory tests of all the relief is met and approval is respectfully warranted. And I would ask that you approve this application for both preliminary and final site plan and the variances involved tonight.  
Speaker 14    01:32:21    Thank you.  
Speaker 18    01:32:22    You're welcome.  
Speaker 14    01:32:25    I believe that sums up better than I can. So that is our presentation.  
Speaker 3     01:32:29    Mr. Arch two, two notes. I believe that there's an indication that there are two containers in the parking lot and there's some outdoor storage of materials in addition to the two sheds that we already discussed. I ask Mr. Welsh to comment upon those and whether or not they can be removed.  
Speaker 15    01:32:45    Yeah, that, that's part of what we tried to create a little extra space to, to, to be able to facilitate doing some of that stuff currently in our, in our warehouse. So that's some of, you know, those are tools that come and go. Those are things that we've done that would be gone if, if we did the, the expansion.  
Speaker 14    01:33:07    Thank you. So expansion's granted they will be, they will be removed and moved inside to the expansion, correct?  
Speaker 15    01:33:12    Yes.  
Speaker 14    01:33:14    Excellent. Okay.  
Speaker 0     01:33:15    Thank you Mr. Welsh. Mr. Arch, any other members of the board of any questions for this application or any comments? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application? Ms. Buckley?  
Speaker 1     01:33:32    No. One. Chairman.  
Speaker 0     01:33:33    Okay. I'm gonna close the public portion and I'm gonna make a motion to approve this application.  
Speaker 3     01:33:42    Okay. Steve Weisman. I'll second.  
Speaker 0     01:33:48    Al.  
Speaker 1     01:33:49    Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 3     01:33:51    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:33:52    Mr. Tillery?  
Speaker 15    01:33:54    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:33:55    Mr. Patel? Yes. Mrio?  
Speaker 3     01:34:02    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:34:03    Mr.. Dacey?  
Speaker 14    01:34:04    Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:34:05    Hey, daca? Yes. And Chairman ca?  
Speaker 0     01:34:08    Yes.  
Speaker 3     01:34:10    Mr. Dacey. We'll memorialize this at our next meeting.  
Speaker 14    01:34:13    Thank you very much. Can we have an extra sign too? Is that okay?  
Speaker 0     01:34:18    Yeah, they're on sale tonight. I like your planner. I would hate to have seen what the long version of his testimony was. Have a good night, gentlemen.  
Speaker 14    01:34:27    Thank you. Have a good night everybody. Thanks  
Speaker 15    01:34:28    Everyone.  
Speaker 0     01:34:29    Thank you. On item number 11, adoption of resolutions from the regular meeting of October 13th.  
Speaker 3     01:34:35    The first resolutions, Aithal per this application was approved. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tiller? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:34:46    I like to listen to  
Speaker 3     01:34:47    All the people who? Mr. Ali? Yes. Yes. Chairman. Cahill? Yes. Next resolution. New singular wireless for a site plan exemption. Mr. Weissman? Yes. Mr.. Dacey? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr.. Dacey? Yes. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman. Cahill? Yes. Last resolution? Chaill. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. O'Reggio? Yes. Mr.. Dacey. Yes. Mr. O? Yes. Chairman. Cahill? Yes. All resolutions that I have received.  
Speaker 0     01:35:24    Let's move on to item number 12. Adoption of minutes from the regular meeting of October 13th, 2022. All in favor?  
Speaker 3     01:35:30    Aye. All opposed? Right.  
Speaker 0     01:35:33    Okay. Item number 13, adjournment. Thank you all as always for your dedication to the Township  
Speaker 3     01:35:40    And happy Halloween.