Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on September 28 2023

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     00:01:06    Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the Courier News notice posted on the bulletin 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 roll?  
Speaker 1     00:01:20    Mr. Weissman?  
Speaker 0     00:01:22    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:01:23    Mr. Tillery? Here. Mr. Patel Kalpesh. Mr. Regio. Y'all tell me they're coming. Mr. Blo?  
Speaker 0     00:01:38    Here.  
Speaker 1     00:01:39    Mr. Hika? Here. Mr. Mitterando? Here. Mr. Ellie here. And Chairman Cahill. Here.  
Speaker 0     00:01:49    Will everyone please stand for the salute to the flag?  
Speaker 2     00:01:57    United States Republic.  
Speaker 1     00:02:01    It just stands one nation  
Speaker 2     00:02:04    Under God. Liberty. Liberty,  
Speaker 1     00:02:06    And justice for all I  
Speaker 0     00:02:11    Mr. Can, are there any changes to the agenda?  
Speaker 2     00:02:14    Yes, there are quite a few changes to the agenda. The application of Alan Cruise Maple Avenue is adjourned until October 26th. He must notice 11th Street Property partnership has been withdrawn and will not be heard. L n r properties is postponed to October 12th with no further notice by the applicant. And finally, V Y O U S A is postponed until November 9th with no further notice. Those are all the changes I have.  
Speaker 0     00:02:54    Okay. Thank you sir. Let's move ahead to item number 5 1 3 dash ZB 80 D. Brandi Rivera.  
Speaker 2     00:03:05    Brandi Rivera present? Yes.  
Speaker 0     00:03:07    Brandy, looks like you're muted. There you go.  
Speaker 3     00:03:08    Hello, how are you?  
Speaker 2     00:03:10    Hi. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear the testimony you're about to give be the truth?  
Speaker 3     00:03:16    Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:03:16    Your name and address, please?  
Speaker 3     00:03:18    Brandi Rivera. 1 3 4 9 West fifth Street, Plainfield, New Jersey 0 7 0 6 3.  
Speaker 2     00:03:24    Thank you. Can you explain to the board what you'd like to do here?  
Speaker 3     00:03:27    I would like to replace the fence that I have now. I'm on a corner property. I would like to replace the chain link fence with a, did you hear with a six foot privacy fence? Did you hear me okay?  
Speaker 2     00:03:44    Yes, I heard you, ma'am. Okay. Mr. Chairman, you may want to check with Mr. Hinterstein.  
Speaker 0     00:03:52    Yes. Mr. Hinterstein, do you have any issues or comments about this?  
Speaker 4     00:03:56    The only, really, there's only two minor items here. This is a corner lot. Again, the, it's in a non-con. The existing home was already in a non-conforming location, setback only 14.7 feet from Oxford Street. But at a minimum, the fence should be set back in this particular case, 10 feet from the property line on Oxford Street just to maintain some assemblance of a site corridor down the street. Again, it's, right now it's, it's, it's practically, I think right up against the sidewalk, if I'm not mistaken. But again, I think a minimum requirement should be a 10 foot setback along Oxford Street in this particular case.  
Speaker 0     00:04:45    Okay. Ms. River, are you okay with that?  
Speaker 3     00:04:49    So right now the, the fence line is like 10 feet from the curb, which obviously is not my property line, but I really wanna keep my side door behind the fence for security and privacy. And I was wondering if I could at least do, maybe meet in the middle and do seven foot from my house, which would be like 7.7 feet from the property line so that I can have at least one panel with the post off the side of the house, please.  
Speaker 4     00:05:16    I don't, I don't see that being issue. Mr. Chairman, in light of the fact that the house is so close to the, to the setback already, is it possible that I, you know, or for one fence panel, I, I really don't see an issue with it. I, I don't think it's worth articulating it. I don't if we're gonna gain anything outta that. So. Okay. Again, I, I think we can live with the one fence panel off the house.  
Speaker 0     00:05:48    Any other members of the board have any questions for this applicant? Or comments? Hearing none, I'm gonna close. I'm gonna go to the public having please.  
Speaker 4     00:05:59    Yeah, I got one, one other issue I just haven't had a chance to bring up was, I believe the engineering department asked for a five foot temporary construction easement on this location just in case they do some future road work. I believe it was on Oxford Street, I could confirm that, but I'm pretty sure they were looking for a five foot temporary construction easement. It's just if they do future road work, that they'd be able to do that road work and then repair any damage that they may do to, to grass if they do sidewalk work or something of that nature. And the Township would prepare that, that easement language, it would just be in agreement and it's only temporary in nature.  
Speaker 0     00:06:41    Oh, Mr. River, that's okay.  
Speaker 3     00:06:45    Yeah, I don't see any, any concern with that.  
Speaker 0     00:06:48    That's pretty standard what we do here, so thank you. Thank you. Any other members of the board of any questions? I heard none. So we're gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments for this application?  
Speaker 1     00:07:02    Okay. Chairman, I have two people raising their hands, but they were raising it since the beginning of the meeting, so  
Speaker 0     00:07:09    Were calling them. I, yeah, they might be waiting for a different application, obviously.  
Speaker 1     00:07:14    Okay. My Maesh Patel,  
Speaker 5     00:07:20    You guys hear me?  
Speaker 1     00:07:22    Yes.  
Speaker 5     00:07:23    Okay. If you guys can hear me, I'm glad you I joined this call today. My street address is seven Long Street Piscataway and I put a application almost seven years ago to have my sidewalk fixed and nothing has been done. The tree, the trees are, it really has nothing  
Speaker 0     00:07:43    To do with this particular application. We're looking at this evening, sir.  
Speaker 5     00:07:48    So I, I'm not sure because I received this and I just joined in this because there is something about a construction that's supposed to be going on on seven Long Street and Plain Street, a new construction. So  
Speaker 1     00:08:07    Mr. Patel, which application did you get a letter for?  
Speaker 5     00:08:11    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:08:12    Which application? What's the name of it?  
Speaker 5     00:08:16    You know what, just gimme a moment please. Sorry about that. My neighbor sent me this link, so,  
Speaker 1     00:08:25    Okay, but did you receive a letter within 200 feet for an application that is on this evening?  
Speaker 5     00:08:30    It's about ronco dev developers.  
Speaker 1     00:08:32    Okay. Yeah, we're not on that one yet. That, that's on next  
Speaker 0     00:08:35    Be heard later tonight. That's a different, it's a different application. So that comes up in a few minutes.  
Speaker 5     00:08:42    Okay. Sorry about that.  
Speaker 1     00:08:43    Okay.  
Speaker 0     00:08:44    You can put your hand down Mr. Patel. Well, you can wait till the end of the next ation.  
Speaker 5     00:08:47    No, no, no, no. Absolutely. It's, I'll put my hand down.  
Speaker 1     00:08:53    Okay. Is there anyone else else on this application fantastic. That we  
Speaker 0     00:08:57    Just heard? Fantastic. Nelson Ziana.  
Speaker 6     00:08:59    Yeah, I guess this is, I was sitting down waiting for the other one. The building's gonna get billed in the Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 1     00:09:06    Okay. Yes. Next application. Okay,  
Speaker 0     00:09:07    No problem. Any other members? Laura?  
Speaker 1     00:09:10    No, that's it. Chairman.  
Speaker 0     00:09:13    Okay. Gonna close the, close the public portion with this application. I'd make a motion to approve it. I'll second it. Second I get a second. Steve Weisman second. Thank you. Please call the  
Speaker 1     00:09:25    Roll. Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Ms. Cal Roy. Mr. Blot?  
Speaker 0     00:09:35    Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:09:36    Mr. Heka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Yes. And Chairman Cahill.  
Speaker 2     00:09:45    Ms. Riveri, your application has been approved. We will memorialize it in a written document at our next meeting and send that document to you.  
Speaker 1     00:09:52    Thank you so much. Good luck. Thank you. Have a great night. Thank you. You too, Brandy.  
Speaker 0     00:09:57    Good night Mr. Herra. Let's move along to item number 7 23 dash ZB dash 70 v Ronco Development Incorporated.  
Speaker 1     00:10:12    Chairman there  
Speaker 2     00:10:13    Present?  
Speaker 7     00:10:14    I'm here. Good  
Speaker 2     00:10:15    Evening.  
Speaker 7     00:10:16    Good evening. I'm here with the owner of Ronco developer Ron Koy. Sits next to me. We're in my conference room.  
Speaker 2     00:10:31    Go ahead Mr. Mirabelli.  
Speaker 7     00:10:32    Okay, so we, this is an application for an undersized lot in, in light of the engineering letter that we received today. I think that would be best if we put on Mark Lieber, who is our professional, because I believe the actual site is going to have to be reworked a little bit in order to accommodate the comments contained in the memorandum dated. It was originally August 8th, but it was revised September 28th. So at this point, I'd like to call our planner and engineer Mark Lieber.  
Speaker 2     00:11:14    Mr. Lieber, are you present?  
Speaker 0     00:11:17    Yes, I am.  
Speaker 2     00:11:18    Mr. Lieber, could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 0     00:11:24    Yes, I do. I don't think I'm on the, on the video right now though.  
Speaker 2     00:11:31    Can we make Mr. Lieber a panelist so that we can see him?  
Speaker 1     00:11:34    Yep. You have to accept as a panelist we could do that.  
Speaker 0     00:11:45    Okay. That worked. All right. Everyone can hear me, right?  
Speaker 2     00:11:53    Yes, we can.  
Speaker 0     00:11:55    Do you want me to put the plan? Yes, we  
Speaker 2     00:11:56    Can.  
Speaker 0     00:11:58    Okay. Do you want me to put the plan on the screen?  
Speaker 2     00:12:03    And before you get started, just for the record, Mr. Lieber has appeared as a planner and an engineer before other boards that I have seen, and he is a qualified profession. I I, I proof his credentials as well. I've seen 'em before as well. Please proceed.  
Speaker 0     00:12:18    Thank you. I'll just put on the screen here the, the variance plan that was filed that we're discussing tonight.  
Speaker 2     00:12:27    And this is 1 46 Hillside Avenue, correct?  
Speaker 0     00:12:29    It is, lemme see something. All right. You could see the scr, the plan.  
Speaker 2     00:12:40    Yes.  
Speaker 0     00:12:41    Okay, so let me, yes, we can, lemme get started. So once again, as you stated, this is 1 46 Hillside Avenue. It's block 7,007, lot 25. It's in the R 10 zone district. That's a residential zone. And the lot's 50 feet wide and a hundred feet deep. So the total area is 5,000 square feet. It's a corner lot, it is vacant and the intersection is with Plain Street. Now there's a little bit of history to the lot. This property was originally created by a subdivision that was entitled Edsl Realty Company, new Brunswick. That was recorded in the Middlesex County Clerk's office on October 29th, 1930 as case 1321 dash 7 25. Now, when that map was filed, all the lots in this entire neighborhood, well 25 feet wide and, and I guess at the time there was also a different block number. It was known on that map as block four lot 16 and 17.  
Speaker 0     00:13:46    And presumably since this was filed in 1930, all the lots in this neighborhood predate the adoption and an action of the zoning ordinance at which point the R 10 zone came into effect, which requires 10,000 square feet for a conforming lot. In addition to having 10,000 square feet, the minimum lot width required is a hundred feet. And as you see on this plan, we only have 50 feet on Hillside Avenue. So what's proposed tonight is a two story single family dwelling that's three bedrooms. The overall footprint is 24 feet in width and 40 feet in depth, which has 928 square feet on the first floor. The second floor of the house is also 928 square feet. So the total area of the house is 1,856 square feet. We do have proposed a two car driveway off of Plain Street and there is a sidewalk presently on plane, but it ends at the corner.  
Speaker 0     00:14:50    So as part of this application, we wanted to extend the sidewalk along Hillside Avenue to the end of our property because it's a corner lot, there are two front yards and in this R 10 zone, each front yard's required to be 35 feet. So if you apply a 35 foot front yard along both streets and then the minimum side yard of 10 feet, the total buildable area for a house is only five feet in width. So obviously due to the narrowness of the lot and the fact that we only have five feet to work with, there's really not enough room there for a functional dwelling. So what we had done is we designed the plan to have a front yard setback of 16 feet along the side street and 25 feet along Hillside. We comply with the 10 foot side yard setback to the neighbor on our right.  
Speaker 0     00:15:44    And then in the rear we were providing a 35 foot setback where only 25 feet is required. And the reason we were choosing that is because we wanted to provide a more usable rear yard. So we were exceeding the rear yard setback. You know, I I, I do want to note that we could move the house anytime, don't about it. Now additional we, we could move this house an additional 10 feet further into the lot from Hillside, in which case we would conform to the front yard setback from Hillside and we would also conform to the 25 foot rear yard setback. So again, it was just a preference of ours to provide a larger rear yard, but we could shift the house back if desired. The last thing I want to note is in the R 10 zone, the maximum building coverage is limited to 20% of the lot area. In this case we're at 19.2%. So that is conforming as well.  
Speaker 0     00:16:43    Now for an undersized lot application, my first stop is always to check the town code to see if there are any grandfathering clauses for non-conforming lots. There is a chapter 21 which briefly discusses non-conforming uses, but there's no clauses that would address an undersized lot. So the next thing I would go to are the court cases. The main court case in New Jersey that offers guidance is do Meyer versus Lacey Township board of Adjustment. And the history behind that is that local zoning boards were at one time really inundated with these undersized lock cases. Inevitably most of them would get denied and appeal to the court. So in 1987 the court decide that they're gonna offer guidance to municipalities as to how to handle these cases. And that was the Meyer case in the decision they summarized what the requirements are. In these cases, starting off with the applicant still has to carry a burden of proof to address the positive negative criteria.  
Speaker 0     00:17:59    We also have to demonstrate that we made attempts to bring the lot into conformity. We have to submit plans for the proposed house that's proposed detailing its floor plans and appearance from the outside. Further, the court said we should attempt to demonstrate compliance with the use. So residential is permitted here as well as the yard setbacks. And to situate the house on this lot, reflecting the fact that it is a smaller lot so that it would be expected that we could be constructing a smaller house. And the last thing was to demonstrate that the proposed use doesn't violate any traditional zoning purposes such as the availability of air light and open space for the board to deliberate a case like this. The court said that they should really evaluate the testimony to determine whether additional information's required for the record then to make specific findings of fact based upon the record that's presented.  
Speaker 0     00:19:03    And also to consider whether in lieu of denying the application it can approve its subject to reasonable conditions which would modify the proposal to minimize any perceived negative impact. And then last to be conscientious in your review of the facts, since an outright denial of an undersized lot may amount to a confiscation, thus requiring condemnation by the municipality. So looking back at the various requirements that were established by the court, first and foremost, we did send out buy sell letters to the adjacent lot owners. We did not receive any in interest from any of the lots whether to sell their property or to purchase this property. So we can't really do much to bring this into conformity.  
Speaker 0     00:19:53    So now the question is, can the variances be granted without substantial detriment to the public? Good. I looked at the specific goals of zoning that are outlined in the chapter 21 dash two of the code. Three of them I wanna cite the first one being item C is to provide adequate air, light and open space. This application does provide adequate yard areas and as I stated earlier, we could actually even comply with the front yard to Hillside Avenue. The only yard area we can't comply with is to plain street. We are maintaining 16 feet, which was a suggestion by the board planner and one of his review reports. So item E was to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities that contributed to the wellbeings of persons neighborhoods and communities.  
Speaker 0     00:20:44    And again, as the court noted in the Meyer case, most towns historically ignored these undersized lots for years until where the demand for housing escalated. And I feel that having a smaller home on this smaller lot is simply adding to a variety of housing stock in the neighborhood. Not every lot in this neighborhood is conforming at a hundred by a hundred. There are a variety of lot sizes. Some of them are 75 by a hundred and I have to go back to that file map from 1930, which established the lot sizes as 25 foot lots. And I guess over the last nine decades, various lots have been merged with other adjacent lots to create either 75 or a hundred foot lots. I don't know why, but for whatever reason this lot was left at 50 feet. Item G is to provide sufficient space in appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural, residential, recreational, commercial industrial uses. And again, the zone permits a residential use and we are proposing a residential use so there's no detriment that we're introducing any sort of a nuisance to the surrounding area or something that's not compatible.  
Speaker 0     00:21:56    Now I do wanna point out that there is a house at two 20 Hillside, which is just down the street. It's the exact same situation. It's a 5,000 square foot, 50 by a hundred corner lot in the R 10 zone and it has a dwelling on it. That house is very similar to what we had laid out on this property. It's a smaller two-story residence. It has a two-car driveway off the side street. And we had looked at that in consideration of submitting the design for this application. With regard to the positives of the application, it is a new house, it would be a house that's probably gonna be more affordable for a first time home buyer than other houses that are in the area. And we're really taking a lot that's vacant and underutilizing it and we're developing it into a permitted use. So I think those are all positives.  
Speaker 0     00:22:52    On the negative side, there really aren't many negatives associated with this other than the fact that it is an un undersized lot. Normally negative criteria. Look at environmental impacts, for example, disturbance to wetlands, floodplains stream corridors impacts through noise and nuisances. Or for example, introducing a new traffic generator to the neighborhood as a single family dwelling that only has three bedrooms. There's no chance that this is gonna be any sort of significant traffic generator or a nuisance. So I really don't think there are many negatives associated with the application other than the character of the lot itself. And really in summary as a planner as well as an engineer, planning is really about compatibility. And I think that the construction of a single family house on this property is a compatible use in the the area. It is a permitted use. We made every attempt possible to adhere to the requirements of the zone and if we wanted we could meet the front yard, the hillside and therefore the only yard area we wouldn't be complying with is on Plain Street. You have the architectural plans for the house which were filed. I feel that the dwelling has been sized appropriately for this lot given the limitations of the buildable area that we're working with. And I just don't think that there's any detriment to the public. And I also feel that, you know, an outright denial of a variance in this case would certainly result in undue hardship because really the law would be zoned into in utility, which would mean it's confiscation in a sense. That's really all I have.  
Speaker 7     00:24:37    Mark, do you wanna address the letter, the revised September 28th, 2023 letter?  
Speaker 0     00:24:45    Yes, this is a letter from the board planner. There's a couple of comments under site impact. Item one is about affordable housing obligations. Obviously we agree to comply with that. Item two is really pertaining to the buy sell letters. The applicant didn't make an attempt to reach out to the neighbors, unfortunately there is no interest for either buying or selling their land. The next item is three, where there's a recommendation to provide a 16 foot setback along Plain Street in the plan that's on your screen. I have a dimension here, 16 feet, so we do comply with that. Recommendation. Item four is speaking to the setback from Hillside. As I indicated earlier, I could address the setback by moving the house 10 feet further into the lot. I personally would rather provide more of a usable yard area behind the house. I looked at the other homes on Hillside.  
Speaker 0     00:25:48    You know, we obviously didn't survey every house on the block, but looking at aerial photos, I feel that the average setback on Hillside is about 30 feet. We were asking for 25, I just don't think a five foot difference is perceptible to someone passing by this property. But I'll leave it up to the board if they would want the 35 foot or maybe even split the difference and do a 30 foot front yard setback. I think that would be fine as well. Item five, the applicant is required to provi provide a one car garage. So technically we need relief from that.  
Speaker 0     00:26:25    In a house of this size, a garage on the first floor would be taking up the majority of the first floor. And as I stated earlier, we did look at the house at two 20 hillside when we had put this plant together. That house does not have a garage. So this is gonna be an item to be discussed with the board as to whether or not they'd rather have a garage which would increase the size of the house and possibly require a building coverage variance as well. Moving on item six. Our proposed building height is 28 feet, seven inches. There's a recommendation to comply with 28 feet. I put in a call to the architect. I don't believe that's gonna be an issue to comply, but we would prefer to keep the 28 feet seven inches because the new building codes do require a two zone heating and cooling system.  
Speaker 0     00:27:21    One of those is gonna have to be in the attic. So the extra seven inches, based upon my review of the last plan, is actually needed to accommodate the unit in the attic. So we would ask for a seven inch increase above the 28 feet, but the zone does allow up to 35 feet for the building height. So it doesn't require variance either way. Item seven, we do provide sidewalks and we will install the six inch thick apron that's noted on the plan. Item eight is to locate trees on the property. We have no issue doing that. We would do that should the board actually grant approval on this at a plot plan, we'll provide a a tree location plan during that time. We would install street trees on both frontages. And then last two items is stormwater management. We would comply as well with stormwater management reductions. And then item 11 was just a statement of no other information was required. That was everything in the letter.  
Speaker 7     00:28:29    So I think at this point if the board has any questions of Mr. Lieber that we would be glad to address them.  
Speaker 0     00:28:35    Yeah, I think Mr. Hinterstein might have some comments on this. I'd like to ask him to step forward. You could take your slide off the screen if you would. Mr. Leber. Thank you. Thank you.  
Speaker 4     00:28:46    Yeah, thank you Mr. Chairman again. He, he went off the report. I think we do have the letters. So there is proof that he did send out the letters trying to, to sell purchase Jason property. So I'm, I'm satisfied with that. Again, my concern with the front yard setback and hillside, we've had some other 50 foot lot applications recently and this is really nothing different than what we've asked of these other 50 foot lot applications. I believe we had one last month, we had one few months prior to that. And we, we, we do notice the fact that it's a corner lot and there's two front yards. But again, there's really no reason not to comply with the front yard setback requirement along Hillside Avenue. I believe most of the homes along Hillside are at the appropriate setback. And again, it's an undersized lot. I'd love to have a bigger backyard too.  
Speaker 4     00:29:45    But the ordinance is there for a reason. Again, this is a corner property. I think site visibility on that corner is important. So my recommendation to the board would be is to maintain the, the 35 foot setback at along Hillside. And if that means a little bit smaller backyard, then so be it. It's an undersized lot. You're, you know, it is what it is. As far as the garage, that is the requirement that came into effect in the, the late seventies. There's a good chance that that house down the street at that point was billed prior to the ordinance requiring the garage. Again, the other applications we've had recently, we've made all of them re require, re require the garage as well as meet the, the coverage variance. So again, and he, again, Mr. Lieber brought it up in his testimony. You have to make every effort to comply with the ordinances that exist.  
Speaker 4     00:30:44    And I, I think the garage is important. I believe looking at the floor plan, what they'll just have to do is the living room will have to be smaller. The dining room will have to be smaller and the kitchen will have to be a lot smaller. And then you should be able to comply with the, the garage requirement. Perhaps the, the powder room and, and, and closet would have to get rearranged. But there's a way, because I've seen these, these applications and these plans come in and they've been able to, to meet the, the requirements. So again, my recommendation to the board would be the, including the garage as per the ordinance, again, the front yard setback of, of the 35 feet. And then the only other issue again was the height is, again, it is an undersized lot due to that fact. We wanna keep the, I think, house to the scale of the, of the yard. You're saying, I think you, you said Mr. Lieber that the, there's a new lawn that requires a two zone heating in such a small house or is that over a certain size? I've never heard of two zone heating cooling in a house that's usually under 2,500 square feet. You can go up to, you could, but I don't, I don't know of any requirement that requires  
Speaker 0     00:31:58    To, I was only, I was only reiterating what the architect indicated to me. I I'm not a code expert. So, but if we have to meet 28 then I'll explain to the architect, we have to figure out how to meet the 28th.  
Speaker 4     00:32:12    Yeah, an a 12 pitch on the roof is, is a very, I mean it's a nice aesthetically pleasing roof, but by all means, a seven 12 pitch is, is still relatively the same. It probably brings it down a foot at best. So I don't, I don't think it's a, it's really a big lift to just change the pitch. I think there's gonna be more than ample room in that a-frame roof for a another unit if he does need that space for a second zone. But again, the house is small enough where it could, I think pretty satisfactorily operate on one zone. Again, typically you would see that for homes that are, you know, over two to 2,500 square foot an area when you start running into the two zones, heating and cooling. But those are my comments. So as long as you know, they're willing to meet those three major items that I think were in the report, they, I think they've agreed to everything else.  
Speaker 4     00:33:10    The sidewalks we may need a corner rounding easement. They provided the eight foot easement. The engineer had noted that there may be a need for a slight corner around the easement, which won't impact really anything other than the fact that if the sidewalk radius were to change on the corners, we'd have the ability to, you know, flare 'em a little bit more, not make their corners on the sidewalk so tight. But I think other than that they've, they've complied with everything that we've asked. So if they comply with those three items, I really don't see any, any major issues with the application. Again, it is an undersized lot and I believe his planning testimony was, was on point.  
Speaker 0     00:33:55    Thank you. Mr. Hinterstein, any other members of the board have any questions or comments? Yeah, I have a question. Steve Weisman, I have a question for him. Sure. When we talk about the coverage, is it just the residence or would it include the paved driveway?  
Speaker 4     00:34:12    Our coverage variance is strictly building coverage. It would be that, so again, they're not asking for coverage variance. I, I think, you know, if they have to increase it up to the 20%, I'm fine with that. They have that ability to go up to the 20% and add the garage. But you know, I don't feel that, again, the house could be made small, the floor plan could be made smaller inside, you know, everybody who loves to have a big kitchen. But again, due to the fact that this is an undersized lot, you know, the, the room sizes have to be sized appropriately for the house and to accommodate the ordinance of having a garage in this particular case. So to answer your question though, Steve, we do not have an impervious coverage ordinance in town. It's strictly building coverage. So the driveway doesn't count towards that ordinance. It's strictly building coverage.  
Speaker 0     00:35:06    Okay, thank you. Okay, thank you. Any other members of the board? Well, hearing none Mr. Elli, are you moving forward with anyone else or  
Speaker 7     00:35:18    No, I just had a comment. If in, in light of the fact that the applicant is willing to, to comply with the installation of the garage, we would like the ability to expand the coverage from the 19 to the 20, which is permitted. At least that'll give him a little more room in the interior of the house with the garage to, to make the rooms, especially on the first floor a little bit bigger. So we would like to have the ability to, to increase the, the size of the, of the building to have 20% coverage in order to accommodate the garage. Which we understand is, is a pretty strict requirement of, of the board. Yeah,  
Speaker 4     00:36:11    I don't, I don't see any issue. You, you have up to that 20% which is basically, I would imagine these are 5,000 square foot lot. You have the ability to go to a a thousand footprint thousand square foot footprint when modifying the home. I really don't think it's gonna just to give the board, you know, a parameter. The house I think is shown at like about 40 by 24 by 40 if I'm not mistaken.  
Speaker 0     00:36:34    That's correct.  
Speaker 4     00:36:35    So you know right now it's at 960 square feet they have the ability to add about another 40 square feet perhaps to that floor plan. But yeah, I mean I don't see an issue with that. I think the important thing is trying to comply with the other ordinance. It doesn't create another variance if they go up to the 20%. So I would be okay with that.  
Speaker 0     00:36:56    Okay, thank you Henry. Okay. Hearing no other comments, I'm gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments about this application? That's  
Speaker 1     00:37:06    The first one we have was Nelson Zu.  
Speaker 0     00:37:10    Hi, how are you doing sir?  
Speaker 2     00:37:12    I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 0     00:37:19    Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:37:19    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 0     00:37:21    Nelson Zu. Five Long Street Piscataway.  
Speaker 2     00:37:25    Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:37:27    So this being, this undersized lot, it was not meant to build, be built when all the houses around here were put up and built around it. It was not permitted to do it then I don't think it should be permitted to do it Now the house trying to squeeze as you know, as much as they can into a lot like, again this undersized, I don't think it's gonna be beneficial at all for anyone in the neighborhood. One car garage. When you have a three bedroom house, what do you do with the other drivers? It's really hard to maneuver around hillside when you, when you park on the street, especially when the snows. So I mean there's no really place to put the cars unless you have a place like a garage or something to pull the cars in. So it becomes, I think, a problem for all the neighbors around it.  
Speaker 0     00:38:26    You know, I, I'm against the building of the, of the house there. Thank, thank you. And the was no, I, I feel heard there was an option to purchase the lot. I did spoke to the, the, not this lot but the other lot on the hillside in Long Street and I believe the builder will sell the lot after it gets approved for a, for a building before that. I don't think right now the way the lot is, I don't think it's an option to be purchase for anything. At least I didn't see a price for that and the letter that we received. Thank you Mr. Za. Thank you. Okay,  
Speaker 1     00:39:09    The next one's a telephone number ending in zero two eight zero  
Speaker 2     00:39:15    Telephone number two eight present.  
Speaker 8     00:39:19    Can you hear me? Yes,  
Speaker 2     00:39:20    Yes, yes sir. I need your name and address.  
Speaker 8     00:39:24    Mahmud Ahmed. 1 38 Hillside.  
Speaker 2     00:39:28    Mr. Ahmed, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? You swear that the testimony you're about to the truth? Yes.  
Speaker 8     00:39:35    Thank  
Speaker 2     00:39:36    You. Go ahead sir.  
Speaker 8     00:39:39    I object to the, this proposal of building the house. I think it'll create a lot of problem into our community. First it'll create more traffic, it'll lower our house value, it will change the whole community looks. There's no house like this in the neighborhood. There's a lot of empty corner lots like this. There's not of them built earlier gentleman mentioned similar lot, that house built corner. But I think that one, that lot is much bigger. I don't know exactly which location he's talking about. But anyway, there's no, this similar lot has this kind of house. This, they're asking for a lot of things less than normal. So it's gonna change our community. And like the earlier gentleman says, where are they gonna park the car? The, during the snow everybody parks their car in the driveway. These people would not be able to do that. So it's gonna create more problem for us, lower our price of our houses and going to create, change the community negatively. I have a couple other friends also I talked to. Nobody received a letter for offer to sell this property. I talked to several neighbors, they didn't receive any letter and we, I did not receive any letter either. That's all I have to say. I object to the proposal for building  
Speaker 2     00:41:07    The only ones that are supposed to receive the letters or the adjacent property owners. The right, the next door neighbors. So  
Speaker 8     00:41:14    You mean the, oh, okay. Okay.  
Speaker 0     00:41:17    Thank you sir. Appreciate it. Laura, do we have anyone else?  
Speaker 1     00:41:21    Oh yes, the next one. Kevin Rod.  
Speaker 2     00:41:24    Mr. Rod, are you, can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Good evening. Good evening. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Yes. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 9     00:41:34    Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:41:34    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 9     00:41:36    Kevin Rod. 1 7 7 Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 2     00:41:39    Thank you. Go ahead sir.  
Speaker 9     00:41:41    Yes, I have major concerns about this particular proposal. We have an increased traffic situation as it is currently on the corner of beating and ho in, in Hillside Avenue is notorious for accidents. Cars actually go very fast through the intersection and it's very known. It's, it's well known as having a accident prone area as you, as you come to Plain Street, which is the next block over. We are having accidents there also. In fact, our, our own mailman has asked us to reallocate, move our cars so he can actually come out 'cause he's already had an accident from cars speeding up and down. This particular the, the Hillside Avenue traffic fair. And we are concerned with more cars having to be on the street. It's gonna cause more problems and more traffic for us. In addition, the, the size of these homes to me, you know, in all due respect are ridiculous for this area. They are very small on a very small lot. They're almost like dollhouses for the, for the most part. And I'm very concerned about my, my particular price value of my home. In addition to that, all the neighborhoods that I've talked to, the ones that have gotten letters, even some that I don't, that they haven't are very concerned about this proposal and they don't wanna see that one or the one on one 60.  
Speaker 9     00:43:00    And we are very concerned about our neighborhood and, and the impact that's going to have traffic wise. Not, not to mention the cumbersome of homes being on top of each other. I object to this proposal.  
Speaker 2     00:43:13    Thank you Mr. Va.  
Speaker 1     00:43:16    Okay, the next one is just the letter. A  
Speaker 10    00:43:19    Hello?  
Speaker 2     00:43:22    Hello. Have your full name and address please.  
Speaker 10    00:43:24    My name is Green Kim. My last name is long. I live with the one 50th Hillside Avenue, which is the, this two houses going to build and we are in the between.  
Speaker 2     00:43:35    Okay, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Sure. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Yes. Thank you. Go ahead.  
Speaker 10    00:43:43    Yeah, so as what rental companies says they, they mentioned there's no negative impact. I totally disagree with that. The issue that it ignore is how our neighbors who are living here comes concern about, they only care about their construction. They didn't care at all about over neighbors. The road, as the previous neighbors said, the road was narrow, the road was that it cause a lot of traffic here. And when they do construction, everyone here is going to get affected. And we love our community, we love the peaceful hair. So we want to court can support us, give us the piece back. That's the first point. The second thing is the company, they are investor, they are not going to live here, but neighbors like us going to live here. So if they are, they do the investor outta the law and the regulation, then why us residential and the neighbors are going to pay for that.  
Speaker 10    00:45:05    And we thirdly, when the, when the one time they get into the land, they were in my property, they're on my land, they didn't ask anything. They stand there. I got so conscious, I I don't know why there, why people in front of my home and why people stand in my home. Nobody lock my door. Nobody ask. So if that's already how happened, how are we gonna trust when they do the construction, they are not going to affect the neighbors. The five point is the first point is we are new people moving to this community. We move to here because we want to build a family here. We want have a child here with all this stress they bring to us. I think I'm fully to against it and I believe everyone in the neighbor against it. The last  
Speaker 2     00:46:20    Go ahead ma'am. After  
Speaker 10    00:46:22    I move in here, I already bring my two young couple friends to look around the community that the time we didn't know they are going to build the house around. After that we told them of a story, they hesitate and stop. Why? Because we trust the peace. God, we, we trust the community. We want trust the back. We want, we rely, this community can bring us the peaceful.  
Speaker 2     00:46:52    Thank you ma'am. Ms. Buckley,  
Speaker 1     00:46:57    The next one is Ra Ahmed.  
Speaker 2     00:47:02    Ma'am sir ma'am can you hear me?  
Speaker 11    00:47:06    Yes. Good afternoon. This is Amara Ahmed.  
Speaker 2     00:47:08    Hi. I need to swear you in. Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 11    00:47:15    Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:47:16    Your name and address please?  
Speaker 11    00:47:18    RA Ahmed 1 38 Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 2     00:47:20    Thank you Ma'am, go ahead.  
Speaker 11    00:47:25    Yeah, I agree with the previous neighbor's testimony pretty much I object pretty much I agree with everything they said. I object to this proposal, definitely no doubt it's going to increase the traffic and I'm pretty next to that per that lot. So it would re negatively impact. Definitely no doubt about it. Also, one of the gentleman mentioned that the post mailman hit somebody's car on the street because the street has not that big either. So that's very true. Happened to our car this year too, so, but eventually they paid off. But that's inconvenient for them, for me, for us. So it's, it's like very true. The traffic and the car are crowded. We don't know how many people, how many cars, you know, some people can have lot of cars or you know, depending on their lifestyle or you know, whatever the they choose to. So it is definitely negatively going to impact us as well as the landscape of the neighborhood. You know, so far is really good, nice and neat except for some, you know, traffic issue. But I completely object.  
Speaker 2     00:48:44    Thank you ma'am. Buckley  
Speaker 1     00:48:48    Esh Patel.  
Speaker 5     00:48:51    Hi yes, uhh eSSH. Patel seven Long Street Picard.  
Speaker 2     00:48:57    Okay, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth?  
Speaker 5     00:49:03    Absolute truth. Thank  
Speaker 2     00:49:04    You.  
Speaker 5     00:49:05    Go ahead. Alright, so, so I do agree with all my neighbors and when I bought the house, I, I looked at the view and everything and I said, you know what, this is the look I want. And once again, with this accident, I lost my car last year for a hit and run right on BD and Hillside. So I do agree with all my neighbors and I oppose to this proposal.  
Speaker 2     00:49:37    Thank you Mr. Patel.  
Speaker 1     00:49:40    Okay, last one is Ryan.  
Speaker 2     00:49:43    Ryan, can you hear me? Ryan,  
Speaker 1     00:49:51    Hands up. He's not muted.  
Speaker 2     00:49:55    Ryan, can you hear us?  
Speaker 1     00:50:00    Should be on, you need to unmute.  
Speaker 12    00:50:08    Hello? Can you hear  
Speaker 2     00:50:10    Meri? Is this Ryan?  
Speaker 12    00:50:11    Yes, yes. Yeah. Hi  
Speaker 2     00:50:12    Ryan. Your full name and address please.  
Speaker 12    00:50:14    My full name is Yan, y u a n and last name is r e n I live in one 50 Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 2     00:50:18    Okay, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Sure. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Yes, go ahead sir.  
Speaker 12    00:50:26    Hi. As you know from the address, I, our house is next to the, the, the two proposal plans. I think a completely object to this plan due to the following reasons since, as you know, we just moving here early this year, 2020. And I think this community is like really welcome. Like neighbors talk to us when we try to move in there, the Piscataway Township come here to inspect our house. They find that one wall is like more than one inch. It's one inch closer to the whatever garage. So we listen to that and then we knock that door and, and then let the Peace Gallery Township check again. We just completely compliance to what about the rules there. However, this is definitely see this lot, the the lot they're proposing is only half of the normal lot. This is so small. I I if you don't understand, if you don't know, you can come.  
Speaker 12    00:51:20    We are welcome to come to the real side to see how narrow it's for this lot. So if you approve this, then next time you'll be like 1000, maybe 1000 a lot. They can also fulfill a certain kind of see and apply for Avar brands in this case we'll get so chaos, chaos here. And some of the gentlemen mentioned that the plain street itself is really narrow, so there's no way for them to park the cars there. If their friends come visiting the car will be all parked along the plane street. So, which will create, make the narrow street even narrower. So that, and also I think we are the part of the public, I guess when they trying to propose this plan, it's harmful to all of the neighborhoods. That's the reason why I objected. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     00:52:05    Thank you.  
Speaker 12    00:52:07    That  
Speaker 0     00:52:07    Is all Chairman. Thank you. As usual, when it comes to building new properties in neighborhoods, there's, there's a lot of opposition and the neighbors just wanna keep everything the way it is and, and they don't wanna change. And I can appreciate that I travel, Beaty is a notorious bad road because people don't want to take River Road and it runs parallel to it. And that, that corner of Beatie and Plainfield is incredibly, they a huge stop sign there. And I, I know it well, but that's, that's the bad driving and that's not really what is a problem with that neighborhood. The property owner is allowed to build on the property that they purchased. This particular application, this particular application, they met with all the criteria that Henry and the, the engineering department put in front of them. In some cases they got actually smaller in some cases than, than they had to, to accommodate the rules and the regulations that are on the books for the Township of Piscataway.  
Speaker 0     00:53:13    If I bought a piece of property and the Township said, you've gotta follow these rules in order to build a house, and I followed those rules, I don't, I wouldn't want the Township to turn around and go, well yeah, I know we gave you those rules. We know we told you the parameters on how to build, but we still don't want to give it to you. I think it's a good application. I've seen thousands of these applications. It is a good application. The applicant has met with the criteria that we set forth and I would make a motion to approve this application. Oh  
Speaker 13    00:53:41    Wait, wait, wait, wait  
Speaker 14    00:53:43    A minute.  
Speaker 2     00:53:44    Wait  
Speaker 14    00:53:44    A minute  
Speaker 2     00:53:45    Everybody. How,  
Speaker 14    00:53:48    Wait a minute.  
Speaker 2     00:53:49    Everyone should be muted.  
Speaker 14    00:53:51    We haven't had a, we haven't had a chance to speak or say anything yet.  
Speaker 0     00:53:55    Everyone spoke. Stanley  
Speaker 1     00:53:56    Was raising his, he just started waving now I didn't see him. He didn't raise his hand.  
Speaker 13    00:54:00    He's probably been waving. No, no, we've been waving,  
Speaker 0     00:54:04    Lord, we're in a different segment. Public sec public portion is closed. No.  
Speaker 13    00:54:08    Oh,  
Speaker 14    00:54:11    Wait a minute. You didn't give us a chance to speak you.  
Speaker 0     00:54:14    We asked you to speak and you didn't raise your hand. We were waving  
Speaker 13    00:54:17    On hand. How are we gonna speak? You're calling on all these other people. You're  
Speaker 14    00:54:23    Gonna let us talk now  
Speaker 0     00:54:25    You if you, if you'd like to. Sure. And if you're just gonna say the  
Speaker 14    00:54:28    Same as you absolutely would like to here an hour to talk.  
Speaker 2     00:54:33    Okay. Sorry. I need your name and address please.  
Speaker 14    00:54:35    Stanley Smith. 1 9 3 Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 2     00:54:38    Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 14    00:54:43    I do.  
Speaker 2     00:54:44    Thank you. Go ahead.  
Speaker 14    00:54:46    Sidewalks, is it gonna put a sidewalk on Hillside and also on the side street?  
Speaker 0     00:54:52    Yes. You agree to do that? That's correct. Mr. Smith,  
Speaker 14    00:54:55    You're gonna have a sidewalk both places?  
Speaker 0     00:54:58    Yes. Yes.  
Speaker 14    00:54:59    Okay. The setback, you said the setback is only gonna be 25 feet.  
Speaker 2     00:55:05    That hasn't been determined by the board yet.  
Speaker 14    00:55:08    Okay. Now because on Hillside Avenue on our side of the street, our site, our, our setback is way beyond 35 feet.  
Speaker 14    00:55:20    Okay? And I can't see, you know, why should he be able to go only have 25 feet? That's the other, the two other lots that are on Hillside Avenue there. If you approve this one, guess what? Those two other 50 by 50 lots are also gonna be applied for. They're also gonna build on those. The other thing that I wanna point out, you know, point there's 39 trees on that lot. One 60 is the builder gonna cut down all 39 of them, he's gonna cut 'em down. Is it gonna put 'em back? We need all the trees we can get this climate Cahn climate change thing is saying, hey, you know, we need all the trees we can get. The other thing is, I think this building, if you put it up there, it's definitely gonna bring down our property values  
Speaker 13    00:56:09    Only because it's so very, very small and it doesn't comply with the rest of the houses on the street.  
Speaker 2     00:56:15    Ma'am, I need your name and address please.  
Speaker 13    00:56:17    Eileen Smith. 1 9 3 Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 2     00:56:20    Could you raise your right hand?  
Speaker 13    00:56:22    It's raised. Do  
Speaker 2     00:56:23    You swear the testimony you're giving is the truth?  
Speaker 13    00:56:26    Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:56:26    Thank you.  
Speaker 13    00:56:28    Recently on Hillside Avenue, ma'am, a home sold for I believe $565,000. So building this very small house next to all of our other houses is certainly gonna decrease our property value, not increase it, which is what we want. Piscataway is a very large Township, lots of land to build on, not these two tiny lots that you're squeezing a house onto. Just leave the trees and the way they are now, it just adds a little something to the street, which is loaded with houses. Right now if you ride up Hillside Avenue, so we disapprove of this 100%.  
Speaker 2     00:57:15    Okay, ma'am. Thank you Mr. Chairman, could I jump in here for a minute? Yes. Yes. Mr. Kinneally, please. The, the law in the state of New Jersey says that on these undersized lot cases, if there is no land available next door to make this a conforming lot, this board is required to grant approvals for lot area lot width and lot frontage. So you're required to grant that. That's the law. That's the law In the state of New Jersey, the applicant cited the Almi case. It is accurate. It is the law in the state up until today, the issues you need to decide are the front setback on to hillside.  
Speaker 14    00:57:56    What's it gonna do with the trees? They gonna cut 'em all down. Is they gonna plan in and retired  
Speaker 2     00:58:03    Law? The public  
Speaker 14    00:58:04    Question?  
Speaker 4     00:58:04    Mr. Can Mr. Cornelia just, if I may just to answer that question. The requirement is, is that they have to locate all trees that are three inches in caliper or greater on the property. They're entitled to cut down what they need to cut down in order to build the lot. We can make and preserve as many trees as possible. That won't be in conflict with the construction. And the ordinance also states that they're required to replace every tree that they remove on onsite if possible. And if not, then they have to make a contribution to the townships tree replacement farm. Well,  
Speaker 14    00:58:40    I would like to see that fall when we  
Speaker 4     00:58:42    See, when we see that plan, we will try to make 'em save or preserve as many trees as possible that again, aren't gonna be impacted. We, we don't want is for them to impact the trees and then have them have 'em die. So, but that's the requirement. So they do have to preserve what they can replace whatever they remove.  
Speaker 14    00:59:03    Now the other two lots, one 40 and the other one below that, you're gonna approve those two.  
Speaker 2     00:59:09    We're only here for this one right now, sir.  
Speaker 14    00:59:12    Well, they're the same size, the same kind of thing. But if you do this one, guess what? He is gonna come back and say, well you've done that one. Now you gotta do these  
Speaker 0     00:59:20    Two.  
Speaker 13    00:59:22    There's a lot of houses on undersized lots here already. Why do we have to have more? Why can't you just leave these two lots as they are and go find other land? Why can't the builder find other land in Piscataway? We're loaded with empty lots, big lots all over the town. Doesn't have to be right here. None of us want it. We all live here. We have  
Speaker 2     00:59:44    Mr the Chairman. You may wanna close the public portion. Yes,  
Speaker 0     00:59:46    I we have. That's  
Speaker 1     00:59:47    What I had a lot of applications, Chairman.  
Speaker 0     00:59:50    Okay, well well I closed the public portion. I already told you. I'm glad you put the, on the record about the law. The, the applicant's met with every criteria that's been set forth by, by state law has something to do with Piscataway. If we were to de deny this application, all the applicant has to do is take us to court at Piscataway expense and, and the judge would find in their favor. So like I said earlier, it's a good application. I'm sorry, so many people oppose it, but that's not, I should tell you something. Yeah, well I know if somebody, you know, you feel passionate about it, I can appreciate that. But can you appreciate the fact that the Township attorney has said that it's the law they've met with every criteria to develop upon the property and if we don't grant it, like I said, they'll, they'll take us to court and they'll win and only, it'll only cost the taxpayers money for the residents of Miss Hadaway. So I made a motion to approve the application with the three points that Mr. Hinterstein made. Can I get a second? So is,  
Speaker 2     01:00:50    Is that for the 35 foot setback to Hillside,  
Speaker 0     01:00:53    35  
Speaker 4     01:00:54    Foot, step back to Hillside.  
Speaker 0     01:00:56    The 28 foot.  
Speaker 4     01:00:58    28 foot height. Height requirement Max  
Speaker 2     01:01:02    Requiring the garage  
Speaker 4     01:01:03    And then all the other conditions of the Yes. The impact report. Correct.  
Speaker 7     01:01:07    But we will have the ability to expand to 20% coverage.  
Speaker 2     01:01:11    Yes sir.  
Speaker 4     01:01:12    Correct.  
Speaker 0     01:01:15    Yeah. Again, I put it, I approved this. I need a second. If I could, I'll second it. Thank you Mr. Weisman. Call the roll.  
Speaker 1     01:01:24    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Blo? Yes. Mr. Haka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? No. Mr. Yes. And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     01:01:37    Yes.  
Speaker 2     01:01:40    We'll memorialize this in a written document on our next meeting and send that copy to you.  
Speaker 7     01:01:47    Thank you. We're gonna do the next one?  
Speaker 0     01:01:51    Yes. Let's go to item number 8 23 dash ZB dash 69 V. Bronco Development  
Speaker 7     01:01:59    And Mayor their mines up already. I'm out.  
Speaker 2     01:02:07    Mr. Mi, are you on that one too  
Speaker 7     01:02:11    Situated with those plans? Just, okay, we're ready.  
Speaker 2     01:02:31    Go ahead, please proceed.  
Speaker 7     01:02:33    Again, this is a very similar situation than what we had at 1 46 Hillside. I think the best thing to do is again, have our planner put the planning testimony on. So at this time I'm gonna call Mark Lieber.  
Speaker 2     01:02:51    Mr. Lieber, could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 0     01:02:58    Yes, I do.  
Speaker 2     01:02:59    Thank you.  
Speaker 0     01:03:02    Hi, good evening. I'm going to just put on my screen the variance plan that was submitted.  
Speaker 0     01:03:16    I'll give you some background on this property. This is one 60 Hillside Avenue. It's block 7,007. It's lot number 22. This is located in your R 10 residential zone and this property is 50 feet wide and a hundred foot depth, which means the area is 5,000 square feet. This is a isolated vacant lot. It's a corner lot there. Our side street to the right is Long Street. Unfortunately I have to go through the testimony in detail as similar to the prior case. So if you just bear with me while I get set up here. The law was created through subdivision. A filed map was recorded in the clerk's office on October 29th, 1930 as case 1321 dash 7 25. I do have a copy of that map on that map. All the lots in this neighborhood in question were 25 foot lots. This particular property was known as block four lots, 10 and 11.  
Speaker 0     01:04:23    And I guess through the decades that have elapsed, many of these lots were combined with adjacent lots into various sizes. Some of them are 75 by a hundred, some are a hundred by a hundred. There were a couple of 50 by a hundred foot lots left. This being one of them in the R 10 zone, a conforming lot does require 10,000 square feet. We have 5,000 square feet existing minimum lot width of a hundred feets required. And we have 50 feet along Hillside Avenue. We propose a single family three bedroom dwelling. The overall footprint is 24 by 40, which is a 928 square foot first floor once you deduct in the front. The second floor is the same area. So the total square footage is thousand eight six square. We depicted a two car driveway off street and we were proposing to extend sidewalk along both frontages of the property. Now, you know, I just want to concede, given the comments we received on the prior application, we were proposing here a 25 foot front yard setback on Hillside Avenue. It's our intention to increase at the 35 foot front yard setback. We will provide the one car garage as well and reduce the roof height to 28 feet. So I do wanna put that on the record.  
Speaker 0     01:05:51    As far as the difficulties in developing the lot. When you apply a 35 foot front yard and a 10 foot side yard, you're only left with five feet to construct a dwelling, which does present serious challenges. There is a house 2, 2 20, which I did look at when we were putting this plant together. It's a similar situation. It's a 50 foot wide corner lot. It has a single family dwelling on it. That house does not have a garage, but we're gonna provide a garage now our building coverage is 19.2%. The maximum permitted is 20% and we do intend to comply with the 20% limitation. Unfortunately, the Township doesn't have a grandfathering clause in the book regarding undersized lots. So I, you know, went further and I will reference the well-known Almi versus Lacey Township Board of Adjustment case, which gives guidance to zoning boards and how to deliberate an undersized lot application.  
Speaker 0     01:06:55    You know, we have to carry our burden of proof. We have to touch on both the positive and negative criteria, but we also have to demonstrate that we did make an effort to bring the lot into conformity. The applicant tonight did send letters to the adjacent homeowners, both on long and hillside. No response was received. You know, he is offering to sell his property, to purchase their property to bring us into conformity, but it doesn't seem that that's gonna be practical. The next item is to submit plans for the proposed house, which indicate its layout and the appearance on the outside, and to try our best to comply with the side yard setbacks and to locate the house in an appropriate place on the lot, given the constraints that we're working with. Lastly, when you address the yard requirements for this type of development, the purpose of that is to try not to violate any traditional zoning purposes such as air, light and open space.  
Speaker 0     01:07:58    Now, when the board evaluates an application like this, they should consider the testimony, determine if additional information is required, and make findings of fact based upon the record and consider whether in lieu of denying the application, you can approve it subject to reasonable conditions that would more or less modify the proposal to minimize any negative impact. In other words, make it better. And then lastly, to be conscientious of the fact that an outright denial could amount to a confiscation of land, thus requiring condemnation by the municipality where the town would have to purchase the land.  
Speaker 0     01:08:36    So there is no additional land available. I looked at the specific goals of zoning as outlined in the code book at chapter 21 dash two and item C is air light and open space. And again, you know, we will comply with the Hillside Avenue setback at 35 feet and the rear yard setback at 25 and the side yard setback at 10 on Long Street. I'm at a 16 foot setback, which does require variance and that was a minimum suggestion by the planner. And I also wanna point out that we heard comments. Normally I don't like to reference another application, but the comment is pertinent to this application as well about the width of these side streets. These roads are 30 feet wide, which are not considered narrow under any standard. In fact, if these side streets were constructed today, the standards today would require 28 foot wide.  
Speaker 0     01:09:31    So 30 foot wide roads does allow for ample off street parking and a house is not a significant traffic generator. When you enter this neighborhood, there's a couple of hundred houses in this immediate vicinity. The addition of one house on this corner is definitely not considered a traffic generator in any way. The next thing I wanted to point out is item E, which was the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations in the Almi case. Most towns have typically ignored these lots for many years until recently when the demand for housing has escalated, it is an a permitted use, a residence is allowed in the zone. Unfortunately this lot has been created almost a hundred years ago and for whatever reason, prior owners did not choose to enter this process of applying to the zoning board. However, we're here tonight, you know, with a design that we would like you to consider. And then lastly, item G is to provide for sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses, which includes residential. And I do wanna point out that the purpose of that clause is so not to introduce a nuisance to a neighborhood. In other words, you know, to bring in a drive-through restaurant into a residential area, something of that nature. This is a permitted use in a zone that allows for this use. And when that zone was designed, they already took into account the roadway network and the, the capacity for roadway traffic.  
Speaker 0     01:11:14    In essence, you know, we are taking a lot which is underutilized and we are prepare providing a a dwelling, which would most likely be a more affordable dwelling, perhaps a first time buyer. I heard somebody mention they had friends looking in the area. You know, this would be a brand new house, which is more modern than existing housing stock, which tends to attract new buyers. There are typically, you know, negatives associated with applications. Usually it's when you're working in wetlands, floodplain stream carders where introducing a traffic generator or things of that nature. But I feel that the only negative in this case is the fact that this lot is undersized. That's the main negative.  
Speaker 0     01:12:03    But in summary, I think the application is really about compatibility and I don't think a single family dwelling is uncompatible with the neighborhood. We did our best to comply with the ordinance requirements for this zone and we did size the house appropriately for the lot. There are a mixture and a variety of housing sizes in this area in addition to lot sizes as well. And I don't think there's a substantial detriment to the public good or that we're gonna impair the zoning plan if the board were to approve this. And I also feel that if the board were to outright deny it, then it would exact undue hardship because the lot would be zoned into in utility.  
Speaker 0     01:12:48    If there's any questions, I'll be happy to take questions. I do have the letter revised September 28th from the board planner. I'll explain item one as a statement, which we have to comply with. Item two, we did send out buy sell letters. Item three, we maintain the 16 foot setback. It actually says Plain Street, it should be Long Street, it's just a clerical error. We will maintain a 35 foot setback from Hillside as item four. We will provide a one car garage as item five. We'll reduce the roof height to 28 feet. That's item six. We are providing sidewalk on both frontages, which was item seven and item eight. We will prepare a tree location plan. We'll locate every tree three inches or greater on the property. It's not our intent to clear cut this lot. We do wanna retain, you know, the trees that are outside the building area and preserve those. In addition, we'll provide street trees on both frontages. That was item nine. And then we'll provide a stormwater management system to mitigate any increase in runoff from the additional impervious areas. And then lastly, item 11 was just a NA item that there were no other documents requested.  
Speaker 0     01:14:02    If there's any questions, I'll be happy to answer.  
Speaker 2     01:14:16    Mr. Chairman, you're muted,  
Speaker 0     01:14:20    I apologize. Any other members of the board or, or Henry, would you wanna address any issues?  
Speaker 4     01:14:25    No, I think he covered everything in this one. Similar to the last application, I can think the planning testimony was on point and they've agreed to all the conditions that we've outlined in our staff.  
Speaker 0     01:14:39    Okay. Any other members of the board have any questions? Mr. Me? Maryvale, you're, that's all for you so I can open it to the public? That's correct. Okay. I'd like to open it to the public. Any members of the public have any questions or comments about this application?  
Speaker 2     01:14:57    My marker.  
Speaker 1     01:14:59    Same people, the one with the letter A,  
Speaker 2     01:15:08    The letter A present,  
Speaker 1     01:15:10    You need to unmute. Okay, we'll skip her then. Nelson Ziana again.  
Speaker 2     01:15:21    Mr. Ziana, could I have your name and address please?  
Speaker 6     01:15:25    Nelson Ziana. Five Long Street, Piscataway, New Jersey.  
Speaker 2     01:15:29    Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 6     01:15:33    Yes.  
Speaker 2     01:15:34    Go ahead sir.  
Speaker 6     01:15:36    Mr. Chairman, you live in Piscataway?  
Speaker 0     01:15:38    Yes I do.  
Speaker 6     01:15:39    Okay. You mentioned on the last case that you will not spend our tax dollars to go and fight this, right? You are supposed to be working in basically defending us, right? On some way, right?  
Speaker 0     01:15:56    Can I, can I clarify that? The reason why I wouldn't be in favor of that is because we, we, we'd lose it would be, it would be wasted dollars to try and defend a case where you won.  
Speaker 6     01:16:08    How much, how many dollars did we waste by having you sit in there and not fighting for us, but going against us? This person builder bought the slots knowing that he could not build it. Okay? That was the re when he bought the slots, he was not allowed to build, right? That's what we going through this process to get permission for it to build. Correct? Because if, if we, if he was allowed to, if he bought this property, he was allowed to build, we didn't have to go through this process he would've built many years ago, right? So you are not, you're not taking us in any consider consideration at all. You basically just ignore what we thought about it, right? And you approve it. That's not fair. Now that's not fair at all. Okay? There's gotta be a next step somehow that works for us as the long time neighbors or residents in scattering.  
Speaker 6     01:17:07    I pretty much live here all my life. Life, okay? And I expect a little more outta you than just throwing your hands up in the air and approving it, okay? Through a Zoom meeting, okay? The builder did not allow anyone to purchase this lot, okay? Because Fuer allowed me to purchase the lot at the market. Fair value. Now before it gets accepted to build, I tell you what, on record I will buy it. It's $80,000, okay? That was never an option for me. I did receive the letter to purchase and was not an option, okay? Because builder wants to wait for the law to get approved and sell it, then obviously at a higher market value, okay? So I,  
Speaker 0     01:17:55    I appreciate your opinion and I'm sorry you feel that way.  
Speaker 6     01:17:58    So purchase is not an option. So what he's saying about purchase, it was, no, I have never an option. Okay? And he can basically buy our properties because then that will make my property an undersized property. So there's no way you could do that. Okay? Another thing I wanna let you know is, so, and please answer this on the record, this lot like minus a hundred by a hundred. If I split that two lots into two lots, 50 by a hundred, are you allowing me to build?  
Speaker 2     01:18:30    No, your, your application to subdivide would be denied.  
Speaker 6     01:18:36    But it's okay for someone sir to build an under lott. The reason it would not be, why can't I do the same as the guy in the corners? Because  
Speaker 2     01:18:45    It would not comply with the ordinances.  
Speaker 6     01:18:48    Because what? Undersized lot.  
Speaker 2     01:18:51    You can't create an undersized lot. This man is not creating an undersized lot.  
Speaker 6     01:18:56    Well this man also bought the lots knowing he cannot build,  
Speaker 2     01:19:00    He bought the lots knowing the law of the state of New Jersey that says if you have an undersized lot and you did not create it yourself, you're entitled to zoning board relief that allows you to build something on that law.  
Speaker 6     01:19:13    And where's the law and where can we look into it? And can we at least have a second hearing after we could somehow get some legal maybe advice and have a second hearing about this? I don't believe, I don't think it's good enough to us to sit here in the meeting Zoom meeting for 15 minutes and you, Mr. Chairman approve it. It's gotta be another way that we could defend our rights or at least fight little board.  
Speaker 2     01:19:42    You can always appeal any decision made by this board.  
Speaker 6     01:19:48    Okay? So how can we go and appeal this?  
Speaker 2     01:19:50    I recommend that you talk to an attorney who could represent you. Thank you sir. And the neighbors.  
Speaker 0     01:19:56    Ms. Buckley?  
Speaker 6     01:19:57    Okay. Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:20:02    Okay, the next one, the letter A again, I don't know if she's gonna unmute.  
Speaker 10    01:20:07    Yeah. Yes,  
Speaker 2     01:20:09    Your, your name and address please.  
Speaker 10    01:20:12    One 50 Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 2     01:20:14    Could you raise your right hand? Yes. Where the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 10    01:20:19    Yes.  
Speaker 2     01:20:20    Thank you. Go ahead  
Speaker 10    01:20:22    Again against the, this, this building because they against the law and you guys all agree with it, it is against the law and what's more important, everyone here doesn't about care about the neighbors. You guys says there's no other land. Please tell us why there's no other land. Why? People previously said that there are a lot of less available. The new government needs to protect the neighbors, neighbor's interest in instead of the investor. So we pay the tax here for supporting you. Support us in send off just that to build, build all this business is not, is, is is a residential area.  
Speaker 1     01:21:15    Okay, thank you. Okay, good. Mr. Chairman, you're muted. Sean, I think you froze. There you go.  
Speaker 2     01:21:34    Am I frozen?  
Speaker 1     01:21:35    No, you're, you're back. Okay, we have Ma Tesh Patel.  
Speaker 2     01:21:40    Mr Patel, your name and address please? Mr Patel. Mr. Patel,  
Speaker 5     01:21:52    Sorry I was on mute. I just unmuted myself. Your name,  
Speaker 2     01:21:55    Address again please?  
Speaker 5     01:21:56    Seven Long Street Peace Car Way.  
Speaker 2     01:21:59    And please raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 5     01:22:04    Absolute truth, thank  
Speaker 2     01:22:05    You.  
Speaker 5     01:22:06    Alright, so my first concern is with a smaller dwelling it's going to lower our property values and as I first said before when we, when I bought the house, I looked at the location, how the neighborhood looks and how the property values are going to go up, how the, all the other properties are on my street and around me in my neighborhood. So to me it's not fair that somebody wants to come in and just wants to build a house so they can make money out of their business and not consider what the property value's going to be for all the other neighbors who's been living here for years.  
Speaker 2     01:23:04    That's the application. I've got streaming video but I can't.  
Speaker 1     01:23:10    Next one is Umra Ahmed?  
Speaker 2     01:23:14    No I didn't Ahmed your name and address again please.  
Speaker 1     01:23:22    Oh wait one second. Okay, now she should be on Ms  
Speaker 2     01:23:27    Ahmed. Your name and address please.  
Speaker 11    01:23:29    Amra Ahmed. 1 38 Hillside Avenue.  
Speaker 2     01:23:32    Thank you. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 11    01:23:36    Yes,  
Speaker 2     01:23:37    Thank you. Go ahead.  
Speaker 11    01:23:39    Yeah, pretty much the same thing. I'm one of the earlier neighbor. I have the same concern and I object to it. It is going to undervalue our, our Robert more traffic and I don't know, I hear a lot of echo.  
Speaker 1     01:24:02    It's you?  
Speaker 11    01:24:04    Yes. Me? Yeah,  
Speaker 1     01:24:05    It's you because I hear you three, you have to lower your computer down or something.  
Speaker 11    01:24:10    Oh, okay second. Sorry. Yeah, I don't, I don't know. Can you hear me any better?  
Speaker 2     01:24:17    Yes.  
Speaker 11    01:24:18    Okay. Yeah, I have the same concern as pretty much other neighbors. It is going to undervalue you. Our house is and the neighborhood and is going to change the landscape and I Cahn considering all the other lands. I'm not, I don't know why they would want it to, you know, create like disturb us here and also that traffic, I don't know how many, you know, cars in going to be in there in the small area. So also I'm wondering like yeah, I understand I respect the laws and understand it, but I'm kind of like confused a little bit of the point of the hearing though it has, you know, like pretty much all, like the lot of people didn't come but they said neighbors, you know, they disagree and they don't think it's good for our neighborhood. So I was just like confused a little bit about the point of this, this, this hearing public, you know, opinion or hearing or whatever that is. So I do obje object to this one as well. Thank you. Thank you.  
Speaker 1     01:25:18    Okay, the last one is Ryan.  
Speaker 12    01:25:22    Hello everyone. Can you hear me? It's me again.  
Speaker 2     01:25:25    Yes. We need your name and address again please.  
Speaker 12    01:25:27    My name Isan, Y U A n. I live in 1 51 5 0 Hillside Avenue. So  
Speaker 2     01:25:34    My log you raise, could you raise your right hand please? Sure.  
Speaker 12    01:25:36    Yes.  
Speaker 2     01:25:36    You swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 12    01:25:39    Yes I do.  
Speaker 2     01:25:40    Go ahead sir.  
Speaker 12    01:25:41    Yeah, so my logs is just between those two logs I to build. Okay? So as you and most normally, I don't want to quote the other people saying, but actually again I beg all of the board members to come to this road, come to this lot to see what is the we of the lot street. What is the waste of this lot? Yeah, okay, once you come here you're gonna check how small. It's alright. I don't think this is a public hearing because what you hear is all opposed, but you still prove that. Then what is the purpose to do this? We just move here, we hope peace together, peace getaway, Township support us, right? You told us to knock at the door. When we try to buy the house, we listen to you, right? You said it's one inch far away. We knock the whole, we knock down the whole wall.  
Speaker 12    01:26:30    Try to fulfill your requirement. Now when you come to the lot next to us, you allow them to build the lot. Only half size, the lot permitted, which is 10,000. I have no idea what is happening there. I, when I move here, I, okay, you said you, you are restricted about those kind of rules. Yes, we'll fulfill it, right? But when it's come to the other people who want to, you do invest next lot don't the support. I totally don't understand. I feel so disappointed here. Okay? You just like disappointed. Look here, just listen to what neighbor, some neighbor we talk about live here more than 30 years did I hope some board members stand up trying to say something for them. Okay. I have no idea there. Trust us. If you come here, see what is the size lot you are not hospital. It's okay if it's like fulfill again, like the previous lady said. If it's fulfill the law, why do you have a meeting? We don't have to come here to listen to your opinions. They just build whatever it is. They come here because there's a Verizon. Here it is you who approve this, right? Not the law approved. Alright?  
Speaker 12    01:27:39    Yep. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     01:27:41    Thank you sir.  
Speaker 1     01:27:45    That is it. Chairman,  
Speaker 0     01:27:47    Okay, close the public portion and as unpopular as it probably will be to those people in the neighborhood, once again, given the facts by our attorney, we have laws we need to abide by the applicant's met with the guidelines that were put forth by the state. And you know, a lot of times we'd like to act emotionally and don't think my heart doesn't go out to those neighbors. But again, I, I think they've met with the, the criteria that was needed to get this application approved. And I would make a motion to approve the application at this time. Gotta I get a second?  
Speaker 1     01:28:26    A second I  
Speaker 0     01:28:27    Please call roll.  
Speaker 1     01:28:30    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Blo? Yes. Mr. Heca? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? No. Mr. Ellie? Yes. And Chairman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     01:28:44    Yes. We'll memorialize this and send a copy of the document to you.  
Speaker 1     01:28:50    Thank you very much everyone.  
Speaker 0     01:28:51    Have a good evening.  
Speaker 1     01:28:53    Thank you. Have  
Speaker 0     01:28:53    A good night. Let's move on to item number 1123 dash ZB dash 35 slash 36 v Piscataway development L L c.  
Speaker 17    01:29:07    Mr. Tubal, are you present? Yeah. Sorry, I just, for some reason my camera wasn't turning on, I apologize. Good evening. Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Jason s attorney for the applicant. This is an application for the property located at 1006 Dalton Road block 5 5 0 1 lot eight. The property's located in the GB zone, formally at the property there was a PAMA facility located there. So that's the property that that, that we're talking about. It's next to other commercial uses in the area right off the 2 87 ramp we're here. The use is permitted in the zone by way of conditional use for a drive-in restaurant. And the only variance that the only variances we're seeking are related to signage. And the only D variance that we're seeking here is related to signage in the sense that the conditional use requirements for a drive-in restaurant do not allow for a free new freestanding sign.  
Speaker 17    01:30:08    We have a freestanding sign located at the property already with the pizza store that was already there, but we are adding a new one or proposing a new one. We do also have variances with respect to wall signage. We have five wall signs proposed where one is permitted. We've been through your professional port reports, Mr. Chairman, members of the board from your various professionals. We believe that we can comply with those and we'll also go through them during the course of our testimony. The proposal is for a SMI slight expansion of the existing building and it's proposing a drive in sonic restaurant. And I'll just briefly go through some of the operational characteristics that we will also provide for in testimony, but I think it might be helpful for the board to know what they are while you're listening. So these store hours proposed are 8:00 AM to midnight from seven days a week, which is similar to other uses in the area.  
Speaker 17    01:31:04    There will be four to eight employees per shift depending upon whether it's a peak shift or an off peak shift. They get two to three deliveries per week of, of, of items for the store. And they get two to three trash and recycling pickups per week. And the pickup and the deliveries just to, so the board is aware, all occur when the store is closed. So there's, there's no conflict between pick, between deliveries and customers coming to the facility. So we have those two variances, the one D three for the freestanding sign that we're proposing and the C variances for the facade signs that we're proposing. So I have several witnesses, Mr. Chairman, that we plan, but we plan on calling. I have our civil engineer Matt Burch, I have our professional planner, John McDonough. I also have other witnesses in the event that there's questions from the board in the event that those witnesses are more able to answer those questions, I provided my affidavit of service and publication to the board. So you should have that. So unless there's any questions for me Mr. Chairman, I'd ask your permission to call our first witness. Please  
Speaker 2     01:32:14    Proceed.  
Speaker 17    01:32:15    Thank you very much. So the first witness I'd like to call is Matt Burch from Dynamic Engineering. So you see him, I think he has his hand raised. So Matt, if you could turn on your screen. Here we go.  
Speaker 18    01:32:33    Hi, I'm sorry if I, I missed anything. I was joining as a panelist. Few seconds.  
Speaker 17    01:32:39    So Mr. Swear in, could  
Speaker 2     01:32:41    You raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 18    01:32:46    Yes, I do.  
Speaker 2     01:32:48    Thank you. Thank you.  
Speaker 17    01:32:50    All right, Matt, if you could just go through your qualifications for the board as a civil engineer, educational background, licenses held in experience testifying as an expert before other boards in the state of New Jersey.  
Speaker 18    01:33:03    Absolutely. So my name's Matthew Burch, b e r s C h. I'm with Dynamic Engineering 1 9 0 4 Main Street, lake Cuomo, New Jersey. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey. I have a bachelor's of science in civil engineering from Rutgers University. I'm a principal with dynamic engineering. I have over 11 years of experience in the field of land development. I've testified at over 20 planning and zoning boards throughout the northeast and I've managed their design, many fast food developments, including provided testimony on those as well.  
Speaker 17    01:33:40    Thank you Mr. Chairman. Will the board accept Mr. Burch's credentials as a civil engineer? You were on mute, but I think you said please proceed. Yeah, I did. Please proceed. Sorry. That's okay. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. So Matt, why don't we get the board and the public oriented to where the site is located and some of the existing conditions on the property.  
Speaker 18    01:34:01    Absolutely. Okay. I believe I'm sharing my screen. Can everybody see that?  
Speaker 17    01:34:09    Yep. So why don't you identify this for the record and Mr. Kinneally, why don't, can we mark this as a one  
Speaker 2     01:34:16    Yeah. A one with today's date?  
Speaker 17    01:34:18    Yep. Today's date's perfect. Yes. Yep.  
Speaker 18    01:34:21    So this is an aerial map exhibit prepared by my office dated 9 28 20 23.  
Speaker 17    01:34:26    Matt, why don't you zoom in just a little bit. It looks like the image is just a little further from the screen. Just,  
Speaker 18    01:34:32    Yeah,  
Speaker 17    01:34:32    There you go. That's a little bit better go. Okay.  
Speaker 18    01:34:36    So to, to orient the board north is to the top of the page. The subject property is located directly in the center of this aerial. It's outlined with that yellow dash line, it's known as block 5 5 0 1 lot eight. The address is 1 0 0 6 Stelton Road. Subject property is located on the southbound lanes of Stelton Road, which are running north to south right here. The property is located just south of Sealy Avenue and just north of the intersection of Centennial Avenue. The property is approximately seven tenths of an acre. I'm gonna zoom in a little bit further without it getting too distorted. So on onsite today is an existing pizza restaurant. There's a bifurcated driveway on the north side of the property. There's an entrance only driveway, which then leads to the, the rear of the property, which is a, a, an open sea of asphalt and parking behind the building. And then there's also an exit only driveway on the south side of the property. Some other existing features on site include a, a freestanding sign located along the frontage, which is in front of the building along Stelton Road. Again to familiarize the board with, with the location in the surrounding area, there's an Exxon just to the north, there's a, a church and a a hotel located to the west and then to the south is the Wendy's on the right side or the east side of the, the site across Stelton Road is the Holiday Inn.  
Speaker 17    01:36:11    And what the property's also the municipal boundary with South Plainfield is across the street, correct?  
Speaker 18    01:36:16    That's correct, yeah, the Holiday Inn is in South. Plainfield.  
Speaker 17    01:36:19    Okay.  
Speaker 18    01:36:20    So the subject property is located in the GB general business zone, as Mr. Tuve mentioned, a sonic fast food restaurant with drive through as a conditional use and we don't meet one of the conditions in the, the Township zoning ordinance, which I'll touch on momentarily.  
Speaker 17    01:36:39    Alright, so why don't we go to the proposed Matt?  
Speaker 18    01:36:42    Absolutely.  
Speaker 17    01:36:44    So why don't we identify this, this will be a two and Matt, I'm assuming that this is a colorized site plan rendering of what the board already has.  
Speaker 18    01:36:53    E Exactly. This is a site plan rendering again prepared by my office dated 9 28 20 23. So this is a two.  
Speaker 17    01:37:01    Alright. And this is exactly what the board has in its packet, except you've added color and landscaping for demonstrative purposes.  
Speaker 18    01:37:07    That's correct. It's our, our site plan and our landscaping plan just colorized to make it a a bit easier for the board and residents to, to see what is happening with this development.  
Speaker 17    01:37:19    All right. So why don't you, why don't you describe the proposed condition?  
Speaker 18    01:37:23    Sure. So I'm zooming in here to the subject property. This, this exhibit is in the same orientation as the previous exhibit with north being to the top of the page, Stelton road running north to south along the east side here. So we are proposing sonic fast food restaurant, which is located here in this tan color. It is 2,380 square feet that includes 1,598 square feet of building. So that's a portion of the existing building that is to remain as well as a small building addition here, the remainder of the development or the, the building area is 782 square feet, and that consists of a covered patio. So a portion of the existing building is being removed for purposes of this patio.  
Speaker 17    01:38:13    All right. So there, there was an, there was an item that wanted, wanted clarification on that in the traffic report. So can you, in the traffic review letter, so what's the ultimate square footage of the building or the proposed area?  
Speaker 18    01:38:24    So the existing building is 2054 square feet. If you add the, the freezer and the shed that are on site, that totals 2,251 square feet in existing conditions under proposed conditions, there's 2,380 square feet of building and covered outdoor seating area. Great.  
Speaker 17    01:38:44    All right. Why don't you walk through the rest of the site?  
Speaker 18    01:38:47    Absolutely. So additional improvements include a, a single drive through, there's the outdoor seating area. There's eight parking stalls under a canopy that also ha provide the capability to order and have food delivered directly to your car. That's under, underneath a 1000 point hundred 90 square foot canopy. There's an additional 10 standard stalls as well as one a d a stall. Additional improvements are trash enclosure, a full bypass lane modified entrance and exit driveways as well as landscaping, lighting and new utilities. And I'll touch on all of these a little bit more as we proceed. So as Mr. Tve mentioned earlier, we don't meet one of the conditional use requirements and that is the proposing of a freestanding sign. So just to get that on the, on the record up front, that freestanding sign is located along the east side of the building facing Stelton Road southbound and northbound.  
Speaker 18    01:39:54    So as I proceed with explaining the site, I'd like to touch on access first. We do have that bifurcated driveway, which is similar to the existing condition. On the north side of the development, there's an entry only driveway. The exit only driveway is in the, the exact location as the existing driveway that's on the south side of the development. So as you enter the site, you proceed past the Sonic restaurant and you proceed to the open parking area. You have the 10 angled parking stalls to the north side, and you have the, the eight canopy stalls on the south side, as one as that, as well as that 180 d a stall. As you proceed through the development to the rear on the west side, you'll come to a, a radius, a curb radius where the drive-through lane will start. So you'll have a drive through lane on the inner side of the radius, as well as a bypass lane on the outside of the radius. The drive through lane will bring you to an ordering station. It's a a covered kiosk with a menu board and an ordering intercom. Once you place your order, you'll proceed through the drive-through lane and pick up your order at the drive-through window, which is on the, really the window's on the west side of the, the main building area. After that pickup window, customers will join with the, the customers leaving that bypass lane and proceed to the, the exit drive.  
Speaker 18    01:41:30    So I'd like to mention the trash enclosure and the northwest corner of the property is a 10 foot by 20 foot masonry enclosure. It will house two separate dumpsters. Those are six cubic yard dumpsters, one's for trash and one's for recycling. Mr. Tuve mentioned the trash and cardboard pickup times earlier, so I'll leave that as he said it. Same thing with deliveries. The only item I'd like to, to mention with deliveries is that there is no dedicated unloading zone. Those deliveries occur overnight when the, the use is not in operation. So the SU 30 truck can park and stage wherever he needs to within the asphalt drive aisles and parking area. So with the, the overall site and the layout explained, I'd like to note that there are no new bulk variances being requested as part of this application. Right.  
Speaker 17    01:42:28    So Matt, for example, the building coverage we're 60% is permitted in the zone, we're well under that at around thir almost 14%, correct?  
Speaker 18    01:42:36    That's correct.  
Speaker 17    01:42:37    And all, all setbacks are met, building heights are met and we comply with the parking requirement?  
Speaker 18    01:42:42    That is correct. Okay.  
Speaker 17    01:42:44    Do you want to, it's up to you, but would you like to maybe go into landscaping next since that was in Mr. Henderson's letter regarding some comments?  
Speaker 18    01:42:52    Absolutely. Sure. So we are proposing a total of 107 new plantings on site. They are scattered throughout the development. They consist of a combination of evergreen and deciduous shrubs as well as three new shade trees to replace three trees that are being removed. The, the site and the landscaping will be irrigated, so an irrigation plan will be provided separately. And there was a comment in the, the staff report that we received with regards to enhancing some of the landscaping on site. So we would agree to, to work with the, the board engineer and the town to enhance the landscaping as as requested and we'll, we'll do that to their satisfaction.  
Speaker 17    01:43:36    All right. So to keep it simple, you'll agree to comply with the landscape comments set forth in the, or in the engineering letter from the department division of Engineering Planning and development dated September 28th, 2023.  
Speaker 18    01:43:48    Yes. Okay.  
Speaker 17    01:43:51    You wanna talk about lighting?  
Speaker 18    01:43:53    Sure. So we're proposing eight new area lights. Those are pole mounted lights and they are scattered throughout the development around the perimeter. They're all facing inward towards the interior of the property. These are mounted at 22 feet. They are l e d light fixtures. It's a low profile design, full cutoff and downward facing. There's no building mounted lighting. However, there are string lights that are used to light the outdoor seating area. So we are requesting a waiver from the, the light levels at the property line. There's a max of 0.5 foot candles permitted. However, however we are exceeding that we're up at 2.8 foot candles along the northern and southern property lines adjacent to the Exxon and Wendy's. I don't think that's a, a significant deviation as both the Exxon and Wendy's also have their site lighting right along the property line.  
Speaker 17    01:44:57    Alright. And Matt, just regarding parking, just while we're there, there was a comment regarding providing one ev charging station. Is that acceptable? Yes. Okay. And then there was a comment about the right of way dedication that you'll work, you'll work with the county on that?  
Speaker 18    01:45:14    Yes, we have submitted an application to the county. We do have review comments, however, we are waiting to be heard by the board before acting on those. But yes, we will agree to comply.  
Speaker 17    01:45:24    And all sidewalks curbing and the parking spaces will meet all a d a requirements?  
Speaker 18    01:45:31    Yes, that is correct.  
Speaker 17    01:45:32    Okay. And I believe there was also a comment, lemme see it here, regarding all broken or damaged repair along road would be replaced?  
Speaker 18    01:45:42    Yes. Okay.  
Speaker 17    01:45:44    All right. I'm sorry, please continue.  
Speaker 18    01:45:49    The only other technical detail I'd like to, to touch on is regarding stormwater and utilities. So as for utilities, we are proposing new water, sewer, electric and gas services to the building as needed. Those, the infrastructure for those utilities is all located within the Stelton road right of way. So as new connections are needed, those utilities are, are available. As far as stormwater, we are proposing a series of inlets and conveyance piping that eventually routes stormwater to the exact same location that water is routed today. So we are maintaining those existing drainage patterns, which eventually discharges into the infrastructure in Staton Road.  
Speaker 17    01:46:39    All right. And, and Matt, just two other comments and I wanna make sure we address from the September 28th letter before we get get into the signage, is all rooftop equipment will conform with the township's ordinances?  
Speaker 18    01:46:50    Yes.  
Speaker 17    01:46:51    Okay. And you have no issue obviously having the application reviewed by the Township Fire Commissioner for based to make sure that they're satisfied with the plan as well?  
Speaker 18    01:47:00    No issues here.  
Speaker 17    01:47:01    Okay, great. All right. So if you could maybe first start with the freestanding sign. Just show us location based on where we're we're proposing it versus where it is today, and then if you can, and then go into the building and the, the building mounted signage after that.  
Speaker 18    01:47:16    Absolutely. So the, the freestanding signs, I'm gonna zoom in a little bit, is located in front of the, the restaurant. It's lo it's here noted by small blue rectangle. And then there's directional signs, which are noted by smaller blue rectangles. I'd like to note that there's wall-mounted signage on all four facades. There's one sign located on the, the front facing east. There's one on the north side, there's one on the west side, and there are two signs on the south side, which I'll explain momentarily. So with that said, I'd like to bring up the, the signage exhibit. Okay. The signage exhibit. This  
Speaker 17    01:48:03    Is, this is the proposed freestanding sign, correct?  
Speaker 18    01:48:06    Yeah, it shows all the signs, but really I just wanted to talk about the freestanding and directional signs. And I have a, another exhibit that I can show all of the building mounted signage on.  
Speaker 17    01:48:15    All right, so we'll mark this as a three counsel. Is that okay? Yes, please. Thank you. Alright. Oh, sorry. Alright, go ahead Matt.  
Speaker 18    01:48:22    This exhibit is titled signage exhibit. It was prepared by my office dated 9 28 20 23. So the, the freestanding sign is here in the bottom left corner. It contains the, the sonic logo, which is this, I guess it's kind of like a star type shape with a blue outline, white background and red channel letters. We are requesting a, a variance for the, the sign area. This sign is 52.7 square feet, whereas the maximum allowed sign is 32 square feet. I would like to note that the dimension we're providing is a complete rectangle around the perimeter of the extent of the sign, whereas if you measured just the sonic red lettering, that's only 11.7 square feet. And if you measure the sign itself, it's only 34.5 square feet. So just a few feet, fair, square feet larger than allowed. And the height of the sign is 20 feet.  
Speaker 17    01:49:24    And you include the reader board. Did you include the reader board as well in the calculation?  
Speaker 18    01:49:28    The reader board is not included in that calculation. I believe we, we have a comment from the, the staff report regarding removal of the, the reader board. So we would agree to remove that. Okay. So all the areas that I mentioned don't, do not include the reader board.  
Speaker 17    01:49:47    Okay. And just if you can go back to the site plan, just indicate where that's gonna be located and in relation to also where the existing freestanding sign is located as well.  
Speaker 18    01:49:59    Absolutely. So that sign is located in front of the restaurant. It faces northbound for the southbound traffic on Stelton Road. I'd like to note that there is a, a slight curve in Stelton Road. There's also the Exxon fueling canopy, which is just directly north of our site. So we do feel that a freestanding sign pole mounted at, at 20 feet high is appropriate for this area for site identification and visibility prior to approaching the, the entrance driveway. Okay. And this sign is, it's generally in the, the same location as the existing freestanding sign.  
Speaker 17    01:50:36    Alright. And it'll, and it complies with the requirements for height as well as setback, correct?  
Speaker 18    01:50:41    That's correct.  
Speaker 17    01:50:42    Okay. Alright. You wanna talk about the wall mounted signs?  
Speaker 18    01:50:47    Yep. I just want to touch on the directionals quickly. So I noted that there's a directional sign at both the entrance and exit drives. This is, this exhibit here shows the design of those directionals. There are 4.7 square feet and three feet in height. And you're looking at the enter here as well as the, the exit sign. There's no specific standards for directional, so we believe that they're, they're accepted by the Township. So with that said, I'd like to bring up one more exhibit. This exhibit, I believe it's going to be a four. Yep.  
Speaker 17    01:51:30    Alright. And just I identify it Matt and just provide the date as well.  
Speaker 18    01:51:35    Yep. The title of this exhibit is Photos of Other Prototype Buildings and Canopy Elevations. It was the, the page number is PB three here, and it was prepared by G 1 41 architecture. The last revision date is 9 30 20 22. I believe this was submitted as part of our application.  
Speaker 17    01:51:55    Yep, it was.  
Speaker 18    01:51:57    So this exhibit is some photos of other sites, but it shows the exact same signage that we're proposing. We think it, it gives a good picture of, of what is being proposed. So it was easy to the easiest to explain to the board. So as Mr. Tuve mentioned earlier, we are proposing five wall-mounted signs, whereas one is permitted. So we are requesting a variance from that requirement to start the front facade facing Stelton Road will contain this, this symbol, this is the same symbol that's on the, the freestanding sign. So it has the blue outline, white background with the red channel letters, and this is 52.7 square feet on the south side of the, the building facing the Wendy's. You'll have these two signs here. So first we'll start with the, the Sonic. This is the white channel letters with a really a, a red outline. And this sign is 17.7 square feet. And then there's this cherry Sonic Cherry logo, which is a red cherry with a a blue stem. And this is 54.4 square feet. I should just note that this is not the exact same building and the building that is subject to this application as the drive through window further towards the back. And then this sign would be closer to the front. But I'm really just kinda showing you what the signs look like on a general facade.  
Speaker 17    01:53:26    Yeah. And, and the, the, the actual design of the building is similar to what's being proposed as it relates to colors and, and all those things. Correct?  
Speaker 18    01:53:33    The exact same color scheme? That's correct.  
Speaker 17    01:53:35    Okay. And then let's go, let's go to the, the last two wall signs.  
Speaker 18    01:53:40    Yep. So the, on the north side facing the Exxon, it's the same white channel letter sign, so 17.7 square feet. And honestly on the west side it's this same white channel letter sign. All right. With a, a red outline. So again, 17.7 square feet. So Matt, just easiest to show it here.  
Speaker 17    01:54:03    Matt, can you go back to the site plan please?  
Speaker 18    01:54:05    Absolutely.  
Speaker 17    01:54:06    All right. So just, just I think it might be also helpful just point out where those signs are located in relation to the, just the site so the board can see the site in relation to the signs. Yep.  
Speaker 18    01:54:17    So on the front of the, the building here facing East, this is gonna be that Sonic brand logo. So that that star type shape sign that's located here. And then the Sonic channel letters, those white channel letters will be located here on the, the north side, towards the front as well as on the west side on the, the rear facade. And then on the south facade really facing like Stelton Road northbound traffic. And then that cherry symbol would be in the rear again on the south facade towards the, the rear of the building.  
Speaker 17    01:54:54    Okay. And, and although we needed a variance for the number, the dimensions of those signs based on the ordinances, based on the ordinance which deals with percentage of facade cover, we do comply with those. They all comply dimensional, correct?  
Speaker 18    01:55:08    That's correct. Okay.  
Speaker 17    01:55:10    Alright. So Matt, if there's any comment that we missed in the, in the September 28th letter from Mr. Hinterstein, you'll agree to comply with those comments, correct?  
Speaker 18    01:55:20    Yes,  
Speaker 17    01:55:21    Yes. If I didn't mention one, I apologize. We, we we're stipulating to working with any technical comments there. So I believe, oh, Mac, he just review any outside agency approvals that you might need, just so the board is aware as well.  
Speaker 18    01:55:36    Absolutely. So we have submitted to the county, we have a review letter and we will proceed with resubmission as a condition of, of approval of the, the Township. And I believe civil erosion is handled by the municipality. So really the outside agency is the county at the moment.  
Speaker 17    01:55:56    Okay, great. All right, Mr. Chairman, that concludes my directive, Mr. Burch. We're happy to answer any questions or if you'd like me to proceed with the next witness before questions up to you,  
Speaker 0     01:56:06    I'm gonna ask anyone on the board if they have any questions for this witness. Henry, they state stated that they're gonna meet with all the site impact regulations. They said  
Speaker 4     01:56:22    That correct, but there's a few I think that we need some clarification on. Yeah,  
Speaker 0     01:56:27    Please proceed.  
Speaker 4     01:56:28    You know, there was one comment about the building and I just wanna make sure again, we got a lot of colorful, linear, vertical elements going all around this building. I don't have a big issue with them on the side, but as I stated in the, in the report, I think we like the front of the building, both the, the sides and the, the front side of the building towards the front could just be all solid or, you know, the woodtone cladding not, not having that, you know, multiple color access all over  
Speaker 17    01:57:00    The place. Mr. Henderson, if it's okay with the board, I saw that comment. I mean, obviously the client would like to keep as much of the branding as possible that, that, you know, that they have. But we'd be happy to work with you as a condition Okay. To, to work out the, those, those items. You know, it's hard to design, you know, the, those colors on the fly at a board meeting, but if the board's okay with it, we'd be happy to work with you as a condition on that.  
Speaker 4     01:57:21    Okay. And then that, that would also pertain to that gray band on the side that's got,  
Speaker 17    01:57:25    Yeah, yeah, just I would say we, we would work with you on the architectural comments as a condition of approval. Great. Hopefully up to a resolution on those.  
Speaker 4     01:57:33    Okay. And then I think the only other thing is again, was the excess amount of signs. I mean the, the Township feels that number of signs is, is way in excess of what's needed, especially in, in talking about, you know, the freestanding sign, which is right up against the road. It's really, the other signs are the back of the property. I think anybody that's already in the property knows that they're out of sonic at that point. Sure. And the excessive signage is not needed.  
Speaker 17    01:57:59    So, so here's, here's my request on that. If we saw that comment, if you would, if we could let Mr. McDonough testify on planning first and then after putting on the proofs, if the board still feels that the co that the signage that we have too many wall signs, we're happy to discuss, you know, your comment about possibly removing one or two  
Speaker 4     01:58:17    Sounds  
Speaker 17    01:58:18    Good. If that's acceptable to the board and the Chairman.  
Speaker 0     01:58:21    Yes it is. You can proceed, Mr.  
Speaker 17    01:58:24    Okay, great. So  
Speaker 0     01:58:25    I have, sorry, I ahead, I'm sorry.  
Speaker 19    01:58:28    This is John Pat. I submitted a report as well August 17. Most of the items have been addressed, the board, do you have a noise level on those things?  
Speaker 17    01:58:44    Yeah, Matt, I believe it's adjustable, correct? The, the menu board for the sound, it just,  
Speaker 18    01:58:49    It it is, it is adjustable and they do adjust for ambient noise. So the, the quieter is outside, the quieter that that intercom will be. And obviously the, they have to meet all of the, the state and local statutes for per sound.  
Speaker 19    01:59:03    Okay. Alright. And the lights within the parking lot, et cetera, you go to she are none working?  
Speaker 17    01:59:13    Yeah. Yeah. There would only be emergency, you know, lighting on after the store is closed, Mr. Chadwick.  
Speaker 19    01:59:19    Okay. That's it. Mr. Chairman?  
Speaker 20    01:59:24    I have, thank you Chaill Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of items on my September 20th letter that need to be addressed.  
Speaker 0     01:59:32    Okay.  
Speaker 20    01:59:34    Mr. Burch, can you just relay any intended operations management in terms of any delays with the drive through and how that would be managed with the lack of recirculation that the site provides?  
Speaker 18    01:59:48    Sure. So the, the pickup window is located at the, the back of the building on the south side here. There is adequate space for a car to pull up while still allowing for a car to, to bypass. So this would be the space used for that car. If there is a, a delay for food if needed, we would, we would be willing to modify this curb line to provide some additional space there for bypassing traffic.  
Speaker 20    02:00:13    Okay. And the only other item we have in our letter is regarding the turning maneuvers for the driveway, for the larger vehicles, how that is going to be feasible with the overlap on an active lane entering and exiting the site.  
Speaker 18    02:00:36    Understood. So we did review the, the truck circulation templates. We do believe that there is space to, to tighten up that movement. This area was striped out specifically for trucks, but upon further review we realized that those, the SC 30 and the, the trash truck that were run through here as well as the fire truck, they do pull in, they overhang this cross hatched area slightly, but there is additional space before the, the curb line. So we believe we can push those trucks a little bit closer to that, that near side lane and reduce the, the overlap into the middle lane.  
Speaker 20    02:01:14    Okay. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     02:01:16    Thank you.  
Speaker 17    02:01:18    All  
Speaker 0     02:01:18    Right. Any other members?  
Speaker 17    02:01:19    Oh, sorry,  
Speaker 0     02:01:20    I I, I, I saw this come outta left field, so any other members of the board have any questions? None. Okay. You can proceed, Jason.  
Speaker 17    02:01:29    Thank you Mr. Chairman. All right. Our next witness is our professional planner, John McDonough. So we should swear him in Mr. McDonough. Yes. Have your name  
Speaker 2     02:01:38    Under address please.  
Speaker 21    02:01:40    I'm sorry?  
Speaker 2     02:01:42    Do we have your name and address please?  
Speaker 21    02:01:43    Sure. Hi everyone, my name is John McDonough. My address is here in Parsippany 1 0 1 Gibraltar Drive.  
Speaker 17    02:01:51    Right. Would you raise your  
Speaker 2     02:01:52    Right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth?  
Speaker 21    02:01:57    Yes, I do. Thank  
Speaker 2     02:01:59    You.  
Speaker 17    02:02:00    Okay. All right, John, if you could just go through your credentials as a professional planner in the state of New Jersey.  
Speaker 21    02:02:06    Sure. My license in professional planning is current and in good standing. I get the good fortune of testifying throughout the state on a nightly basis and I've been accepted here many times before. I'm also nationally certified under A I C P that is also current and in good standing.  
Speaker 17    02:02:23    Your credentials are fine, please proceed. Alright, thank you. Thank you. So John, in preparation of the application, your office visited the site in the surrounding area. You've reviewed all the plans, reports, heard the testimony, and have reviewed the relevance sections of the master plan and zoning ordinance, correct?  
Speaker 21    02:02:39    Yes, I have.  
Speaker 17    02:02:40    Alright, so you have any, you have exhibits that you wanna show just to put on your planning proofs for the sign variances that we're seeking?  
Speaker 21    02:02:48    Yes. Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I'd like to share a slide of three photographs that we actually took today. So it's as close to real time as, as you can get,  
Speaker 17    02:02:58    So, absolutely. So John, let's mark this as a five and with today's date. And it consists of how many?  
Speaker 21    02:03:06    3 3, 3, 3 drone shots.  
Speaker 17    02:03:08    All right. So Jim, if we could say a five consists of three sheets, if that's okay. That's fine. Thank you. Alright, go ahead John.  
Speaker 21    02:03:17    Okay, so just to give a little bit of context here, the subject site is right in the middle. This will be a view looking, I'll say do south on Stelton Road. If you've just come off of the 2 87 exit, I forget the name of that cross street I should remember, but I don't. And then if you're traveling due south, you've got this multi-lane roadway and you can clearly see that we're on the inside of a curve. There are a number of positives here in terms of what the applicant is doing with signage, especially the fact that it is going to provide clear and safe roadside recognition on the inside of a curve, which is of paramount importance, especially given the fact that we do have a multi-lane road. We don't want people making sudden stops or sudden movements. We want good advanced identification and demarcation of, of this site.  
Speaker 21    02:04:05    Next view is just the reverse view. We've now got the site in the middle of the photograph, and this is looking due north. There's 2 87 and the off ramp right there. And again, you get a sense of the signage in the area. The, the primary relief that the applicant is asking the board to move on is to have a freestanding sign. You've, you've seen the details, but we do have an abundance of similar type signs in the area. I know the board is trying to move towards more monument size type signs, and I know there's one for the car wash nearby, but that site is a little bit more visible in terms of that sign location than the subject site again, being on the inside of a curve. So we think that higher sign here provides clearer visibility and safer visibility, especially given consideration of the road and the multiple lanes that are there.  
Speaker 21    02:04:55    And then finally, this is just a, a top-down view of the subject property. This is going to be a nice adaptive reuse of an underutilized commercial piece of property. So that will go towards the positives in your consideration of this application. Bearing in mind, we are here in the GB zone district, your general business district where the use is permitted as a conditional use. The only relief the applicant needs is to have a freestanding sign that's the only conditional use standard that is not being met. There is also interrelated relief as to the area of that sign at 52.7 square feet where 32 would be the maximum permitted. Again, we think in the interest of brand recognition, customer familiarity, and certainly promoting safe, clear identification of the site and in consideration of the surrounding signs in the area, this is not going to be excessive or obtrusive or out of context or creating a substantially adverse impact with having that sign.  
Speaker 21    02:05:56    There. There is also relief related to the number of building mounted signs where five are going to be proposed, where one is the maximum that would be allowed. Again, each one of these signs serve a, a purpose and I think with Matt's help I could probably get those, that architectural plan on the screen. I, I don't have that queued up here to actually talk about it. But again, the key point is the overall sign package is tasteful. It integrates very well within the architecture of the building. We don't see this as any over branding here, any over branding and certainly complimenting the architecture and providing for a safe and efficient identification of the site. There you go. E each sign serve as a purpose integrates very well with the overall building plan and is not going to be excessive in in the context. With that said, we think that this application as a whole is certainly going to land squarely on the positive side, outweighing any negative impacts.  
Speaker 21    02:06:57    Repurposing underutilized commercial land with a viable, permitted conditional use that will promote jobs including first time jobs, provide a service along a commercial highway. This is a highway commercial type use. It is going to promote a positive aesthetic. We know retail more than any other land use needs to stay fresh in the public eye. This is going to introduce a name brand along your corridor, which will reinforce the image and the identity of, of your community as a, as a good place for businesses to invest. Certainly going to promote planning goals of efficient use of land redevelopment, repurposing a site that's already there, and also the planning goal to provide for a variety of uses in appropriate locations. The entire package goes together. The pullin case tells us to look at the application as a whole. We see the application as a whole advancing purpose, a approach to the general welfare, purpose G, purpose I, and purpose M They go towards all those goals that I just spoke about. On the negative side, no substantially adverse impacts related to the sign package. This is going to be, again, good, clear, safe identification of the site, not over branding, not gaudy, tasteful, and, and integrates very well with the surrounding land use context. All said, I think that's all I have on direct, Jason, unless you want me to augment with anything more? No,  
Speaker 17    02:08:20    Just put the site plan back up, Matt. Okay. So John, just on the D three, based on the Coventry Square case, you believe that the site could accommodate the one deviation from the conditional use standard of providing a freestanding sign?  
Speaker 21    02:08:37    That's correct. And importantly, that Coventry Square case reminds us that even though it's a D variance, it's not a use variance per se. The the use itself is not at question. It's the condition. And none of the, the condition that's being violated here does not relate to site activity or site intensity. It only relates to site identification. We think at this particular location that relief is warranted for the reasons I've given.  
Speaker 17    02:09:03    Right. And the fact that there's been a freestanding sign there for, I'm assuming decades with the prior use that was located, the prior tenant that was there.  
Speaker 21    02:09:10    Yes, exactly. Alright.  
Speaker 17    02:09:12    So you believe that the purposes of the municipal land use law met, I think you cited several, including a h and I. And you believe that the negative criteria is met as well for the, for the, for the, I'll call 'em the wall signs to meet the C two balancing test?  
Speaker 21    02:09:29    That is correct, yes.  
Speaker 17    02:09:31    So in your professional opinion on the C two variances, the granting of the variances would substantial outweigh the benefits, would substantially outweigh any detriments  
Speaker 21    02:09:39    Substantially? Yes. And that could also go against mitigated impacts. I saw your, your landscape architects comment about supplementing with additional plantings, and we're, we're happy to work with your professional in that.  
Speaker 17    02:09:52    Great. All right, Mr. Chairman, that, that concludes my directive. Mr. McDonough,  
Speaker 0     02:09:56    Thank you so much. Does anyone on the board have any questions or comments specifically, Mr. Interesting.  
Speaker 4     02:10:02    Yes, Mr. Chairman? Again, I, again, I just thought, you know, even after the testimony, I still don't see the need for five signs. Those, you know, I could, I could probably eliminate three signs and the branding would stay the same. Everybody would know this. This was a sonic by the colorations, by the canopy ordering area in the back, by the freestanding sign that's very predominant in the front of the property by the front facade sign. So again, I just don't see the need for, you know, five signs when our ordinance requires that only, or only allows for one three  
Speaker 17    02:10:42    Standing signs in order to, in order to be efficient. I, I, I guess John, Mr. McDonough has not convinced you and that's okay. I, I suspected you'd still have that feeling. We would need Mr. Henderson and members of the board the, the rear sign, because that face is the pickup window where people will come up and pick up their, their orders if they choose to do so. So I think it's important there. So if it's a pre, if you believe we could, we have to eliminate two or three, we'd prefer the ones on the side of the building, if that's okay.  
Speaker 4     02:11:13    That's fine.  
Speaker 17    02:11:14    Okay. And if, if the board agrees and Mr. Hinterstein, we could revise that as a condition of approval as well.  
Speaker 0     02:11:22    Thank you, Henry.  
Speaker 4     02:11:23    No problem.  
Speaker 0     02:11:25    No. Any other members of the board, any, any other members of the board of any questions for this witness and or this application in general? Okay. Hearing now  
Speaker 19    02:11:35    Question. Are these, these signs gonna be lit 24 hours?  
Speaker 17    02:11:39    Yeah, they would be lit, but they'd be turned off when the store's closed.  
Speaker 19    02:11:43    Okay.  
Speaker 0     02:11:44    Thanks, John.  
Speaker 17    02:11:45    Within, you know, like 15 to 30 minutes of the store shutting down? Yeah. Yeah. Okay.  
Speaker 19    02:11:50    I wanna go back to the agreement to work with Henry on the colors. Henry, I we're gonna stay with these natural type. We're not gonna get into a bright colors all over this building. Correct?  
Speaker 4     02:12:06    Yeah. I mean, my concern was the front and the sides of the front portion of the building. What's really more visible from the road? You know, they obviously, they have that sonic blue. I don't have a problem if it's a solid portion of it's blue, you know, I really think that the, the wood cladding look is a nice look. Maybe they can incorporate more of that, but, okay. As long as they got the blue, white, neutral tones solid without all of that vertical striping in the front, you know, if some of that exists in the back of the building. John? I think  
Speaker 19    02:12:36    It's okay. No, we're on the same, we're on the same page.  
Speaker 4     02:12:38    Yep. Yeah,  
Speaker 19    02:12:39    If the board, if the board approves it, why did you have Henry? And I agree.  
Speaker 17    02:12:43    Yeah, no, that's fine. I, I, like I said, it's hard to, to, to do architecture on the fly. Like, you know, removing a sign is obviously very clear what you're doing. So we're happy to work with you as a condition. And I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm confident we can, we could figure something out. That works. Good.  
Speaker 0     02:12:58    That sounds great. Good. Any other members of the board have any questions? Hearing none, I'm gonna open it up to the public. Anyone on the public portion that has any comments or questions about this sonic application, please raise your hand. Can  
Speaker 1     02:13:13    You please then share your screen?  
Speaker 0     02:13:15    Yes.  
Speaker 1     02:13:16    Thank you Mr. Beach. Much easier. No one's raising their hand. Chairman.  
Speaker 0     02:13:23    Okay. That being said, we'll close the public portion and I'd make a motion to approve this application.  
Speaker 19    02:13:29    Oh, second.  
Speaker 0     02:13:30    Can I roll the call?  
Speaker 1     02:13:32    Party  
Speaker 0     02:13:32    Call roll.  
Speaker 1     02:13:35    Mr. Weisman? Yes. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Blount? Yes. Mr. Heka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. All? Yes. And Chairman. Cahill? Yes.  
Speaker 0     02:13:48    Great.  
Speaker 19    02:13:49    Thank you very much, members of the board. Appreciate it.  
Speaker 0     02:13:51    Have a great evening. Have a good night.  
Speaker 2     02:13:52    Thank you.  
Speaker 1     02:13:53    Have a good night.  
Speaker 0     02:13:55    Okay guys, let's take it down to the number 1223 dash ZB dash zero two slash zero three V T r we Weniger and 1900 New Brunswick, L l c.  
Speaker 22    02:14:07    Yeah. Hi everybody, this is Paul Swany on behalf of TR Winnier Inc. In 1900 New Brunswick, L L c.  
Speaker 0     02:14:18    How we doing tonight, sir?  
Speaker 22    02:14:20    Good. Thank you. The last time that we were before the board, we had put on our case, and at that time the board expressed an interest in Cahn, considering the application and possibly visiting the, the site today, the board's attorney, Mr. Mc, excuse me, Mr. Canali and I and Greg Oman, the engineer, had a discussion. I think there may have been some confusion about whether the board thought we were going to go to the N J D E P at the time of the application. I indicated to the board that this was really a chicken in the egg situation and we didn't want to go to the N J D E P for approval until we had some feeling from which way the board was going on this. And I'll, I'll let Mr. Omens speak a little bit more about that. But again, right now, the, our, our case was put in the last time, and so we're awaiting the board's decision, and if the board has any questions, we're here to answer them.  
Speaker 2     02:15:38    And Mr. Suwanee, we did discuss there is a possibility based upon what TP does, if it changes your, your plan significantly, you may have to come back to the zoning board for additional hearings.  
Speaker 22    02:15:51    Yeah, we, we understand that, and I, we, and we said that we understood that at the last hearing. And again, I, I think Mr. Roman can explain our rationale with that. And if, if, if he's still sworn in or if he's under oath or if he needs to be sworn in, I'll leave that up to you.  
Speaker 2     02:16:14    He remains sworn in.  
Speaker 19    02:16:16    Thank you. So, yeah, at, at the last hearing I had testified that we would need a D E P approval as the property falls within the floodplain of Bound Brook. And what the applicant wanted to do is, instead of us moving forward with an application to the D E P, we wanted to kind of get a, at least a warm fuzzy feeling from the board that what we're proposing to clean up the site, consolidate the containers where we're showing 'em to be located, the additional plantings, the pavement, et cetera, that the board would at least seem favorable to what we're showing. For me to go into the D E P I need to have a, a kind of a lockdown plan. The d e p doesn't like me moving things around and making changes on the fly. So we kind of wanted to have that warm fuzzy feeling at least from the board or an approval even better from the board before we filed an application with the D E P and started that, I'll say painful process.  
Speaker 19    02:17:16    If anyone has ever had to work with the D e P, this site's a little different. If I was going in, if this was a brand new site, totally vacant to go into the D E p, I would be really pulling my hair out to get an approval. This one's a little bit different. I'm not gonna say it's easier, much easier. But there are some hardships. This, this site has been developed since the thirties. There are plenty of hardships on the site. So going in with a plan to the D E P that we feel that the municipality is in favor of would be a huge help. Instead of kind of spinning our wheels with the d e p moving things around also,  
Speaker 0     02:17:58    Any members of the board have any questions? Inquiries? Henry, did you wanna chime in?  
Speaker 4     02:18:06    No, I think, I think Mr. Kinneally said it best. You know, if the DP later on requires any type of changes that you know, are gonna impact this approval, they're gonna be back before this board. Whether it be fermented site plan for new variance, it may even require a new use variance due to, you know, it's tough to say what the dps gonna, what, what they're gonna say. Right. So, but as long as they understand that I, I really don't have, you know, much issues as long as I, you get it sometimes gone by. I believe they've agreed to most of the conditions that we put forth previously. I think that, I think that John had brought up, that I had brought up. So that being said, Mr.  
Speaker 0     02:18:52    Al, I'm fine. I'm sorry to cut you off for here. I apologize. No problem. Can, can we make this a condition of the approval?  
Speaker 2     02:18:59    Yes. Or normally you would make, when there's a D E P issue outstanding would make a conditional approval that the applicant obtained d p approval, whatever l i, whatever resolution is, is required by D E P and, and you can also require the applicant to, to report back to the zoning board periodically on the progress of D E P status of the application.  
Speaker 1     02:19:26    Okay.  
Speaker 0     02:19:27    Any other questions from any other members of the board?  
Speaker 4     02:19:31    No.  
Speaker 0     02:19:32    Move on. Go ahead again.  
Speaker 4     02:19:33    Yeah, Sean, I just wanted to reiterate what, what Mr. Kinneally had said that I think we should get some updates on that. DP issues perhaps six months, you know, nine months, something of that nature. I know it takes quite some time, but perhaps the first update could be at six months and then determine, you know, if any further updates would be necessary at that time.  
Speaker 0     02:19:55    Okay. Sounds good. I guess there are no other questions from the board, so I am gonna open it to the public. Anyone in the public have any questions or comments? No.  
Speaker 1     02:20:06    One Chairman  
Speaker 0     02:20:07    Okay. Close the public portion and I would make a motion to approve this with a condition. Thank you.  
Speaker 2     02:20:16    That was Mr.  
Speaker 0     02:20:19    Mitterando.  
Speaker 1     02:20:20    Who? Second  
Speaker 0     02:20:22    Mitterando.  
Speaker 1     02:20:23    Oh, bill. Okay. Thank you. Chairman? We Vice Chairman. Weisman?  
Speaker 19    02:20:30    Yes.  
Speaker 1     02:20:30    Mr. Tillery?  
Speaker 2     02:20:32    Yes.  
Speaker 1     02:20:33    Mr. Blot?  
Speaker 0     02:20:34    Yes.  
Speaker 1     02:20:34    Mr. Haka? Yes. Mr. Mitterando? Yes. Mr. Riley? Yes. And Chairman. Cahill?  
Speaker 0     02:20:41    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:20:46    Thank you.  
Speaker 1     02:20:47    Cool. Thank you. Have a good night.  
Speaker 2     02:20:48    Okay. Thank you. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     02:20:51    Alright, let's make our way down to number 14, the adoption of resolutions from the regular meeting of September 14th, 2023.  
Speaker 2     02:21:00    Resolution meet Aithal Gutierrez, would you vote to approve?  
Speaker 19    02:21:07    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:21:08    Mr. Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman. Cahill?  
Speaker 0     02:21:16    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:21:17    Next, Catherine Rizzi, would you voted to approve Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 19    02:21:20    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:21:21    Mr. Reggio Ali? Yes. Chairman. Cahill?  
Speaker 0     02:21:29    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:21:31    Next is Liana command. Would you voted to approve Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 19    02:21:35    Yes.  
Speaker 1     02:21:38    We can't hear you dear  
Speaker 2     02:21:41    Mr. Ali? Yes. Uhrin ca?  
Speaker 0     02:21:45    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:21:47    Next is Amir Awa. Would you voting to approve Mr. Weisman?  
Speaker 19    02:21:52    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:21:53    Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman. Cahill?  
Speaker 0     02:21:57    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:21:58    Next is you voted to approve?  
Speaker 19    02:22:02    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:22:03    Mr. Ali? Yes. Chairman. Cahill?  
Speaker 0     02:22:07    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:22:09    Last is Moad Ali, would you voted to approve Mr.  
Speaker 19    02:22:13    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:22:14    Mr. Ali? Yes. Terry Cahill?  
Speaker 0     02:22:18    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:22:19    Those are all the resolutions I have received. You.  
Speaker 0     02:22:21    Okay. Item number 15, adoption of the minutes from the regular meeting of September 14th, 2023. All in favor say aye. A Aye. Aye, aye. Okay. Item 16 a. Jeremy, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. A thank. Thank you all tonight as always, for your sacrifice. I appreciate each and every one of you. Have a great night. Have a good night. Good night everybody. Evening.