Transcript for Piscataway Planning meeting on November 8 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 1     00:00:00    I think they're having a mic problem. Madam chair.  
Speaker 0     00:00:03    Oh, okay.  
Speaker 3     00:00:18    Madam chair. I'm gonna stay in my office  
Speaker 1     00:00:20    System.  
Speaker 0     00:00:22    I think she spoke. She said, can  
Speaker 3     00:00:23    You hear me?  
Speaker 0     00:00:24    I can hear you. Yes,  
Speaker 4     00:00:25    We can.  
Speaker 3     00:00:26    Yeah, they're having problems with the microphones in there. My apologies. No problem. Okay, we ready?  
Speaker 0     00:00:31    Yes. I read the opening statement. Could you please call? Oh,  
Speaker 3     00:00:34    I heard you. I heard you. Mayor Wahler. Present Councilwoman Kale. Here. Ms. Corcoran. Reverend Kinneally. He's in here. He is.  
Speaker 0     00:00:46    We see him. I can see him on the screen.  
Speaker 3     00:00:48    Mr. Atkins?  
Speaker 0     00:00:49    Here.  
Speaker 3     00:00:50    Mr. Foster? Mr. Hammed.  
Speaker 0     00:00:54    Mr.  
Speaker 3     00:00:57    And Madam chair  
Speaker 0     00:00:58    Here. Would we, can we all recite the Pledge of Allegiance? Flag is over my shoulder. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic. The Republic For which, which It stands one nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty. Liberty and Justice. Mr. Barlow, is he here? James?  
Speaker 4     00:01:28    Standing in for Mr. Barlow  
Speaker 0     00:01:29    Tonight. Okay. We can you read the open public meeting notice, please.  
Speaker 4     00:01:33    I do not have the open public meetings. Notice no one gave it to me. Yes,  
Speaker 3     00:01:36    Ms. I emailed you Madam chair and asked you He wasn't gonna do that tonight. Under my last email.  
Speaker 0     00:01:43    Okay. Well,  
Speaker 3     00:01:50    We could go to number. Any announcements for changing number six.  
Speaker 0     00:01:53    Oh, okay.  
Speaker 4     00:01:55    The Amal pharmaceutical application for this evening will not be heard. It's adjourned until December 13th. The applicant must notice and publish. Those are all the changes I'm aware of.  
Speaker 0     00:02:08    Okay, fine. Thank you. Can I get a motion to pay the audited bills?  
Speaker 3     00:02:16    Recording stopped.  
Speaker 1     00:02:21    I heard the recording stopped  
Speaker 3     00:02:22    Recording in progress. I just put it back. I'm recording it. We're fine. You guys keep going about  
Speaker 0     00:02:27    It. It's back again. Can I get a motion from the board to pay the duly audited bills?  
Speaker 2     00:02:31    Madam chair Dawn Corcoran. I make that motion.  
Speaker 0     00:02:35    I'll second that.  
Speaker 3     00:02:36    Councilwoman Cahill.  
Speaker 0     00:02:37    Thank you. I Council roll call please. Mayor Wallace?  
Speaker 1     00:02:41    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:02:42    Councilwoman Cahill?  
Speaker 0     00:02:44    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:02:44    Ms. Corcoran?  
Speaker 2     00:02:46    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:02:47    Reverend Kinneally. Yep. I heard 'em in there. Mr. Atkins and Madam. Yes. Madam chair?  
Speaker 0     00:02:55    Yes. Item number eight, adoption of resolution to memorialize action. Taken on October the 11th, 2023. From there.  
Speaker 2     00:03:06    Should I set him off on my computer?  
Speaker 3     00:03:14    Okay. Carol's not here. Somebody has to adopt the resolution, please.  
Speaker 0     00:03:18    Madam chair. Go ahead. Go ahead, Ms.  
Speaker 2     00:03:20    Bergen. I I can see that for you. I'd like to make a motion that we adopt the resolution for application number 23 PV 22 JSN at Centennial Piscataway, LLC block 67 0 3 lot 8 88 Centennial Avenue Minor.  
Speaker 0     00:03:36    Do I have a second roll? Paul  
Speaker 3     00:03:41    Mayor Wahler. Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran?  
Speaker 2     00:03:46    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:03:47    Reverend Kinneally? Yes. Mr. Atkins heard? Yes. And Madam chair?  
Speaker 0     00:03:54    Yes. Yes. Item number nine, adoption of the minutes from the regular meeting of October the 11th, 2023. Ms. Cochrane  
Speaker 2     00:04:06    Madam chair, I'd like to make a motion that we adopt the minutes.  
Speaker 0     00:04:10    I have a second. Mr. Atkins. Second. Thank you. Roll call.  
Speaker 3     00:04:16    Mayor Wahler. Yes. Councilwoman Cahill? Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally. Mr. Atkins?  
Speaker 0     00:04:27    Yes.  
Speaker 3     00:04:28    And Madam chair?  
Speaker 0     00:04:29    Yes. Item number 10 23 PB 25 IDIL 1551 South Washington, LLC. Preliminary and final site plan. Mr. Paul Cahn.  
Speaker 5     00:04:45    Thank you. That's, that's great. That's exactly how you say it. Thank you very much and, and good evening everyone. My name's Paul Cahn. I'm an attorney at Price Me Schulman in Arminio representing the applicant. 1550 IDIL 1551 South Washington, LLC. The applicant is the FI owner of the property property to no surprise, it's 1551 South Washington Avenue.  
Speaker 5     00:05:10    Surprise, no surprise the this application this evening is for, there currently is a office building located, a vacant office building located on the property. This application proposes the demolition of that structure and the replacement with a 155,272 square foot warehouse building. I would, I would also note just for the record, that there currently is T-Mobile cellular Communication antennas on the roof of the existing office building. The plan is, as you will hear, that those antennas will be removed, placed on a temporary structure on the property while the building is demolished and the new building built and then replaced back on the, the rooftop of the new warehouse building. The Piscataway zoning Board of Adjustment has already granted approval for that temporary structure to be located while the construction occurs and in the very near future. I, I believe the next couple of weeks they will be filing T-Mobile will be filing a, a new application for approval for placement on the roof.  
Speaker 5     00:06:20    In this application, we will be talking about screening and such, so you will have an opportunity to hear about that, but I just wanted to note it for the record, the applications for preliminary and final site plan approval. The uses and the plan itself is in full compliance with the redevelopment plan. There are no deviations of any kind. There are two minor site plan design waivers for lighting, as you'll hear in two discrete areas at the property line, both of them right near the DOT right of way. And in both instances, the slight exceedance is to provide additional lighting for safety reasons for pedestrians to access. As you'll hear crosswalk, there's a set of stairs for a new sidewalk to be constructed to connect to the wait seven overpass and then in another location. Similarly, there's a crosswalk and sidewalk that it made sense to provide a little extra lighting.  
Speaker 5     00:07:14    Other than those two design waivers, there are, there is nothing. The plan is exactly in compliance. I have four witnesses this evening. Rob Fisher, who's vice president and co-head of development for the applicant. IDIL will be testifying. Also have Alex Lume, who is the from bowler. He's the project civil engineer. Dan McGinnis of Bowman is the traffic engineer. And lastly, Claudio Bria is from where Malcolm, who is the project architect. So that's, that's kind of the lineup. Unless there's any questions, I can, we can swear in the first witness and I can get started. You may proceed with your first witness. Thank you very much. Mr. Fisher, are  
Speaker 4     00:07:59    You present?  
Speaker 5     00:08:00    Yes, he's present.  
Speaker 6     00:08:02    Unfortunately, I'm not the other Alex Lo May, I'm Rob. Right.  
Speaker 5     00:08:06    For some reason his, his box seems to say Alex Lumay, but it is Rob Fisher.  
Speaker 4     00:08:11    Mr. Fisher. Okay. Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 6     00:08:17    I, I do your  
Speaker 4     00:08:18    Name and address, please.  
Speaker 6     00:08:20    Yeah. Rob Robert Fisher. F-I-S-C-H-E-R 35 86. Northwood, one word, drive. Memphis, Tennessee, 3 8 1 1 1.  
Speaker 4     00:08:31    Thank you.  
Speaker 5     00:08:32    Great. Thank you. And Mr. Fixer, if you can to start just provide the board with your title, your involvement with id, the applicant and your familiarity with this project, the plan and the property.  
Speaker 6     00:08:47    Yeah. This is Rob Fisher. I'm the vice president, co-head of development for IDII handle development and construction for New Jersey, so I'll actually be in charge of building the new building. I've been with IDI actually, since I'm the only original member, I've been here 34 years and I numerous buildings all over this country, but predominantly in Memphis, Nashville, and New Jersey.  
Speaker 5     00:09:13    And I, I would assume just for the record, that you're intimately aware of all aspects of this property and this application?  
Speaker 6     00:09:20    Oh, yes, yes. I, I was part of sourcing the land and I've worked on it ever since.  
Speaker 5     00:09:25    And just for a little background, briefly, IDI logistics, perhaps you can, I know up with the app, exact applicant entity is ID Iil 1551 South Washington, LLC. But it's IDI Logistics. Perhaps you can give the board just a sense of Sure. Who you, who that company is.  
Speaker 6     00:09:42    Absolutely. IDI logistics has been around in different forms for 34 years. Like I said, I've been there the whole time. They're headquartered out of Atlanta. We've developed about 190 million square feet over that time of light industrial logistics centers. We have about 4 million feet currently in New Jersey. And I've done eight projects in New Jersey.  
Speaker 5     00:10:09    Great. And, and can you give the board just the general idea of what is proposed in this application?  
Speaker 6     00:10:16    Yeah, this is a speculative warehouse. It's 155,272 feet. The general idea is speculative. We don't know who would take it. We don't have a tenant at this time, but generally speaking, it will be either one or probably at the most, two tenants typically.  
Speaker 5     00:10:36    Great. And could  
Speaker 0     00:10:37    You speak a little louder? I didn't hear your last comment. It'll be generally two. What  
Speaker 6     00:10:41    The last comment? It generally it is one single tenant, but sometimes it could be subdivided for two at the most.  
Speaker 0     00:10:49    Okay, thank you.  
Speaker 5     00:10:50    Sure. And, and just kind of to clarify that point, Mr. Fisher. Yeah, I I I would say it obviously you, your preference I would assume, and please correct me and confirm for the record your preference would be for two tenants, but I, I know have you designed this building to accommodate two, I guess is, is how I Yeah,  
Speaker 6     00:11:08    Our preference would always be one single tenant for the building. Yes sir. And typically a building of this size. That's the way it trends.  
Speaker 5     00:11:16    Okay. Would you ever anticipate there being more than two tenants?  
Speaker 6     00:11:21    I cannot see that happening. It's possible, I guess, but I highly doubt it. We, we haven't designed it for subdivision that way.  
Speaker 5     00:11:30    And you, you heard in my opening remarks, commenting on the existing telecommunications antennas that are located on the roof. If you can just to confirm for the record, briefly describe the process that will be undergoing in terms of those antennas.  
Speaker 6     00:11:44    Yeah, the, the antennas, once we have all the approvals in place, which I think we do now, will be removed from the building, it will be placed on temporary basis on a cow, a cell on wheels basically. And then once the building is erected, it'll be reconstructed on top of the building. So there'll be no interruption of service. So y'all's telephones will still work. Right,  
Speaker 5     00:12:07    Thank you. I know in one of the reports, I believe it was the planning review, there was mention made of environmental remediation. I know there was a very small item for, for a historic hydraulic lift that might have had a spill to it. Can you just describe, I believe that's done, but can you just describe and provide some detail for the record on that?  
Speaker 6     00:12:30    Yeah, yeah. During our pre predu, our due diligence of the property, we did discover through the previous Sona that there was a small hydraulic leak. We investigated, we removed all the soils, we determined it had not infiltrated the groundwater. And the LSRP, Rebecca Hollander of DRC is preparing the final reports to submit to N-J-D-E-P so she can issue our RAO. So  
Speaker 5     00:12:57    It's all, so just to, so there's, because there's a couple of technical terms, lemme just make sure for the record, it's clear all, all of the contaminated soil has been removed and, and, and disposed of offsite, correct?  
Speaker 6     00:13:08    Correct, yes.  
Speaker 5     00:13:09    Okay. And the sampling has been done to Cahn to confirm there is no groundwater impact in any way?  
Speaker 6     00:13:15    That is correct. Also,  
Speaker 5     00:13:17    And as you just described the report, the l SRP is preparing a report to file with the DEP and that will closed the matter.  
Speaker 6     00:13:25    Yes.  
Speaker 5     00:13:26    Okay. And do you have a general concept of how long that would take?  
Speaker 6     00:13:30    I would imagine 60 to 90 days typically. Okay.  
Speaker 5     00:13:34    Thank you. Now, can you confirm, and there was a question about solar ready. Can you confirm for the record the expectation and tension as to solar ready, the rooftop solar?  
Speaker 6     00:13:46    Yeah, I mean, in general, IDI logistics is known as a high-end developer of this type of product. We take the higher end. We also try and minimize our impact so that at this time the, the building is currently designed for the roof load for solar over 100% of the building. And it is our intent to not have it solar ready, but to install a solar system to match the final needs of the tenant that's selected.  
Speaker 5     00:14:16    Okay. And so, again, just to kind of make it clear, I know there was a question on, I believe the planner's report about solar ready and, and it being clear from the plans to, and I know that entails a certain additional weight weighting load for the roof. Right. You're confirming for the record that that solar ready roof would accomplish a hundred percent of the roof?  
Speaker 6     00:14:37    That is correct.  
Speaker 5     00:14:39    Okay. And I know we'll hear in the architect testimony, but I, but there will be a note added to the architectural plans to  
Speaker 6     00:14:46    Reflect. That is correct, yes.  
Speaker 5     00:14:49    Lastly, can you provide some detail on IDIs view on lead? Will this be a lead certified building? What, you know, a little, a little background on that? All,  
Speaker 6     00:15:00    All our buildings are lead certified at this time. Yes, I want to try and make it gold, but we just go for the highest achievable that we can get.  
Speaker 5     00:15:09    Very good. Those are all the questions I have for this witness.  
Speaker 0     00:15:14    Members of the board, do you have any questions of Mr. Fisher hearing? No questions from the board. Can we open that up to the public? Ms. Buckley, do you see any hands? No. Madam chair close to the public. Okay. You can call your next, next witness. Okay.  
Speaker 5     00:15:36    Alex Lomay.  
Speaker 4     00:15:38    Mr. Lomay, are you present?  
Speaker 7     00:15:40    Present?  
Speaker 4     00:15:41    Could you raise your right hand? Yes. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 7     00:15:46    I do.  
Speaker 4     00:15:47    Your name and address please.  
Speaker 7     00:15:48    My name is Alexander Lme. That's LOM as in Mary, EI Address is 30 Independence Boulevard, suite 200 in Warren, New Jersey.  
Speaker 4     00:15:58    Thank you.  
Speaker 5     00:16:00    Mr. Lomay, I know you are an engineer at, at er and you very briefly provide your background so that I can qualify you as a civil engineer and noting testimony, et cetera in the past.  
Speaker 7     00:16:11    Sure. Graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from the University of Delaware. I've been licensed in the state of New Jersey since 2016 and been working with Boer in the field of civil engineering for over 12 years.  
Speaker 5     00:16:25    And obviously you are familiar and, and, and preparing these plans and, and to provide this testimony?  
Speaker 7     00:16:31    I am,  
Speaker 5     00:16:32    I would, I would ask that he be qualified as in civil engineering to provide the project engineering testimony.  
Speaker 0     00:16:37    Have you testified in Piscataway or Middlesex County before Mr. Lame?  
Speaker 7     00:16:41    I have not testified in Piscataway, but I have been in Middlesex County, Carter at Perth Amboy and, and Hillsborough.  
Speaker 0     00:16:46    Thank you. He can, he's qualified to testify as an engineer. Thank  
Speaker 5     00:16:51    You. Mr. Lomay. I think probably easiest to to, to have you kind of run through things. I would ask you to provide the board with a summary of the plan, what is proposed, highlighting the, the relevant areas. Obviously I can stop and add some questions as needed and then making comments to the relevant reports as you deem necessary during that. And then we can close up any loopholes or anything we missed at the end. So please provide the board kind of a summary of your, of your services.  
Speaker 7     00:17:24    Sure. I'd like to start with the existing conditions. I'll bring up an exhibit prepared by our office. So what you'll see on screen now is the, is the aerial exhibit prepared by bowler dated November 8th, 2023. And I'd like to mark this as exhibit A one with north being to the top of the page. The site is identified, site is identified on the tax map is block 53 0 1 lot 1404 or 1551 South Washington Avenue, the surrounding area we have South Washington Avenue and an access ramp along the frontage to the west of the site with some industrial beyond. There's retail, industrial and self storage to the north of the site. Self-storage and residential to the east and with two i with I 2 87 to the south and commercial beyond. The site is approximately 10.02 acres. It is situated in the 1551 South Washington Avenue redevelopment area where a warehouse is of permitted use. Currently on the site, I know Mr. Concentrator had mentioned it, there's an existing office building that is plus or minus 49,616 square feet. And in the existing condition there is one access point from Washington Plaza Drive, which is access via South Washington Avenue in a signalize intersection. So with that, I'd like to move on to the proposed condition. I'm just gonna bring up another exhibit.  
Speaker 7     00:18:57    This exhibit is a colorized version of our site plan that was submitted with the application. This exhibit was prepared by bowler as well, also dated November 8th, 2023. Conveniently, and I'd like to mark this as exhibit A two, noting that north is still to the top of the page and I will zoom in a little bit. Just, you know, with a virtual presentation, I'd like to kind of get a good view of the, of the building and the surrounding site plan. The proposed development proposes 155,272 square foot warehouse with associated loading docks, driveways, car parking spaces, as well as stormwater and u utility infrastructure. The building is oriented in such a way that the truck docks and the loading are facing west towards South Washington Avenue. During early design and concept plans for the, for the project, we, we had a, a more, we had a different layout of rotate about 180 degrees with the loading that was facing towards the east of the property so that the front of the building with the parking would face South Washington Avenue.  
Speaker 7     00:20:02    But after evaluation and looking at it, we had decided to have the layout that you currently see on screen, which rotates the building so that the loading faces South Washington Avenue so that it's not facing the east with some of the residential properties along New Brunswick Avenue and the cul-de-sac. There just a note for the board that it is a little bit unconventional for the loading to be facing South Washington Avenue in this way, but with the residential in the, what I'll call the rear of the property to the east, we wanted to provide, we didn't want to have the loading and the operations be in close proximity to the residential relative to parking for the site proposing, we are proposing 144 parking space, which satisfies the requirements in the redevelopment plan. This all this includes six aada, a accessible parking spaces, two of which are van accessible spaces, and we also propose seven electric vehicle parking spaces, which are located to the north and south sides of this easterly car parking area.  
Speaker 7     00:21:01    We are proposing 20 trailer parking spaces to the north side of the building as well. On the north end of the site, we are proposing concrete sidewalk along the south, the east and the north sides of the building to service the car parking spaces and provide access to the building. We are also proposing a sidewalk, a little bit difficult to see along the west side of the property where this access ramp exists with connections from along the north of the property out to the, the right of way for the ramp. And on the south side of the property as well. To, to the sidewalk for the ramp, there are ADA accessible roofs proposed to the building from the ADA parking spaces to the entrance doors of the building. I'd also like to note that the, we are aware that the redevelopment plan calls for a sidewalk along the frontage of South Washington Avenue as well. The myself along with the other professionals, some of which you'll talk to tonight, and the, the applicant, IDIL, we are in process of reaching out to the DOT regarding that sidewalk along the frontage South Washington Avenue and going through the proper permitting with them as part of what is required in the redevelopment plan. I will note is, I know it's, I understand it's separate from the application or resolution compliance, but it is something that we will be doing as part of the redevelopment plan.  
Speaker 5     00:22:19    And, and, and Alex let me just interrupt you there, just to make, make clear and you correct me and obviously confirm for the record. Essentially we are in the process of, of getting together what is needed for meeting with the DEP to start as the first step to ultimately install that sidewalk on South Washington, which as it is right of way of DOT, we need their approval for. So that, you know, I assume will happen, obviously we're waiting for tonight to finish and then we would, would start as a first step. That pre-application meeting is that, is that accurate  
Speaker 7     00:22:52    With the N-J-D-O-T? Yes, that is correct.  
Speaker 5     00:22:54    Okay, thank you.  
Speaker 7     00:22:57    As far as access for the site, access is from Washington Plaza Avenue, which is, which comes via the signalize intersection from South Washington Avenue as well with that intersection and another intersection with this access ramp that comes from South Washington Avenue heading northbound. So you have a, a stop controlled intersection here with the site with Washington Plaza Avenue as well as far further to the west, the signalize intersection with South Washington Avenue. The site proposes two-way circulation around the entire site. I would like to note that circulation for trucks will be limited to the west truck court, which is located to the west of the building as well as the north. There's a, another court to the north really more for access to the, the north parking spaces for the truck. The, the tractor trailers and the trucks, the, the trucks will not circulate, I would say on the east side and around on the south side of the building that is specifically designated for, for car access only for parking.  
Speaker 5     00:23:58    Is it true, Alex, just, just to make that clear on, on this rendering, it's not as clear, but the site plan makes it. I I think that's consistent with the allocation of heavy duty pavement. I I just, that is kind of limited to the areas where we would anticipate trucks to.  
Speaker 7     00:24:12    That is correct. Mr. tro, and I'll zoom in a little bit for, for the members of the board and the public that are watching it is a little bit hard to see, but you can see a different coloration of the, of the pavement sections on the north side and then on the west side of the building, it's a little bit darker to denote to denote the heavy duty asphalt that will be installed for the, for the truck access. And then it's a bit of a lighter gray on the, the car parking to the east and to the south, which is standard duty asphalt, again for just for vehicular access for cars and no trucks to be circulating through this portion of the property.  
Speaker 7     00:24:48    The truck court and docks along the west side of the building total 130 feet in width for truck access and maneuvering. So truck access will come in from the site entrance, access the loading on the west side of the building, be able to turn around and exit. They can also access the, the trailer parking on the north relative to signs for the property. We are proposing one monument sign for the site near the northwest corner. I will zoom in, so bear with me. I apologize if I'm making anybody nauseous with the zooming in and out. We do have a monument sign just off the northwest corner of the building. I will circle it with a blue pen here.  
Speaker 7     00:25:29    That sign will be less than 75 square feet. The, the dimensions of the sign, there was a, a comment in the, I believe the plaintiff's report about a discrepancy for the area. The, the dimensions of the sign are about eight feet, eight feet tall by nine feet wide if you include the base of the sign, but without including the base, the, the sign height is actually six feet tall, so it would be a six by nine foot sign, which both, in both cases that'll be less than the, the required 75 square feet. But we will clarify any sort of discrepancy on the plans through any subsequent revisions.  
Speaker 5     00:26:03    And just Alex, again, just kind of for for the record and I believe this is the case, but please confirm obviously we'll correct any discrepancies during resolution, compliance and the like. But as a blanket statement, the intention is that all signs will comply with the applicable order That's correct. Redevelopment plan or other standards. We're not looking for any variances besides  
Speaker 7     00:26:22    Correct.  
Speaker 5     00:26:23    Okay.  
Speaker 7     00:26:26    As far as the building building signage is concerned, we are proposing three wall signs for the building, each of which will, will comply with the area requirement for a hundred of 150 square feet and no more than one sign on any facade. So we will be complying with the code relative to the building signs as well. And I just, the, the architect maybe speak more to any of the proposed building signs, but I would like to assure the board there will not be any signs on the east side of the building facing the residential or the self-storage facility. Just wanted to make sure that that was clear relative to to drainage for the site. There's, it's, there's not much there. The stormwater management proposed on site is designed in compliance with the N-J-D-E-P stormwater management regulations. Stormwater is generally conveyed through a network of underground pipes throughout the site as well as a grass swell on the east side of the property, ultimately discharging to a stormwater basin and on the west just to the west of the property in the NJ DOT's right of way, which is similar to the way that it drains today, the proposed pipes that will be discharging back to the basin tie into existing pipes upstream of the basin.  
Speaker 7     00:27:36    So we're not proposing any changes to the, to the existing basin, to the discharges, to the basin. And from a flow perspective, we will be matching or reducing flows from a stormwater to that basin relative to impervious coverage for the site. We are actually reducing the impervious coverage overall by 15,694 square feet, which is roughly a little more than a third of an acre or 3.6% of the site area for the property. So reduction of impervious coverage there. There's also a reduction of motor vehicle surface area, so you have less concrete asphalt in any kind of areas where vehicles can access and that's due to the nature of the, the warehouse building being a bit larger than the existing office building relative to utilities for the site, we are proposing a gas service connection out to South Washington Avenue. We have electric with telephone and cable tying in from a utility pole along the entrance to the north of the, to the north side of, of Washington Plaza Avenue as well as a proposed utility pole to the northwest corner of the site. Water will tie, will tap off of the main and South Washington Avenue and then come in from Washington Plaza Avenue, come into the site with a water loop around the full perimeter of the building and fire hydrants tied off of that water loop for emergencies and firefighting purposes.  
Speaker 5     00:29:01    And I would confirm for the record, and and Alex please, please confirm it that the fire department did review, we did se separately submit to them. They did review it and there were no any, there were not any comments on the plan, correct?  
Speaker 7     00:29:14    Correct.  
Speaker 5     00:29:15    Okay, thank you.  
Speaker 7     00:29:17    From a sanitary sewer perspective, the building's tying into an existing eight inch sanitary sewer line via an existing manhole located on the site near the north, the northwest corner of the building. So from utility perspective, the building will be fully connected. Gas, electric, water, telephone, cable. Okay. I'd like to spend a little bit of time just talking through some of, of the landscaping for the site. So we had met with early in the process prior, you know, during when the redevelopment plan was being considered we had met with the, with the township's landscape architect Mr. Interesting just to talk about the site landscaping and, and talk through the redevelopment plan as well. So what we're proposing from a landscape perspective here tonight and with this application we have a lot of existing trees. We have a pretty good amount of existing trees that are on site, which we intend to maintain a majority of.  
Speaker 7     00:30:12    And we would also like to supplement those with a combination of shade trees, evergreen trees, deciduous shrubs, evergreen shrubs to really kind of bolster the, the landscaping and the buffering for the property. We have, you'll see on the, on this colorized version of the site plan that we have landscape screening around the property with a mix again of the existing and proposed landscaping. I do want to kind of call out and highlight on the east side of the property where we were proposing an infill of shade and evergreen trees along with some shrubs as well to compliment the existing trees in order to enhance the buffer that exists specifically for the residential properties on New Brunswick Avenue. We think that adding the substantial amount of shrubs, Aithal as well as a row of evergreen trees that go along the property line there to the east, will really provide a nice strong adequate buffer and screening to kind of limit the visual impact from of that warehouse to the residential properties.  
Speaker 7     00:31:10    I'll say to the southeast, as you head north on the east side of the property, you do run into the self storage facility that's there. So that also helps kind of create a buffer, but from the residential perspective, really enhancing that landscaping, really kind of building that up along the property line there to limit the visual impact. And a comment in Mr. Stein's letter also referenced adding some additional landscaping. I'll circle it with a blue pen on the, on the exhibit A two here. We would be looking to do some additional landscaping to enhance that buffer further. Just to comply with Mr. Stein's comment as well.  
Speaker 5     00:31:49    And, and I just, just in terms of kind of screening and, and just putting the whole plan into context currently and, and again correct for the record and confirm for the record I should say, as it exists now, there is parking, car parking in this exact area and we've maintained it here essentially, correct?  
Speaker 7     00:32:05    Correct. And the existing condition there is car parking for the office building that's there  
Speaker 5     00:32:10    And obviously it, it's obvious that the, that, you know, with, with the design of this building, it's essentially a conscious of screening because the, the operations, the truck operations, the building is between, is between the residences besides all the screening and the, the building is between the residences and those operations.  
Speaker 7     00:32:30    That is correct. I had mentioned it earlier and maybe I can I'll highlight it again, but from the, from the residential perspective for the homeowners on New Brunswick Avenue and those living there on top of the landscape screening, yes there is car parking that we are proposing here, which is similar to what exists there today, but from a loading from the loading docks and the loading operations that is on the opposite side of the building on the west side, which would be not, which would not be visible to the residence on New Brunswick Avenue.  
Speaker 5     00:33:00    Please continue  
Speaker 7     00:33:01    Along the west side of the property. We also have, there was also a row of trees and shrubs as well to provide some screenings from South Washington Avenue. So see the little landscape island just west of the truck court and just west of the loading dock that's also there to enhance some of the visual screening and limit the impacts from South Washington Avenue as well, driving down the right of way. And I will highlight, we will be adding additional landscaping on the north side as well relative to one of Mr. Stein's comments. But we do have a few shade trades on the north side as well near the, the truck parking.  
Speaker 7     00:33:39    One other item, just in the same spirit of of screening, I'd just like to discuss fencing for the site. Currently along the residential there exists a I'll call a six foot high stock eight fence. We are proposing to replacing kind any of the sections of that fence that are, appear to be in disrepair now or have any sort of damage associated with them. We will replace that. That'll really be more closer, would be close to the property line within, I'll say plus or minus five feet along the east there. 'cause it already exists today. But that is another kind of mechanism that we're looking to improve and enhance on top of the landscaping to kind of help screen the, the, the residential properties and improve that visual impact for, for the building and the operation of the warehouse. There is also proposed a six foot high board on board fence at the south of the property.  
Speaker 7     00:34:31    That fronts on route 2 87 there as well. So we are proposing a new six foot high board on board fence, which will ultimately connect to the existing stock aid fence to kind of provide a, a continuous fence run along the south and east side of the property up to, you know, where the, the self storage facility is really more bordering on the east of the property line relative to the lighting proposed throughout the site. And Mr. Roy had mentioned it in the, in the open that we do have a few deviations from a design perspective, we'll call 'em design waivers other than the, the design waivers for the maximum foot candles at property lines. The, the lighting for the property does comply with the, the requirements of the borough. We are proposing a combination of pole mounted area lights for the drive aisles and parking areas as well as building mounted lights. All the pole mounted lights that are proposed throughout the site will have shields to reduce glare to, you know, adjacent properties. They are the LED lights and they, they even have individual shields themselves to, to reduce any glare that goes kind of, I'll call behind the light and the, the way it's not intended to be shining. I did, we did note the design waivers for the maximum foot candles at the property line. So I'm going to zoom in a little bit to discuss the two areas where those design waivers are being requested.  
Speaker 7     00:35:56    The first area is at the entrance to the site from Washington Plaza Avenue. We have readings at the property line of 1.4 foot candles, which exceeds the 0.5 foot candle maximum. Typically a driveway entrances or entrances to a site. We do like to add a a bit more lighting there and, and light that up a little bit more just to enhance visibility in, in an effort to promote safety for cars and, and vehicles coming into the site at the intersection further to the south side of the site, we have a sidewalk that connects from the property to the right of way where we are also connecting to the proposed sidewalk along this, this ramp that comes from South Washington Avenue, which ultimately would connect to a sidewalk that comes over the, that's part of the overpass of South Washington Avenue over i 2 87. We have an exceedance of the, the, the maximum lighting at the property line here as well, which is 3.9 foot candles, again just to help lights, pedestrian access ways just to enhance visibility and, and in an effort to promote safety for anybody utilizing the sidewalk here back accessing out to the right of way.  
Speaker 5     00:37:03    And, and just, just to confirm for the record, based on a factual summary of your expert opinion, that it's certainly reasonable based on the safety component and the lack of kind of detriment here, it is reasonable to grant both of those design waivers.  
Speaker 7     00:37:19    I would say it's reasonable, yes. You know, promoting safety, having better visibility in these areas as well as the, the, I see a very limited detriment considering the, the, the locations of which we are exceeding on, on the property line from a lighting perspective are in a right of way for with its DOT for South Washington Avenue and the access ramp. Okay. From that essentially wraps up the, the kind of the proposed conditions and presentation from that perspective. Mr. Cahn, I do have some comments relative to some review letters that we have received that I think might be beneficial to kind of highlight now and go through.  
Speaker 5     00:37:58    Yeah. And even before you do that, if you can very quickly just run through either things out outside agency approvals, I know we have letter of no interest and some other things. If you could maybe just run through those.  
Speaker 7     00:38:09    Sure. I'll, I'll highlight a few of those items relative to the, to the DOT. We do have a letter of note interest for, for the proposal for the site that is separate from the, the sidewalk that will be proposed on South Washington Avenue. That's something we're pursuing separately with the DOT. But relative to the, the proposed improvements for the site, for the warehouse, we do have the letter of no interest from the DOT as well as the county. We have a, we have an exemption from the county. We made the application from the county planning board. They also granted us an exemption from, from their requirements as well, noting no interest.  
Speaker 5     00:38:41    Okay. Thank you. And there's no other land use approvals as it relates to anything, wetlands or anything else?  
Speaker 7     00:38:48    No, high, high level from the, the, from the deps perspective, there's no DP approvals for this site from a soil conservation district. That's something that goes through Piscataway itself after any sort of planning board approval should there be one. So that's something we would apply for after the fact with the Township.  
Speaker 5     00:39:05    Okay, thank you. Yes, and I think it makes sense to, to run through the reports and, and note, I know you said you've spoken to the landscape architect and, and others, so perhaps you can provide the board with a, a general summary of that.  
Speaker 7     00:39:19    Sure. We'll start with the, the letter, the divisions of engineering and planning and development letter from Mr. Henry Hinterstein dated October 25th, 2023. Mr. Hinterstein and I spoke on Friday. We went through and reviewed his letter and in general we came to an agreement on all of the comments in the letter in order to comply with his comments. Just a, a few items just I think that warrant a little bit of a discussion. The architect and their testimony will speak to, there was a request for additional color banding for the building from an aesthetic perspective. They'll touch on that. There was a comment relative to the stormwater basin to the west of the site in the DOT's right of way and, you know, kind of pursuing proper maintenance for that, for that basin. Looks like maybe there's some, some grading and lawn mowing and maybe uncovering of some low flow channel that has to be done. That's been overgrown discussion with Mr. Hinterstein. We said we would work with the, with the DOT to request old plans, talk to the DOT about maintaining that, uncovering any sort of low flow channel, making sure they're maintaining their, their rip wrap and stone at their flared end sections in accordance with soil conservation district regulations to work with the DOT and Mr. Hinterstein on that. We'd also,  
Speaker 5     00:40:30    And, and just just to clarify for that, so to make sure I understand it for the record and the board members and such, the public as necessary, it's obviously the DOT's area. So we're, we're essentially looking to volunteer to assist, but ultimately it is the DOT's property essentially,  
Speaker 7     00:40:47    Right? That is correct. It is when it was, it is within the, the NJ DOT's right of way. So we are agreeing to help assist with that, reach out to the DOT at look to them to, to provide any specific maintenance for, for the base and kind of clean it up to make sure that it is still functioning properly as it was when it was installed.  
Speaker 5     00:41:05    Okay.  
Speaker 7     00:41:07    Another, another item in the discussion with Mr. Hinterstein was to just do a, a video of the downstream pipe, which we can coordinate with the DOT on as well. We could also have the video done as the applicant as well, just kind of vetting that out with the DOT to make sure no issues from their perspective, but we can do that to kind of confirm the, the physical conditions of the pipe and see if there are any issues from a downstream perspective. Okay. Another item for Mr. Stein's letter. He had asked for some additional landscaping. I'll, I'll note them on the, on the exhibit A two here to the east of the, of the building near the, the residential properties add a little bit more infill landscaping. He had asked for some areas to the north of the trailer, parking to infill a little bit more landscaping, which we can do. He had also asked, which we, we noted we would discuss with the DOT as well, maybe adding a little bit more landscaping on the outside of the basin, behind the curb, along the ramp coming from South Washington Avenue. I will sketch it in blue, but essentially it's on the north side and then the east side of the basin along the ramp there. Nothing substantial but a few trees kind of dress that up from a landscape perspective. So we will certainly,  
Speaker 5     00:42:18    And again that that's, that's an instance where the DOT basically has to give us the right,  
Speaker 7     00:42:23    Correct. So we will, we will coordinate with the DOT on that item as well. Other than that, in Mr. Stein's letter, we came to an agreement to comply with the, the comments in his letter. I shouldn't say other than that. I say in addition to those, I just wanted to highlight a few notes that we have from our, from our discussion relative to the CME associates letter as well. That was, that we received dated October 20th, 2023. Before jumping into the specific comments, there are a few items in the front end of the report. Just I want to kind of highlight the, the building height. There is a discrepancy between the civil plans and the architectural plans. That really is due to the civil plans measuring building height from the average finished grade around the building, which is consistent with what the code requires for Piscataway. So the, the architectural plan from an elevation perspective will show one height, but when we measure the height from a, from a code and a zoning requirement perspective, we measure it from the average finished grade, which accounts for the discrepancy. But we will, we'll make sure that we coordinate with the architect and maybe ask the architect to note on their plans the, the height that would be measured from the mean finished grade.  
Speaker 7     00:43:36    There was a note about the office space within the warehouse. I'm not sure where the discrepancy or the confusion comes from, but just for the record to confirm the anticipated office space within the proposed warehouse space, again, assuming potentially two tenants would be 6,388 square feet. And I would just like to confirm for the record that the light fixtures will all be dark sky compliant relative to some of the comments in the, the mentioned CME letter comment number four, we, we, we will clarify the side versus rear yards on the plan. Seems there is a little bit of a discrepancy with calling the east boundary or a side yard when it might be better suited as a rear yard. That will not result in any sort of deviations from the code. But we will clarify that, clarify that on the plan there was a discrepancy with the lot width and the lot depth on the plan.  
Speaker 7     00:44:28    The existing lot width and lot depth are shown. There was a, we flipped the numbers as a typo on what was proposed, but essentially the existing condition for lot width in depth is not changing. We are not changing the, the, the size of the lot, the configuration of the property lines or the boundaries. So those items will be clarified on future revision of plans. Comment number seven also talks about building height discrepancy for the architectural plan, which I just discussed. There was a comment regarding screening on the roof, which, which is related to the cell equipment which the, the project architect will walk through during their testimony. I had noted it earlier in my testimony as well, but a, a discrepancy for the sign area, for the monument sign, what we had listed in our sign table was really inclusive of the base of the sign as well.  
Speaker 7     00:45:15    The detail references just the sign area itself, which is a bit smaller in both instances, whether we include this, the area of the base or not, it will be compliant with the requirements of less than 75 square feet an area for the monument sign. So just to clarify that. And then for there a couple a few other comments relative to parking to result disp discrepancy of a calculation versus what's required for the, the number of EV parking spaces and a credit for the EV parking spaces based on the New Jersey State statute. We will rectify and clarify those items on the plan as well. But I assure the board those comply with the requirements for the ev for the state statute and we will just update on the plan in a future revision. Mr. Ator, we also received a traffic letter as well. I will reserve that for, for our traffic engineer and his testimony, but they can attest any of the, the comments from the traffic ed, from the board's traffic engineer as well.  
Speaker 5     00:46:12    And then just to be comprehensive items, 14 to 15 reference remediation and LSRP, which we did answer in Mr Fit's testimony, that single discreet item that requires some soil excavation has been completed and the RAO, which is the final document that evidence is the matter is closed once the report is filed will be also issued. So that should be in the next, as Mr. Fit fit indicated, roughly 60 days, you know, 60 to 90 days, but might be even sooner. So clarify that, that has all anything else, Alex?  
Speaker 7     00:46:48    That's all I have.  
Speaker 5     00:46:49    Okay. Those are the questions I have for Mr. Lame.  
Speaker 0     00:46:53    Thank you. Members of the board. You've heard the testimony of this witness. Does any, anybody on the board have questions of this witness?  
Speaker 8     00:47:02    Madam chair. Oh, go ahead. Go ahead, Dawn. Oh, that's I yield to you. It's Reverend Kinneally. Thank  
Speaker 2     00:47:09    You Reverend Kinneally. Madam chair. If I may, it's not a question, but it's a comment with regard to the staff report. There is one additional item that you, you will not see in the staff report, however it will be required. Is the installation of the repeater system for emergency personnel, is that something that the applicant is agreeable to?  
Speaker 5     00:47:31    Yes, I'll have Mr. Fisher just Cahn that will something that's in the redevelopment plan, which is a requirement. So I think it's yes. But Mr. Fisher, if you can just confirm for the record that that that will be, will be done. Yes,  
Speaker 7     00:47:43    I can confirm that.  
Speaker 2     00:47:45    Thank you.  
Speaker 5     00:47:47    Thank you  
Speaker 0     00:47:48    Mr. Ken. Reverend Kinneally, do you have a question?  
Speaker 8     00:47:51    Yes, yes. Just for the safety factor of it. When on, I guess that would be the northwest corner where the car entrance comes in. Is that for cars only? No trucks. Am I correct  
Speaker 7     00:48:04    The entrance right here?  
Speaker 8     00:48:07    Yes.  
Speaker 7     00:48:08    This, this is for cars and trucks  
Speaker 8     00:48:10    Car? No, the other, I guess it's the other entrance I guess.  
Speaker 7     00:48:15    So I guess I'll just circle the, the entrance then near the site. This is for trucks,  
Speaker 8     00:48:20    Right?  
Speaker 7     00:48:20    And you will have cars and trucks  
Speaker 8     00:48:23    Right  
Speaker 7     00:48:24    Along the north of the building. The truck access will stop at the building car,  
Speaker 8     00:48:29    At the staging area  
Speaker 7     00:48:30    To the east,  
Speaker 8     00:48:31    Right?  
Speaker 7     00:48:33    No truck access to the east and the south side of the building.  
Speaker 8     00:48:37    Okay, so there's no interaction with, with the cars on, on, on that side at all.  
Speaker 7     00:48:43    Correct. No interaction with the cars for the loading zone operations. Very limited access, very limited interaction with the truck and trailer parking.  
Speaker 8     00:48:52    I, okay, that's my one question number two question. Your loading and operation hours, there's not gonna be any overnight state trucking there is that, am I correct? You got certain hours of the operations or, or you don't know until you get attended?  
Speaker 5     00:49:10    Well, yeah, and, and I would also add, right, I mean obviously if, if there are municipal ordinances that that fly, but this right in the, the reality is that that warehouses are essentially 24 hour operations in the sense the trucks are, the work is done in interior essentially overnight. So they're, they're loading and, and that kind of thing. So that, that's just the way it operates. So that would is what it would be. We don't have a specific tenant to be able to give you a specific answer, but obviously those are, are general ordinances in town and whatever they are would've to be complied with. But as a general matter, every warehouse is essentially 24 hours because they, the the, as you'll hear from the traffic engineer, the trucks leave before, before the rush hour and so they're loaded overnight inside. Right,  
Speaker 8     00:49:57    But, but my question is, I, I know there's compliances in the state that you cannot run these units. Diesel  
Speaker 5     00:50:04    Oh you mean idling. You're talking about idling, right? Yes, yes. Alex, why don't you just confirm, obviously there are the idling signs and you know, there's, there's state, state laws that apply. We'll,  
Speaker 8     00:50:15    Okay, that's the only questions I have. Thank you very much.  
Speaker 0     00:50:19    Are there any other questions from members of the board?  
Speaker 9     00:50:23    Madam chair if I may? This is Councilwoman Cahill. So Reverend Kinneally already asked one of my questions about the idling. I mean I see the parking there, the truck parking there. I'm, you know, just again, you know, reiterating that although the parking is there additionally for any trucks that may, I guess need to wait to be loaded up, you know, that's a big concern of ours in town. I'm sure many of you've heard, you know, trucks getting backed up, you know when things happen. So we certainly don't want that to happen and certainly don't wanna have obviously any idling going on either. While truck's there. What I'm mostly concerned about is certainly on the residential side, I appreciate the saving of the existing mature trees and also the addition of them also noting that the lighting in the back will be compliant so that it's not going out into the neighborhood and it complies with all our lighting ordinances.  
Speaker 9     00:51:41    And you may have specifically said that, but I didn't, you know, my audio, I apologize. It's going a little bit in and out there. And then additionally, since you know, the loading is sort of facing, you know, a main road thoroughfare, I see the additional, you know, trees, shrubs, you know, the landscaping there. The question for you right over in that, you know, general, well not that particular vicinity, but almost parallel to that new Brunswick Road, there's a, a Bob's discount warehouse there where there is kind of like a berm that's built up and they don't have loading facing the road there. I mean, is there any opportunity that the applicant would consider building this up so that you know, because right now there's not a, you know, there's not a lot there that was an office, right? You'd go and park in there. Would there be any consideration to adding additional sort of soil there so that the investment of this additional landscaping could at the start have even more of an effect of a barrier or even consider putting in a berm?  
Speaker 9     00:53:11    Yeah, I said the berm but the, I don't know if I, you know, again, I don't know if this would comply because is this the frontage, is this the side, you know, this is the frontage, some sort of maybe a privacy fencing, one of those solid fencing vinyl fencings that would add a little bit more buffering. I don't know actually, you know, just put an asterisk next to that. I'm not sure that that would being compliant with one of our ordinance about fencing because we have certain ones with frontage and Dawn, I'll let you chime in on that and if it's possible, just wondering if it's a consideration because I do see that the applicant here wants to create that buffering in order to sort of offset that look. Just wondering if there's anything more that might add additionally to the start of very young vegetation. Yeah,  
Speaker 5     00:54:13    And I, I would,  
Speaker 7     00:54:14    Yeah, if, if I may, Mr. Atory, chairwoman chairwoman Kale. I'm sorry. It's an excellent question and what I would like to, to note to you and to the members of the board is that in this, in the landscape area where we are proposing trees and shrubs to the west of the loading, we actually do on the grading plan show a three to four foot tall berm in that area. So we, which is, you're dead on there like perfect, it's a great question for the buffering, it really enhances it. So we do have a three to four foot tall berm in that, in that landscape area as well. I'll also note that South Washington Avenue I, is it elevation, I think it's at around elevation 80 or 81, which changes along as you go north and south. This, the height of that berm will be at around elevation 89.  
Speaker 7     00:54:56    So there is already a little bit of a gray differential there as well. On top of the burn being added with the landscape buffering, that should really provide a nice screen and a buffer to the, to the loading operations for the building from South Washington Avenue. So I'll go, I'm gonna try and go in reverse order of your questions if I can. The lighting, I would like to confirm for you the light poles specifically near the residential that are proposed along the, the east side of the, the car parking on the east to the east of the building, dark sky compliant will be facing down and we'll have shields to limit glare and visual impact to the residence to the east. So I wanted to note that for you as well. I don't know if, I don't know if there's another question in there. I think those were the,  
Speaker 5     00:55:36    I think that was it.  
Speaker 7     00:55:37    Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Great questions. Chairman McHale. Thank you.  
Speaker 9     00:55:42    No, I appreciate that and I didn't notice the burn, but I do appreciate that very much. Excellent.  
Speaker 0     00:55:49    Are there any other questions from members of the board? If not, I'll open it up to the public. Ms. Buckley, would you see if there's anyone raising their hand that wishes to be,  
Speaker 3     00:55:59    Can you please unshare your screen Alex?  
Speaker 7     00:56:02    Absolutely.  
Speaker 3     00:56:02    Thank you very much. Okay. Members of the public, if you have any questions or comments for this witness, you could raise your hand on the bottom. Noah Madam chair.  
Speaker 0     00:56:14    Thank you. Close to the public. I think we can have your next witness.  
Speaker 5     00:56:20    Great. And that would be Dan McInnis.  
Speaker 4     00:56:24    Mr. McGinnis, are you present?  
Speaker 10    00:56:27    Yes, I'm here.  
Speaker 4     00:56:28    Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 10    00:56:33    I do.  
Speaker 4     00:56:34    Your name and address please.  
Speaker 10    00:56:36    Dan McGinnis McMahon of Bowman Company office address, four 60 Veterans Drive, Burlington, New Jersey.  
Speaker 4     00:56:43    Thank you.  
Speaker 5     00:56:45    Mr. McGinnis, you're here to provide traffic engineering testimony. Can you please provide the board with your credentials experience in terms of giving expert testimony in the area of traffic engineer?  
Speaker 10    00:56:56    Sure. I've got a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from North Carolina State University with an emphasis in transportation. I've been practicing traffic engineering in New Jersey since 2004. Been a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey since 2008. And I have a professional traffic operations engineer certification from the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Those licenses and certifications are current and I've testified for various Landy sports throughout the state of New Jersey as a expert witness of traffic engineering, including Woodbridge, Township and Middlesex County, but not this board.  
Speaker 5     00:57:27    Great. I would, I would ask that Mr. McGinnis be qualified as a traffic engineering expert. Yes.  
Speaker 0     00:57:32    He's so Thank you. He's so qualified.  
Speaker 5     00:57:34    Thank you. Thank, thank you. Mr. McGinnis. Similar to Mr. Lame, I know that you did prepare a traffic statement that has been submitted to the board, was reviewed by the board's traffic engineering consultant. So perhaps you can walk through making reference to that statement as, as you need, if you can walk through the pertinent of, of the traffic engineering aspects of this project.  
Speaker 10    00:57:58    Certainly. So, yeah, Mr. TRO is referring to our traffic statement dated September 16th, 2022, which I'll just summarize briefly. So we, we, in, in that summary, we compared the site traffic, we expect the proposed use to generate and compared it to the existing use of the previous use at, at full occupancy of the existing office buildings. And so just to very briefly summarize the, whether on a daily basis or, or a a peak hour basis, the traffic will be significantly reduced by a factor of six or seven. So the proposed use would generate about one sixth or one seventh of the traffic of the existing use the, the office building of full occupancy. So on a daily basis, the existing office building when fully occupied, would generate about a little over 2000 trips a day. That's in and out where the proposed warehouse is expected to generate a little under 300 and in each of the morning and afternoon peak hours, the previous use generated about a little less than 300 trips in and out during each peak hour, whereas the warehouse would generate a little under 50, so significantly less overall trips.  
Speaker 10    00:59:21    Now, of course, the truck traffic will, will increase, but will still be pretty low. And as Mr. Cahn mentioned it, it's, it'll, it'll be well distributed throughout the day. So we would expect about 93 truck trips in and out per day, but only three and five in the morning and afternoon peak hours respectively. So not a significant impact expected from the, from the development in terms of site traffic. And as, as Mr. Lo May mentioned, the the site is, is blessed with excellent access in in fact, Aithal. Alex, could you, could you bring up that exhibit A one, the, the aerial exhibit?  
Speaker 10    01:00:08    So as Aithal as a, as, as Alex mentioned that there's, there's direct access to the partial interchange of Washington Avenue and, and 2 87 to the north and south, right there, Washington Avenue and then to the north, and then east via Stelton Avenue, you can access the other movements to, to 2 87. So this is where we expect most of the truck traffic to, to travel to and to arrive from when accessing the site. And of course, these are Canyon State routes designed to accommodate truck traffic. So that, that summarizes our, our, our report. I, I would like to address one of the comments from the board's board traffic engineers letter. The question was how will the truck traffic from the development that was it, it expected to affect queuing along the approach to the traffic signal along the Washington Plaza approach to, to route to, to Washington Avenue? And, and the answer is, I mean, it's, it's mental traffic. So while we didn't, we have not yet performed traffic counts or analyzed the capacity of that, that intersection.  
Speaker 10    01:01:23    You know, the, the, the most demanding period for traffic leaving the site is the afternoon peak hour in which 29 passenger vehicles and three trucks are expected to leave the site. And that traffic signal operates on a 92nd cycle. So on average throughout the afternoon peak hour, that's, that's one passenger vehicle every four signal cycles and one truck every 13 signal cycles. So we would not expect the site to significantly increase the queing at that traffic signal. And then, like I said, that, that, that brings me around to, to, to DOT permitting. I, I, I just wanted to comment a little further to expand a little more on, on on the statements. Mr. Atory, Mr. Lomay mentioned, as Alex mentioned, we, we, a letter of no interest was, was obtained, but we do expect, we do expect a permit will be required to permit the proposed sidewalk at the signal. And then along with the sidewalk, we would expect DOT to require pedestrian signal heads, which the implementation of which would require some minor modifications of, of the signal timing. So we will work with DOT to see if, if there are any incidental improvements we can make to the signal timing to make things operate better out there. So that, that's the, the direct testimony of prepared. I'm happy to answer any questions. Great.  
Speaker 5     01:02:53    Those, that's all the questions I have for this witness.  
Speaker 0     01:02:57    Members of the board, do you have any questions of this witness hearing? No answer is open. I will open it up to the public. Ms. Buckley, would you check and see if there's anyone in the public who wishes to ask some questions of this witness?  
Speaker 3     01:03:12    No one's raising their hands. Madam chair.  
Speaker 0     01:03:14    Thank you. Close to the public. Do you have another witness, Mr?  
Speaker 5     01:03:18    Yes, I do. My last witness is Claudio Brida. He's the project architect.  
Speaker 0     01:03:24    Okay. May pursue,  
Speaker 4     01:03:27    Is Mr. Brida present? Yes,  
Speaker 11    01:03:30    I am. Yes. Would  
Speaker 4     01:03:31    You raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Yes. Your name and address, please?  
Speaker 11    01:03:38    Excuse me. Claudio Breta. Where? Malcolm one 10 Edison Place in Newark, New Jersey.  
Speaker 4     01:03:45    Thank you,  
Speaker 5     01:03:47    Mr. Breta, if you can briefly provide the board with your credentials and, and experienced testimony to qualify as a licensed architect and give such expert testimony.  
Speaker 11    01:04:00    Sure. Good evening. Again, my name is Claudia Reta. I'm a licensed and register architect in the state of New Jersey, as well as three other states here in the East coast. I've been in the field of architecture for over 21 years now, and I have a bachelor's in architecture from Pratt Institute in New York. Although I've not provided any professional testimony in Piscataway, I have provided in other parts of Middlesex County. The last one being in Saraville.  
Speaker 5     01:04:31    I would ask that Mr. Brett be qualified as a professional expert testimony in the, in the area of architecture.  
Speaker 0     01:04:39    Yes, he's acceptable.  
Speaker 5     01:04:40    Thank you. Mr. Breta, if you can, similar to the, the last two witnesses, if you can run the board through the pertinent parts of your testimony as it relates to this project, the design of the building, making particular note of the couple of items that we know questions have been asked, either in reports or otherwise, for example, screening of the rooftop and antennas. And there was a question about banding of the, of the color banding. So if you can please provide the board with summary of your services and your conclusions.  
Speaker 11    01:05:11    Sure. Just start off with a quick overview of the overall floor plan. As previously noted, the overall building is 155,272,000 square feet. So the overall building length is 570 feet in the depth of 275 feet. All the exterior walls are made of precast concrete walls with again, would you, which you typical punch ins for doors for life safety, as well as all the, the dock doors, which are here in Plan North, which is actually the west. So there's a total of, of 24 dock doors plus two drive-in ramps for box trucks and vans, et cetera. As noted earlier by previous witness, this building is speculative with the idea being for one tenant, but it does have the flexibility for two potential tenants. As you can see here on the corners, these shaded areas are the potential areas for the office spaces for the future tenants. Again, it does have the flexibility for two potential tenants, as you can see here with these two corners here on the plan south.  
Speaker 5     01:06:30    And Mr. Brenda, let me just interrupt you. Is this the exact plan that was submitted? I just wanna make sure if I have to mark it as  
Speaker 11    01:06:36    It, it's, yes.  
Speaker 5     01:06:38    Okay.  
Speaker 11    01:06:40    One other item to bring up here on, again, plan north or west, again, you have some of the building infrastructure, which is the typical fire pump and electrical room. This case we do have an access ladder here for roof access. That's the way the land for the overall floor plan. Going back now to the, the roof plan as not early. This roof will be designed and be ready for live loads and dead loads associated, not only with snow, of course in New Jersey, but also for the solar panels themselves. So the, the structural design will be enhanced to the additional five pounds per square foot for the, the solar panels, although hard to see here, but, which I don't noting on the other sheets. But you can see here on some of the corners, which is actually this corner as well as this corner, the the roof antennas from T-Mobile, which I'll go further a little bit on the other sheets.  
Speaker 11    01:07:45    So jumping on to the, the elevations, as I noted, the exterior walls are precast concrete panels. The main colors are two tone of, of gray, which are relatively the aesthetics or the branding colors of IDI logistics, if you will. But the, some highlights of blue, particularly at the corners of the building where we do have the, the office spaces, the branding colors for IDI is is a gradient going from really dark blue all the way to a very light, almost white color at the top of the, the parapet, again, it's the lighter gray on the top and in the darker tone on the bottom of the concrete panels. And then we do provide some breaks here with some recessed panels with darker tones of gray, again to, for lack of a better term, it's a modern inter interpretation of pyla. So that's the east elevation. And, and again, you could see here what I mentioned before regarding the antennas here in the corners. This is a good example here. There's some screening here to conceal the antennas. And the idea is to color match the paint of the, the concrete panels below to the top of the antennas. The overall height is right now 61 feet from the finished floor elevation of the building. And the typical parapet height is 45 feet, four inches. That's the average parapet to the, the top.  
Speaker 5     01:09:25    And I know you, I see Mr. Retta that you have it listed, but perhaps you can also just reference for the record the, the height from the, the roof. The roof deck itself.  
Speaker 11    01:09:36    Sure. So from the roof deck itself to the top of the screening, we have 14 feet one, and again, from the top of the roof deck itself to the top or the most high or the highest point of the antenna for that matter, it'll be 18 feet one.  
Speaker 5     01:09:53    Thank you.  
Speaker 11    01:09:54    Sure. Again, as I note on the floor plan, you'll see here the typical punch opens for egress doors and life safety and fire department access into the building. And again, the corners are just a little bit more dressed up, if you will. They do have a canopy over the, the main entrance for the office space and has a, a little bit more glazing just to bring natural light into the office space. The other elevation such as the south and north elevation, a little bit more toned down if you'll, it doesn't have as much as the, the blue as the other elevations, but it does keep the, the aesthetic moving throughout the building with the same reveals of the concrete panels in the same two tones of the, of the gray. We do add a little pops of color here and there's, as you can see here with the blue, which again, the standard, the IDI color brands and just some form lines with some additional reveals there just to dress up the concrete a little bit more.  
Speaker 11    01:10:58    The other elevation, which is where all the dock doors are, as I noted before, is a total of 24 dock doors. And you can see here the two driving ramps for, for vans and box trucks, et cetera. The elevation does have some additional punch up business for clear story windows above just to bring in some natural light into the warehouse itself for all the workers as they're loading up the, the trucks. So that's the elevations. And the last page is really just a three D rendering of the typical corner. As I mentioned here. This is the, the office, one of the corners of the office is for that matter. And you can see here the screening to conceal the T-Mobile antennas right behind it. That's pretty much it.  
Speaker 5     01:11:55    No, I will, I, I will point you to, and, and Mr. Fisher obviously can, can jump in as needed. There was a comment in one of the reports about adding, and I wanna see if I can find that comment specifically about adding some additional color to, to possibly, you know, add to the interest on, on certain of the walls. If you can comment on that or, or you or, and or Mr. Fisher just in terms of how, how we would look to respond to that comment.  
Speaker 6     01:12:26    I mean, we're open to it. We just haven't gone beyond this initial design. I'm assuming it would be probably be handled with resolution compliance with the city planner is my guess.  
Speaker 5     01:12:39    So there resolution compliance you could see to add in potentially some additional color or, or, and, and Mr. Brenda, that, that makes sense to you?  
Speaker 11    01:12:47    It does, yeah. We're certainly amenable to, to make the, the necessary changes.  
Speaker 5     01:12:53    Okay. Those are the questions I have for the treatments.  
Speaker 0     01:12:58    Thank you Mr. Cahn. Have we marked all the exhibits of anything that was used tonight?  
Speaker 5     01:13:02    This is, this one is new. The others were plans that were submitted, so Mr. Breta did not have to mark them. They're other ones that are submitted. That's the application. This one I believe is new, right, MRTA, it's, it's, so we should mark this? Yes. This last rendering here. Thank you. Thank you. Madam. I believe  
Speaker 4     01:13:17    It should be three.  
Speaker 5     01:13:19    Okay. Thank you. That, that is it.  
Speaker 0     01:13:21    Okay. Members of the board, do you have any questions to ask of this witness?  
Speaker 9     01:13:27    Madam chair? I'm not so sure I'm gonna ask of the witness, although maybe Dawn could jump in here. The commentary about the additional coloring. I'm wondering if the, any professionals here wanna enlighten me as to what additional coloring they'd be looking for and like where  
Speaker 4     01:13:55    That comment was in Mr. Hendrick's report. I don't believe if he's with us tonight,  
Speaker 9     01:14:00    Mr. Kinneally, your audio is pretty bad.  
Speaker 2     01:14:03    It's in Gabrielle. It's, hi, it's Dawn. It's in it's common six of the staff report. Henry was looking, he didn't, he didn't make any specific recommendation as to color, but he was just asking if there could be some other color incorporated into these, into the, the walls to like, to break it up essentially.  
Speaker 5     01:14:24    And, and, and certainly just to kind of, obviously we have everyone here to, to answer. I think I, I always likes to try and address certainly this is the way they kind of do it. These are the colors certainly, but this is the way their buildings are generally done. So this is what they would like. But certainly if there's a specific request for something, they're amenable to consider it. You know, I don't know if that helps, helps you or not. So they're, they're open to discussing.  
Speaker 9     01:14:49    Yeah, no, because I'm coming Mr. Cahn tore from the perspective of, well, you know, the aesthetics are very important for me that, you know, that's kind of the perspective I'm always looking at. What I bring to this board is looking like as a resident what it would look. And I'm just concerned if we're, well, maybe I shouldn't be concerned. Will we see the final plans before this board Dawn before it goes into effect? Because like, quite frankly, a pop of orange through here wouldn't be something I'd be looking for.  
Speaker 5     01:15:33    No, it would, well it wouldn't, let me just say this and it would be, I assume, and, and Ms. Richard please comment the, these specific colors are the ones that are actually in the redevelopment plan. And so it would be the colors you're looking at. So as a matter of color, there wouldn't be any other color introduced.  
Speaker 9     01:15:48    Okay. Yeah. Then, then that is fine. Okay.  
Speaker 5     01:15:51    No oranges, no oranges. Yeah. There, there's no other color, but the colors you're looking at, it must be a matter of, I assume possibly adding a couple more blue. I'm, I don't know the exact term, you know, a couple more of those blue reveals or whatever you wanna call them. It's that kind of thing. But there would be no other color introduced.  
Speaker 9     01:16:08    Yeah. Okay. And as long as it's not a big blue stripe along the top, the way I've seen another town allow another big building to do where it looks just not good. And by the way, I wouldn't mind orange 'cause I am a Met fan.  
Speaker 5     01:16:26    Well, there you go. But  
Speaker 9     01:16:26    Not on your building, but not on the,  
Speaker 2     01:16:29    Okay. But Gabrielle, it'll not come back to this board that if, if this is approved, you won't see this again.  
Speaker 9     01:16:35    Okay. So could I just, and I can only imagine that the architect would never do this, but could we not put a big bl blue band or anything like that up the top? Whatever the interest is, just keep it very tasteful.  
Speaker 11    01:16:53    Yeah, I, I don't think I'll do that either.  
Speaker 9     01:16:55    I mean, thank you. I, I'm not gonna name names of the nextdoor town, but we have a beautiful set of distribution centers. But when you go down that road, the only thing you can see is an ugly white building with a big, bright blue band along the top. But I won't even mention the company. Let's try to keep this like looking tasteful, you know, as much as you know, we can with warehousing just to make it look as yeah. As tasteful as possible. Thank you. Okay,  
Speaker 11    01:17:27    Well thank you Fisher noted earlier, you know, we are seeking higher class type of development, so  
Speaker 9     01:17:38    That's appreciated. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     01:17:42    Okay, we have any other final questions of this witness? Members of the board? If not, let's open it up to the public.  
Speaker 3     01:17:52    Can you please share your screen? Coia. Thank you. Okay.  
Speaker 0     01:17:56    We're now opening it up, opening up to the public for any questions that they might have of this particular witness.  
Speaker 3     01:18:04    No. And Madam chair, thank  
Speaker 0     01:18:05    You. Close to the public  
Speaker 5     01:18:07    And, and thank you Madam chair. I do not have any other witnesses.  
Speaker 0     01:18:11    Thank you so much. Members of the board. You heard the totality of this application if there's no discussion, does someone wanna make a motion?  
Speaker 9     01:18:23    Madam chair. I'll make that motion. This is Councilwoman Cahill to approve this application based upon the staff compliance with the staff reporting. Dawn, is there anything else I'm missing here? So I think the rate, the repeater system that is not in that staff report, but is part required of the redevelopment plan. Anything else? Dawn  
Speaker 2     01:18:51    The other, you heard testimony that they are working with the DOT about the installation of the sidewalks along South Washington. Certainly that will not hold up any construction, but that will be a requirement of the develop redeveloper agreement.  
Speaker 9     01:19:07    Okay. So that they, with the final approval and opening of the building cannot be done until that is completed.  
Speaker 5     01:19:13    No, that  
Speaker 9     01:19:14    Will not hold  
Speaker 2     01:19:14    Them up. That will not, it would be part of their redeveloper agreement. Part  
Speaker 9     01:19:18    Of redevelopment  
Speaker 2     01:19:18    Do it correct. But  
Speaker 9     01:19:20    They'll have a period of time to get that done  
Speaker 2     01:19:22    Right. And no blue band  
Speaker 9     01:19:25    Blue. No blue band. Yeah. So I'll put that motion forward.  
Speaker 0     01:19:31    Do I have a second?  
Speaker 8     01:19:32    Madam chair, Reverend County. I'll second that motion.  
Speaker 0     01:19:36    Thank you. Roll call.  
Speaker 3     01:19:38    Excuse me. Mayor. Wahler. Yes. Councilwoman. Cahill?  
Speaker 9     01:19:41    Yes.  
Speaker 3     01:19:42    Ms. Corcoran?  
Speaker 2     01:19:43    Yes.  
Speaker 3     01:19:44    Reverend Kinneally. Yes. Mr. Atkins? Yes. And Madam chair.  
Speaker 0     01:19:50    Yes. Thank you so much, gentlemen. Thank  
Speaker 5     01:19:53    Thank you very much. We appreciate your time.  
Speaker 3     01:19:56    Have a good night.  
Speaker 5     01:19:56    Take care. Goodnight,  
Speaker 8     01:19:58    Paul.  
Speaker 5     01:19:58    Goodnight.  
Speaker 0     01:20:01    Item number 1223 PB 26 slash 27 River Road Estates. LLC, Mr. Arch?  
Speaker 12    01:20:14    Yes. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, esteem members of the board and board professionals. I am Tim Arch. I'm an attorney licensed in the state of New Jersey. I'm here representing River Road Estates, LLC. We're here tonight with seeking preliminary and final subdivision approval for a property located at 8 57 hose Lane West. This is a, this is, as I mentioned in a redevelopment area. So there is a redevelopment plan that is in place. We are proposing to subdivide the existing approximately 8.7 acre property into 16 lots to accommodate 14 new single family homes and associated site improvements. We are conforming to that redevelopment plan with the exception of two minor deviations, one of which is for front yard setback. 40 feet is required and you'll see that on one of the proposed lots. We are seeking 30 foot for one of those homes. But you'll see that it's really just at one sort of section or one side of where that that home is proposed to be situated and it's really as a result of a curvature in the roadway.  
Speaker 12    01:21:29    So I think you'll find that, that it'll still appear to be in line with, with all the other proposed homes in the area. And the other that we're seeking is for fencing. The code has a six foot maximum height allowed. And while all the fences that we're proposing are no higher than that six feet because of the topology of the site, there are some walls as well where the, there are some areas where the fence is on top of the walls. And so if you take that in its entirety, it is over six feet. And I think that affects, I believe, four of the proposed lots to varying degrees. Apart from that, we are compliant with the, with the redevelopment plan. We do have several reports. We have Mr. Hinterstein report, we have ACME letter, we have Ms. Corcoran's zoning letter. Just at the outset, I would like to say that we can, we can comply with all the comments in those reports and that we are more than happy to work with the Township professionals if we are approved into post-approval compliance to address any concerns or any issues that they might have that they might bring up.  
Speaker 12    01:22:41    So we can certainly do that. We do have a couple exhibits. I'll mention them just right out the, the only ones that need marking, I believe we have a, a colorized existing conditions exhibit, which would be marked as a one, A two would be a colorized overall site plan. And then a three will be a colorized rendering of a conceptual home. One thing I do want to note before we get into our testimony, and this wasn't contained in any of the reports, but it's something that just, I, I know that Piscataway is, is always concerned about single family homes being sort of misused as multi-family rental properties. And what we're showing tonight are some conceptual homes that have, some of them have, may, may have full basements that could legally accommodate bedrooms. So I wanna make it clear and sort of offer as a, as a condition that we will agree not to have multiple bedrooms in any of the basements and not to have any second kitchens located in any basements.  
Speaker 12    01:23:43    And then we're happy to also provide that by way of a deeded restriction to let any future owners know that, that it's not to be used as a, as a multifamily, it's just a single family establishment. So I know that's something that Piscataway is always sort of, has an eye towards when it comes to single family homes. So I do have three witnesses tonight. Our first witness is Eric Ballou. He's our civil engineer. He's gonna take us basically through the, the proposed site plan and touch upon those deviations that I spoke about. We then have Chris Zeek, he's our architect. He's gonna take us through some, some of the conceptual architectural plans that we have. Again, I, I wanna stress that these are conceptual plans, so we don't know exactly what the homes are gonna look like. We want every individual owner to be able to sort of customize them, but this is gonna be a good representation of, of what we wanna bring in, in terms of those homes. And then finally, we have John McDonough, he's our professional planner and he will do what professional planners do, which is provide the, the analysis under, under the MLUL as to the justifications for our deviations. So unless there's any questions of me before I call my witnesses, I think I'm ready to proceed.  
Speaker 0     01:24:57    I think you, you may proceed Mr. Dorn.  
Speaker 12    01:25:00    Okay. First witness I would call is Mr. Eric Ballou.  
Speaker 4     01:25:04    Mr. Ballou, are you present?  
Speaker 13    01:25:07    I am.  
Speaker 4     01:25:07    Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? I  
Speaker 13    01:25:13    Do.  
Speaker 4     01:25:14    Your name and address, please.  
Speaker 13    01:25:16    Eric Balu. The address is 1955, route 34 in Wall, New Jersey.  
Speaker 4     01:25:23    Thank you  
Speaker 12    01:25:25    Mr. Ballou, if you can just briefly take us through your credentials and let us know if you've ever been in front of the boards in Piscataway before.  
Speaker 13    01:25:34    Definitely. I've been practicing for 27 over 27 years now. I've been qualified for numerous boards across the state in Piscataway. It, it was interesting seeing one of the, the exhibits there. We did the warehouses on Access Road in Piscataway back in like 2015. And we're also presently working for this applicant for the residential project on the 37 old New Brunswick Road. So I've been doing projects approximately eight years in Piscataway. Thank you.  
Speaker 12    01:26:06    He's accept. Thank you Mr. Blue, if you can, I appreciate, I'm, I'm gonna pretty much give you the, the run of the, of your presentation and ask you to just go through the site and let us know what we're proposing.  
Speaker 13    01:26:20    All right. Excellent. Can everyone see the screen of the existing conditions exhibit?  
Speaker 13    01:26:27    All right, excellent. So this is exhibit A one. It's an existing conditions exhibit, which is really a 2023 aerial image with the yellow outline being of the, the property. So you can see we're located at the intersection of hose lanes west in River Road, which is also Middlesex County Route five 14. We have about 445 feet of frontage along River Road and about 306 feet of frontage along hose lanes west. And then we have quite a bit of an irregular shape to this property. The overall property consists about 8.7 acres and along this property we actually do have some wetlands along the eastern side as well as, as a stream that's there and a, an associated repair and buffer along that edge. And then along the northern edge we also have a little bit of riparian buffer as well based upon NJDP permits and approvals that have been obtained for this property.  
Speaker 13    01:27:32    One thing I wanna talk about that's sort of unique about this property is there's significant amount of topographic changes. The site slopes down from hose lane last to the intersection of River Road by about six feet. So there's about six feet of drop in this orient direction. Then it drops another 14 feet on River Road from one end of the property to the other. When you look on site, some of the elevations from the high point near the middle to the, where the stream is, that drops off almost 24 feet. So there is a lot of topographical changes and, and that'll sort of come into an understanding when we talk about fences and wall heights and, and things of that nature. This project is within the 8 57 hose lane west redevelopment plan where single family homes are a permitted use. So now we're going to advance to exhibit A two. And this exhibit is the same aerial image that you saw in the previous existing conditions exhibit. But now we've superimposed and colored the proposed subdivision to give you an understanding of what we're actually proposing as part of this project.  
Speaker 13    01:28:50    So as, as I said before, we're proposing a total of 16 lots within the subdivision. 14 of those lots will be utilized for single family homes, as you can see the various boxes. And then two of the lots will actually be for stormwater management basins to address those needs. We're proposing, you know, a 50 foot wide right away, we call it Road A for right now. So we have a, a roadway that goes through the site that terminates at, at a cul-de-sac. So in a sense we have a dead end street system for this project, this roadway, you know, it's a 50 foot right of way, it provides 30 feet of pavement. We also have sidewalks on all side, on both sides of the roadway. So there's plenty of, of walking and pedestrian paths being proposed as part of this project. Of the 14 lots, all of them meet all of the bulk requirements such as the, the, the minimum square footage, which is 17,500 square feet, all the lot widths and lot depths, which is a minimum of a hundred feet in both directions.  
Speaker 13    01:29:57    So we meet all of the bulk requirements for the actual lots themselves. It was talked about, one of the deviations that we're requesting for is for a front setback for one of the lots. So on lot 22.2, the provost lot number what's being proposed here is a 30 foot setback on one edge and it actually gets even greater when you look at the opposite side. It actually varies from 30 to 47 feet. And the reason why we're requesting that relief is that behind the irregular type property, we have the riparian zones and the wetland areas at the eastern side of this project. So to provide a usable rear yard for this unit, we are asking for a little bit of a deviation relief at this corner to allow a a 30 foot setback. Besides that, all of the lots will meet the setback requirements and coverage requirements as well parking.  
Speaker 13    01:31:01    So, so each one of these units requires, some of these can be up to six bedroom homes or so that requires approximately three spaces per unit in accordance with the RSIS standards. What we're proposing is, is a combination of some have two car garages, some are up to three car garages, and all of them also have a minimum of about 20 foot wide by 18 foot deep space in front of their garages for wheel will be providing what RSAS considers two in a garage, two in the driveway. They give you credit for three and a half spaces where three is required. So we meet the parking requirements for the single family homes and accordance with the residential site improvement standards. The redevelopment standards also have garage criteria as well. They see you need to have a minimum of a two car garage and a maximum of a three car garage. And all of the proposed buildings will meet that requirement as well.  
Speaker 13    01:32:07    In regards to lighting, we will light the roadway and, and the associated adjacent walkways with, with decorative lighting to make sure that it's a safe roadway and safe walkways. And then as, as landscaping in regards to that term, we've really focused on river road placing a lot of vegetation, a combination of decision with evergreen trees and shrubs to really buffer the, the county roadway from the rear of the homes. Also, you can see the basins also too there, these are bio retention basins, so they're grass bottom basins with plantings inside of them. So we do have a variety of landscape being proposed for the project as well as the common street trees that, that are, are typical with a, with a street streetscape in Piscataway to supplement the landscaping. We also have fencing. So we have a six foot board on board fence along River Road that goes for the entire distance and then it converts to a four foot high board on board fencing, sort of along the backs of the properties on the eastern side.  
Speaker 13    01:33:17    Fencing is, is where we're asking for deviations and it's really coming down to really the topographic change that we had to address for this project. So within this lot, 22 point 21, we have that six foot board on board fence within the front yard area where four foot is allowed. But we have a six foot board on board fence per the redevelopment plan on top of a 16.51 foot wall. So we have a total distance of 22.51 feet when you add the wall combined with the fence as was noted in the zoning review. And then in regards to the walls on 22 point 22, where we have walls along the back to make up the grade difference, how it drops off so severely in this area. We have a four foot fence on this property combined with a 10.71 foot wall that's along the back of the property and that's about a total of 14.72.  
Speaker 13    01:34:21    We go to the next lot. These are all very similar situations where you have a four foot fence on top of an eight foot wall for a combine distance of 12 feet. And then 2224 we have the four foot fence, seven and a half foot wall. So it's about 11 and a half feet. These the, is the areas where we're asking for deviations on the fencing. You know, as you can see in this photo, this really shows all the natural vegetation that we're re remaining in place and, and remaining undisturbed. And that gives you almost like a 75 foot buffer between where these fences are being proposed in the walls compared to the property line of the lots that above us to, to mitigate any impacts that may be there. Even on the river road aspects, we have the walls, we also have vegetation inside of the basin, sort of screening out some of that wall and mitigating some of those visual impacts as well.  
Speaker 13    01:35:17    Well, so we feel like based upon what we've done by preserving existing vegetation plus supplemental vegetation, we're mitigating the impacts of these increase in wall heights, storm water management. So we are reducing storm water rates. We're required to be 50, 75% of the pre-development rates once this development is constructed. So to do that we're utilizing two bio retention. So we have a bio retention basin on 2228, and then we also have a bio retention basin on lots 2221. So these basins basically, you know, treat the water for water quality from all the pavement surfaces. And then they also retain the water, slow it down to decrease the runoff. These basins will connect up to the river road, the county storm sewer collection system, where then it's gonna be conveyed to a culvert that goes across River Road. So we're maintaining the same drainage patterns, just reducing it with basins, sanitary sewer, you know, these will all be, they all have sanitary sewer, no septic systems. We're able to connect for an existing sanitary sewer line from hose lanes west throughout the development to service them. There's also water mains, existing water mains within hose lanes west as well. So we'll be able to provide water service by extending a Maine through there and providing the hydrants and things of that nature for, for public protection.  
Speaker 13    01:36:50    So, so that, that really, that's my, the direct testimony that I had outlined to give an overview of the entire project. Tim, what else, what else? I,  
Speaker 12    01:37:02    Thanks Eric. So just to, to turn to the staff reports, I don't wanna go through them point by point, but just in general you agree any of the comments that we've received in the staff reports that we can comply with those comments? Is that correct?  
Speaker 13    01:37:18    Based upon my experience over two completed projects, yes, we can definitely work out everything and get it addressed.  
Speaker 12    01:37:24    Okay. And we're more than happy to deal with the Township professionals if we are approved as part of post compliance to address any issues that they might have in, in part of post compliance, is that correct as well?  
Speaker 13    01:37:36    That's correct. Oh, one thing I, I, I guess on one of the letters I guess to address, there was a comment in regards to potential environmental or contamination type issues within Yes, the C review letter.  
Speaker 12    01:37:47    Yeah. I was gonna ask you on the two letters, I think there were two questions for you that required a little bit of testimony or commentary. The first one is, is, is environmental. So if you can ask that or address that first.  
Speaker 13    01:38:00    So, so the applicant did have a phase one report to, to review environmental issues. That report did not, did not highlight any issues of concern from an environmental standpoint. As with all properties, if, if we were to uncover something that had, that required any kind of environmental type of, of cleanup or, or work, then the applicant would retain LSRP as as necessary in the state to address anything. But right now there's nothing that we know that we have to deal with or anticipate.  
Speaker 12    01:38:31    Thanks. And Eric, I believe the other question that came up was about those stormwater basins and, and sort of the management of those basins. Do you know what the plan is to, to ensure that the management is done?  
Speaker 13    01:38:45    Yeah, so those two basins would, there would be a homeowners association established for these 14 single family homes and they would be the responsible party to maintain and take care of these basins.  
Speaker 12    01:38:56    And we're gonna be, and we have a, a operations manual that outlines all the maintenance on that, is that correct?  
Speaker 13    01:39:04    Correct. We submitted the, the stormwater maintenance manual and then that manual is actually recorded with the county as a, as a formal obligation and, and a restriction and obligation for this property ultimately.  
Speaker 12    01:39:17    Thank you Eric. I don't think I have any other direct questions, so I would give him over to the board.  
Speaker 0     01:39:25    Any questions of this witness from the members of the board?  
Speaker 1     01:39:29    Madam chair? I have three questions. Yes  
Speaker 0     01:39:31    Ma'am. Proceed.  
Speaker 1     01:39:33    The, you mentioned about the decorative lighting. Yeah. What type, what is that gonna look like?  
Speaker 13    01:39:42    Basically, I have, let's see if I can pull it up. So it's, it is APC and G fixture  
Speaker 1     01:39:49    And  
Speaker 13    01:39:49    It's  
Speaker 1     01:39:50    14 consistent decorat lighting that we have in town. Is, is all is in black and it has a Piscataway logo on it.  
Speaker 13    01:39:59    Okay. So, so this lighting is black poles, black aluminum metal poles. I don't believe we have right now the Piscataway logo in it. Yeah,  
Speaker 1     01:40:08    Well if I can make a mention, Mr. Hinterstein has the contacts with that. I mean, they're all up and down the multi-use path on Route 18 and in our government complex and around of our, our community center. So you can easily get the specs for that and that those are actually PSEG lights.  
Speaker 13    01:40:31    We would agree to that, that  
Speaker 1     01:40:33    One. Okay. Now the second question, and this is one more geared towards Mr. Arch. I I know you're gonna, there's gonna be the de restriction with the homeowners association dealing with the stormwater detentions. But, but in all these years of being involved in government, when it gets down to the closing time of buying the unit, buying the properties out there, nobody really reads the fine print. You need to have it up front that they're, they're gonna be in charge of maintaining that because a lot of 'em have a tendency to getting the new homeowners get shocked that they're, they're have the homeowners assist to maintain it.  
Speaker 12    01:41:12    We, we certainly understand that and, and again, we, we are happy to provide that the homeowners association is gonna maintain that and we're not gonna hide that from any of the, any of the purchasers. We will be upfront with that as well as any of the conditions of the deed restriction that I spoke about in my, in initially as to the basement bedrooms and the second kitchen, we will,  
Speaker 1     01:41:34    And the only reason I'm bringing that up is because they have, the homeowners associations have a tendency to come running to the Public works department asking for them to maintain it. So I just wanna make that crystal clear for the second one is the maintenance of the, the lights, the PSEG. I think we need Mr. Arch, we need to speak further with Mr. Hinterstein on this, the lighting on that. I mean that could part be part of the Cahn, the approval with the developer's agreement in, in the future on that. Okay.  
Speaker 12    01:42:08    I I certainly, again, we have, we have no issue with working with the Township professionals in whatever capacity that that ends up being. So. Okay.  
Speaker 1     01:42:15    And then the la the last question I have is, I think Ms. Corcoran contacted about the fiber optic cable runs the Yes. Cahn Yes.  
Speaker 12    01:42:25    Yeah, I'll, I'll note it is in the revised report that we got, we are agreeing to comply with all the comments in Mr. Hinterstein report, but just for the record, we are providing conduit on both the newly proposed road as well as both frontages of River Road and hose lane West. So that was noted.  
Speaker 1     01:42:44    Okay. That's, that's all the questions I have. Madam chair.  
Speaker 0     01:42:47    Thank you. Any other members of the board wish to ask any questions?  
Speaker 9     01:42:52    Madam chair, it's Councilwoman Cahill. This is A-A-A-A-A Township Road, correct? Not a private road or is it a private road? That's correct.  
Speaker 13    01:43:05    This is for propo. This would be constructed by the applicant and then dedicated to Piscataway within a public right of way.  
Speaker 9     01:43:13    Okay. The other, I, and I may have more than that. The other question I have Mr. Arches understand that, you know, they're looking for the relief on the fencing for the, I guess the two lots that are on the southern most or the three, I guess here on the southern most part of the, of the plan, but the lot, but the, but the lots actually go deeper is, is that what those white check marks are showing? Is that the proper, the property owner would actually be be be paying taxes on a larger piece, but where we are suggesting here that the existing vegetation is not being touched in the development of these pieces. Is that accurate?  
Speaker 12    01:44:13    So yeah, I I think Eric can speak to that, yes.  
Speaker 13    01:44:16    Yeah, so these lots along the back here are actually in a sense they're oversized, like we're required to have like 17,500 square feet of, of minimum lot size where this lot like 22, 22 I believe is almost 22,000 square feet. So even though these lots are larger in size, their usable area is a little bit condensed. So that's why we're asking for some of the re the relief there on the setback of this one lot.  
Speaker 12    01:44:43    And, and Eric just, if I could, if I can ask to Ms. Cahill's question, the lot actually goes all the way back to where that yellow line delineation is, but the reason that the homeowner can't develop that area is because that's the wetlands of the riparian area. Is that  
Speaker 9     01:45:01    Correct? Okay, so that is the wetlands area, correct.  
Speaker 13    01:45:04    The repair, technically for the record, it's the 50 foot riparian buffer from the stream.  
Speaker 9     01:45:11    Okay. Going back to now the northeast property there 22 point 29, it's kind of like a weird sort of very long driveway between those two properties. I guess that's just the only way that could be situated.  
Speaker 13    01:45:39    Yeah, so, so it is, it's a right, it's a flag in a sense a flag lot where it has a long driveway to the back and the way the, the redevelopment code was written, it does allow this as a permitted option to do flag lots so that the way the curation of the site worked out, that worked out to be a, a flag light lot type of development.  
Speaker 9     01:46:02    Okay. And that's only a, that's a driveway. Okay. Right. Bum bu bum. Oh. So we do have an issue with, with rental properties. As a matter of fact, we have a resident who's right across the street who had two rent, you know, homes sell and then, you know, buyers immediately purchased the homes, specifically two rent. And I know that, you know, can't really tell people or, or you know, I mean I guess you can tell them, but I'm really very, very concerned about that Mr. Arch. Now these homes may not, these are brand new, very, very big homes. I I I would imagine that these are gonna be people moving in who wanna live in homes like this and not necessarily rent out, you know, it's not correct. Okay. But is it only the fact that you're not putting a, a kitchen in the basement? I mean, are there any other remedies or any, anything else in a toolkit from a land use law from, you know, not, you know, stepping on the rights of people who own property and this any other remedies we have to, you know, very much dissuade that sort of activity or No?  
Speaker 12    01:47:34    Well, what I, what I had suggested and what I believe is, which could be is certainly a condition is to record that in a deed restriction so that those are recorded documents that, that are legal documents that, that the homeowner will be made aware of prior to purchasing and will have to abide by those. And that any violation of that can certainly be something. And o of course if it's a condition of, of an approval here would be enforceable by the town. So the town would have the ability to have an enforcement mechanism  
Speaker 9     01:48:05    For that. Well what does the applicant think about that? Because I'll be quite honest with you, I mean, living, you know, we're a university town and we, we have the same issues as any university town, right? With people renting out homes. But with new properties coming in, if, if I'm not, you know, stomping on anyone's right, I would like to have that recorded because there is really no particular reason why we would want to have to, or a neighbor to have to experience, you know what, some other neighbors who don't wanna leave their home probably wanna retire and pass their home onto the next generation. But, you know, you know, not all renters are bad. Most of those people over there are very nice people. But as you know, what can happen in college, college kids, we'd like to try to avoid that as much as possible for our residents. Especially given, you know, obviously the amount of taxes that I would imagine the people buying this home are gonna be paying on, you know, properties of the size, the housing, the size of the house. I mean, what do you think of that?  
Speaker 12    01:49:26    O one thing, a couple things that I can say for that is that there, I don't believe that you can put a, a restriction on a rental on the, on the ability for, for somebody to rent their home. But there is obviously restriction on multi-family use on more than a single family use. So for example, if you were to rent the property, it'd have to be rented as a, as a single family rental. But really the, the mechanism that you can put in place is through that deed restriction is to make it so that it is not a conducive to, for example, having, you know, 12 Rutgers students renting this place, which would mean a, a restriction on, again, multiple basement bedrooms, second kitchens. And then my, my only other comment is I was a Rutgers student. If I could find, IIII couldn't imagine ever finding a place like this that would, to me, well, well,  
Speaker 9     01:50:21    Lemme tell, but things have changed Mr. Arch, the way that youngster, I mean, you know what the new dorms look like. Yes,  
Speaker 12    01:50:27    No, understood. Understood.  
Speaker 9     01:50:28    As you can imagine, you know, parents who are trying, who do more for their kids than not seeing my parents. My parents did a ton for me, but, you know, at the end of the day I rented a little room in a house that had, you know, the carpets were disgusting, everything was gross. So I I I could imagine at some point down the line it happening. So what I would like to suggest then is that they, that that, that whatever we can do in terms of that deeded recorded is that deeded restriction that we actually do as much as we are legally allowed to do, to protect that neighborhood.  
Speaker 12    01:51:08    And, and we're, we're perfectly open to that. And again, one thing that I just wanna stress is that the, the, the, these are gonna be marketed as premier homes. They're not gonna be marketed in, in any way, shape or form as a, you know, the, the only term I can think of is, is sort of a, a flop house for a bunch of Rutgers. It's not gonna happen. So well  
Speaker 9     01:51:32    Look down, listen down the street, off river road, there's actually a, a small billboard there, but there were big homes built in, in those lots too. And to my knowledge, they're all still, you know, single family homes. It's no rentals. I completely understand that. But in light of what is happening at a faster pace than it has in the, you know, previous history in our town in what we're seeing and when, you know, code enforcement might be called out to homes and they're finding locks on doors and, and things of that nature, you know, I I think it is incumbent upon us that where we can and as much as we can within the law is to try to dissuade and protect that from happening elsewhere. That's m gonna be my recommendation and I believe it should be part of the approval.  
Speaker 12    01:52:40    Well, we, we are certainly agreeable to, to taking any reasonable steps to dissuade that sort of multifamily or, or what I'm gonna call a mis a misuse of a single family home. And that's certainly not something that we want to happen. And we will certainly, we're agreeable to take steps to dissuade that.  
Speaker 9     01:53:04    I think that's all my questions. Oh, you know what, one thing I I I, and I I probably don't even have to ask this. I'd imagine part of the pro approvals are, are you upgrading that the sidewalk there on the hose lane west? Are you doing any sidewalk improvements? Okay, I see Mr. Belu, you're shaking your head. Does that include sidewalk improvements on the county side of the road? On the county Road, river road?  
Speaker 13    01:53:35    Right now we're showing full replacement of the sidewalk along hose lane. We don't show any replacement of the sidewalk or curbing on River Road since we're not  
Speaker 9     01:53:46    Did that, does this application need any county approvals, Mr. Arch?  
Speaker 12    01:53:51    It it will, yes. And, and I imagine that, and obviously the placement of sidewalks and curbing there is gonna be within the purview of the county. My understanding is that Middlesex County has been requiring sidewalks along all county frontages.  
Speaker 9     01:54:06    So there's sidewalk there. So, but it, it, it's, it is in need of in definitely in need of improvement. And I, and I'm hoping at some point to that intersection there, the lighting will get, I mean i I, I don't know when it would happen because it was just not too long ago improved, but with the countdown lighting at the light there, I think anybody buying this property here is gonna find themselves in good company with the people who jog down Hoz Lane West crossover to the park. And I am pushing for good improvement of that intersection there with even better sort of pedestrian enhancements to like the crosswalks, whatever they can do there. But yeah, that, that, that sidewalk there along River Road is definitely in need of, of improvements and I'm, I'm gonna guess that the applicant would be agreeable to that as well.  
Speaker 2     01:55:03    Gabrielle? Gabrielle, I'm sorry, it's Dawn that is in our staff report. The prior staff report, the one that you have is the most, the latest one. But they had made some revisions to the plan, but we did cover it in the report  
Speaker 9     01:55:15    Okay. That  
Speaker 2     01:55:16    Any damage or broken curb along River Road be replaced.  
Speaker 9     01:55:20    Okay.  
Speaker 2     01:55:21    Just so you know. Okay.  
Speaker 9     01:55:23    Okay. Yeah, that's a And I think the only thing is, is I might have just learned something today, I guess River Road was at sometime County Road five 14 and then became 6 22. So that's something new for me.  
Speaker 0     01:55:43    Okay. Have we done let people, I have a question as to road internal road a Yeah. Internal road A is going to be utilized and then turned over to the Township I heard you say,  
Speaker 12    01:55:56    Correct?  
Speaker 13    01:55:56    That's correct. That correct.  
Speaker 0     01:55:59    So does the Township then have responsibility for maintenance and snow, snow removal and so forth at that point? Yes. Correct. Or will it be the homeowner's association  
Speaker 13    01:56:09    Now? I think the, the road a maintenance and, and obligations would be similar to, to the adjacent roadways to here. That would be truly a Piscataway roadway.  
Speaker 1     01:56:21    Madam chair just is for, for the record, whenever that they build it to Township standards and then typically the town accepts the roadway once the engineering and the public works department signs off,  
Speaker 0     01:56:34    Then they, then they're responsible for maintain maintenance  
Speaker 1     01:56:38    Yeah. As far as the plowing. But they're gonna take care of the, the homeowners association's gonna take care of the storm storm drains. Okay. Stormwater drain SY system.  
Speaker 0     01:56:50    All right. Members of the board, any other questions? Yeah,  
Speaker 8     01:56:52    One question I need to ask the Madam chair on these homes, Mr, Mr TI guess it's you or Mr. Blue, are they three quarter basement full basements or, or on slabs?  
Speaker 12    01:57:08    So I think our architect is gonna testify next and he might be able to answer that. Okay. But, but one of the things I do wanna highlight is that these are for the purposes of the subdivision application, these are gonna be conceptual. So we do have a couple designs that we submitted to the Township, right. As sort of spec designs as to what we, what we think the homes are gonna look like. But obviously each individual homeowner is gonna have the ability to, to sort of customize or, or, you know, design the home to their liking. But some of the homes do have walkout do have proposed walkout basements. Some of them do not. If the homeowner wants to have a finished basement versus an unfinished basement, those are all decisions that each individual homeowner can, can  
Speaker 8     01:57:50    Make. Okay. That answers my question then. That's why you have the homeowner's association then. Okay, I got it. Okay.  
Speaker 0     01:58:03    I'd like to, are we, I would like to open it up to the public for any questions that they may have of this witness.  
Speaker 3     01:58:12    Can you please unshare your screen?  
Speaker 13    01:58:27    Sorry about that.  
Speaker 0     01:58:28    Thank you. Members of the public, you have an opportunity to ask questions of this witness. Okay. We have, does anyone in the public  
Speaker 3     01:58:34    Yes. Have the first one is Satish, lemme give them allowed to talk. Hold on. Okay. Alright. Satish has permission to speak.  
Speaker 14    01:58:44    Thanks. I'm a resident of Kroger.  
Speaker 4     01:58:46    I'm chairwoman. Is it your p does the board usually swear in the witnesses? Yes.  
Speaker 0     01:58:51    Well, we do get their name and address.  
Speaker 14    01:58:54    Okay. I'm Satish Al Krishnan. I live in six Kroger Lane Piscataway.  
Speaker 4     01:59:04    Thank you.  
Speaker 0     01:59:05    What's your question? Sorry,  
Speaker 14    01:59:08    My question is maybe understanding, looking out from Kroger Lane, there's a huge drop off to where the new proposed properties expected to be built. So we talked about the topographical changes. So is the level of these houses going to be raised to what height are these new houses going to come up to  
Speaker 13    01:59:34    Eric? So the, so the house, yeah. So the houses here were allowed up to 43 feet of a maximum building height for the three houses that would, in a sense, back up to the Kroger Lane, rear yards Kroger Road. So 43 feet of the, the home heights up to,  
Speaker 14    01:59:53    That's from the elevation, which is 20 feet down from where? River Road, I mean, where Kroger Lane properties are. So that 43 is,  
Speaker 13    02:00:03    Yeah. So yeah, so the 43 fees measured measures from the average grade around the structures where the 43 foot dimension is from.  
Speaker 14    02:00:14    So, Eric, sorry,  
Speaker 12    02:00:16    Eric, sorry. I, I think, I think, I guess the question that he is asking is what are, do you know what the sort of the, the, the grade elevations would be? Yeah. In that area? I think that's what he's getting at.  
Speaker 13    02:00:26    Okay. Yeah. So the, you know what the retaining wall along there is around Elevation 40. So the retaining wall is around elevation 40, where the low part of the stream, I think was around, I think I said, let's see here, was around, around the, probably I think like 24 range and the wall is around 40.  
Speaker 14    02:00:46    Okay.  
Speaker 13    02:00:47    And then the houses are, they're walkout basements along that edge and the houses would, would go up from there.  
Speaker 14    02:00:53    Right. And between the Kroger land properties and the houses, which border that you said there's about a 75 foot gap.  
Speaker 13    02:01:07    We're retaining about 75 foot of natural vegetation prior to where you get to the retaining wall. And then from there the houses are set back even further from that. So the house is, I can, you know, the, the house, the houses are over 110 feet from the property line, the rear of the house is got.  
Speaker 14    02:01:33    Got it. Just last question. I know you had said about soil and those studies just looking out, we see a tremendous amount of wildlife in that area. Is there any study or anything conducted on the impact to wildlife, which is in that area?  
Speaker 13    02:01:53    So in a sense, yes. When we, the project actually got, you know, wetlands approvals that delineated the wetlands through there as well as they delineated the, the edge of the top of bank of that stream and established a 50 foot riparian buffer. So if there was things like threatening endangered species and things of that nature, we'd have a much large riparian buffer. So the DEP has agreed to these buffer widths based upon not having any threaten or endangered species within this area.  
Speaker 14    02:02:26    Got it. Okay. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     02:02:29    Thank you. Thank you. Any other members of the public would like to ques ask questions of this witness? Yes, I have  
Speaker 3     02:02:36    Vandana.  
Speaker 15    02:02:40    Hi. My,  
Speaker 0     02:02:41    Would you give us your name and your address and before posing your question?  
Speaker 15    02:02:46    Sure. My name is Wandon. I'm a resident at six Kroger Lane Piscataway, New Jersey.  
Speaker 4     02:02:52    Okay. I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 15    02:03:03    Can you see me?  
Speaker 0     02:03:05    Did you hear that Ms. Vanana?  
Speaker 15    02:03:07    Yeah, I'm raising my hat. Yeah. Okay.  
Speaker 0     02:03:12    Did you respond to the question? Do you swear to Chelsea please  
Speaker 15    02:03:16    Repeat? Yes.  
Speaker 0     02:03:18    Oh, thank you. Okay. Proceed with your question, ma'am, please. Okay.  
Speaker 15    02:03:23    So my, I'm sorry,  
Speaker 16    02:03:25    I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. Your name is Bandana. Is that your first or last name for  
Speaker 15    02:03:29    The record? That's my first name.  
Speaker 16    02:03:30    Okay. What's your last name?  
Speaker 15    02:03:32    Maan. M-A-S-A-N-D.  
Speaker 0     02:03:36    Thank you. Thank you.  
Speaker 15    02:03:38    All right, Mike, I have two questions. My first question is with respect to the storm retention pieces, which we talked about will be homeowner association responsibility. Has there been a study done that for a eight acre property where there's a considerable amount of vegetation and huge trees that just the two storm detentions will be enough to prevent any kind of water level going up or causing a storm, a runoff on the river road?  
Speaker 13    02:04:13    So, so yes. So a as part of our application, we have the submitted what's called a storm water management report. So what it does, it evaluates the pre-development conditions or the exhibitions that are out there today versus the post-development conditions with the street and, and the homes and it, so we submit this to the engineers for their review to go through all of the calculations. So things like, like tree coverage and grass areas and things like that are incorporated in the pre-development analysis of runoff.  
Speaker 15    02:04:46    Okay. And do the public members have access to that report?  
Speaker 13    02:04:50    We do. So it's one of the, the submission documents. We, we submit plans and one of the other things is a storm water report submitted to the board and the professionals for review and comment.  
Speaker 15    02:05:01    Okay. Thank you. My second question is with respect to the retaining wall and the fence on top that we talked about. So as noted from all of you that there's a 24 feet drop from the beginning of the hose lane to where the retaining wall will be built, right. We have talked about the ownership of the storm retention and it'll be AHOA who will maintain those, but who's going to maintain these retaining walls and the fence around it? Who is responsible to maintain that?  
Speaker 13    02:05:39    Good question. So the, the retaining walls and the fencing that are located on each individual property are the individual obligation of that homeowner. So he's responsible for the retaining wall as well as the fence above that retaining wall. Hmm.  
Speaker 15    02:05:57    So we are expecting the new buyers to maintain a 40 feet wall and the fence on top of that. Oh,  
Speaker 13    02:06:04    Oh, I'm sorry. So, so the, the fence, the wall is not, that was elevation 40, not a 40 foot in height. So the wall height along that area go through here, let's range from let's say seven and a half to, to 11 foot high, the retaining walls.  
Speaker 15    02:06:27    So how are you raising the elevation in that case from 24 feet to be able to build that wall and all, are you gonna be regrading you will be putting soil over there?  
Speaker 13    02:06:39    So what is, so there is such a large grade change. So where the stream is, is sort of at the lowest point. Okay. We're, we have to stay at minimum of 50 foot away from that stream. So we're further up the bank. So we're not starting at 24, we're putting in the retaining walls. We're sort of further up the, the embankment in the, that area. So that's why the walls range from I said like seven and a half to, to 11 feet of height there. So we're not building it adjacent to the stream. We're further up the hill when these are being built.  
Speaker 15    02:07:13    Okay. So my last question, I know you mentioned that the existing vegetation will be left, you know, after the retaining wall where you are building it. Is there any way or survey you have done to see from a Kroger lane backyard perspective, will we be able to see, see those retaining walls or are, is there enough density of trees that we don't lose the privacy of our backyard?  
Speaker 13    02:07:43    See, I did not do a study of that, but looking at the 75 foot of vegetation, it's pretty dense vegetation along that rear area. I think that that wall will have very minimal impact from your rear yard.  
Speaker 15    02:08:00    Okay. Thank you. Those were my questions.  
Speaker 0     02:08:04    Thank you. Any other members of the public and would like to ask questions of this witness?  
Speaker 8     02:08:10    No. One,  
Speaker 0     02:08:11    Charles. Thank you. Close to the public.  
Speaker 12    02:08:14    Thank you. Our next witness is Mr. Chris Ekk. He's our architect. I believe he's there.  
Speaker 4     02:08:21    Mr. Ekk, are you present?  
Speaker 8     02:08:23    Yes.  
Speaker 4     02:08:24    Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 8     02:08:29    I do.  
Speaker 12    02:08:31    Chris, if you can please just briefly go over your credentials and let the board know if you've ever testified in, in front of this board or, or similar boards.  
Speaker 8     02:08:39    Sure. My name is Christopher Za. I have a bachelor's of architecture from NJIT, New Jersey Institute of Technology in 1988, I was licensed in the state of New Jersey in 1991 and I have been working for Appel Design Group since 1993. I have appeared in various boards around the, the state, never in front of this board. The closest in Middlesex is probably Edison and most recently Woodbridge. Other than that I've been in Livingston, flora Park, Kenworth Summit. So we do a lot of work up north.  
Speaker 0     02:09:20    Thank you. He's acceptable.  
Speaker 12    02:09:23    Thank you. Chris, if you can please just basically tell us what our conceptual homes are, are in a nutshell gonna look like. Okay.  
Speaker 8     02:09:32    Can I screen share? Sure.  
Speaker 12    02:09:34    You could be able to, yep.  
Speaker 8     02:09:37    Okay. Okay. So the first thing I'd like to show you is this is Model A. This was, this house was submitted and I think we have to submit this as a exhibit. We're  
Speaker 12    02:09:53    Sorry to interrupt you Chris. I don't see it. Does anybody? I don't know if anybody else No, I  
Speaker 0     02:09:56    Don't see  
Speaker 8     02:09:57    It either. Oh, you're not seeing my screen?  
Speaker 0     02:09:59    No, not yet.  
Speaker 12    02:10:03    There you go.  
Speaker 8     02:10:05    All  
Speaker 0     02:10:06    Right.  
Speaker 8     02:10:07    Okay. I'm sorry. So we had a rendering made of, this is exi model A, this is the, the house that you have our floor plans and elevations. We just took one of the front elevations and did a colors per perspective rendering to just kind of indicate what kind of materials we're using, what kind of style the house was under. And and so these are all very conventional houses upscale. So we're going to have some nice materials. It is shingle roofs, you know, asphalt shingle roofs. We're gonna have some board and bat siding, some horizontal siding. There will be some accents of metal roofs, like at the porches, and there will be some cultured stone accents. So I think we have to make this, we have to make this exhibit A three,  
Speaker 12    02:11:02    Correct? I think we're up to a four.  
Speaker 8     02:11:04    This is a four.  
Speaker 12    02:11:05    No, I think this is Mr. Kaela. I think I had identified this one in the beginning, so I believe this is Okay, thank you.  
Speaker 8     02:11:13    So this is, this is representative of one of the standard houses that we're doing gable roofs. There will be no blue lines across the top of the roof. So I think they're all kind of there, sitting here. Moon, it, they're all very kind of nice, nice looking houses. Now I'll take you to the drawings. These were the drawings that were submitted. So this is, this is the front elevation of that house. Each model will probably have two different front elevations. So this front elevation is just another representation of what the house could look like, the same floor plan. So if it's built next to each other or across the street, we can give it a different look and still maintain the floor plan. So this house right now has very common features for a house of this size. This is a thirty eight hundred and seventy nine square foot house that's living space.  
Speaker 8     02:12:19    So we'll have a living room, a dining room, a family room, a dinette, a kitchen, and a back room that will be either used as a guest room or an office with a, with a bathroom. And the, and this one particular house has a three car garage on the second floor. This particular house has four bedrooms and one primary suite. The primary suite will have standard features, walk-in closets its own bathroom. And, and the other bedrooms will either get what we call princess suites, which are in, in-room suites, which a bathroom or they will have a hall bathroom where, where several bedrooms will share a bathroom. So this is, this is a very typical house. We, we have some tough lots. So we were trying to keep the widths of these houses within 60 feet of width and 60 foot in depth. So, and so that's what we, we designed into this house.  
Speaker 8     02:13:32    Now since, since this was submitted, one of the co comments in the staff reports was that there was a, a desire to see some other models. And I have brought with me two other models. I did not get them submitted 10 days before the meeting. So you do not have copies of these, but I'd like to show you those quickly as a representative of, of other models. This, should we say this is A four, this is model B, we'll call this exhibit A four. Do you, this, this, this house has four drawings. Should we give each one a different exhibit number or is this model one exhibit?  
Speaker 4     02:14:17    You, you can call 'em all a four.  
Speaker 8     02:14:20    Okay. So this, this model is representative of the two car front entry. We have some lots that we cannot get side entry, so we have to do a front entry. And when we do that, we cannot have a three car garage. We can only have a two car garage. So that's what this model represents. Again, we have two different front looks on this house. And then I'll go to the floor plan. And here's our two car garage From the front we have a guest room, dining room, living room. There's a library, a family room, a dinette, and a kitchen. That's the first floor. And then on the second floor, this particular version has three bedrooms. And then the primary suite on, on the right side here, this does not have four bedrooms upstairs. It, it, it has four bedrooms. One's a primary suite. It does not have five bedrooms up here. The next house I'd like to show you is,  
Speaker 17    02:15:35    Let's go.  
Speaker 8     02:15:43    Nope, that's  
Speaker 17    02:15:43    The one Model C.  
Speaker 8     02:15:52    Okay. This, should we call this a five? Yes, yes. This is model C. Model C was specifically designed for the lot 22 point 22. This is the, the lot that was needs the variance for the front yard setback. So again, there's two, two optional front elevations on this. And, and this, i, I drew this one up and I show this one as a representation of a walkout basement. So from the back of a house, when the grade is dropping off, it exposes more of the basement wall. This is the type of elevation that you will see from, from the back of the house. Mm.  
Speaker 8     02:16:44    Now this one we have kind of shrunk the depth of the house and, and still maintain a three car garage. But this is, you know, we try to to get it as as narrow front to back as possible and give them some kind of usable backyard. But this is, this is the one that was planned for the variance lot. So on the first floor, living room, dining room, family room, a dinette kitchen, and a study on the, on the far left, on the second floor, we have three kids' bedrooms or, or small bedrooms. And then a primary suite on the left side with walk-in closets, sitting room and a primary bathroom. That is all I have to show you today.  
Speaker 12    02:17:45    Thank you Chris. Chris is available for any questions of the, of the board,  
Speaker 0     02:17:50    Board members. Do you have any questions for this witness?  
Speaker 9     02:17:56    I, I really just Madam chair, it's Councilman kale. Really just have a question. Did they, when the homes are being built, they're going before zoning or will this approval here, like as the homes are being built, what is the application process from there?  
Speaker 12    02:18:16    So go ahead. Oh, sorry. So, so as long as they are conforming to, to the code and all the Township standards and ordinances, they would not need to have any relief If they, if they did require any, any ordinance or if the homeowner that was building it required a, a design change that would trigger a variance, it would obviously have to go back in front of a board. Right. But the construction department through the permitting process will have an opportunity to, to review any of these through the building permit process. Well,  
Speaker 9     02:18:46    So Mr. Arch, just correct me if I'm wrong, because I think Mr. Blue had made a comment that made me uncertain as to how this development I, it goes right. So the homes are going to be a standard plan that the new property homeowner can tweak somewhat to their liking. But if they're looking to go to, to add something either on the height of the house side yard setback or whatever, they have to come before us or, or these homeowners getting their own builders and developers too. It's one developer, correct?  
Speaker 12    02:19:25    Correct. It's one developer that's gonna be developing this and you're correct. If they wanted to change, for example, if they were insisting that they wanted to change the height or add some sort of addition that would go into a side yard setback or something along those lines, then they would have to, that they would have to file their own application prior to building their home to go in front of either the planning board or the zoning board, likely the zoning board in that case.  
Speaker 9     02:19:48    Okay. So these were preliminary plans of these homes. Are we gonna see something that's more final that's gonna, you know, fall within the ordinances is, I guess what I'm saying.  
Speaker 12    02:20:04    So when each individual homeowner meets to, to decide on the design of their home and to build their home, if they, if they put in those building permits and the design of that home is not in conformance with, with the zoning code, then at that point the zoning department would, would trigger that they would need to come in for, for variance relief.  
Speaker 9     02:20:27    Okay. So essentially the dimensions of these homes, the footprint, everything, even though this is preliminary and nothing sort of set in stone in terms of the facade and things of that nature, these homes or what the developer plans to build outside of a homeowner trying to deviate from that all fall within Township ordinance.  
Speaker 12    02:20:53    Correct. These are, these are conceptual just to show that it's possible to do this, this is what can be possibly built and this is the, you know, that, that we're to, to ensure you that a home could be built there without necessarily having to come in for relief. But if, if there is each individual home is gonna be available for customization, again, these are, these are gonna be sold as, as sort of an opportunity for somebody to build, you know, their dream home, their a premier, high-end home. They're gonna want to, to, you know, have a say over all these design elements.  
Speaker 9     02:21:31    Right. And not because, and not because we have a say on this board, but just outta curiosity, so does that mean that the facades would not necessarily just be an option of two or three? It, and I'm only asking that just out of pure curiosity to be honest with you because, you know, I'm used to seeing like developers where it's sort of the same looking home or slightly different facade. Does this mean that there is potential for more uniqueness with these homes or,  
Speaker 12    02:22:02    Absolutely. So, so this isn't a situation where here are the three models. You can choose each model. Okay. Yeah, yeah. And then, and maybe choose granite countertops, one color or another. Got it. This is really gonna be a customizable developer experience. Okay. So yeah, it's not, it's not gonna be cookie cutter in any sense of the word.  
Speaker 9     02:22:20    Okay. And that's a good thing. Nice to hear that. Okay. Thank you.  
Speaker 18    02:22:26    Madam chair. Can I just make one comment on this? Go right ahead. Okay, so mi mr. Arch, basically these are like, what you're looking for is box approvals. Basically Mr. Blue said we'll comply with all the setbacks except for the 30 30 foot front yard setback and, and the fe and the defense height. Correct?  
Speaker 12    02:22:46    Correct.  
Speaker 18    02:22:47    And I think sometimes confusions on box approvals is basically you don't want to have to come. I I just wanna say in our letter, I have no objection to Mr. Blue's bulk charts because I would hate you to come back because you specify you're gonna be just, for instance, 35.7 feet on one side, you're at setback, but you, you actually still comply, but you're 38 feet. So I have, you know, again from my comment, I, I said it's partially satisfied in my comment letter, but I said I have no objection to what Mr. Ballou did that because it, it's simplifies it basically, you don't wanna bifurcate this application. It's a basically a subdivision application,  
Speaker 12    02:23:28    Right? It is a  
Speaker 18    02:23:28    Subdivision and you're saying you're gonna comply except for A, B and C.  
Speaker 12    02:23:32    Correct. So, so the point of a subdivision application, and this is common with subdivision applications, is we're, we're the dimensions of the lots are really what is the, the what is being set here and the ability exactly to then place a conforming home. And if we can anticipate that there may be a non-conformity because of the di dimensions of the lot that we wanna address through subdivision, it obviously makes sense to do that so that we don't have to necessarily come back. But this is, this is no different than any other, any other vacant lot that a homeowner may want to put a single family home on. And if they, if they choose to do something that is, that is outside of the code, then they would have to come back in front of a board.  
Speaker 18    02:24:12    Exactly. And this is a much larger, a lot of these subdivisions we've had are only two lots. So those are a lot simple. Th this is 16 lots. Th there's a lot more moving parts on this one.  
Speaker 12    02:24:24    Correct.  
Speaker 18    02:24:25    Okay. Thank you.  
Speaker 0     02:24:28    Thank you. Should we open it up to the public now if there's no more questions from the board? Kris  
Speaker 12    02:24:36    Do you mind stop sharing your, your screen please. Thanks.  
Speaker 3     02:24:41    Thank you.  
Speaker 0     02:24:44    Members of the public, you have an opportunity to ask questions of this witness. Is anyone interested in having a question indicate by waving your little hand down?  
Speaker 3     02:24:54    Raise your hand. No. One Madam chair.  
Speaker 0     02:24:58    Okay. Thank you. Close to the public.  
Speaker 12    02:25:00    Thank you. Our final witness tonight is gonna be Mr. John McDonough. He's our professional planner and I see his camera is on and he is ready to begin.  
Speaker 0     02:25:07    Okay.  
Speaker 4     02:25:08    Mr. McDonough, can you raise your ha right hand? Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?  
Speaker 19    02:25:14    Yes, I do.  
Speaker 4     02:25:15    Thank you. Your name and address please?  
Speaker 19    02:25:17    Sure. Hi there everyone. My name is John McDonough mc, capital D-O-N-O-U-G-H, my business address 1 0 1 Gibraltar Drive over in Parsippany, New Jersey.  
Speaker 12    02:25:28    John, I believe you've been in front of this board before, but if you can real briefly just go through your credentials and, and see if you can be accepted.  
Speaker 19    02:25:36    Sure thing. I'm a licensed professional planner here in the state of New Jersey. That license is current. It's in good standing. I'm also certified on the national level as an AICP. I've been accepted in both capacities in front of this board and I am also a licensed landscape architect, but that's not my capacity here this evening.  
Speaker 0     02:25:56    Thank you Mr. McDonna. You're acceptable.  
Speaker 12    02:25:59    John, take it away.  
Speaker 19    02:26:01    Take. Okay. So this is a pretty clean application from a subdivision standpoint. In fact, it is a clean subdivision. We're talking about a single tax lot now, as you heard through Eric's testimony, block 1 1 9 0 1 lot 22.15. It's about 8.7 acres and it's basically sitting there for the subdivision that's proposed before the board. Now we are in the 8 57 hose lane west redevelopment area. It's a site that's been designated as an area in need of redevelopment and it is, is sitting there fallow. It is good planning to put residential against residential and that's exactly what our applicant is doing here. Again, from a pure subdivision standpoint, this application is clean, no relief being requested from the subdivision itself per se. The platting of these lots all fully complies with the ordinance requirements including the lot area for every one of the lots, all of the 14 buildable lots and the two non buildable lots, the detention basin lots.  
Speaker 19    02:27:04    We're also looking at conformance in terms of the lot width, lot depth and as you've heard, setbacks on all sides. But for that one lot really that's related to the feasibility analysis that the applicant has put forth and, and as part of its obligation to show that this subdivision is developable as it is laid out and platted Eric gave you the good sound technical reasons why that relief for that setback is justifiable. Again, these are representative homes, these are representative footprints. This may not be the ultimate build out, but it gives a sense, a depiction of what could materialize here. And clearly, as you saw through Chris's testimony just now, these are gonna be million dollar estate homes. The actual price is going to be well north of that million dollars. So these are high quality, high premium homes that are certainly going to add value and quality to the site, which in turn adds value and quality to the neighborhood at large.  
Speaker 19    02:28:00    In terms of the justification for that one relief, that one setback relief related to lot 22 point 22, where we're looking at 30 feet for only a portion of the building where 40 feet would be the minimum required. I think the board can certainly find that due to the presence of wetlands in the rear, the need for the cul-de-sac, the presence of the N-J-D-E-P flood hazard riparian buffer all lend itself as appropriate in terms of hardship. And in terms of a better planning alternative to locate that home a little closer to the front, this home is on a curve. We have a general repetitive pattern here of homes on each side of the cul-de-sac, but this lot is somewhat isolated from the others and is clearly not breaking up a pattern by virtue of the fact that it is on the outside of this curve here.  
Speaker 19    02:28:51    So we think the relief can be granted under that balancing test where the benefits of the application as a whole, which substantially outweigh any detriments. On the positive side, the project is going to deliver permitted use here, which explicitly serves the public good necessary housing according to the needs of all New Jersey residents. And this is a, a housing product that will certainly c cater to the higher end. The project will advance the intent of the redevelopment plan to take this site and to revitalize it. As I said, it's going to add value and quality, certainly a positive aesthetic to the area with beautiful homes that are as shown on these illustrative plans. We know it is good planning, put dwellings and people proximate to parks, recreation and entertainment is a great neighborhood that you have here. We know the amenities are there, including Johnson's Park right there, the Rutgers football stadium, the golf course.  
Speaker 19    02:29:46    This is not far from the, the employment center down at Colgate that I just testified to not too long ago. So you have all of these great amenities converging right here, which renders this an excellent neighborhood in which to live interrelated to that relief. For the front setback, we've also got the relief that Eric spoke about relative to the fence on top of the walls. We think there's a very practical planning benefit there as well. And that the fence height relief is sought for safety and fall protection on the top of those retaining walls. As you've heard, these are not going to be obtrusive structures. They're well buffered and mitigated from any visual impact on the surrounding neighborhood. With that said, we think all of the positives that I just gave you with respect to the front setback relief on that one lot would also carry forth for the setback, for the fence height relief related to those four homes.  
Speaker 19    02:30:40    All said, we think the project positives here substantially outweigh any negatives. Based on all of the testimony, all relief can be granted without creating any substantially detrimental impacts to the public or to the zone plan. As you've heard through Eric's testimony, through Chris's testimony as well, this project is going to flow, it's going to function and operate safely, efficiently, and comfortably. It's gonna be a great place to live. We think the planning basis is there that for all of the statutory criteria to be met. On the positive side, this is going to advance multiple purposes of the land use law, especially purpose A, the promotion of the general welfare purpose E to provide for appropriate population densities, purpose G to provide for a variety of land uses according to the needs of all New Jersey citizens. Purpose I, the promotion of a positive aesthetic and purpose. M for efficient use of land. All said again, a very good application here from a practical standpoint, it'll be nice to see the site revitalized and put the functional use. Most importantly, the statutory criteria for grant of all relief are met and approval is warranted. And with that Tim, I'll pause on direct.  
Speaker 12    02:31:55    I have no further questions of of John. I would turn 'em over to the board to see if anybody has any questions.  
Speaker 0     02:32:01    Members of the board, you have any questions of this witness hearing, no response, I'll open it up to the public members of the public. You have the opportunity to question this witness. You can do so by raising your hand on your computer.  
Speaker 8     02:32:23    No. And Madam  
Speaker 0     02:32:24    Chair. Thank you. Close to the public, Mr. Arch.  
Speaker 12    02:32:29    Thank you. That's all of our witnesses. I make it a policy not to sum up after John's testimony 'cause there's no way I'll better. So that is our presentation.  
Speaker 0     02:32:38    Thank you. And Mr. The board heard the application, if you, you can either discuss it or you, someone can propose a motion  
Speaker 1     02:32:46    Madam chair. I just wanna make sure I know the applicants that they're gonna comply with the staff report, but however, I just wanna make sure there's a couple little items I wanna make sure if we have to get a developer's agreement to make sure they get over the finish line. But I don't, I don't see this holding up the, the application.  
Speaker 0     02:33:09    Thank you. Do I have a motion?  
Speaker 8     02:33:16    Reverend Kinneally Madam chair. I, I make a motion that this application be approved, that it goes forward and that they comply with all the staff reports as was submitted forward.  
Speaker 0     02:33:31    Go ahead and seconds. I'll second. Thank you. Any commentary Ms. Cochran?  
Speaker 2     02:33:41    No. I would just in addition to complying with the board professionals reports, as the Mayor stated, just a couple of things for the record. Just that the applicant will agree to install the black PSEG light poles with the Township logos, homeowners associations responsible for the BA basins and maintenance of the lights. And anything that can be done to possibly avoid this, you know, any of these homes turning into a multi-family use. But that's all I have.  
Speaker 0     02:34:11    Thank you. Roll call please. Mayor Wahler.  
Speaker 2     02:34:15    Laura, just for the  
Speaker 9     02:34:16    Madam chair. I just wanna say one thing. Years ago when I first moved in, people were trying to take that land and turn it into like a rehabilitation sort of high density use area. And the people in my area fought that group. It's unfortunate that the university allowed the house to go into disrepair because it absolutely would've been a beautiful home for the president, a great entree into the university. But this use is so much better than what could have been there. And so I just wanted to put that on the record. Madam chair. Thank you. Thank  
Speaker 0     02:35:00    You.  
Speaker 1     02:35:00    You know, and I, I, I wanna follow up with Councilman. Cahill says for the areas that all the homes in that area are in AR 15 zone. This is an R 17 five zone, which is bigger lots than what are the lots that are out there surrounding this, this project. And it's a heck of a lot better than what could have happened. And this has been an ongoing battle for, well, at least 35 years on this site because of what, what transpired with the, the original owners and then the U University. So I look forward to voting. Yes.  
Speaker 12    02:35:39    We appreciate your comments  
Speaker 0     02:35:40    With that, we'll have the roll call Ms. Buckley.  
Speaker 3     02:35:43    Mayor Wahler.  
Speaker 1     02:35:45    Yes.  
Speaker 3     02:35:45    Councilwoman Kaya. Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally. Yes. Mr. Atkins?  
Speaker 0     02:35:53    Yes.  
Speaker 3     02:35:53    And Madam chair,  
Speaker 0     02:35:55    Those of us who've been on the board a while realize that this is a very satisfactory outcome for that property. And I vote yes. You. Thank you Mr. Arch. Congratulations. Thank you so much.  
Speaker 12    02:36:08    Thank you. Have a wonderful evening everybody. You too.  
Speaker 0     02:36:10    You too. Tim. Thank you. We do have one more item, I believe on our agenda. Item number 13, adoption of resolution for 8 57 hose lane. West  
Speaker 2     02:36:30    Madam. chair You? Dawn. Corcoran. You want me to bring us through that? Excuse me. I'll make a motion. I can do it. Would you, Ms. Carol's not here? Of course.  
Speaker 0     02:36:37    Okay.  
Speaker 2     02:36:38    I'd like to make a motion that we adopt the resolution for 8 57 hose lane West, application number 23 PD 26 27. This is for preliminary major subdivision.  
Speaker 9     02:36:53    I will second that. Madam chair. Thank  
Speaker 0     02:36:55    You. Thank you. Roll call please.  
Speaker 3     02:36:57    Mayor? Wahler. Yes. Councilwoman. Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran?  
Speaker 9     02:37:02    Yes.  
Speaker 3     02:37:03    Reverend Kinneally. Yes. Mr. Atkins?  
Speaker 0     02:37:06    Yes.  
Speaker 3     02:37:07    And Madam chair?  
Speaker 0     02:37:08    Yes. And item number 14. We have all been received a copy of the planning board calendar for the 2024. If there's no corrections, would someone make a mock motion to adopt that calendar for next year? Madam chair. I'll make a motion chair. Reverend Kinneally. I'll second. Reverend Kinneally. Thank you. Roll call. Heard second. Thank you.  
Speaker 3     02:37:31    Mayor Wahler?  
Speaker 0     02:37:33    Yes.  
Speaker 3     02:37:33    Councilwoman. Cahill.  
Speaker 0     02:37:35    Yes.  
Speaker 3     02:37:35    Ms. Corcoran? Yes. Reverend Kinneally. Yes. Mr. Atkins?  
Speaker 0     02:37:40    Yes.  
Speaker 3     02:37:41    And Madam chair.  
Speaker 0     02:37:42    Yes. And with that Madam chair, I just wanna wish everybody a happy Thanksgiving coming up. Thank you. Thank you all of you. Thanksgiving everyone. Yeah. For those who are attending the league, hope to see you there. Okay. Stay safe everyone. Okay. Take.