Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on December 10 2020

Transcript generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Use the audio player to verify any passage.

Download transcript Download audio
Dec 10 2020 · Zoning
0:00
–:––

Meeting Sections
  • 00:00:07 — Meeting Opening
  • 00:00:30 — 20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Response to Prior Public Questions 20-ZB-41/42V
  • 00:04:09 — 20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Public Questions Phase (Part 1) 20-ZB-41/42V
  • 00:30:23 — 20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Public Questions Phase (Part 2) 20-ZB-41/42V
  • 01:18:08 — 20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Public Comment Period (Against/For) 20-ZB-41/42V
  • 02:34:47 — 20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Board Deliberation and Straw Vote 20-ZB-41/42V
  • 02:48:47 — 20-C-33/34 — AP Aspen LLC: Storage Structure Presentation & Questions 20-C-33/34
  • 02:57:36 — 20-C-33/34 — AP Aspen LLC: Public Input and Board Approval 20-C-33/34
  • 03:05:05 — Resolutions from Prior Meetings and Adjournment
Meeting Opening AI  00:00:07 – 00:00:30
Chairman confirms recording and prepares to proceed with first agenda item.
Speaker 0We ready to proceed in Florida. Yes, we are recording. We are ready. Okay, awesome. Let's go to item 10 20 dash ZB dash 41 slash 42 V M and M partners at the Skyway.
Speaker 1Thank you, Mr. Chairman members of the board. I am Doug Wolfson. I represent M and M Realty. The board members may recall that we were in the process of responding to questions from the public portion when we hit the witching hour and the matter was carried, we do thank the boards for its efficient handling of the matters in the, for us, frankly, enabling us to get on a tonight instead of having to wait. We certainly appreciate the hard work and the efficiency with which you put together, your handling, a depressant, the fire applications. So appreciate that in the interim, between the last time we were here and tonight we did receive an email from Mr. Noblock, who I believe was one of the people who had asked questions during the question period, last time. And we have had Aberdeen with the chair's permission. We would respond to that question now, or whenever you think it's appropriate during this questioning period, we'll leave that to the chair and Mr. Cornelius to when you will have us respond to that,
20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Response to Prior Public Questions 20-ZB-41/42V AI  00:00:30 – 00:04:09
Applicant's attorney and engineer respond to questions submitted by public commenter Mr. Noblock regarding storm water system design, detention vs. conveyance, and site classification as urban redevelopment area. Responses address 100-year storm handling and compliance with township/DEP requirements.
Speaker 0I might as well put it out there now. Yeah, I agree.
Speaker 1Very much. Obliged gentlemen, John dye, kina, you were sworn last time and I know Mr. Can, you know, they would normally remind you that you've been under oath, but I will pick the opportunity to remind them myself and you please provide for the board and the listening public. It made sure Mr. Noblock his question and then your response to it.
Speaker 2Yes. Thank you. Do you think board members has chairman Kaylee? Thank you very much for having us again. Yeah, well, we received some questions from Mr Noblock and I just wanted to respond to them. But the first one asked about that. We, you know, we stayed in art, the show more than mattered report that, that, that the site is located in urban redevelopment area. And, you know, on the state planning policy map, the metropolitan planning area one, and as a, as a site that is currently developed, it's providing with utilities, notably the power line across it, and surrounded by development. We fit that definition of, of an urban redevelopment area. And according to the, our, our storm water system is, is appropriate. Secondly, there was a question about the difference between a, a storm water detention system, which is designed for a a hundred year storm.
Speaker 2And the fact that this storm water conveyance system, I E the pipe and inlets themselves are only typically designed for a 25 year storm. And that is, you know, typically typical engineering practice it's been reviewed by the DP as well as by the township, the hearing staff, and there have been no issues with anyone. So typically the storm water system is located at the low end of the site. And even if the pipes quote unquote can't handle it, it would just flow over land until it hits a, you know, a another point further down the system and collection to the storm water system. But the overall system will contain the a hundred year event without any impacts or a Honda surrounding properties in any way, shape or form. So we just wanted to respond to that question. We appreciated receiving it, and we just wanted to advise the court that that question was asked and, and we think those are adequate response.
Speaker 1Thanks, Sean, Ms. Chairman, I guess, between you and the security and we, I guess we still need to finish questions cause I don't, I don't think we finished the last time
20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Public Questions Phase (Part 1) 20-ZB-41/42V AI  00:04:09 – 00:30:23
Board opens to public questions on prior testimony. Multiple residents sworn in and question applicant witnesses on storm water volume/rate, building construction details, drainage impacts, property ownership, flood history, and project motivation. Testimony covers 100-year storm discharge rates (~90 cu ft/sec reduced to 46), retaining wall heights (up to 6 feet), wetlands permits, and traffic estimates.
Speaker 0We did not flush from the public. A number of members of the public had the opportunity to ask questions. I believe that there were more waiting. So I think it would be a Pope appropriate to take questions from members of the public who have not yet had an opportunity.
Speaker 2Thank you, Ms. Feeling
Speaker 0At this point, I'll open it to the public for questions about the testimony that was provided at the November event did that true, Mr. <inaudible> and Mr. Mr. Wilson are questions on the testimony comments?
Speaker 1I'm sure if you ask me a question. Oh
Speaker 0Yes. Are, are you done with your testimony? Yes, sir.
Speaker 1The, my recollection was you would open to questions. We at 11 o'clock, there were a couple more, there were we're asking questions. We reach a carry. So I guess you're correct. You need to go back and finish the question period before you go to comments.
Speaker 0So this is the time for questions after questions would be comments for or against the application. Ms. Berger has already had an opportunity to ask questions. I want to give anybody that hasn't had the opportunity to ask questions. The, the opportunity first,
Speaker 3Then we had ed marsh. I don't know if he said
Speaker 0I don't have Mr. Marsh on my list from the last meeting, Mr. Marsh, I need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth? Yes. Your address, please. Even though you've given it to me several times tonight, this is a different application. Yup. A one 13. Why Collins avenue at the Stanaway. Thank you.
Speaker 3You
Speaker 0Have a question. You have questions.
Speaker 4Yes. During a hundred year storm event, what is the volume and rate of storm water that would be coming off of this site?
Speaker 2It would be less than it was coming off the site today. There's a requirement in a hundred year event that there is a significant reduction in the clothes, and we need all those clothes per <inaudible> and township requirements.
Speaker 1John, identify yourself when you're speaking for all of my witnesses. So the record is clear for the court reporter and the public. Who's answering the questions.
Speaker 2Thank you. Thank you, Doug. This is John Tykene.
Speaker 4I don't think you answered the question during the hundred year storm event. What is the volume and the rate of storm water that will be coming off of this property.
Speaker 2Craig, can you respond to there? Take a look at that. That's a little bit of a detail that we typically would not address at attic board hearings, but cracking you, please take a look at that.
Speaker 3Wow.
Speaker 0Appears that someone is crushing our meeting.
Speaker 3Yeah, I muted. I'm muted the person.
Speaker 0Please continue
Speaker 1As you and you have any other questions while we get that info for you,
Speaker 4What will be a follow-up question? You know, how long would it take to cover a football field of a hundred with a foot of water at, at whatever rate this is that you're going to be generating
Speaker 0Though. I don't think we get, thank you so much. Anyone else? In the public portion, Alyssa, I'd like you to kick them out of the meeting please.
Speaker 3And they keep changing their names to
Speaker 0And tell time you see some bizarre name like that. Just they're trying to disrupt.
Speaker 3All right. They're out. I have a William Makita. I don't know if he spoke last night. The name's familiar.
Speaker 0I did speak last time. So if there's other people I'll I'll wait,
Speaker 3Thank you. Okay. I have a telephone telephone number with no name. It ends in 9, 6, 9, 7.
Speaker 0Can that person identify themselves?
Speaker 2Hello, Charlie Prattville.
Speaker 0Can you hear me, bill? Did you ask questions at the last meeting? No, I did not. Okay. I need to swear you in, cause you raise your right hand. Swear the tests the way the test should be the truth.
Speaker 2Yeah.
Speaker 0And you have questions of the applicants? Witnesses?
Speaker 2Yeah. Was there a witness from M and M properties? That's me, John Sakina. Okay, great.
Speaker 0Credible. Can you give us your name and spell your last name please?
Speaker 2Certainly Charlie Kratovil K R a T as in Tom, O V as in Victor. I L thank you. And I live on sedan street here in new Brunswick.
Speaker 2Great. So I wanted to ask the representative of M and M about their connection to Piscataway. You gotta be, they are headquartered here, I believe. And they have some other projects. Can they tell me, do they have any warehouse projects in Piscataway or anywhere else in central New Jersey? No. M and M does not have any other warehouse products in Piscataway and we don't have any active warehouse projects elsewhere in central New Jersey at this time. Okay. And who are the principals of M and M? Jill Marino and Jack Morris. Okay. But same Jack Morris of Edgewood properties and Robert Wood Johnson university hospital, correct? Yes, that is okay. Well, you know, I, I presume I get some time to make comments later, but I
Speaker 0Time to make comments later. This is the time for questions of the applicants witnesses.
Speaker 2Great, great. So I guess the, the real crux of what I'm getting at here is why M and M wants to build a warehouse in this area. You know, given it's not something they'd done before, not something they have experience with. Do they have a, for instance, a particular tenant in mind or a particular product that that would be, you know, stored or made it the, the warehouse is there, you know, what prompted them to propose this for this piece of land, the market for the warehouse, frankly, exploding with the prevalence of along line shopping and the, like we felt given the presence of the warehouses next door, that it was an appropriate use to continue and, and be a better use for the town, its proximity to interstate 2 87 and route 18 as miss Capone testified, renders it particularly suited to the proposed use. And we, we believe that it would be an appropriate use for the site.
Speaker 1And I, and I'll just add Mr. Chairman, because it does call for a legal conclusion to some extent, and I will re for her to Ms. Scafone's testimony that in addition, the particular suitability of their site for warehouse use, given its proximity to 2 87 and warehouse use next door, that the underlying zoning and zoning pursuant to the Springwood hearing rendered the property unsuitable and not reasonably adaptable for those purposes, especially because of the economics of the sewer extensions and things that would just fight you. So those are the reasons why, and warehouse use was proposed for that site, as opposed to something else who are going along with the underlying zoning or the zoning through a stream with hearing. So,
Speaker 2Okay, so that raises another question. What is the whispering woods hearing?
Speaker 1Do you want me to take that, Mr. Conneely Mr. Walston, go ahead. W this was addressed during the first hearing, apparently Mr. Credible did not hear it, right. So originally the property was zoned in a certain way. We believe the property was not reasonably adaptable for the purposes, for which it was on. We made a request, right? Different treatment of the property that we're hearing is before the board, the board was not instead that we were correct in terms of what we wanted to do that resulted in denial. I lawsuit sued the matter was litigated and ultimately settled in conjunction with land use applications in order to us, for settlement to be effective, has to be what's called a whispering with hearing, which means an open hearing in the public open to the public at large, properly advertise in order to discuss any open, what is being proposed by way of a settlement. They listened to the reasons set forth by us. They discuss it among themselves. They take input from the public, and then they decide whether the settlement is in the best interest of the community, which they did. And they voted on that as I remember, unanimously approved the settlement, which provided for, I think 240 or 50 residential units plus commercial, which ultimately proved me also in feasible, which prompted the ultimate application in before the board.
Speaker 2Okay. And I guess then, you know, my, my final question is what, you know, what if the board thinks that, you know, this development is not necessary or not appropriate, the site would remain undeveloped and that course settlement would, would not be affected in any way. Correct. It would fit would be
Speaker 1Okay. Oh, that's incorrect. While
Speaker 0We're at settlement, the board doesn't consider whether or not an, an application is appropriate. They consider whether or not the applicant has provided the legal proofs necessary and the evidence necessary for relief from this ordinances and the laws of the state of New Jersey, the board doesn't consider whether or not it's appropriate.
Speaker 2Okay. Okay. Yeah. I'm not, not trying to introduce any incorrect information here. I'm just trying to understand, you know, what, you know, what impact this court case has on the land use hearing. And I'm still a little bit confused about it, you know, especially now I'm also confused about how, how a case would be settled in such a way that totally infeasible development would be a condition of the settlement. But I guess I'm trying to understand the zoning board's role here. And, you know, I guess the extent of the relief you're asking for, is there a specific number of variances that this application is requesting?
Speaker 0Yes, there are.
Speaker 2And that number would be
Speaker 0For the warehouse use. And I believe there's a variance requested for a sign and a retaining wall, not a sign of fence and a retaining wall.
Speaker 2Okay. Well, I appreciate you answering my questions and I'll look forward to making some comments perhaps later tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 0Anyone else in the public portion have any questions for this application comments? Nancy van Dyke. Nancy, are you there?
Speaker 5Okay. This is Karen van Dyke. Nancy. They indict is my spouse. We live at 82 Lakeside drugs.
Speaker 0Okay. Are you both going to be asking questions? Yes. I need to swear both of you in it. Could you retrace your hand, you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth?
Speaker 5Yes.
Speaker 0And one at a time, please ask your questions. First. I need to for Nancy van Dyke, Karen van Dyke, I'm sorry. Thank you.
Speaker 5Okay. I live at 82 Lakeside thrive north, which comes off of the intersection of south Washington. And Mettler is by the restaurant there. I can see from my property south Washington avenue, across the wetlands and through the woods, I have a question about the building construction. That was a map that was confusing. It showed that there would be landscaping around the building, and yet people were talking about a wall going around the building. So, which is it, will I be staying a wall or landscaping from my home?
Speaker 2John, this is John Thai, kina from M and M. You will be seeing landscaping. The walls in question are related specifically to the parking area. And then we landscape around that. So to the, I guess to the north and to the south are, are where the walls are leading daffodils to the drainage facilities. But with you, and you would be in plan view to the south and landscaping, not necessarily at the desk, that's
Speaker 5What you just said. The wall was going to be on the south.
Speaker 2Correct. And then we, now we have the landscape on the outside of the wall as well.
Speaker 5So
Speaker 2We'll be painting. It's a retaining wall. It's not a, like a, it retains the earth. They support like, yeah, it likes to play. It's not like a wall, like, you know, like a fence, it's a retaining wall against the ground.
Speaker 5Okay. That helps. Well, would it be,
Speaker 2It's about 60, those from two feet up to about 60.
Speaker 5Yeah, that's substantial. Okay. The other main thing that I'm concerned about is drainage, but you keep talking about the hundred year storm. Well, theoretically, we had that in 2011 with Irene, and then again, in 2012, with hurricane Sandy, hurricane Irene, we were down in the basement trying to move stuff off the floor. Our power went out within, in the us with it. And some pumps within half an hour, the water was up to our ankles and we've called it quits. Ultimately Irene deposit in two and a half feet of water in our basement requiring major reconstruction and a ton of stuff being thrown away. This is wondering how the property is going to protect us from that. We are sitting on a very high water table during this getaway. And I know I have a spring under my house. The basement waterproofers complained that it was clear water shooting through there. And I'm wondering where that spring goes. Could it possibly go where the warehouse is going to be? And have you taken into consideration the fact that this is a very wet area that you were building up?
Speaker 2Yes, we have. And that's why the storm water system was designed as it was. There was a question asked before by Mr. Marsh about, you know, the a hundred year storm. And currently our current discharged the site is about 90 cubic feet per second. And that's what the current a hundred year storm is. We are reducing that down to 46 cubic feet per second. So cutting it almost in half. So
Speaker 5Overall,
Speaker 2Excuse me,
Speaker 5That sounds like you're absorbing less water, not more water. It's cutting.
Speaker 2We are, we are, yeah, we're reducing the flow by every painting. Correct. We're retaining more water on our site. So we will hold water on our site and big storm water facilities under the parking lot. Okay. And then after the storm passes, those, those underground facilities will then discharged slowly so that the peak flow at the, for the a hundred year storm is substantially reduced again from 90 cubic feet per second, down to about 46 to 50%
Speaker 5That that gets absorbed and does surrounding property,
Speaker 2Correct. It gets discharged the same place it does now. So now 92, 16 per second goes to a post to that discharge point. And in the future 46 cubic feet per second will go to that discharge point. So there'll be less discharge at the peak period in the future than there is today.
Speaker 5Did you see this as being better, more efficient than say using asphalt that allows the water to seep through it and directly into the ground?
Speaker 2Absolutely. You kind of asked you kind of answered that question. So when you have bad soils, that, that don't, that was wet, as you said, they're actually not very well suited to that type of per porous pavement is what it's called to be able to absorbing water that way, because the soil wet underneath the asphalt would have, you know, would have water in it already as, as you already said. So by putting the, the underground chambers there, you actually have, you know, big empty chambers to collect the water and it's held and then discharge rates lower under the parking lot. Correct? Correct. They're under the, under the parking lot.
Speaker 5Oh, okay. I thought that they would be visible like the one across the road on south Washington.
Speaker 2That's why I asked that question. No, no, no. There are there, they are under the parking lot.
Speaker 5They're under the parking laws. How's the parking lot blank drained in there. He said you are using the poorest asphalt. So it'll drain in there.
Speaker 2No, no, no. We're not using porous asphalt. We're using regular asphalt, but it will drain into the storm. And let's just like, you see a regular storm drain in the street and then I'll go down into the storm chambers underneath, you know, a big, think of a big concrete box to hold water. And then it will be discharged very slowly out the end of,
Speaker 5Okay. And how will this inspect the wetlands that are here that theoretically are not supposed to be built on?
Speaker 2Well, we, we are obtaining permits from the NDP to build on the aloud portion that we are permitted to disturb, and we're doing it all in accordance with what are called general permit. So these are the regular ordinary permits that you do as part of development that is all been reviewed by CBP. And you're waiting to the issuance of those permits, any debt.
Speaker 5Okay. And from what I understand, this property was zoned residential, and then you had that sentenced to commercial and you want to go back to residential. Was that for,
Speaker 1It was, it was on residential. We proposed residential and commercial together and mixed use project because remember residential long wasn't sufficient to make it work because the density was too low. That was what was denied by the board. That was what was litigated in court. And there was ultimately a settlement, which I think I described around 240 years of X and some, some commercial, but even that proved to not be sufficient in order to justify the cost of laying sewer lines about a mile. So that was a part of the problem probably is not reasonably adaptable, either the underlying zoning or the zoning that was achieved by virtue of the we're spraying woods hearing.
Speaker 5Okay. I'm confused as to why a residentially zoned area would have such a huge subplot created by the town is they didn't expect it to become Mursal. At some point,
Speaker 1I can't answer that. I can only tell you what zoning was. We agree to the extent that got your implication, that the property wasn't zoned properly. That's one of the arguments we've made here as to why we think this is a better alternative. And we presented testimony, which we think and hope will convince board members to relax the zoning restrictions and that from the spraying of, and shaming to allow this choose, which we believe is particularly suited for this spot.
Speaker 5But to me, it sounds like you didn't do your homework before you bought the property. And now the residential area, property owners are being made to feel the penalty of that by having the character of the neighborhood and saying this substantially, the applicant is here for a variance and we will
Speaker 0See whether or not the zoning board agrees with the applicant's presentation or not.
Speaker 5Okay. I guess I have a comment left the bed all reserved for later.
Speaker 0We will do comments as soon as we're done with the question.
Speaker 1Did Ms. Van Dyke also have a question answering
Speaker 5Nancy van Dyke 80 to make side, excuse me, 82 Lakeside drive north Skyway van Dyke. Thank you. I going to start off with air pollution, environmental studies, where they done. I do not.
Speaker 2The answer was no air pollution, air quality as a regional phenomenon, if you will. It's not something that an individual site would typically be impacted by. So it is, I I've actually never done one in my 27 year career. You know, again, it's a regional phenomenon. It's not something that, you know, an individual site would typically impact in any way, shape or form
Speaker 1And for what it's worth to traffic testimony, Ms. Van Dyke made it clear that they under the original settlement, many, many, many more cars, the exhaust would be leaving and coming onto the site that I proposed by this warehouse shoes. And they're essentially at off peak hours as well, not during rush hour. And with regard to the environmental question, we are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction to GDP, and we haven't made applications to the GP for our environmental permits.
Speaker 5Okay. If you don't know who you're going to rent the warehouses to, how do you know whether the warehouses are gonna run 24 hours a day or only let's say from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM.
Speaker 2We don't know. We expect that they will run 24 hours a day because most of them do for those reasons that that actually Doug just referenced that they want traffic to happen at all hours and those types of things. So, you know, it's typical that the warehouses, you know, can run 24 hours a day. It's also typical that they and run eight hours a day and only one on one shift. It's not going until, until you actually have a tenant. But in this instance, we would submit that it will likely be a, a 24 hour a day operation in different way, shape or form. And, and that's what we represented to the court.
Speaker 5Yeah. One more question. I understand that governor Murphy on September 18th of this year signed legislation as 2 32, which lists scattered away as it sound that shouldn't be burned anymore, earned any more with more buildings. How do you respond to that?
Speaker 1I don't accept that premise as either as legitimate. I don't, there's no legislation that says the Skyway shouldn't accept any more applications for development. So I'm not sure what you're talking about, but I know that wouldn't be legal
Speaker 5Or can I send that to someone?
Speaker 1Sure. I'd be happy to look at it.
Speaker 5Okay, great. Thank you. I'll get information later. Thank you very much. That's it for right now? Thank you very much.
20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Public Questions Phase (Part 2) 20-ZB-41/42V AI  00:30:23 – 01:18:01
Continuation of public questioning. Questions probe environmental impact, traffic study date (May 2020, during stay-at-home order), truck routing feasibility, emergency services coordination, air quality assessment, and applicant's financial rationale. Extensive colloquy on traffic patterns to Route 287 and southbound movements, with applicant indicating willingness to post turn-restriction signage if required.
Speaker 0Thank you. Thank you. Fantastic.
Speaker 1And one of the public portion have any
Speaker 0With this application, but who haven't had an opportunity previously, who hasn't had?
Speaker 6Yes, it's his friend's wife, Jessica. He sent out today the call, but I do also have some questions. Okay.
Speaker 0Ma'am I need to have your full name.
Speaker 6Of course. It's gender that's K R a T O V I L 1, 2 47. What side? Wrong cause Hattaway.
Speaker 0And then you swear you in, could you raise your right hand swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth?
Speaker 6I do so swear. Thank you. So I have a couple of questions primarily about the storm water management. So I went on Brookside road, which is less than one mile from the proposed site and the road was repaint. I believe it was two years ago. And prior to the repayment, then there was new storm water vaults placed underneath because my property is on the lowest point of the site and has a drainage easement. And we thought we had quite a bit of flooding despite what is I'm imagining air quotes, adequate drainage located in our area. Can you give us a little more insight onto how these calculations were made and who deemed them adequate? Because we'd been in contact with the state regarding our property flooding.
Speaker 2So yeah, I will. It's John 16 again. So the calculations are done by our engineer, according to his standard engineering practice, there are set reductions that have to occur for different size storms. And we have met all of those reductions. They are redeemed by the township engineering staff to he, that all of those reductions had been met with the appropriate strategies, storm, water management. And then in arcades on this site, we have the additional obligation because we have state permits to make our submission to the state. And we've done that. And again, we expect our permits to be issued any day now. And, you know, we've complied with all required stormwater reductions. So in terms of impacting your home along the ambulance Brooks, we would expect that, as I said, we're going to reduce our too close in all of our storm events by at least the requirement
Speaker 1Also soil erosion.
Speaker 2Correct. So I wrote to the county, the county is going to review stormwater as well. So again, we kind of get the triple whammy of local municipality, Middlesex county and the state of New Jersey.
Speaker 6Okay. Thank you for that one, sir. I do have another question. Was this the only site considered in the area for this development or where other sites consider?
Speaker 2This is the only site in the era. We have the contract.
Speaker 6Okay. Because there's a site at the corner of Centennial and Stilton that as far as I'm aware is for commercial or industrial use that would not need to eradicate this nature area or wetland or whatever we're calling it. Is there a reason that that site wasn't considered at all?
Speaker 2We had this site under contract and we were not able to put it that side under contract, but we're here on this application for this, for this property tonight.
Speaker 1And for the record, it's not, it's not a nature preserve and we are respecting the wetlands and we are not going anywhere near them or impinging or impairing them in any way as required by the state DDP. It's just a piece of property like any other. And it has appropriate uses that can be put on either by way of the zoning, underlying zoning or by way of their litigation, or by way of a variance application. We've chosen this route and we hope we've put up sufficient proofs. And the record before this board that we convinced them that this is an inappropriate location, particularly suitable location for this particular use. This is the use that we have under contract. We're not making an application anywhere else.
Speaker 6Oh, wait. I did have another question was not a park proposed or actually the county owns the site across the street on something while she was in to be developed into a, like a non-sporting fields only type of park would not be warehouse, traffic and truck emissions and noise and UN operations in pans on the townships desire to have a passive peaceful type of recreation park consider.
Speaker 2As you testified, you don't believe we're going to have a negative impact on the surrounding area. South Washington is not exactly a sweeping country road. We believe that the vast majority of our traffic to be oriented towards 2 87, route 18, and we will direct our, our shooter pennants to have their truck traffic oriented that way, you know, with the county, what they choose to do with the land across the street is, is up to them. But we don't having the warehouse on this property in the warehouse. Next door has a negative impact on them in any way, shape or form.
Speaker 0Thank you, Jen, Ms. Credibility, any further questions?
Speaker 6Thank you.
Speaker 0Thank you. Thank you. Ma'am I'm sorry. Before we move on Brian rack, Jessica Prattville husband. I had some comments as well. Okay. Question comments or questions? Sure. Well, hold on, hold on, hold on. This is the time for questions where I agree. I have some questions. Do you have questions? Okay. Have you previously asked questions on this application? No. On this application I have on this call, this particular call today, but, and I recall you, I just don't remember if it was this application or not. So if we're on this application, I need to swear you in. Could you raise it? Sure. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth, ideally your name and address Brian rack. Wasn't his RA K. I live on 1247 Brookside road right around the corner from this referee. Thank you. So I may have missed it before, because I wasn't aware of this happening are the previous testimonies visible anywhere because I would have loved to watch them before I came to answer questions.
Speaker 0And I see someone's recording this. So are the previous recordings visible anywhere? No, I do not believe that they are. Okay. So I have to ask a question blindly, because I didn't know about the previous testimony. It was previously the subject of a public hearing on November 12th. Okay. So even though the township is recording needs, they're not publishing them anyway. No, the, the applicant is, has a court reporter who is preparing transcripts of the, but I mean, whoever's hosting this right now. He's recording the video and they're not publishing that anyway. No, they record the video so that they can prepare minutes of the meeting as required by law. Okay. So I can't see the video of previous testimony and ask questions based on that. I don't believe video is ever been posted for any application since the pandemic began. Okay. But the videos exist. So presumably I could submit a open Pope directly to Jack for them.
Speaker 0I can't answer that. Okay. Well, we'll see what happens tomorrow. My, my question is the property directly across the street, which is owned by the time which the township finding engineer Henry has testified at a previous zoning board meeting about the park. That's going to be built there. There's going to be no impact to the park based on having a bunch of trucks coming into the warehouse here to say that that's the county doesn't seem to make any sense to me because Mr. Rick, this is the time for questions, not comments, right? I'm trying to figure out, is there going to be an impact to the park that the township as flying across the street from this facility,
Speaker 2The applicant has previously testified that we do not believe we will have a negative impact on any of the surrounding properties. As we've said, the traffic from this proposed use will be less than the traffic from the use at which we had a settlement agreement to construct. We think that the slower traffic use is better suited for the property.
Speaker 1And you think that testimony by the way, for Mr. Sackler was one truck, every six minutes during the peak it had, is that right?
Speaker 7You have to unmute. Yep. Sorry about that. For the record, Matt, Sechler from Stonefield engineering design and I still am under oath. It's about the amount of truck traffic you're talking about at its Buick about one truck, every 10 minutes during the peak evening rush hour, sorry, every six minutes and the evening and morning peak hours, every six minutes.
Speaker 1Well, the answer from our perspective is no matter what the use is, this use will have no impact. It's negative.
Speaker 0I don't understand how can a it's currently in vacant lot. How can any truck traffic be a negative impact for what it is currently?
Speaker 1It's currently zoned by virtue of the settlement agreement for 240 plus residential units and thousands of square feet of retail. This is Dramont, demonstrably and dramatically less.
Speaker 0I mean, it might be zoned for that, but there's nothing there currently. It's not like you're saying
Speaker 1You have to keep it as a park. I don't want to argue with you, but we're not required to leave the property vacant.
Speaker 0You're proposing a change for me. They can parcel to a warehouse parcel,
Speaker 1Posing a warehouse far. So instead of a 242 unit residential parcel with thousands of square feet of office, that's correct.
Speaker 0I'm sorry. I've never seen the 250 square feet of warehouses or offices there right now. What I see is a bunch
Speaker 1I apologize for that, but it is part of the record in this case. And if you were to ask, we would provide it. I'm sure Mr. Conneely could provide and I'm sure the clerk could provide it. So it is what it is. You have any other questions for my witnesses?
Speaker 0I don't have any pretty good questions without. Yeah, I'm done. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Anyone else? In public portion? Yes.
Speaker 3Excuse me. The next one is James.
Speaker 8Hi James. My name is James Fuller. Oh, you want to swim in first?
Speaker 0Yes, sir. I do. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth?
Speaker 8I do. My name is Jane credit-risk.
Speaker 0Mr. Fuller, excuse me. Your address please? 16
Speaker 8Wine it's avenue. Piscataway New Jersey. Yes, I've been, I have one question for M and M. What do you, you mentioned trucks. What are the primary would be the primary type of trucks that would be used in this? Where, whether the house
Speaker 2We would expect that they would be the regular hippie three foot tractor trailers that you see on the road delivering to warehouses throughout the
Speaker 8Yeah. 18 wheelers. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0Thank you, Mr. <inaudible>.
Speaker 8Laura. Who's next?
Speaker 3And the next one. Okay. Mr. Marshall already spoke as van Dyke. Ray spoke. So I believe Debra.
Speaker 0Debra. Hello? Ma'am could I have your name? Yes, I can hear you. Can I have your name and name and address with this
Speaker 5Deborah Underwood 51 24 Emerson street in Piscataway
Speaker 0It's under what could you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth? Yes. Thank you.
Speaker 5So my one question is they did not do any environmental impact by site. Has anything been done regionally due to the building up all of these massive warehouses in the area? He said they don't tell them by sight. They only do them regionally, but we've had a lot of construction going on in this central area, right here has any impact environmental impact and done studies been done at all.
Speaker 1John
Speaker 2Regionally. I have no idea what the DP or the EPA is doing regionally. My answer was that air quality is generally a regional issue. It is not something that goes down to the individual site very well or very often. So I'm not aware of any of, of what they're doing regionally from the DEP or the EPA.
Speaker 5So we
Speaker 2Have, we have done all of the required environmental studies that are required by the township, by the Middlesex county and by the DDP to provide for offer post use.
Speaker 5Okay. With regard to the open space across the street. So maybe the, the warehouse would not create an impact environmentally, if there's only one truck, every 10 minutes coming in and out. What about safety? Six
Speaker 2Minutes. Oh, one time we expect it. What? Every six months. Yeah. W we expect again, when we, when we have our applications before the county, that at the township engineers that reviewed it, we expect the county engineer will review it and that they will determine that we can make all of the attorney movements that are required for the site to hit a safe and efficient manner. That's what the reviews do. We will have improvements on top Washington for turn lanes and, and those types of things. And we expect that we will be able to have shaped movements in and out, in and out of the site
Speaker 5With all of the empty warehouses, the littering Piscataway. I'm a little curious why you would not repurpose a different area as opposed to taking down Woodlands.
Speaker 2I guess I'll answer it. So I got it. I got it. So I want this one. There is far from empty warehouses in Piscataway and, and in the, the I 2 87 Carter in general, right now they can see as at a record low for the last 30 years in the I 2 87 Carter and literally all throughout New Jersey, it is, it is in the low single digit, like one and 2% in terms of they can see the absorption is virtually immediate for vacant warehouse. So there is literally nothing to repurpose. They are all being used and that is dry. Right. Thank you, John.
Speaker 5I have no further questions. Thank you.
Speaker 2Buckley's
Speaker 0Who's up next?
Speaker 3Well, we did Deborah Juliet pastors,
Speaker 0Ms. Pastors, I need to swear you in, could you raise your right hand? You swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth, so help you. Yes. Thank you. Your name and address please.
Speaker 9Hi, I'm Julia <inaudible>. I live in nine Juniper, Lambdas, cat away. My question, and this may have been included in your original testimony, but as Brian said, I have not had an opportunity to view that, but I was wondering, we spend so much time proving how this would not be a detriment to our community, but how exactly does this warehouse improve in our community? What benefits does it have?
Speaker 2We believe we believe we're providing for an appropriate use and inappropriate location. We think we're implementing aspects of the master plan that are desired in terms of commercial activity. And, you know, we hope that we'll be providing a good commercial rate-able and, and good jobs in the town. And again, the standard of, for this board is, is that we meet the positive negative criteria and particularly suitability for the site. And as Ms. Capone testified last time, can you believe we, we need all those requirements very, very well, and we believe we will not have a substantial impact, a negative impact on the area.
Speaker 9Okay. And can we, how can we ensure that you hire locally or that jobs are created for the people of scattered away?
Speaker 2We are not, we don't, we don't make any commitments in terms of, of, of who's going to work where the opportunity with that we've provided a real estate opportunity for patients to come in and, and utilize the facility, how they deserve, how they choose to hire is entirely up to them. And then for these jobs to be the history of these jobs, is that a good number of them end up coming from the local community? You know, they end up employing local people just because that's, who's most likely to, you know, to take the, the types of jobs that are offered in each facility. We don't make any commitments again. And we don't know that as you said, we know who the tenant is. So we don't know if it's going to be a tenant that is going to have hundreds of employees, or we don't know if the pit attending who's going to have three employees. My experience in the warehouse business is that we have both, I've had, you know, I've operated facilities up to 1 million square feet in the past, and I've had a hundred thousand square feet tenants that had two employees on the site on a hundred thousand square foot tiny that had 150 employees on the site until you get that tenant in the place, you can't make any representations what they're going to do.
Speaker 9Okay. Thank you. I have one more question. Have you explored, or you thought about any other possible things you could have built on this land that would have fallen under the original zoning that maybe would have clear benefits where community,
Speaker 2No. We considered the dispute building zones very briefly, but frankly, as soon as the warehouse went, next door, single family development just was not something that we felt was the best possible use for the site in the warehouse. Next door. You given the fact that you were bisected by utility Carter that had some impact on, on all perception for single family development. So that was why we went to the multi-family development of the a hundred thousand square feet of retail space. And you talked about previously that it's fifth subject for the settlement. <inaudible> by this board again, as we continue to evaluate the more faced tended to work locally, we decided that ambulating warehouse store one that would have the most Spanish script to the town with the lowest impact. And as we said, it had significantly less traffic impact on south Washington avenue. And we had the ability to direct that traffic towards 2 87 18. So you felt that this changed from the 242 units and a hundred passes. He did commercials to proposed warehouses a little bit better use,
Speaker 1Hey, John, I'm getting a lot of static. Is that me? Or did anybody else hear this? I hear the static as well. And maybe you're too close to the Mike where you got some electronics on.
Speaker 2I'll go this way. That'll better clear.
Speaker 1What's
Speaker 2Your question?
Speaker 9Yeah. Sorry. One more thing. Just cause you mentioned the traffic again, while the traffic might be less, right. Have you given any thought to the safety, especially with trucks making that left turn without a light they get to
Speaker 2Yeah. Yeah. As I testified, actually from the last person listed 60 questions on
Speaker 1The phone, you got to mute screen.
Speaker 8Cause we're still getting that static.
Speaker 2If spike screen, the only, my only device is my phone,
Speaker 8But we're still, I'm still getting a static.
Speaker 0Well, it's doable. We can muddle through, I think.
Speaker 2Okay. Let me turn off the bottle through. Hang on. I got one more, one more choice here.
Speaker 0I don't think it's you. Oh, it could be another. There you go. Perfect. Oh, time stopped on my end.
Speaker 8Yeah, John.
Speaker 2Yeah. So as you said, you know, as you go to our reviews with the county, you've already been to the town as you go to the reviews with the county and then again, south Washington county road, they will ensure that we have safe and efficient access onto, onto the site, into the side and off of the site. Again, we will have improvements and currently in downtown Washington avenue and given the surrounding lights that will have sufficient gaps for us to get in and out of the site. Again, our traffic will be directed towards 2 87, route 18. And we think that with that we'll have safe and efficient access to the site.
Speaker 0Thanks, John. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Pastors. Who's next? Miss buckle. Stacy Berger. Okay. Is there anybody else that hasn't been hurt? No, there's only four people. All four of them have spoken already. Okay. Mr. Chairman, everyone inside the opportunity to ask questions. It may now be time to be maybe
Speaker 11Additional questions that are not about information about which was not available to me.
Speaker 0I, people can not interrupt it. It may be appropriate to go to the public comment portion now,
Speaker 8Excuse me. I'm here. I've been raising my hand and I have not had
Speaker 0Laura did we? Wasn't at this last hearing. Okay. Correct. Mr. Thorpe. He was
Speaker 11Additional testimony though. So we have the right to
Speaker 0Ask additional questions. Mr. T Mr. Targus. Yes. Did you raise your right hand? You swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth.
Speaker 8Yes, sir.
Speaker 0Your name and address please.
Speaker 8<inaudible> tango alpha Romeo Bravo, Oscar uniform, Zulu. I lived at four 11 new market road at the Skyway, New Jersey.
Speaker 0Your question questions.
Speaker 8So my understanding is that M and M is the applicant on this, this, this, or made this application to the board that says your company and then a Realty coming in real to, so is that an ongoing concern or was a forum for this ongoing concern? And Mr. <inaudible>, I believe has been testifying as a representative of M and M. Can you tell me what his role is with the company?
Speaker 2I'm the director of real estate development for a minimum Realty partners.
Speaker 8Okay. Are you an architect or a civil engineer?
Speaker 2I'm actually a planner.
Speaker 8So what does that mean with respect to what role or certifications are relative to an architect or civil engineer?
Speaker 2I'm a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. The same way it'll lay an architect is licensed and engineer's license. A planner is licensed in New Jersey. I hold a license and professional plan.
Speaker 8Does that, does that profession include similar training and knowledge and certifications with respect to the, with like things that a civil engineer would be testifying to such as like the water drainage and all?
Speaker 2Yeah.
Speaker 8Okay. I've heard, I've heard some folks talk about tonight that there's something about something is under contract. I think both Mr. Wolfson, Ember, Tina had said that. Could you explain to me what is meant by you? Something is under contract or were you referring to
Speaker 1Check that exists between M and M real people are owners and the owners of the property?
Speaker 8Sure. So because you don't so M and M does not currently own the property. That's correct. Okay. So is M and M obligated to buy, to purchase the property under that contract?
Speaker 1Are you a lawyer?
Speaker 8No, sir.
Speaker 1Okay. So it's a complicated question. I don't mean to be obnoxious about it. We're bound by the contract. We're bound by the terms of the contract and the terms of the contract are not really public, but we are, we are bound to do certain things in order to act in good faith under the laws and in doing so ultimately to purchase the property. And the seller is bound under the laws and state of Jersey and the provisions that contract to sell us the property. So other than that, I'm not sure what I can be more accessible.
Speaker 8Oh, that's fine. That's fine. That's fine. Thank you. So I guess I think sometimes those are referred to contingencies, right? In a real estate contract that you need to perform, or you need to perform certain actions you mentioned, does that include making this application before the board that you required to make this application in under the contract or
Speaker 1I'm not required to make the application we're an authorized and allowed to.
Speaker 8So, so your, your, your, your presence here is not too, you were being entered into that contract.
Speaker 1Please say that again, your
Speaker 8Presence here making this application you're saying is not required under the contract. Are you're you entered into
Speaker 1The answer is it is. That's one of the reasons I asked you, if you were an attorney, explain it to a lay person is a little more difficult than to an attorney, but there are obligations under the law that we have to act in good faith. And this is one of the things as required of us to do.
Speaker 8Okay. I've heard mentioned that. I believe that this is under some sort of redevelopment plan. No, that's not correct or correct wealth. Or I did here to use the word redevelopment used. So this is an area,
Speaker 1You know, redevelopment. We're not designated redeveloper and I'm not sure you may be confusing this with other properties elsewhere, but this is not, this is not sorry.
Speaker 8Well, I thought I heard that word used with respect to this application earlier tonight. This is not a redevelopment area. This is not a redevelopment plan. In fact, that wouldn't even come before this board. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. No, I'm not. I'm not, I'm not finished. I'm sorry. That's fine. I heard someone say, I think Mr. Wilson said that I think it was based on whispering woods settlement, that this was quote, this land quote was not zoned properly. So what does that mean to say that it's not zoned properly
Speaker 1And well, it's more complicated, but I'll try to help you with that. The underlying zoning of the property we felt was inappropriate for the site and the property was not reasonably adaptable for what it was owned for. Given what was in the area. You made an application before this board for variance to allow something other than what was permitted under the then existing zoning. That application was 240 something. Residential units. I think I heard John saying, if I'm incorrect, you can correct me, but a hundred thousand square feet of retail, that was, we made our application where we believed that we had put sufficient proofs on to timeless, to various to allow that to board disagreed. They denied the application and we filed the lawsuit. During the course of that litigation, the lawsuit was ultimately settled on certain terms. We might put some of them on the record. They are of record. And ultimately because of where the loo the sewer locations, where the cost of getting them to, to there and the need for the size of the pipe based on uses, it was being to be about reasonably adaptable for that use. So we had to figure out a different use that was appropriate for the site, given its particularities particular suitability and its particular location after our, I'm sorry. You want me? Let me
Speaker 8Stop. I'll stop. Yeah, that's fine. Thank you please, to answer your question. That's fine. Thank you. With respect to the drainage of the stormwater from this property. I've heard that there I'm assuming that, or I heard that there was no notion of a single discharge point from the property. Is that true for both the Proctor property in its current state and in the proposed future state?
Speaker 2There's a single analysis point, which is what you do. You combine all the different discharges and you get to what would be the, for this downstream analysis point. And you use that issue as your point of analysis for all of your reduction. So there isn't a single discharge, there's several, they come together in the weapons and then they, they can be analyzed at the downstream end of the level.
Speaker 8Right.
Speaker 2Thank you guys. So,
Speaker 8So, so, so most, or maybe all of the discharged from this site goes into the wetlands where everything that people have been mentioning, that's I guess, adjacent to this site, and you
Speaker 2Said that on a property and continues off.
Speaker 8Okay. And so you said that you were going to, in certain situations, the runoff to that property will be reduced, which is what you said. I know some folks have some concerns about there being excess runoff, and you said it was going to be reduced. Was that correct? Under certain circumstances, situations,
Speaker 2All in all scoring situations, they were on awful.
Speaker 8Okay. I've also heard that this property, this, this project will not adversely impact surrounding properties, but if the surrounding the surrounding property is a wetland, and then you're reducing the runoff into that wetland, doesn't that change or impact the wetlands adversely.
Speaker 2It does, again, we were being reviewed by them, but they're finding that are the general permits, which are the impacts that are permitted under state law will not have a negative impact on the wetland environment or the environment that whole
Speaker 8Are those. You said you have, those permits had been applied for.
Speaker 2Yes. They've been applied for, we've been to, I believe two sets of reviews and we're waiting for issuance.
Speaker 8Alright. Is there, is there any set of public hearings associated with the permits, those applications?
Speaker 2No, sir. No. So there general permits that are provided for in the statutes.
Speaker 8Okay. With respect to that traffic, I've heard that there's a estimate of six trucks per minute, a truck, one truck per six minutes, one truck, I'm sorry, one truck for six minutes. I've also heard that the ability to forecast the number of employees on the site is very difficult to forecast. So if the number of employees is difficult to forecast, how can or how accurate, or how reliable is the estimate of the buyer mortar, the rate of traffic flow. If you don't know what the tenants are going to do face
Speaker 1John standard texts and Mr. Sackler, I would ask you to respond to Mr. <inaudible> question.
Speaker 7Yeah. It's based on the it trip generation manual, which is a sample of data collected at existing warehouse facilities, and they come up with a kind of a best fit for that analysis. It's based on over. It gets you the exact number it's based on a total sample of about 34 different sites. You know, this is based on
Speaker 8The sites that those 34 sites are they located in Scotland?
Speaker 7No, they are not.
Speaker 8They're located in the area.
Speaker 7There are mics, there are the majority of them are actually within the New York region, but they are mixed throughout the United States.
Speaker 8Okay. The I've also heard folks testified that that will not be a negative impact on adjoining properties. And I've also heard that this is inappropriate use because there's an adjacent where what I have not heard is what's the, what's the impact. You know, there's going to be an impact on adjacent properties that are not warehouses, or we're not so much the impact, but what is the, how is it appropriate to mention only the warehouse adjacent and not be concerned about the residential and open space is areas that are based in their property, but doesn't that make sense?
Speaker 0Are there, there's been considerable testimony about the impact on all adjacent properties?
Speaker 1Thank you, Mr. Stanley,
Speaker 8I'm talking about the appropriateness of folks talked about the appropriateness of granting this, this, this, this variance. So one of the arguments made is actually Jason <inaudible>. You asked for people not to interrupt folks earlier. Thank you.
Speaker 0There's been extensive testimony by the applicant about the effect of this property on all adjacent properties, not just the warehouse property
Speaker 1At the warehouse property was, was related to the particular student, the ability, not the negative criteria. Mr. <inaudible> testified about the negative part to Syria and how this was a much lower impact use that needed the prior use. That was permitted by the way, whispering with settlement or even the other, the underlying residential very low impact.
Speaker 8So, right. I've heard that the traffic is going to be cool less than that. So
Speaker 1Typically the most significant impact on surrounding areas is traffic, right?
Speaker 8So when, when, when, when making a determination that it's less impact, but the impact is going to be a different sort of flavor of impact in that the current use is residential and retail, I believe, but now you're going to have 18 wheelers. So how is it, how is the determination made that it's less, if, is it done just fine? The law vehicle count?
Speaker 1Well, the testimony that was sent forth indicated the comparative and qualitative analysis, both in terms of number of vehicles, type of congestion, the capacity of the roads and the number of employees. And there's in phase traffic. And there's out of face. Traffic is traffic that comes at rush hour, which would be significant when people leaving their homes for work and rush hour traffic coming home from work. And the warehouse use is out of phase, which is not during rush hours, spread out during all 24 hours of the day so that was the testimony of Mr. Sackler and also the testimony of Ms. <inaudible>. And I'm sorry that you didn't hear that, but that's as Mr. Conneely indicated that took up very significant portion of last hearing.
Speaker 8So has there been any study or consideration about th the difference in the noise that the trucks pay versus the a and being out of phase and the hours that the noise, the trucks will name?
Speaker 1I don't know. I'm not aware of any noise study being done or what the impact would be on one truck, every six minutes on a public road, where there could be trucks anyway,
Speaker 8Th there, so there's no requirement to do a study about noise as part of your application.
Speaker 0There is no study and any trucks that enter or exit this property have to satisfy whatever noise standards are applicable to all other trucks in the township of scaffolding.
Speaker 8I also heard testimony that said that I believe MNM properties, Mr. Tycoon, I believe said that the wrecked their tenants to use south Washington avenue to go to route 2 87. So what exactly does that mean though? What, what ability does M and M have to sort of enforce or ensure that the tenants will have their trucks moving towards route 2 87?
Speaker 2We have, we have two things, two things. One is it's, unfortunately it's the best route. And it's the route that Bush trucks takes when they access these industrial facilities. They are not like this, but we also have the opportunity to work with our tenants to say, this is the preferred truck routes for, for your trucks to come to the facility. We would like to direct them from 2 87. And if they can come from 2 87 and then, and it comes from 18 and we'd like that to come all the way up to the Tenille and the down Centennial and onto south Washington, that is what, what we will do in terms of directing our trucks with that type of truck wrap. And we would accept that as an addition to
Speaker 1After the record, that was Mr. Takina. And also I would indicate that Mr. Sackler indicated based on his studies that 70 to 80% of the traffic would go in the direction towards 2 87. So very, very few trucks would go the other direction. But as Mr Takina said, if the board was concerned about that traffic, they would probably ask us to accept a condition which has Madrid. Like Keanae indicated that we would be amenable to, to post two signs in restricting turning movements. That's up to the board.
Speaker 8Right. So, okay. So that means that 20 to 30% will be heading south on south Washington avenue. If 70 to 80% is heading north towards route 37.
Speaker 1Right. But we want every 18 minutes or one every 12 minutes.
Speaker 8Okay. There's a major, there's a major divergence just down the road onto Mettler's lane in each direction. So are there, is there any estimate as to which, which of those two directions that additional 20 to 30% of traffic will be edit?
Speaker 1Mr. Sackler, have you been here? You answered that question and Mr. Tavis pleased
Speaker 7Again, the, the most, as you stated earlier, the most likely route is to 2 87. Those vehicles not going to 2 87, it's probably a mix. Again, there are parts of this roadway network that has some form of truck restriction. When trucks get their routing package, they don't typically use ways. You know, like we would, we're trying to find a location. They use specific software that indicates which roads have restrictions on them on which roads notes. But again, we expect the vast majority to go north. And again, if this board and or the county wishes for us to post a return for truck restriction at the driveway with a enforceable 10 or 39, we would have no issue with that.
Speaker 1Thank you. Thank you, Matt.
Speaker 8So, but there will be based, based on what I've heard. There will be for instance, trucks traveling south on south, Mettler's sorry, southbound south Washington. And in turn west on Mettler's towards new Brunswick, there will be a incremental or impact on, on Trump traffic. There'll be additional trunk traffic on Meadows road, others' lane, sorry, towards new Brunswick. Who's that
Speaker 1Gets beaten that one every 12 or 18 minutes
Speaker 7Probably be less than one, every 18 minutes. And that would be again during that one peak hour. And again, that movement, if the board wishes, and that's a concern of theirs that they don't want trucks heading to the south, you, you know, we would be in compliance with the restriction and require them to go north. So they wouldn't be using the Miller's lane area at all.
Speaker 1Right here is a public road.
Speaker 8Yeah. Oh yeah. So I I'm well aware of that. So are there any restrictions to your knowledge? I mean, that that's a route to 18 south. Awesome. That's a major route that route 18 south. So are there any truck restrictions between this, this parcel and routine south, which could be entered into near river road? The Piscataway?
Speaker 1I'm sorry. Are you asking us if we can do that?
Speaker 8<inaudible> are there any current restrictions for trucks? Do you get to route 18 south from this
Speaker 7Again, this is Matt Sackler from Stonefield. I believe there's a restriction on Drake lane, depending on if the trucks would take Drake to work themselves through the area. But I do believe that trucks are unrestricted for a good portion of the route that you're referring to.
Speaker 8So I've heard testimony that said that the best route to the warehouse is via route 2 87, but for trucks traveling two points to her phone on route 18 south, isn't that a, a more expeditious route for them to take isn't it a more direct route for them to take route 18 exited at members' lane and then get to this, this land via that route?
Speaker 2No, we don't believe so. As you know, we do to Northeastern improved significantly office and Tenille avenue, and we believe that that wrap all the way up through the teens to Centennial, and then they're write in a right, is a superior route than a winding way on met.
Speaker 8Right. But the trucks, trucks leaving would be making left. They left and right on right. Would be going to route 18 south DIA via his lane. So let's assume that yes.
Speaker 2He asked Mr. Jarvis who dirty says, we will accept that restriction on the right time. Right.
Speaker 1And we also had testimony that it's less than one truck, every 18 minutes. So I don't know that we need a restriction, but yes, if the board felt it was appropriate, there was an indication from the applicant that we would have signage and ingress and egress would be restricted. So that should take care of her.
Speaker 8So less than one truck, every 18 minutes on members buying through a residential area, even though I guess it's a county road, technically will have an impact. There'll be additional truck traffic. You're basically testifying. There will be additional truck traffic on Mettler's lane southbound. Is there any question, sir? I'm asking you, are you, are you saying that there will be additional traffic? We're
Speaker 1Saying, we're saying that less than one truck, every 18 minutes and that's no impact. That's what we're saying. Obviously you disagree with us and you're entitled to disagree. A positive number is not impact is zero impact. Okay? Correct. And they're made to be true. Mr. Tablets roads are made to be driven on trucks will be on that road when one truck, every 18 minutes or less is in perceptible. So if you disagree with us, that's okay. You're entitled to your opinions. It's interesting to express it to the board. So you're saying that a truck, every 18 minutes, isn't perceptible, I'd like 2:00 AM in the morning, but
Speaker 0Okay. Let's move on from this line of questioning. I think we've covered it.
Speaker 1Thank you, Mr. Keneally. Okay. Thank you. I have no further
Speaker 0Questions. Thank you, Mr. Jarvis, Ms. Buckley, are there any other members of the public that have not had an opportunity to question? No.
Speaker 3We just have the four lifts. Stacey Berger.
Speaker 0Okay. Everyone has had an opportunity to ask questions, Mr. Chairman, I think it's appropriate to go at the public comment.
20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Public Comment Period (Against/For) 20-ZB-41/42V AI  01:18:08 – 02:34:47
Board receives comments from residents and interested parties. Overwhelming opposition voiced on grounds of environmental impact (wetlands, stormwater quality, air/noise pollution), traffic safety concerns, lack of proven community benefit, aesthetic/character changes, and absence of air quality studies. Few in favor (board member notes smaller impact vs. prior 240-unit residential plan). Applicant's counsel provides rebuttal on legal standards and offers traffic-restriction conditions.
Speaker 11I had the opportunity to ask questions about testimony that was issued and, and discussed during this meeting. And I had the right to do that.
Speaker 0I
Speaker 11Have two specific questions about the chest.
Speaker 1It's up to the board, but as attorney for the applicant, we don't object. We don't object. Mr. Chairman. Unfortunately, we got an old volunteer board here and mostly before
Speaker 11We were all volunteers too. I don't, I don't. I have questions to ask about a development I'm allowed to do that. They don't object.
Speaker 12Excuse me. You guys read a letter purported to be from me. That mis-characterized my position. I believe I have the right to risk.
Speaker 0Okay, sir, you're speaking out of turn. Please wait until you're called upon Mr. Chairman. What is your pleasure with how to proceed to the CT? I would
Speaker 1Like to go to public comment.
Speaker 0Okay. Okay. Now is the time for public comment, any members of the public that wish to comment, please indicate your intentions. And we will call you in order,
Speaker 1Ms. Buckley feel free to start when you want
Speaker 0Ms. Bergen already been sworn in to tell the truth you remain sworn in.
Speaker 11First of all, I want to object for the record that I'm not being allowed to ask additional questions of the witnesses, even though the witnesses were willing to answer those questions, which I appreciate Mr. Wilson, it's really both inappropriate and just a disservice to the public. We're all volunteers here except for Mr. Wilson and the rest of the M and M team who are obviously paid by their companies to be here. Everyone else is a volunteer and are here of their own free will. So that doesn't really carry water. First of all, the traffic study was done during the height of the stay at home order, which I was going to ask. And perhaps one of the respondents wants to answer anyway, whether that has any impact at all on their understanding of what the traffic is going to be and what the traffic might be on.
Speaker 11The what the traffic that you're proposing might have on a normally traveled busy road. It was done in May, 2020 when there was a stay at home executive order from the governor. And therefore does not seem to have a very valid basis. In fact, because it was done at a time that most people in Skyway were not on the second. Mr. Takina consistently has said, and I'm sure this, that 2 87, I don't know if Mr. Wilson wants to put himself on mute. Thanks, Mr. Takina has consistently said that he and his company believes that 2 87 is conveniently located from this facility. In fact, if you're traveling south on 2 87, it is not at all conveniently located, and I'm not sure if Mr. Takina has tried to take 2 87 or Mr. Sackler has tried to take 2 87 south from this property, but you cannot do that by going down south Washington, you have to turn left where you can, but then you have to go all the way around on Stilton.
Speaker 11You need to then in order to go onto south Washington, rather in order to go south on 2 87, you need to go left on Mettler's lane, left on Stoughton road and then access to 87 south by being in the south, the left-hand lane of, of Stilton road. So the traffic study that I saw didn't really address that. And I was wondering and hope that at some point M and M or Mr. Olson, or somebody can address the traffic impact in reality, because what you've proposed does not actually match how the traffic pattern flows. So whether or not people go, right, it's not the only issue it's whether they're going north or south on 2 87. And that is just completely,
Speaker 1It was the type of shot only Mr. Wilson, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Wilson. It's common now by the public point of order. Yes. So Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to the courts, sorry, with the chair's discretion and authority, I think it would be better to allow the other members of the public that did not ask questions in light of the answers that we gave tonight. I think it would be a procedural mistake not to allow them to do that. I think at this point is correct. And I would advocate I'm trying to help you. I would prefer. And I would prefer if I had my druthers that you allowed other people that had already asked questions to ask questions limited, of course, that the new evidence testimony that you heard tonight, because she's correct. We introduced by way of our answers, additional testimony that legitimately could have prompted new questions. So I would ask the chair to please reconsider its ruling and allow those persons who have previously asked questions to continue to do so, but limit them to new
Speaker 0Evidence. That was to me, I stick Stacy and the other three that are on old here, please just leave.
Speaker 3Excuse me, chairman, not to cut you off now. There's about four other people besides them that have already spoke. They're trying to speak again. So I don't know if the little limiting
Speaker 0Questions,
Speaker 3Excuse me. We do have another case after this. That is still pending,
Speaker 0Just as a reminder. And, and, and Mr. Chairman, as long as we're sort of taking a break right now, we ordinarily do not accept any new applications after 10 30. Yes. That applicant has been waiting since seven 30, but it's after 10 30 now. So if we're not going to hear them, we should advise them and, and let them go for the, yeah. Fortunately, unfortunately, things ran over with this application, so Aspen's going to have to be put off. And I apologize for the delay
Speaker 13If I could. And I don't say this lightly, I know it's all been a long week for all of us that it's almost 11. We have a seven to 10 minute case, and this has been pending since the summer and the pandemic got in the way. We've got a very simple case that I could almost put on with almost no witness. If, if the board would oblige, we've been here three and a half hours or so we'll hang in. If you tell me to go online and if then we'll have,
Speaker 0I've been here three and a half hours for three and a half hours near to healthy.
Speaker 13It's an experiment. If you tell me when you're done with this case, go home, Larry I'll go home. But the board is inclined to give us five to 10 minutes. I know the applicant would greatly.
Speaker 0I appreciate it. I hate to, I hate to keep you around longer, but this could go some midnight. I
Speaker 13Understand. We've, we've been there. We, you know, I, it is what it is,
Speaker 0What we're, if, if you're willing to stay, if I a five minute presentation, if it's a five minute presentation and case five to seven, stay around, we're going to tell you some testimony.
Speaker 13I will gladly stick around. And I know that there's no guarantee we'll be heard, but
Speaker 0Please don't need to rip on talking. I'm going to, I'm going to get back to you. Give me a second. Wait. Well, if, if it's only a five minute thing by all means, but I will tell you, like I said, most of us work full-time full-time today, and now we're up to whatever, listening to this testimony. It's I have to wear it all volunteer board and I have to respect my board members. But Mr. Wilson, I will take that on there. Okay. Go back and have a cup of coffee or something. We'll get to you in a little bit, Stacy, if you could keep your questions brief, I'd be happy to let you ask questions of the testimony that was given tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it as well. Okay, Laura, please recognize Stacy murder.
Speaker 3She's on, she's
Speaker 0On this with chairman. You're there stage I'm here. Okay. Nope. Ask your questions. Did you hear the question? And Stacy
Speaker 3Keeps
Speaker 0Having things to say it's Doug Wilson. And I was asking Matt that he could
Speaker 1Answer your question
Speaker 7Again. Matt Sinclair from Stonefield Ms. Berger, just to clarify, the report was dated in 2020, but the data collected was from 2018. It's the data within our traffic study was collected prior to COVID. We had just happened to run the analysis, you know, the, put the report. Thanks
Speaker 1For that.
Speaker 11So that report again is not current in any badging, cause it's more than two years old. So the question that I could thank you for that, the question that her braids, Mr. Thomas raised that, that, that Mr. Wilson and I believe Mr. Takina answered was that you were under contract to purchase the property who owns the property. Now,
Speaker 1Do you want me to answer that, Mr. Keneally? Yes, please. He had drinking family.
Speaker 11And so I, can you spell that?
Speaker 1E D R I N G T O N.
Speaker 11Okay. That's the first time that I heard that second.
Speaker 1There's no reason you would've heard it. I'm sorry. There's no reason you would have heard that relevant to the application.
Speaker 11Well, it's new information and it's curious to people
Speaker 1Who want to not relevant to the case. Go
Speaker 11Ahead. Okay. I mean, are you the
Speaker 1I'm asking you, so you asked your questions. I got the chair. I want you to ask your questions,
Speaker 11Huh? That's off that. I finished the question, the environmental justice bill that Ms. Vandyke raised is actually very relevant and I'm surprised that you don't know about it. And so I wanted to ask a little bit more about your familiarity with, with the woods full of really known as the environmental justice bill. In fact, Piscataway is absolutely listed as an overburdened community. And there is a requirement that the department of environmental protection, there are promulgating and goals now. So it may or may not apply. But the question about whether you did or didn't do an air quality study didn't I didn't have a good answer to that. I believe that Ms. Tina said that there's a, it's a region study,
Speaker 1But I know we did not do an air quality study.
Speaker 11Okay. Because you're because you believe you're not required to do that,
Speaker 1Correct? Correct.
Speaker 11Do you have any assessment of what the impact of those would be on our air quality? Are you familiar with the Skyway is very low air quality rating?
Speaker 1No.
Speaker 11Okay. So you don't know what the air quality in our community is. You didn't do an air quality study and you're not familiar with the environmental justice bill that lists this getaway as an overburdened environmental justice community, in which the department of environmental protection is currently
Speaker 1The environmental justice act is medical waste landfills, to which plants, et cetera,
Speaker 11It was signed by God. It's not that judge walks in your eye. I'm sure you had
Speaker 1It's Doug Wolf. And I don't want to argue, I don't want to argue legal issues with, we're not, we're not required to comply with it.
Speaker 0I, I, I believe the answer to your question is no, they did not do an air quality study.
Speaker 11I mean, I'm specifically asking you about the environmental justice bill that Mr. Wilson seems insistent on insisting on is not clickable, but may become a clickable. If, if the DEP exercises its rights to reject,
Speaker 0Of course, according to the laws of the state of New Jersey, the applicant is bound by the time of application rule. This was not in effect at the time that they applied for this application. So it's not an effect for this application.
Speaker 11Right? And what I want to know is whether, whether this continues to go on, if they have any sense of what their air quality impact is going to be, or that's something that they simply don't have consideration of,
Speaker 1We're not going to do it.
Speaker 11Okay. Someone, I think it was Mr. Takina, but I wasn't taking deets at that kind of level of detail notes testified that this will bring the, I believe in response to Ms. Pastor's his question about the, the benefit that the community will get from this warehouse. You testified that it would bring good jobs to our community. Can you provide a definition of good jobs or an example or any kind of specificity to that statement? I got a job that I'm sorry,
Speaker 2A job that pays you a wage is a good job.
Speaker 11Any job that pays a wage is a good job.
Speaker 2Yes, we believe. So.
Speaker 11Did you say with benefits, their emphasis in the beginning,
Speaker 2I'll stick with pays you a wage, not everyone in the world.
Speaker 11It doesn't pay your way to, it requires your labor is not a job. Correct. Okay.
Speaker 1I'm sorry. What was that question?
Speaker 11You're you're saying that any job that provides a wage is a good job, but what I mean, is there a job that doesn't provide a wage because a job that doesn't provide a wage as a different company or containment,
Speaker 2I answered the question. I answered your question. Thank you.
Speaker 11Okay. So Mr. Takina testified that there, that the warehouses are economically preferred because the original scene didn't fit your, your, your need. But then Mr. Wilson seemed to testify the opposite or corrected him. You clarify what the economic objective of this is, because it doesn't seem that the two of you were on the same page.
Speaker 1We are on the same page and you mischaracterized the testimony. And it was Ms. A phone who testified as to the particular suitability of the property. And it did not reasonably. And excuse me at the property is not reasonably adaptable for the purposes, for which it is zoned. And for which it was a subject of whispering, much hearing at the property you put to use is a positive, and it will provide taxes. It will provide jobs in construction,
Speaker 11And it will
Speaker 1Provide, excuse me. And it will provide jobs for the people who may end the warehouse,
Speaker 11The work that we say, work the warehouses and not man them anymore. But what's the what's, what's the tax bill that you expect to pay.
Speaker 1Whatever the found will assess the property in accordance with the challenge appropriate standards. And the taxes will be a lot more than they are now.
Speaker 11Okay. Can you give me a ballpark figure that a bread box?
Speaker 1I cannot, I cannot, I don't know how they're going to assess it. And I don't know.
Speaker 11I know what you don't like. You can't tell us whether or not there are actually taxes that are going to be okay. So last question, I think w I had started to ask, and then everybody got a little worked up about whether we were taking questions or taking public comment, 2 87 to turn, to turn, to go south on 2 87 is not possible by going left out of the parking lot. So what is the rationale for the trucks that will be traveling south on 2 87? Because they are going to have to get
Speaker 2And make a left at you make a left side of the parking lot. <inaudible>
Speaker 11You make a left out of the park? What? It's hard to hear you.
Speaker 2No, you go north on south Washington. You make a light onto some time the only, and that the left Felton and you get on 87,
Speaker 11Correct? But there's, there's a number of traffic lights and a tremendous amount of traffic through that area. Are you not, are you familiar with that? The other way you could do it as you could make a right.
Speaker 2Okay. I will. I work on mile from the site every day. No, it's not. No, it's no. These southbound movement on 2 87 minutes, not a straight shot. You are correct. Every other movement on 2 87, it's a straight shot. That one is not
Speaker 11Okay. Is there any differential misdemeanor, Mr. Sackler knows in the percentage of traffic of trucks that are going to go southbound versus northbound, since she seemed to have a sense of whether some are going to go to 18 or
Speaker 7Really, it depends on the end user. Again, most of the cars would likely go north, but until there's an end-user, it's unknown. What I can state is from following the truck volumes on this roadway, looking at the adjacent warehouse development and the way those trucks turn, whether it's left or right. It gives us a good idea in terms of the likely paths of the truck truck.
Speaker 11Okay. But without a tenant or an end user, you don't really know anything about the traffic pattern. How do you, how did you estimate one truck for every six minutes without knowing who the tenant is going to be
Speaker 7Student transportation, engineers as a collection of studies in which they studied over 35 warehouses to determine the truck percentage, peak hours of traffic and the number of cars that would come in and out of a site.
Speaker 11I'm sorry, the Institute of who now
Speaker 7It's the two to transportation engineers. It is the guidebook that is utilized, but it's our department of transportation and the county, the DEP, as it relates to traffic impacts the all utilized Institute of transportation, engineers trip, generation manual.
Speaker 11Okay. Do you have any sense of whether there's an over, under on what they estimate?
Speaker 7These are the weighted averages.
Speaker 11Okay.
Speaker 1Thanks Matt.
Speaker 11Pardon? Thank you, Mr. Seth. I appreciate that. And my last question is for any of the principals at M and M or the, the architects, if any of you made campaign contributions to either Ms. Kay, Hill's wife or Ms. Johnson,
Speaker 1I believe we filed forms with the town as part of the Dom an application. My recollection is no contributions were made
Speaker 11By M and M. Is that true?
Speaker 1I mean, I'm running the principles
Speaker 11About what form would the town, Mr. Wilson, I'm not familiar with that one. So I'd love to have the of it, which I can get his nose, Mobic records act request, but you can just tell me the name of the,
Speaker 1I can't tell you the name of the form. And I can't even tell you whether it was this town versus other towns. Most towns have a disclosure requirement that asks you a pay-to-play ordinances, whether they've done. So the answer is no, the answer is nobody made any contribution.
Speaker 0I'm sorry, Ms. Berger. I could not understand your question.
Speaker 11I'm sorry. The question is, is there a standard disclosure form that is part of a zoning board application as Mr. Wilson said, sometimes having sometimes don't meet doesn't know whether they filed one here or not
Speaker 0Zoning board application. No.
Speaker 11Okay. Are you? Thank you. Thank you so much,
Speaker 0Laura, who was the second person that wanted to ask some questions? William Makita is William Makita. Hit me up. Are you present?
Speaker 14I am president. Everybody asks the question I was going to ask. So thank you. I know Mr. <inaudible> probably wants to
Speaker 0I'll let him talk. Okay, Mr. Novack. Yes. I'm here and sworn in to tell the truth. I do. Thank you.
Speaker 12Okay. So first I'd like to start with the email that I sent to the engineer that prepared the water pollution control report. So I sent that email because I found some pretty, I don't know, glaring omissions within it. And in the beginning of this meeting, Mr. Takina explained w you know, his response to, to that. And I, I'm glad that I have an opportunity to respond to that cause because not doing so I think would have been very unfortunate. So he's, he did say though, I believe her raised it as well. He did say that this was an area in need of redevelopment. He, he said those words. And as Mr. Wolfson and others said, that is not true. The state website confirms this. You can look at the DGPS data, miner website and determined that this law is not an area in need of, of redevelopment. You ask a question. And so my question was, why did Mr. Takina say that when he responded to the content of my email,
Speaker 2Mr. Chairman, I said at this is John pipe. And as I said at the time, the question was that section eight of the report states, the parcels are loaded in located in urban redevelopment zone, by nature of the reading, all the reasons <inaudible> metropolitan planning area in the state planning with the state planning policy map, there is something that is called in urban redevelopment area. I could not use the term. They need a re an area in need of redevelopment. I am a licensed planner, and I know the difference. I use the term urban redevelopment area, specifically responding to the question. And I stated that since the site is located in the PA one, it's developed to the residence and it has power power line. You spent a surrounded by development. It fits the definition under the state plan policy map of being urban redevelopment area. And that is the context that was used in the storm water management report in no way, shape or form an area in need of redevelopment.
Speaker 12But is it true then that all areas that are <inaudible> metropolitan planning zone are urban redevelopment areas,
Speaker 2No areas that are <inaudible> developed with utilities and surrounded by development to meet the definition that is not every property.
Speaker 12Okay. And so then you think that it's proper for VBA report, the stormwater report to not consider impacts to brown water whatsoever. The content, the context of that is that your report explicitly says that it does not consider impact around winter,
Speaker 2By definition.
Speaker 12Okay. For the record, I dispute that characterization of, of the zone, but, but that's, that was my impression on that topic. The next question I had, which is on new information is about section 10 of that report, which says that onsite, onsite storm water conveyance, designed to carry runoff or a 25 year storm, but a hundred year storm would exceed the onsite conveyance system by several times yet that doesn't appear in any of the flow charts. Where, where would that excess storm water run off gov?
Speaker 2It would sit in the parking lot, like a puddle.
Speaker 12So you don't think the storm water runoff would then flow over the top of the three impoundment basins and into the wetlands or into the row, the roadway or into neighboring parcels. You think it would sit in a parking lot despite having a lower elevation where it can flow into
Speaker 2Correct and shit in the parking lot. And it's a slow English it's flowed over the curb at the bottom. They would flow into the wetland at the same discharge point. But again, we expect that it'll fall either into the basin that it's directed or that it overflows that patient. And we'll go to the next, but it will stay the Jeremy stay within the parking lot. And then from there, you know, ultimately be collected by the system. The conveyance system at 25 years is different times a hundred years. That is, you know, is that the overall system is the, by that designed at the pipes themselves or a sufficient at 25.
Speaker 12Right. I understand that. I, I, my question came from the context of looking at the topography map and showing that there was nothing stopping the water at all, once anything exceeding a 25 year storm, you know, word of a fall Piscataway that would easily overwhelm the impoundment basins, and then looking at the topography that would, would flow over into neighboring parcels. And given that your study admittedly did not look at groundwater, it eliminated that as a carer category of consideration. So that that's the context from my question. I just, I dispute your, your conclusion there, but thank you for answering the question.
Speaker 12So this question is for Mr. Sackler, this is on new information that came up in, in the colloquy between him and other folks. So he justified that the proposed uses traffic impact would be much less than the, the whispering woods project, the aborted one that other folks have testified about as well. And I'm curious, perhaps this exceed Mr. Cycler's responsibility, Mr. Wolfson can chime in or Mr. Betina whoever's best suited. I don't understand why the comparison is appropriate between the proposed project that you folks are seeking now. And the whispering woods project given. That seems like the only reason you are where you are, is because of an undue financial hardship or financial hardship, as you see it, because the project was too expensive. The development of residential and commercial mixed use was too expensive. So to restate that a little bit more succinctly,
Speaker 1The standard is whether the property is reasonably adaptable for the purposes, for which it is. So that would be one of the positive criteria to justify a board and grant use Ferencz if it accepted that characterization. So if the, just as a matter of logic, if the whispering woods property turned out to not be reasonably adaptable, certainly the <inaudible> one residential, which is decidedly, less density would even be more unreasonably adaptable. Those would be less units to spread the cost of connecting a one mile pipe for the sewer, which we thought we would be able to do and junction with the density and the commercial,
Speaker 12Excuse me, Mr. Olson. I, that, that sounds like that's a financial argument that you're saying that it's just true.
Speaker 1So I, you can call it what you want, man, or mustard or sorry, minister, but you know, the law we're bound to who to abide by and apply the laws. So under the municipal land, you slow what you've heard on one occasion, we are not bound forever and a day, whatever the underlying zoning it is, we have the right under the constitution and under the municipal, and just wanted to make a reasonable use of our property. You choose to characterize that as financial that's okay. You can characterize it any way you want. We have a right to make reasonable use for property. And the law is an Mr. Cannula and correct me if he thinks I'm misstating it, but the property has to be reasonably adaptable for the purposes, for which it sewn. And if it's not, we're not entitled to relief. And one of the things that we've said is the underlying zoning and even the whispering woods zone and the property is still re not reasonably adaptable for those purposes. It is reasonably adaptable for this purposes, we believe. And that's one of the arguments that we've made in addition to Ms. <inaudible> argument, that the property is particularly suitable for warehouse based upon what's around the property it's location and proximity to 87. And the fact that it is so far distant from any residential property is more than 600 feet, two football fields away. So those are the reasons so include reasonable adaptability and particularly the suitability.
Speaker 12So it was my understanding that the positive criteria was proof that the characteristics of the property president have an opportunity to put their property more in conformity with development plans and advance the purposes of zoning. I don't remember seeing any
Speaker 1That's all included in the particular suitability as Ms. <inaudible>. You can't pigeonhole it into one phrase of, of a body of case law that controls and dictates what proofs we are required to put forth and what findings the board is required to make in order to give us the relief. And
Speaker 12Besides it being more cost-effective for the developers, is there a, is there a distinct reason why, why they chose this use as opposed to other alternatives besides the one that was encompassed with the Mr. And woods,
Speaker 1Many yous were considered for the property in order to figure out what would make the most sense from a planning standpoint and economic standpoint, and they positive and negative criteria standpoint, this was what was selected.
Speaker 12Okay. And one of the thing you, you previously, Mr. Wilson, you previously stated just maybe an hour or so ago. This is not going near wetlands. I just wanted to clarify that it doesn't. In fact, you're feeling that it's showing up to an acre of wetlands under a GP six
Speaker 1Or I said is we are not disturbing wetlands in excess of whatever our GP permit allows. You make an application to the DEP, you identify the wetlands, they, they, they review and granted LOI to indicates the perimeter and limits to the wetlands. And we are bound by and limited by New Jersey laws to what we can. And we can't do, we have our application into the DP, they have exclusive jurisdiction over it, and we will abide by whatever they determined we can and can't do. And one of the things that they will be reviewing is our drainage situation, which allows for discharge of water into the wetlands. And if they disagree with us as perhaps you do, they'll deny us, but I suspect that they won't because we know we're doing, and we made applications like this before, and we know what the roads are. Okay.
Speaker 12Now we miss Ms. Pastors. One of the commenters I believe made this, made this comment about who would be helped. And I don't think anyone's specifically answered that. They talked about, you know, kind of vague and nebulous. The community will be helped by having more renewables, stuff like that. But who can you name anyone in particular who would be helped in this town and how they might be helped?
Speaker 2No, that is not the standard for the board to review that the board is empowered to make its decision. The standard is, as Mr. Wolfson said, is this site particularly suited? Is there any substantial, negative impact on, on the surrounding area and his own plan and the master plan? And, and do we need the positive and negative criteria? That is the standard. It is a legal standard under the planning wall, and it is not a negative school has helped concept.
Speaker 12And, and on that point previously, Ms. <inaudible> testified that it would that in her opinion, it would help purposes. G I and M, and this is getting on Ms. Pastors is more recent comment, you know, asking about detriments, you know, did you weigh the remainder of those purposes of zoning and find that there was no detriment? Did you study each, each of the purposes?
Speaker 1Somehow it works. The purposes of zoning are one of the things that the municipal land use law and the cases provide for in terms of an applicant demonstrating the positive criteria. So advancing the purposes of zoning is one of the broad terms of the kind of proof that's required. Mr. Phone, those items as listed in the Ms. Financial ads purposes, they were being advanced. That's what she did.
Speaker 12She, she identified three true, but she didn't offer any analysis on the remainder of them. And I'm when they're not applicable. I'm sorry.
Speaker 1One of them is one of them is providing providing homes for the elderly. That's it that's a purpose of zoning. So she didn't list ones that didn't apply. If you take a look at the annual UL, pulling up on your, on your, on your iPad, and you'll see the purposes of zoning, and we'll see the ones that she said applied, that we are advancing, and there are others that don't relate to us.
Speaker 12Right? So my question was the ones that did relate, did she specifically find in her analysis that no, none of the purposes that those specific components intend to advance were harmed. That's my question.
Speaker 1And you have your term mixed up. There's two things. There's the positive criteria, which include a variety of things that we've now discussed often probably making the board crazy. And then there's the negative criteria. So the negative criteria is, is what we're doing and going to cause substantial detriment to the public. Good. And the public zoning ordinance. That's what the, and she testified about that. We believe though, and we believe the proofs that we submitted to the board will demonstrate to the board and hopefully convince them that we've satisfied both. They're two unrelated. They're not related to each other.
Speaker 12I don't, I, I, I don't know that that's, I mean, I'll have to take your word for it. I, I,
Speaker 1Yeah, you don't have to take my word for it. Here's your chance to ask questions. They give you answers.
Speaker 12The question is why did we not hear any testimony on purpose? A I could read the, the statements from the statute.
Speaker 2It's not because it's because it's not required to analyze gun or to have an answer to every purpose of day. You need to show that you sat by your bed, a purpose of a single-purpose <inaudible>,
Speaker 12If you would advance one purpose, but, you know, cause you know, a pal, a noticeable detriment on five purposes,
Speaker 1I totally get that. There's no detriment on purposes. There's detriment to the zone plan and zoning ordinance. You're mixing up your terms and I apologize for sounding like a professor to you. But the fact of the matter is they're not related. The purposes of zoning are part of the positive criteria. The negative criteria is not the purposes of zoning. It's a comparison to the zone plan and zoning ordinance and its requirement
Speaker 12Of substance negative criteria.
Speaker 1I say that one more time.
Speaker 12The purposes of zoning listed in the statute do not inform the negative criteria. No. So
Speaker 1Your criteria is, is specific to the municipal ordinance on investor plan
Speaker 0And the general welfare
Speaker 1And the general welfare and Joe offer. That's correct.
Speaker 12Ah, I, I don't, I I'm, I'm skeptical of that characterization. Given the laws that I reviewed where, you know, specific cases have considered the, you know, criteria to encouraged municipal action to guide the appropriate use and development of all lands in the township in a manner that would promote public health, safety, morals, and the general welfare, all that I've looked at when you know, towns haven't considered that a disagrees.
Speaker 1I disagree. Mr. Noblock do you have any other questions for us?
Speaker 0I think we need to move on at this point.
Speaker 12Okay. I can, I can raise the
Speaker 0Rest of the <inaudible> excuse me, in the comments. Thank you. I appreciate that. I said, can you wait for your comments? Thank you. I'm gonna open it to the public at this point for comments, Mr. Kelly, and now is the time for any members of the public that want to give their comments for, or against this application. And I'm going to ask the public, if you couldn't keep your comments. I see Mr. Noblock, that's fine. If I could ask the public at a do respect to the board, if you could keep your comments to less than three minutes and also for members of the public, if someone, before you gives the same comment that you want to give, if you want to just agree with them and not repeat it, it would be appreciated. There's a Dan, Jay, I think Dan, could you Dan, Jay, could I have your full name and address?
Speaker 15Yes. My name is Dan Jackson. I live at three study avenue in Piscataway.
Speaker 0Thank you. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth? I do.
Speaker 15Thank you. So the first thing I would like to clarify is that Mr. Takina is not a scientist, the toxicologist public health expert, or have any formal training and medicine as far as he's testified. So he's completely incorrect. That air quality is a only a concern on a regional level. And in fact, there are a whole host of peer reviewed studies to suggest otherwise. And a good example is software docs and contaminants that are commonly released from semi-trucks that are bad for asthma severity. And this has been shown time and time again in published research. Nevertheless, I'm here to, you know, voice my strongest possible opposition to this application. I don't believe these folks have considered the environmental impacts of their application. They have consistently stated they're only removing 80% of total suspended solids with their purification system. The Genentech storm filtration system, which I am given to believe is what they will be employing has several technical documents that indicate that the total suspended solids criteria misrepresents, and mis-characterizes a lot of different potential contaminants in stormwater runoff.
Speaker 15Classic example, our pH is which are commonly produced by a number of different vehicles, oil and diesel ethylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, which are all toxic substances and released from cars into parking lots on a regular basis, all wash away in storm water systems. The storm filtration system that this site is proposing to use a works-based on a suspended sediment. It's based their filtration ethicacy is based on that. So there's no measure of the chemical contaminants that are released or are passed into these wetlands. So they can say that they are in accordance with DEP regulations at 80%, a total suspended solids removal, but it's entirely possible that they continue to contaminate wetlands in the entire surrounding area. And they don't know they're doing so specifically because these systems must be a installed and then optimized for each specific site. And again, this is all mentioned in the technical literature that is on the manufacturer's website.
Speaker 15So it, it doesn't seem like the, the developers have given more than a passing reference to this. They've they've gone so far as figuring out what color they're going to paint the buildings. And yet they can't answer the questions about the, the water treatment infiltrations. Please. I have some concerns about light pollution that haven't been addressed. And I have not been able to ask about, there was some, some conversation about noise pollution as well. I'm curious, you know, who, if there's any recourse or any ramifications for semi-trucks that do not follow the noise laws or like Mr. Jackson, that goes on a abated, all of these things, you know, what, what are the residents that live with their houses facing all of the bright lights coming off of these warehouses? What are we to do when the lights are too bright and we can't sleep?
Speaker 15You know, my wife and I moved here in December, we purchased this house. We decided to settle in Piscataway. We've invested tens of thousands of dollars in the past 11 months and thousands and thousands of hours renovating every aspect of our home and getting set to start a family in this town and to be contributing members of society. And now we find out that all of the money and time we've invested in this house is being met with a warehouse that's being built roughly 200 yards from our back window. And we don't get much time to ask questions that we want to ask. And the only chance we have to voice our displeasure is after six hours of testimony. So that's why I would like to voice my opposition. And my final point would be that I applied for an application for a variance to build a shed this past summer in doing so this pregnant exact board agreed that I needed to increase my setbacks in order to increase the height of my shed. I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect that these developers of this site have the exact same standard. We are the closest residential structure to this warehouse. That's being proposed. It's perfectly reasonable to say that if they want to increase their building height by 15 feet, they should have to increase their property. Setbacks by
Speaker 393 minutes is up. We have to move on.
Speaker 4Thank you. Who's next, Laura
Speaker 3At marsh
Speaker 4It's morning to tell the truth. I guess first I would like to read a, say a little bit about wetlands. I have a citizens guide looking at made citizens guide to wetlands and the New Jersey wetland rules published by the Stony Brook millstone watershed association. Why are wetlands important? Wetlands are unique and diverse. They include swamps, bogs, wet Meadows and forested areas. Wetlands provide essential ecological benefits that no other landside can, including flooding is controlled soil and plants and WIC wetlands act as a sponge to capture slow and store water, reducing the volume and velocity of flood waters.
Speaker 4Water quality is improved based flows to streams and recharge. The groundwater I maintained critical habitats are provided recreation and education needs are met. Economic contributions are significant. So this is also going to increase truck traffic. It will likely increase affordable housing obligations by having more people working in town. So any taxes are going to be offset by increased. We're going to have more housing, high density, housing, more kids in the schools, more taxes for services. It's outrageous. You'd even consider this consider. This is considering this property is zone for one acre, residential. You're not obligated to grant these variances. We have zoning rules for a reason to protect our quality of life. Just saying no, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Marsh. You're welcome. Or who's next?
Speaker 3Nancy van Dyke. Here's me. We're up to seven or eight people again. So
Speaker 4Ms. Van Dyke, you remain sworn in to tell the truth. Yes, absolutely. I've been waiting to ask an additional question based on the testimony that
Speaker 5I heard tonight. So I want to do that before my comments, as I said, I live on Lakeside drive north, which is my street address, postal address. My actual address is like side place, which is a paper street that starts in front of my house. And then it goes off into the woods and has been just woods for all 37 years. I've been here recently. The township came and took down several Frieze by our property, along this paper street, and a few more of, a bit of a distance, couple hundred feet beyond that angering people who had just bought that house. They're perfectly healthy trees. When we asked why they were being taken down, we were told for safety reasons, but given that they left a lot of the dead trees and took down perfectly healthy trees. We're skeptical that. And then when we pursued it through an email, we were told that they had this big property that was landlocked and they wanted to make sure they had access to it. So it seems that that landlord property is the property that we're talking about now. And I'm wondering now, if they are going to pave what is currently Lakeside place, the paper street in order to buy, to access to this new warehouse,
Speaker 1Mr. Wilson, I want to be sensitive because I wasn't sure whether you wanted me to testimony to that. John, when I was questioning not a comment, right? John, are we paving vapor street, right? No, you're muted. Oh, the answer's no. Okay.
Speaker 5Yeah. I mean, not trying to pay that. Okay. Now I have two comments if I ended please.
Speaker 5Okay. One is that when I first moved here, very rarely heard the trucks on 2 87, just when the atmosphere was pressed. Now, here at all this time, and the more trees that are taken down, the more we hear it. And I'm concerned with this additional truck traffic, even though it's going to be just like one truck every minute or so, it's going to be during sleep time, time when I want to the rest time that I'm used to have an uninterrupted quiet. And so I go test this warehouse based upon that. The other thing is the lake Nelson community is a unique, unique area. It used to be a resort community maybe 50, 60 years ago. Now it's still has a lake community. A lot of under the auspices of the Blake Nelson improvement association. We have rare sense of small community in marijuana. Here. We have a braid that goes by our house every 4th of July, that the fire department and the rescue squad, they, they throw out candy towards us. People put out shares in front of their house and you just don't have this anywhere else in this dense area. And then, and there is going to take care of, get rid of that
Speaker 5Phone number ending in nine six, nine seven
Speaker 0And the color 9 6, 9 7 identified themselves, please.
Speaker 2Yeah. Hi, it's Charlie credible again. Can you hear me?
Speaker 0Yes, we can. Do you remain under oath?
Speaker 2Thank you. So I asked my them, I apologize, but there's a
Speaker 5Limp on the comments.
Speaker 2Okay. Well, that's the first thing I want to talk about. First of all, I do want to, you know, for the record, I'm a new Brunswick residents for the past 15 years. I'm leader of a neighborhood association here and my sister lives and on property in this area. And, and it's just less than a mile from the site. So I am an interested party. I am a want to officially be an objector to this application and, and I'm going to begin by taking issue with how this hearing was conducted and some of the problems with all due respect, Mr. Chairman, a three minute time limit for such a significant project is really uncalled for. And it's, it's quite clear that the board is trying to rush through this application to get it over with quickly, rather than hear the public. And I would think that, you know, in the middle of this pandemic, you know, when you can do this work from your home and you know, it just is, is astonishing that, you know, you, you would, you know, continuing to remind us that you're a volunteer.
Speaker 2We get it. You're a volunteer. It should be an honor to serve on this board. And you should be eager to listen to the people who have comments here and not rushing us through them. There was no agenda or documents available on the website. I, you know, I come from a different city in new Brunswick, our planning board, our zoning board. We have all of the documents available on the web for people to review. Mr. Rak pointed out that the previous hearing is not made available. The video recording is not available. So people who missed it can't watch it. This is basic 1 0 1 stuff you've made a recording of it. The township has a TV channel. You've got a YouTube channel. You have the ability to put these recordings out there. I don't, I can't for the life of me, figure out why this board would not want to share those videos and make them available so that more people could, you know, I think a lot of people here have an interest in this, in this project and really do care about it and would have listened to the testimony.
Speaker 2Had it been easy to do so, but the board did not make it easy. You did not tell people by the way, how to raise their hands. I, I only know because I'm a zoom professional now, but you know, you got to press star six to unmute star six or star nine to raise your hand. You know, that was not said to folks, you were, you know, ultimately, you know, not willing to let people ask questions about the testimony from tonight until the applicant, you know, requested you to do that on behalf of the public. And I think that really shows that, you know, the board was resistant to having questions resistant, to having public input. And, you know, I do know quite a bit about Jack Morris and his other companies. And I would ask people to look into them, Edgewood properties, some of the stuff that happened with the contaminated dirt from the Ford plant. I know some of his projects here in new Brunswick have been, you know, broken promise after broken promise. Things that they promised to develop or deliver were lackluster or just never came to pass. And of course, now that he's the big boss at Robert Wood Johnson in new Brunswick, they are making their play to evict the school, children of Lincoln annex here in new Brunswick. And basically, I'm sorry, what's that?
Speaker 0I don't know who that was. Mr. Credible strong back. Can we please talk about the application tonight? Not about new Brunswick minister on back. If this is public comment, please allow Mr. <inaudible> is three minutes. I'm sorry. Three minutes.
Speaker 2Am I recognized as puzzle? Am I recognized? May I speak
Speaker 0Loses?
Speaker 2This is Charlie <inaudible>. Who is this Totally credible? I was testifying.
Speaker 0Thank you, Lauren. Who's next Stacy Berger again, Ms. Berger, you remain sworn in.
Speaker 11So I want to echo the comments of both Mr. Jackson and Mr. Credible, who I don't believe was given a warning that he was even close to three minutes and he was cut off by not official member of the, of the planning board. So I don't know what Mr. Oland back's role here is, but that is inappropriate. And the chair should have recognized someone wasn't was not a recognized someone who's not.
Speaker 0He came in on his own station,
Speaker 11Please stop calling me states. We're not friends. The zoning board has an obligation to do what's best for our community. Last time in the last hearing, Ms. Capone testified that was in the best interest of our community in order to get the zoning variance, you couldn't testify about what impacted a development like this would have, where she lives or anywhere else that she's done these kinds of developments. But I think that it's really grossly inappropriate for this zoning or to give his bearings. There's been no testimony that has answered any specific question, provided any specific data to show that this is going to improve the quality of life or the economics of our neighborhoods in our community. There's been no data about the kinds of jobs. There's been no data about the quality of jobs. There's no data about the tax benefit that Mr. Wilson testified about tonight that we're supposed to believe is going to mysteriously materialize, that nobody can give us even a range of dollar amount.
Speaker 11There's been no testimony about what kind of tenant this is going to be. There's been no testimony about what the actual traffic impact is going to be. We're relying on a modeling without actually knowing this is a huge deal for our community and for people to be or 54 people to be on a zoom at 1130 at night on a weeknight, all of whom are volunteers, except for the people who are going to profit from this development. Should they be allowed to get these zoning? Variances says a tremendous amount about what is important to our community. I'm sorry that it's a problem for people to have to do their job. You all volunteered to be on the zoning board. If you're volunteers and you volunteered to be here, if you don't want to be here and someone else should, should step aside and let someone else do it.
Speaker 11I'm sorry for the staff who left here and listened to everyone and take notes and call on people. But this is the job. And so if you don't want to do it, please find someone else who does, because clearly there are dozens and scores of people who care deeply about what happens in our neighborhoods. And there's literally no evidence that's been presented in now probably five hours of testimony and questioning. And it's the standard that was put out early on, which was that this was going to be a benefit to our community. No one has proven that and all of the testimony and all of the questions have been about what the negative impact is going to be. Neither Mr. Wilson, or Mr. Takina inclusively proven that there's an actual benefit to anyone here except to M and M. It's unfortunate that they can't come up with an economic development strategy to do what they want to do with their property.
Speaker 11That is that, I'm sorry for you all who bought the property or in contract or whatever legal term you want to use. That says you have to have some kind of resolution, but that's not the Piscataway taxpayer resident's problem. And the variance that they're seeking and the zoning board changes that they want are not appropriate. And up to the zoning board to represent the best and full interest of our community and not a private developer. There's nothing that you're, that you're compelled to do here. And therefore you should do nothing. And the novice application, I think luckily Laura,
Speaker 0Anybody, Julie, okay. Ms. Or you remain sworn in to tell the truth. Yes.
Speaker 9I just want to echo Ms. Berger's comment and raise my concerns for the lack of benefit, proven that this warehouse will provide to our community. And further than that, I think that a lot of the detriments it may cause have not been totally disproven or not clearly disproven air pollution, traffic, the effect to the helper, farm Ecolog ecological, preserver park, whatever that area ends up being. I don't think that any of those detriments have been totally disproven or would be unaffected by this warehouse. And so I think that the board should not accept this application. Thank you.
Speaker 0Thank you for your testimony and your comment, Ms. Buckley, Debra, is there a Deborah there? Could I have your name and address please?
Speaker 5Debra under 51, 24 Emerson straight. I was on earlier.
Speaker 0She testified earlier. Yes. And you remain sworn in to tell the truth.
Speaker 5Okay. My comment is based on Dan's input and the gentleman from new Brunswick, I would like to actually hear more. I don't think, I think that there are serious valid concerns and I too would strongly UPROSE oppose approving the variance at this time. I do realize that you're tired. We're all tired, but this is our town. This is where we're raising our families. And this is important to us. I have to be up in the morning. My son has to be a for school. We get it. I don't appreciate the board being hostile. I think it's inappropriate to treat people poorly that are trying to voice their concerns. And with regard to not being able to review past meetings or recordings with all the taxes that we pay, I think perhaps we need to update our it department because it's inexcusable in this day and age. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. So
Speaker 0William Makita again. Well, Mr. Mikita, you were sworn in, in prior hearing, you remain sworn in to tell the truth
Speaker 14Are you? I do while. Well, some don't believe, you know, somebody that one truck, every 18 minutes going south is insignificant. When your daughter is on the bus, making the left hand, turn into that area. It's not so insignificant to you. So I would urge the board if they were to approve this variance, to prevent any trucks from making a right hand turn and going south, because that's going to be a disaster, but B does it make even a lot, even making that order ordinance, preventing them from making a right-hand turn, it's still going to be a traffic disaster, making a left-hand turn across four lanes of traffic in order to go south on to get to the south on 2 27. I think this is, this is something that they have to look at it again, without the light there. It's going to be very, very, very difficult it's to create a traffic disaster. And I think, you know, you should deny the bearings for now and then have them take a better look and maybe get a better idea as to how to alleviate the traffic problems. Thank you.
Speaker 0Thank you, sir. I, yeah, I'm here before. I, I just want to make it clear that I have photos. This hold on Brian, is this Brian rack? That is correct. Yes. Mr. Rack, do you remain sworn in to tell the truth? I mean, I'm just giving my opinion beginner, but shorter. Yes. I, I just like to make it clear that I imposed this from the beginning. I'm also very disappointed. I've been watching the proceedings here and I've seen several members of the board just wander away while people are giving testimony, which isn't really a great look for. You guys have also been lodging Dutton space during these testimonies and that's been a disaster, but I'm not really sure why you're saying, oh, it's, it's far from residential. When the town is proposing building a heart across the street and has not done anything with it in, I mean, we've been here for five years. We haven't seen any progress. The time keeps talking about this part. So it seems like that's not even being considered here. And the fact that you're saying, oh, well just try and trucks all already around this park that we're going to be able to, it's going to be great. And the residents will love it. It is just ridiculous.
Speaker 0Thank you for your testimony thing. It's about James. James. Could we have your full name please? Yeah, I'm sorry. Before we continue, my wife was here as well. You wants to speak as well. So did she get here in three minutes or by all means, please,
Speaker 6Jessica.
Speaker 0Yes. And Ms. Credibility, you remain sworn in.
Speaker 6Thank you. I wanted to say that. I definitely agree with Ms. Berger and Mr. Crowder elf about the concerns about the lack of consideration for environmental impact. Having a two year old traffic study doesn't seem like it's very accurate anymore. A lot of things have changed in the last two years. No one else has noticed. I'm very concerned about the distance to the ecological park bring was saying, we have a proper setback, no place within 600 feet. And it's within 600 feet. The ecological preserve is within 600 feet. And I also don't know about any of you, but I wouldn't buy a house that's within 600 or even greater than 600 feet within an operating warehouse that potentially works 24 7 with 53 foot tractor trailers coming in and out every day that isn't what everybody who lives in this area signed up for. And for you to change the game at this moment, seems like it's not for the benefit of the community.
Speaker 6And then it's really just to benefit this private developer. Who's looking to buy this property. They don't currently own the property. They're looking to buy it to make a bunch of money for them. They're not looking to make a positive benefit for the community. They want to employ some people and pay them a some wages. I don't see how that benefits Ms. Skagway or our community in this area that the air quality hasn't even been evaluated. You're going to build a building on wetlands across the street from an ecological preserve. I just don't understand why anyone would approve this. So I urge you very strongly to please deny the request. Thank you all for your time. And you have a lovely,
Speaker 8Thank you for your comments, James Fuller. I believe. Yes. James Fuller here. Mr. Fuller, I believe you were sworn in earlier. Yes. You remain sworn in. Thank you. I've been resident scattered away for over 30 years. I think the last thing this township needs is more truck track. We built, we built two huge warehouses in this town in the last two years. One huge warehouse is under construction. As I speak on holes lanes, and all it's going to do is bring more huge 18 wheelers there. The roadways are not designed to handle this kind of traffic. And I just want to express my strong opposition to this, to this, to, to permitting this variant or this warehouse on south Washington avenue and also met Louis Lane going south on Mettler's lane. That's a very narrow and there's also a bridge over lake Nelson. I don't even know if that bridge could handle the weight of these huge trucks. That's all I have. Thank you.
Speaker 0Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Fuller
Speaker 3Again, Nancy van Dyke.
Speaker 0Hold on Ms. Ms. Van. Okay.
Speaker 5This is Nancy van Dyke this time. Yes. Thank you very much. I do want to say that I do oppose the building of these warehouses for several reasons that everybody has already said of the diesel fumes from the trucks will affect everybody in this neighborhood. They will affect not only the residents, but the students and the staff at Randall Phil school Skyway high school and Rutgers university. The light pollution will affect our house, not just our house, but everybody else in the neighborhood. The warehouses will bring trucks and cars from the employees. That's going to make more noise for this area that will affect us. Also, we already here now, trucks and cars, but trucks mostly from 2 87. We can hear them. We can hear them on Mettler's land. We can hear them on south Washington anatomy. Adding more trucks will be not pleasant living in this nice, quiet neighborhood. I do ask board, please, if you do approve of this, these warehouses, please ask for the restriction of right-hand charms for the trucks onto Washington avenue. As the gentlemen previously said, the bridge on Mettler's lane, I didn't even think about the bridge on Metro's lane, the little bridge. So that is my opinion. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Speaker 16Ma'am
Speaker 3The next one is John Toronto.
Speaker 16John. I like to agree with all the previous,
Speaker 0Well, Mr. Toronto, hold on a minute. I need you to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth
Speaker 16I do now,
Speaker 0I need your name and address.
Speaker 16It's John Toronto, 5 1 5 Longfellow avenue, Piscataway New Jersey. Thank you. I've been a resident of Piscataway for twenty-five years and a resident of Highland park before that for five years. And when I first moved here, that area was, I think it was a tree farmer. At one point, I agree with all the previous callers that that area is, is not suited for another, yet another warehouse, because of all the traffic issues, all the pollution being so parked that they're planning to develop. Eventually there's already issues with, with traffic on, on that road, especially because you try to come through at five o'clock, you know, it's, it's, it's an incredible amount of traffic already and then selling roads and other nightmare. So between stolen and Washington, there's no other choice, right? So adding more traffic is just going to be a disaster. And, and again, I also worry about the, the wildlife in that area. It seems that every place trees are being cut down. This reminds me of the Lorax and you guys are, are just cutting trees down left and right for profit. And it doesn't seem to be benefiting anybody, but the developers. Thank you.
Speaker 12Thank you for your comments.
Speaker 3And the last one is Mac.
Speaker 12Okay. Thank you so much. And so far we've seen unilateral opposition from ed. Hold on. Okay. Your name and address please. Matthew Noblock when three, two eighth street, Piscataway New Jersey, you have been previously sworn in, you remain sworn in, correct. Thank you. Okay. So I would just like to start with the context that every single one of their experts has made the comparison that there's will be a benefit of this project compared to the whispering woods project because of the financial hardship that it's just too much money to spend on that sanitary sewer line courts have held that undue hardship does not include personal hardships to the property owner. So like another, another respondent said, you know, it seems like they made a bad purchase or they made a bad contract rather too bad. That's not a valid reason to grant a variance. One of the other important points is, you know, the purposes of zoning to promote public health, safety, and general welfare.
Speaker 12This parcel is 24 and a half acres, and it's going to become from completely wooded to 70% impermeable. We heard another applicant this evening talk about having our cover less than 30%. And this is going to be more than double that, which is going to destroy the, the already super saturated carrying capacity for wildlife we've talked about in this town. And the first meeting, I said that the Middlesex counties, Rican studies, that there were 110,000 deer in the county. That's 300 deer per square mile where the carrying capacity is five deer are the primary carrier of chicks, which is the primary vector for Lyme's disease, the fastest growing vector-borne disease in the United States with over 400,000 new cases annually. And this is going to be 600 feet from a school where children are playing at recess. You've got like, you know, you're going to push all those deer right onto the school grade for the kids.
Speaker 12Another important point is we talked about air pollution. Diesel diesel emissions are worse than any other kind of emissions for, you know, for secondary conditions caused from that. The EPA on November 20th released a report talking about the severe consequences of diesel emissions. And this parcel has an opportunity for 60 trucks to be idling simultaneously the testimony of Mr <inaudible> and Mr. Sackler talked about a couple of points, a couple of purposes of zoning, but it failed to look at any other, any of the, you know, any of the detriments that that would cause, you know, they, they looked at that. It would promote the visual environment because the warehouse was blue. That's something Mr. <inaudible> testified to. I don't get how a Baloo warehouse is more visually desirable. Then a forest in what world are the property values of homes higher, next to a blue warehouse compared to a forested area.
Speaker 12She talked about how it promotes a variety of open space. How was a monolith of warehouse after warehouse in this town have a variety of open space. And Mr. Mr. Wolfson justified that, oh, the zoning use was improper because it's our R one, which is one per one dwelling per acre. It's it's because that, because it was a farm land and it was farm land since John Reed first surveyed it in 1685, it's been that way for almost 400, 400, 400 years. You for a program 300 years rather. And now we're sitting here saying, oh, we need to make some money real quick on it. Your need to make money on your unwise contract to develop real estate is not a proper reason for this board to grant a variance. It's simply not. And to end all cool Aldo Leopold, the father of wildlife ecology that finished his boat. Okay. We abused land because we see it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community, to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And you, you and I'm want to send me that I can be your friend. That's okay. Just don't build the warehouse. I thought I would like that. Thank you. I'm going to close the public portion.
Speaker 8I've been raising my hand shot.
Speaker 12Mr. I'm so sorry.
Speaker 3Other people raise it. I see below in the corner. I didn't see you there. It blends right in with your background. I can see it.
Speaker 12I go ahead. You got three minutes, bro. Okay. Please give us your name and address
Speaker 8Her tarp. Use four 11 new market road, the Skyway. And you've
Speaker 12Been sworn in you
Speaker 8Remain sworn in. No, sir. I also oppose the granting of this variance. I think that just on environmental reasons, that's enough where we've heard testimony that this is going to impact the wetlands. We've heard about how valuable wetlands are, and we've heard that this is going to reduce the amount of water running off into the weapons or in some certain storms. So that, that alone is a reason to reject this. And also the things that Matt talked about with the deer population, we've lived in Piscataway for almost 30 years. And for the first 25 years, we've never had a deer on our property. Now in the last three years, the good development or overdevelopment in areas, not far from our home, we have <inaudible> minutes to, to our, to our property. If it's, it's just, it's just uncomfortable being in this town. It's unconscionable that that alone is a reason to reject this, but there's other ones think about, I want to talk to the folks on the board, think about how this decision fits into the greater environment that we're operating in.
Speaker 8What we've seen statewide in the last week or months is that we've seen as, as Charlie mentioned in new Brunswick, tremendous community outcry against the destruction of the Lincoln Anik school. It went through people, just rubber stamp that went through. We've seen the same thing with the, who was LNG looking for natural gas project on a Delaware river, massive community outreach, or a protest against it, rubber stamp, rubber stamp, right through. We saw the same thing happening with other warehouses and Piscataway rubber stamp, right through this fight, that tremendous community opposition we sorta simply happened in Hudson county with an immigration and ice facility, massive, massive community oppositions, rubber stamp, right through. So I understand, I understand that the law, as it's written may say that you need to approve this based on the testimony. But the law also said that slavery was legal. At some point in this country, somebody has got to stand up.
Speaker 8Somebody has got to show the idea that you guys are volunteer is nonsense. I looked up the definition of all fear. It says someone who freely gives of their labor. I can't, I can't imagine it. Any of you can say that you are here strictly on altruistic purposes. That's nonsense. You're all part of a political machine. You're all trying to get ahead, get the next step in a political machine. And it's actually quite, quite disturbing and even disgusting to hear you guys describe yourselves as volunteers is trick the strictly and absolutely not true. It's not true. We're not even volunteers. We want something out of this. We want a better quality of life for our town and for our state and for a country. And this world, you know, the, again, going back to opposing unjust laws, it doesn't matter what the law says. If the law is unjust and the law is not serving the people, you must oppose it.
Speaker 8Otherwise you're part of an unjust political machine, a political hierarchy that doesn't care about people and cares more about profit and profit and, and profit. And that is essentially the definition of fascism. The definition of fascism is the merger of the corporate and the state. The one money takes over the state that is fascism. That is what's happening. We've seen it happen over and over again. The folks on this board will be contributing to fascism by, by approving this. And that's something you're going to have to live with. And then it's not. And where you all have a clear conscience. I can't imagine that you folks do. Thank you very much.
20-ZB-41/42V — M&M Realty: Board Deliberation and Straw Vote 20-ZB-41/42V AI  02:34:47 – 02:47:51
Board discusses applicant's offer to restrict right-hand turns to/from south Washington Avenue. Chair notes board has only 5 members instead of required 7 for use variance; requests non-binding straw votes to gauge sentiment. Results: 3 in favor (retention of reasonable use of property; less impact than prior plan), 1 opposed (concerns about character), 1 abstaining. Case continued to January 28, 2021 for full quorum vote. Applicant accepts no-turn-restriction conditions (no left or right turns onto south Washington southbound).
Speaker 0Thank you. Her now close the public portion.
Speaker 1Need a
Speaker 0Motion, Mr. Kenny Ali, I would like to discuss with the applicant a couple of points that came up this evening. Yes.
Speaker 1It's your chairman. You need a motion to close the public meeting
Speaker 0Now. Okay. The chairman closed the public meeting the time it was the only board would require or ask the applicant to have a no right hand turn sign posted at the end of the parking lot, going out onto south wash. Is that something you'd agree to? Yeah.
Speaker 1I was actually going to ask the chair to allow me a brief comment to sum up. I'd keep it to different. I would keep it to three minutes, but that is one of the issues I was going to raise based on the testimony.
Speaker 0I, my angry and I'll hold it to three minutes. I've been dying to limit you to three minutes for a long time.
Speaker 1I deserve that. It seems to me that there are people here that have raised legitimate issues and concerns personal to them, and also in conjunction with their, their love and their respect for their community. And we understand that and encourage that. And we don't think we're hurting that. Generally the comments criticisms fall into three categories. One is the environmental. And the question is, yes, there is far scenario that will be disturbed. That'd be disturbed. Whether you build single family homes, whether you build multi-family with commercial or whether you built the warehouse, and it's not appropriate to compare what we're doing to a forest, because no, one's entitled to make somebody else's land a forest. Nobody can force somebody else to keep their land Parkland. And it doesn't matter whether or not we are the contract purchaser or whether we were the owner was the hardship as it exists, runs with the land.
Speaker 1And I was standing, the comment is raised by Mr. Noblock about economic hardship. He misperceives what the law is on that issue. And I think perhaps Mr. Conneely chameleon properly instructed the board. It's not a personal hardship. It's a hardship that runs with the land and our land. It doesn't matter whether Mr Edrington raised it or we raised it because the land is the land and the owner or the contract purchaser stand in the same flooding. And they're entitled to make a reasonable use of the property and the extent to which the municipality zones, the property, they have to make sure that they zone it in a manner that allows for reasonable adaptability and a legitimate use of the property. So in terms of the environment, we are compliant with all DEP requirements and then some, and we are regulating their outflow of water properly, regularly, the water quality and properly, everything is required.
Speaker 1There were some comments that we were disturbing wetlands or building wetlands. Of course that's incorrect and you're not EPA would never let it happen. Ciao never let it happen. And we will have all of our permits. And of course the municipal zoning board will addition to any approval when it decides if it were to grant one w approval by the DB. The second with regard to positive prior to area, if seemed to be some misunderstanding that we have a requirement we've developed property to do something that's to the benefit of the municipality, that would be nice. And we think we're doing that in terms of construction jobs, back to you still an increased taxes and workers that will come to the site, but that isn't a test. The test is whether or not, I think as Mr Tara said, or are we complying with the law?
Speaker 1We are a nation of laws. We are community laws and you have to abide by the law. So we believe that based on the laws that we have satisfied the positive period through the testimony of Ms <inaudible> has explained by all of our other witnesses and the arguments of counsel and myself. So it's not a personal economic hardship, it's reasonable adaptability and this particular suitability and the negative criteria has, I think well-done satisfied because you don't compare it to a forest, compare it to other reasonable developments. And the final thing was track. And I think that may be perhaps the most legitimate of the things that were raised by the various people that were involved. And I think you perhaps chairman the chairman heard us say during the course of our proceeding, through Mr. Chiquita and myself, and perhaps also Mr. Seckler, that we are sensitive to that issue.
Speaker 1And even though we think as a public road with the lights where they are there sufficient gaps to allow it a free flow of traffic without a problem. And even though we think it's only one truck, perhaps every 18 minutes or so, that would go stout. We understand that there are people that think that maybe that's too much that's too much. And as a result of that, we certainly would be willing to accept a condition that would be imposed by the board that would restrict those traffic movements in order to protect those residents to the south. So, and I believe that relates to the negative criteria as well. And to the extent that that was a negative issue, we were eliminated by meaning to any condition that the board choose to oppose on any approval team. Victoria, the only other thing I would ask for is since the board, as I think I'm counting correctly, there's only five members tonight. I will stand, we need five out of seven to do it. I was hoping that if we were to get us a straw vote something point before, so we know whether or not we need to wait and have board members read his transcripts or whether or not
Speaker 0Okay. Now, Mr. Wilson, before we get to that. So you're, you're offering a condition that you would accept the condition. That would be no trucks, right? Turnout. Yes, sir. And no trucks left turn in. Yes, sir.
Speaker 1Sorry, probably leave signed that and make sure that the ingress and egress design is consistent with what your engineer thinks.
Speaker 0Yeah. It's obvious here that you guys would have to work that out, but you're, you're agreeable to those two conditions.
Speaker 1We are. I think they make sense.
Speaker 0And, and, and with that members of the board, the applicant is actually entitled to a full quorum of the board or a full compliment of the board for a vote. We don't have that tonight. We have five members and we've discussed several times. You're all volunteers. Some couldn't make it tonight. So we have five members. It's a use variance. They would need five out of five, according to the law, the applicant's entitled to seven. If we can get it, but we can't get it tonight. So he's asked the applicant is asked for a Strava, meaning it's not an official vote, but could the members give their opinions of this matter this evening? And then at the next regular meeting, we would hopefully have a quorum of seven so that the applicant could hopefully get five out of seven. So with that, unless anybody has any objections, I would ask that the members individually give their opinions, and this is a straw vote. It's not a motion. There's no second. Just give us your opinion, Mr. <inaudible>
Speaker 0was that your warrant? Did you want to start chairman? Okay. I effect, I object to this. You're speaking out of turn. The public comment is closed. The attorney has made comments that hopefully the board will approve this. No, no, I did not. I never said anything of the kind you're speaking out of turn, please stop. Or we will disconnect you because you're disrupting a public hearing. I have a right to object for the record. No, no, no, you don't. Whatever decision this board makes you have the right to appeal. You do not have the right to object out of turn for the record. I object. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When I think of what this location could have been with 242 identity apartment units, eight retail locations, and what I, I August stood was to be a ShopRite Supercenter. I think the neighbors would be pretty happy that they're coming back with this type of application and not that apartment complex supermarket, more, whatever you want to call it. I think they should be quite pleased as this as being an alternative. And I, I think about the traffic. I mean, if there are two or three people per apartment, you're talking mad traffic on that stretch of Washington. So based on that and based on the testimony that I've heard, and I understand people don't really like the word warehouse nowadays, it kind of has a stigma with it, but it's a good application. I've been on the zoning board for 14 years and I will be in favor of this application.
Speaker 0Okay. Warren Zimmerman here, next based on what I've heard this evening with all the testimony and all the comments that have been made, I've been in this town for over 60 years and I've seen the progress that had been made. And in my opinion, I mean, I, I think I, I would certainly move to approve this, this, this application and the other board members that are still here. Yes. This is a Royal ratio. I've been in this tone for over four to five years. And I've enjoyed my time here. I've gone to retire here for the rest of my life. I have, I wouldn't be in favor of disapproval. If I Owe agent,
Speaker 4I've been here for almost 30 years and this town has a great strides, but I think I'm going to have to say no to this one right now. That's just how I feel right now. I'm sorry.
Speaker 0Thank you, God.
Speaker 17Okay. This is about page. I'm also in this town for last 30 years and I'm in favor of approving this application.
Speaker 0I'm sorry. I did not hear that.
Speaker 17I'm in favor of everyone in this application.
Speaker 0Okay. Mr. Wilson, do you have your straw vote? We need to pick a new date so that you don't need to re notice. Yes, sir. January 28th available.
Speaker 1I believe it is, but essentially you don't need any of our people. You just have to continue formal deliberations and have additional people that are members of the board. Boom.
Speaker 0Correct. Well, w we need to have the missing members have an opportunity to get the transcript and review it. And we are short a one member of the board. So we anticipate that someone will be appointed at reorganization. They would also then need to have an opportunity to review the transcripts.
Speaker 1All right. I have the 28th of January set off. One of the dates. Are you indicating in case we didn't finish tonight? So the answer is yes.
Speaker 0Thank you. Okay, Mr. Chairman, I believe we should continue this matter to January 28th, 2021 with no need for further notice by the applicant. Okay. And Mr. Camille, just for the record, we will have the transcripts for, to your office. Thank you. So anybody here that is interested in the M and M Realty matter, it is going to be carried to January 28th, 2021 with no further notice by the applicant. The only notice you're receiving is my announcement here tonight. Thank you everybody.
Speaker 1Okay. Thanks chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Conneely. Thank you very much members of the board and I'm sorry, we kept you so late and I'm, I apologize for the Aspen as well.
Speaker 0No problem. At this point, I'm going to ask my fellow board members, if you'd like to continue on with the next application, or do you want to work on the resolution and concluded the meeting? I have a perspective. I think the, the other application certainly had been waiting long enough and they're willing and they're went through said five to 10 minutes. I'm willing to stay. Okay. Jeffrey. I'm willing to stay. Let's get it or okay. I'll bet. Yes, yes. Okay. Mr. Kelly, are you in 13?
Speaker 13I am here. Thank you all. We appreciate it. I
Speaker 0Thank you. I take you at your word, like a five to six minute reader's digest version of this
Speaker 13Once you're going to get that's what you're going to get. Mr. Chairman and board members for the record, Larry Kelly,
20-C-33/34 — AP Aspen LLC: Storage Structure Presentation & Questions 20-C-33/34 AI  02:48:47 – 02:57:36
Attorney presents brief application for 1,200-sq-ft storage shed (variance needed—zone allows ~625 sq ft) at rear of 27-acre apartment complex (2800 New Brunswick Ave). Shed matches existing building architecture, set back 300 ft from rear yard. Engineer and design witness address site plan improvements, landscaping, sidewalk adequacy. Board member questions aesthetic quality and site engineer recommends design improvements (hip roof, windows) to better fit adjacent residential area.
Speaker 0But the apple. Let me in out your app for some item number 13, 20 dash C dash 33 slash 34, B AP Aspen, LLC.
Speaker 13Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the record, Larry Kelly, on behalf of the applicant, we saw this board about a year ago. We had a density application before the board. We added one unit on the property and it's our, our, our density out of whack to the point where we had to come to the board of adjustment for review, it was like 15 to the acre alive. We're a 15.0 something to the acre. So this board retained jurisdiction. And at the time the board voted unanimously to approve it in about 20 minutes. And at the time we discussed how the ownership of this property continues to better the property that continued to improve and adapt and, you know, sort of repurpose areas for the benefit of the people on the property. So this application is no different than as Mr. Chairman and members, relatively simple application. It's a proposal for a storage structure at the rear of this 27 acre property.
Speaker 13And then there's other site plan improvements, which are variance free. And those include a pergola and some other seating areas near the pool. It's strictly just improvements proposed. What brings us before this board is site plan review technically, but there's also a single variance. And that variance is for the size of our storage shed. What's allowed in the zone is about half of what we're proposing or proposing is about 1200 square feet. Give or take what's allowed. I think it's 6 25 is the number that it sounds big right at 1200 plus square foot shed. But it's really not that big. It conforms to all the hype requirements, the setbacks it's about 300 feet from our rear yard, about 125 feet from our side yard. The reason it's double the size is because the zone contemplates 10,000 square foot, lots, it contemplates quarter acre, residential lots.
Speaker 13So it's 600 square foot shed. It's pretty sizeable. That's really sizable for an accessory structure here. We're going a little bit bigger than that, but we're on 27 acres. Nevertheless, we have to comply with those accessory structure area requirements of the zone. And that brings us to this board. The storage shed is going to match the skin of the existing apartment buildings. It's going to look just like what's there today. And it's got that very limited accessory use of storage primarily for the pool of related equipment. So that is essentially our case. Mr. Chairman, we have two folks ready to testify tonight. Plus we have ownership reps here from AP Aspen, our civil engineer, bill lane from Menlo. I know the board knows bill and Menlo engineering. Well, bill was going to take you through the site plan, show you the limited corner of this 27 acres that we're proposing for this shed.
Speaker 13And then our design professional Ryan Kelly was going to take the board through all of the niceties, all the bells and whistles that are just sort of part of the story to tell as to how we're improving and bettering this site, given the hour. And my promise to keep it limited. I can, if the board wants to simply ask questions of our witnesses, we can swear them in and qualify them to answer deliberate questions towards them. Or I can let Mr. Lane quickly take you through his plan sheet and show you what I've explained to you. Whatever the board's pleasure may be at this hour, Mr. Chairman, at this point, I think we'll, we'll
Speaker 0Just ask questions. And our first question is to Henry go up the side impact real quick. W we should swear in Mr. Lane, before we do that. Sure. Mr. Lane, can you raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give to the truth? Yes. I believe Mr. Lane has been accepted as an expert before this board on prior occasions. Oh yeah, I'm ready. Yeah. If you just want to go into the site impact at this point, I think that would be the most easy way to add this. Maybe the advocate or bill kit could address the, the report. Let me just go through and whether there's agreement to agreeing to some of these comments
Speaker 13And bill Walker going through them, I can tell the board one thing we did discuss early this week is the report noted whether or not we can do some significant aesthetic improvements to the structure. And that's simply cost prohibited for the applicant. At this time, the proposal was to match what's there, which we think is good enough. The only impact that is to ourselves, it's hundreds of feet from the property line and it matches the existing development. So what we thought might be a suitable alternative is we could plant Trubs and plantings in the area to sort of break up the facade of the storage structure. If the board thinks it's warranted. But that was the item in the report that I think we're going to have difficulty conceding to beyond that. I don't think there was anything that was a problem for us, but bill, please, I'll go ahead and go through the report.
Speaker 0Yeah. I mean, as far as number one, we already discussed once, you know, it's used for applying storage, maintenance, snow removal equipment, number two, what Larry just spoke about. We're looking to lead the building as designed and provide some landscaping around it, which goes to number three control. We'll agree to add some landscaping around number four. I was out at the site back in January and it looked like all the curb and sidewalk along the Brunswick avenue is in good shape. But again, if anything's deteriorated since then, I'm sure the applicant would be happy to repair that any dead or missing landscaping. I'm sure that's no problem getting that taken care of any broken fencing should the applicant's okay with that taking care of that repaired and then the same thing, number seven, anything that stemmed from the farm resolution that we're okay to take care of. And I think just yesterday we received the Middlesex county letter. That's good enough to me. It's a jail
Speaker 18And I, I just have one comment or two comments, actually, it's a sidewalk that leads to this storage building. It looks like it's about three or four feet wide. I gotta be wide nephew.
Speaker 0Well, for me
Speaker 18And you going to, why not? I'd walk or not?
Speaker 0Are you dressing now proposed to be widened instead? That's the width that we have. I mean, I don't know. I guess I'm assuming that that felt like that makes snow quick, you know, snow removal and snowblower come down, which should fit down the corporate sidewalk, but I know what they need it to be a little bit wider for any reason to have anything, anything more than,
Speaker 18Yeah, you gotta be, you gotta have concrete being poured and they would see me. I knew a little bit. And the last thing Mr. Chairman is basically the way the ordinance is written. They couldn't have a bunch of little sheds scattered around his property or this one all the way. And then you heard that better planning solutions,
Speaker 8Every single shed.
Speaker 0That's all I have to say. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 13That's all we had with the chairman. We're glad to answer more questions. You'll see us again. You know, this applicant is always improving this style, so you will see us again. I'm sure. And these are feel-good applications retired now. So not that great, but this is by the vanilla as an application could get, we think
Speaker 0Any, any members of the board have any questions hearing none. I'm gonna go to the public portion, 81 of the public portion. Have any questions about this application?
Speaker 8Yeah, this is sort of Thomas. Could you just tell me which property this is? Mr. Garvis. We need to swear you in. Could you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth to LTI? Yes, sir. Your name and address, please are targets for 11 year mark the road from Skyway. Thank you,
Speaker 13Phil. Can you please identify the property for the member of the public?
Speaker 8This is,
Speaker 0This is the heart in court. So apartment complex, opening Brunswick avenue.
Speaker 8Is that the one that's just office Feldman road, the new ones you say new Brunswick, old new
Speaker 0Brunswick, new Brunswick avenue.
Speaker 8Okay. Okay. So it's over by the custody plant. This is where we're talking down by the old average steel. Is that right?
Speaker 13All our site engineers looking at the targets. Do you have a question for our witness? No. I was just curious about
Speaker 8Which property it was. Do you have an address? It was flying to
Speaker 132,800 new Brunswick avenue.
Speaker 8Okay, great. Thank you very much. Okay. Misquoted questions,
20-C-33/34 — AP Aspen LLC: Public Input and Board Approval 20-C-33/34 AI  02:57:36 – 03:04:50
Limited public questions identify property location. Site engineer testifies to willingness to work with board professional on aesthetic improvements. Board approves application with condition that applicant coordinate facade enhancements with staff professional (roof, windows, or landscaping mitigation). Vote unanimous (5–0).
Speaker 0Ms. Buckley, anyone else who had the hemorrhage?
Speaker 3They do not see anyone
Speaker 0Chairman don't see. No.
Speaker 19So, and again, again, I just to go over that steps report again, I don't have really any issues with most of this stuff, but again, I just think that this very long building is just aesthetically, not what it really could. Again, the cost prohibitive nature of it. You know, I don't buy that argument. That's not a defense for relief for variance to back that intensity it's to the back of a 27 acre site. We also say that there's there's residents that live in the Mr. And interesting is talking. Could you let them finish or don't residents live right next to that shed that you're placing there? Yes. Oh. And so they'll, don't those residents have the opportunity to look at something that's a aesthetic. They pay good rent off that we proffered and testified that the structure looks exactly like the exhibits. And I disagree with you a hundred percent.
Speaker 19Okay. And the other thing I disagree with is you said you need this for storage. Didn't you just take a garage at that building that you converted into apartments. We did. You did so. So if you didn't want the additional, if you needed storage, you probably should have left that in there. I'm not going to build a smaller shed. I'm not asking you a question. So if you would have left the garage there, you would have had additional storage space. You wouldn't need to build such a large garage here and now I'm not so opposed to the garage, but you're making the point of, of finances when you took a garage out. So you could get two more additional directly units. So please don't bring finances into again, a, a grant application because you know that that's not a reason for relief. I am <inaudible> let him finish.
Speaker 19I thought he was couch. Really? I'm still talking. How could I be finished? I'm not happy with the look of the building. Okay. I think you could do something with the roofline making it more of a hip roof. Okay. That would, back's a little bit more of what your existing buildings look like. Okay. You could perhaps add a window or two on the side of this blank wall building. And again, it's right next to it. 10 feet away from an existing two, three story apartment unit, all of the residents in this area, you have a beautiful area that you're beautifying in the recreational area of the, of the site. And then you're going to have this very unattractive shed. All I'm asking for is for you to do something, to try to improve these statics. I'll be more than happy to work with your landscape architect, your architect, whoever it may be. So then we can come to an agreement. I'm not asking you to necessarily build a Taj Mahal here. I'm asking you to make this shed look a little bit more attractive. It's a very long building. You're building it twice. The size of what's allowed. And it's a walking skinny narrow building with no windows on it. A very low roof line. It aesthetically to me, it just doesn't go. Or it doesn't fit with the you're saying it looks exactly like the, I disagree. Now I'm done Mr. Galli. If you can make some
Speaker 0Small improvements work with the engineering department, I think we might look favorable upon this.
Speaker 13We're glad to do that. We don't have an open checkbook. And the nexus between costs of cost, primitive nature is relevant in a sense that there's got to be a metric, that there's gotta be a mitigating factor associated with the relief. So, and all we're asking for is to exceed by 600 square feet of what's allowed on a property that is about, I don't know, bill, bill, you're an engineer 200 times the size required in the zone. So when you look at the nexus and the conductivity of the lipstick that is being asked to be put on with potentially an open checkbook that Mr. Interstate and asked for it's it raises caution on behalf of the applicant. That's the issue there, sir?
Speaker 0Okay. Now, now you now have you a planner. We
Speaker 13Have no planning. No, we have no planning witness council. Okay. So
Speaker 0You can't justify the variants that you're asking for
Speaker 13Sure. We can. The board, the board can be as to vote on a variance without planning testimony. It's a dimensional variance of the 27 acre labile. We're exceeding the allowable square footage by 600 square feet where we're set back a hundred feet and 300 feet.
Speaker 0Okay. So I'm telling the board that the applicant does not have planning testimony to justify the bulk variants that they are seeking and how in ships witness does not like the proposal. And perhaps the applicant wants to go get a planner.
Speaker 13No, I think we said we will work with your witness. I think Mr. <inaudible> is in his final, a few sentences said, just work with me and we're willing to do that. And that's what the chairman suggested. So we'll work with them, but there's got, gotta be a reasonable metric by which we're dressing up this shit. I think there's, it's gotta be within reason.
Speaker 18I haven't dealt with that. It, why don't you find out what that is after you've jogged Danbury, you're arguing to avoid.
Speaker 13And we're glad to do that. Post approval. The port says subject to our board consults its approval with the facade improvements. We can appreciate this. We're fine to do that.
Speaker 0That's if you object to the board professional's opinion, you'll come back to the board.
Speaker 13I guess we're back here. Yeah. I guess we're back here then. Hopefully
Speaker 0You won't be waiting to find out.
Speaker 13I hope so. I can't delete. Don't think we'd be back here on this matter. I think that we will find the solution that works for everyone. I'm sure. Reasonably enough.
Speaker 0Okay. Jim, did I open it to the public? I did. Didn't I? You did not yet. Okay. Can I open it to the public? Now anyone have questions for this application? Mr. <inaudible> testified, but I don't know that we knew that there was anybody else.
Speaker 3I do not see anyone
Speaker 0Else. Okay. Seeing none public portion is closed. What would, how would you word the conditions Mr. <inaudible> on? If I was the one for approval for this application, the application would need approved subject to the applicant, working with Mr. <inaudible> to approve some of the aesthetic qualities of the building. Okay. Now, to make my motion to approve the application with that verbiage, seconded by Mr. Clerk. Please call it up.
Speaker 3I'm sorry. He did the second
Speaker 0Zimmerman Zimmerman. Was it
Speaker 3Mr. Tillery?
Speaker 0Yes.
Speaker 3Zimmerman. Mr. Patel? Yes. I'm chairman Cato.
Speaker 0Yes. Oh, because thank you for hanging in with us. We very much appreciate it and happy holidays guys. Thank you. So thank you very much, Laura, for everything. Very welcome there guys. Thanks for waiting.
Speaker 3All right. Number 15, chairman
Resolutions from Prior Meetings and Adjournment AI  03:05:05 – 03:07:02
Board votes on and adopts resolutions for multiple prior applications (Equity Land Group, Ribbon condo, Dennis & Shauna Johnson, Miller Realty, Chris Products). Adoption of November 12, 2020 meeting minutes. Meeting adjourned with thanks to applicants and public for their participation.
Speaker 0Ocular resolutions from the regular meeting between fourth 24th, 21st is equity land group. This was an application that the resolution was delayed because the applicant wanted to check the, the, the transcripts it's now been resolved. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. <inaudible>. Yes. Which was Zimmerman? Yes. Mr. Patel, E ex chairman. Kale. Yes. Next number six. I'm sorry. There's 16. Yes. Ribbon. Not by this application was approved. Mr. Tillary. Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Zimmerman. Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Erin K hill. Yes. Next is Dennis and Shauna Johnson. This was application was approved. Mr. Tillary. Yes. Mr. Reggio? Yes. Zimmerman. Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Jeremy Cahill. Yes. Next is to Miller Realty. This application was approved for use variance. Not a non-conforming use certificate. Mr. Tillery. Yes. Is there a Reggio? Yes, sir. Zimmerman. Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Chairman hill. Yes. And we have one an added resolution tonight. Chris products, kissed products. Would you heard this evening requested a resolution this evening, which I prepared and have, has been distributed. Mr. Tillery? Yes. Mr. Reggie? Yes. Mr. Zimmerman? Yes. Mr. Patel? Yes. Jeremy Cahill. Yes. Those are all the resolutions that I have this evening. Number 17, adoption of the minutes from the regular meeting of November 12, 20, 20. All in favor. Say, say, aye. Aye. Alright, good. Motion to adjourn.
Speaker 0Okay. Good morning, everyone. Thank you all guys. I really appreciate your sacrifice. Merry Christmas, happy new year to be safe. Okay. Talk to you soon. Thanks. Bye.