Transcript for Piscataway Planning meeting on May 12 2021

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

Speaker 0     00:00:34      well, Ms. Sanders, we with us tonight, I believe so.  
Speaker 2     00:03:09    Okay.  
Speaker 3     00:03:11    Oh wow. Okay. Madam chair, we are ready.  
Speaker 2     00:03:25    Good evening. The Piscataway township board meeting will please come to water in compliance with the open public meetings act. Adequate. Notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways. Notice published in the courier news notice published in the Star-Ledger notice, posted on the bulletin board of the municipal building notice made available through the township clerk notice made available through the township librarian. Um, Mr. Barlow, will you read the community affairs at  
Speaker 4     00:03:56    Yes. And keeping with the department of Q and the affair guidelines. This meeting is being held virtually on a zoom platform. As a result of the COVID pandemic. All the notices have indicated the appropriate zoom links, um, and therefore I believe it's appropriate for this board to go forward in this virtual setting. Madam chairwoman.  
Speaker 2     00:04:15    Thank you. Madam clerk, would you please call the roll  
Speaker 3     00:04:21    Marijuana council, woman Cahill here. Ms. Corcoran, Ms. Saunders. It's not letting them on mute again. Somebody changed the settings. I apologize here. Can you hear me? Yep. Now we can. Thank you Carol new system. Let's figure this out. Reverend Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Espinosa. Mr. Espinosa,  
Speaker 4     00:04:57    The thought he's here. He's here.  
Speaker 3     00:05:01    Oh, he was here. I always put thumbs up. Let me ask the unmute him. I don't know why this is doing this. Okay, Dennis, can you do it now? Hi. Thank you, Mr. Foster. I don't see him. Okay. And share women's Smith  
Speaker 2     00:05:37    Here. Um, is he, did he call, okay. Uh, we'll now pledge of allegiance. He has a flag. I pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the Republic for which it one nation under God, indivisible  
Speaker 3     00:06:03    With Liberty and justice.  
Speaker 2     00:06:09    Um, are there any amendments or changes to the agenda this evening, Mr. Barlow?  
Speaker 4     00:06:18    Um, I believe, um, there are changes to the agenda. Madam chair, one, the minaret matter, which is 19 PB, 20 and 21 V has been postponed. There is no new data at this time. And when it is scheduled, they will re notice everyone.  
Speaker 2     00:06:38    Thank you. And you want a pairing for that? Uh, we'll have to we'll get the new notice.  
Speaker 4     00:06:46    Mr. Godly. Madam chair.  
Speaker 2     00:06:49    Okay. Mr. Godwin massages.  
Speaker 5     00:06:53    Mr. Godly, can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give with the truth and nothing but the truth?  
Speaker 2     00:07:01    Yes, I do. Adoption gives me,  
Speaker 4     00:07:11    I didn't know if Oregon wanted to say something I'm in a red. I don't know if I caught them off accidentally.  
Speaker 2     00:07:16    Okay. Ms. Mr. Arthur, do you have any comments? Okay. All right. Next on our agenda. Item number seven, adoption of amendment resolution to memorialize action taking one April 14.  
Speaker 5     00:07:32    Madam chairman. I'd like to memorialize the minutes from the action of the meeting taken on April 19th,  
Speaker 3     00:07:39    April 14th.  
Speaker 5     00:07:40    Oh, sorry. April 14th.  
Speaker 3     00:07:42    I wasn't here the 19th. It was the weekend.  
Speaker 5     00:07:44    Okay. I'm sorry. I got it. I just put my glasses on  
Speaker 2     00:07:48    And do I have a second? Thank you. Roll call.  
Speaker 3     00:07:57    We're having such a problem. Marijuana council, woman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. She did it again. One second. Try it. Go ahead. Yes. Thank you, Ms. Saunders? Yes, Reverend Kenny, Mr. Espinosa, what is going on with this?  
Speaker 4     00:08:26    I think the problem, or at least I had is I needed myself when someone else was talking just to be courteous. And then in order for me, I can't unmute myself. Yeah.  
Speaker 3     00:08:36    I don't know why. It's alright. I tried another. Yeah, but that's not going to work. I try to get the, everybody on mute again, but then another system kicks in. So I'll try this one. Hopefully everybody. Marvin, can you try to unmute yourself? All right. Okay. Okay. Please continue. Madam chair, technical difficulties.  
Speaker 2     00:08:59    Uh, Ms. Saunders, will you do, um, item a  
Speaker 5     00:09:04    Okay. Madam chairman. I like to memorialize the application 21, PB zero five slash zero eight for duke Realty circle drive development, LLC. Preliminary and fight. Final site plan.  
Speaker 2     00:09:22    Do I have a second? Thank you. Rocco.  
Speaker 3     00:09:27    Their wallet? Yes. Councilman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corporan. Yes. Ms. Saunders? Yes. Reverend Kenney. Mr. Espinosa and Madam chair. Yes.  
Speaker 5     00:09:47    Madam chair. I liked it more, a lot of it's application, 21, PB zero six slash zero seven. Duke Realty, Washington avenue development, LLC, for preliminary and final site plan, a block 51 0 1 lot 5 0 2 six.zero two and seven.zero, two  
Speaker 2     00:10:08    Second. We'll have a second to incorporate. Thank you. Roco  
Speaker 3     00:10:15    Marijuana? Yes. Councilman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. The cylinders. Yes. Mervin Kenney. Mr. Espinosa? Yes. And Madam chair? Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:10:30    Okay. Item number 9 21. PB oh three slash oh four V as in Victor, Goldman Rutgers land limited. Mr. Arvin.  
Speaker 6     00:10:43    Thank you. Madam chair, members of the board. Good evening. My name is Arvin and I told them an attorney at law, uh, present the applicant golden Rutgers land limited partnership before the board this evening, a couple of housekeeping matters as always. If I may just confirm with the board attorney, uh, that notice is proper and the board does have jurisdiction over the application.  
Speaker 2     00:11:05    Uh, it was proper and the board  
Speaker 6     00:11:06    Does thank you. And, uh, Madam sheriff, I can also confirm that the reports and memoranda that we'll be re referencing that were generated as a result by the township, uh, will be comprised of a February 16th, uh, fire Marshall Gore's approval letter, uh, February 24th, uh, zoning officer's report from Ms. Corcoran, uh, March 17th, uh, DPW, uh, report from Guyagus Berry, Mr. Gottlieb's, March 18th, CME planning report, Mr. Inter Steen's, March 22nd, a memorandum. And finally, Mr. Carly's, uh, DNR engineering report dated May 12th of this year. Those are the reports and memoranda that, uh, we'll be working off of this evening.  
Speaker 6     00:11:54    Okay. Is that consistent with your Mr. Garland and Mr. Tom Barlow? Yes, it is. Okay. Thank you. You may proceed. Okay. Thank you, members of the board. Uh, this is an application where we're seeking site plan and variance approval to allow the applicant to construct a warehouse facility of approximately 78,400 square feet of which 3000 square feet are proposed to be, uh, office space. And this is, uh, uh, the property itself. The site is looking at 30 duke road. So geographically, where that would be is just north of 2 87. It actually borders 2 87 south of circle drive north. And it's roughly between possum town road and old new Brunswick road. And this is a 10 acre vacant site it's wooded currently. Um, and we're proposing to disturb less than half of that site, uh, to make the improvements that we're going to be testifying to this evening, which is the warehouse with the office space, uh, parking and the associated improvements on site.  
Speaker 6     00:13:00    Uh, the majority, which is more than half of this site will remain in its natural state, as it is currently. Uh, there are a number of variances that we'll be seeking because of the unit, a unique shape and, uh, uh, the circumstances, the environmental circumstances of this lot. Uh, the variances that we're asking for include a minimum, uh, side yard setback parking within 25 feet of a street line, more than half of our parking in the front yard and a four minimum parking spaces. Now we've noticed in, in addition, and it's been called out that we'd also, uh, would need a variance, not having any charging station, but we're going to comply with that requirement as you'll hear from our witnesses to see evening. Uh, there are also a number of waivers that we're asking for and that's for a parking in the front yard setback area, the maximum, uh, lighting, uh, the foot candle at the property line and a number of design or the landscaping in the parking area. I'll have four witnesses to present the application. It's evening. Madam chair, with your permission. What I'd like to do is call our first witness, uh, Ken Oldman. Who's a principal of the applicant in a little bit of a background about the applicant and what we're proposing on doing on the site. May I call him Mr. Goldman?  
Speaker 2     00:14:21    Yes.  
Speaker 6     00:14:23    Great, Mr. Goldman, if you can turn on your camera and unmute yourself, can you hear me? Absolutely. Okay.  
Speaker 5     00:14:34    Yeah. Okay. Can you please raise your right hand, Mr. Goldman, the testimony about to give will be the truth and nothing but the truth.  
Speaker 6     00:14:44    I do. I  
Speaker 5     00:14:45    Swear. Can you please state and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 6     00:14:48    My name is Kenneth K E N N E T  
Speaker 7     00:14:51    H Goldman, G O L D M a N.  
Speaker 6     00:14:58    Mammoth measure.  
Speaker 7     00:15:00    Yes,  
Speaker 6     00:15:02    Mr. Goldman. Good evening. Um, I'm going to ask you a  
Speaker 7     00:15:05    Board.  
Speaker 6     00:15:07    I'm going to ask you a number of questions and if you can keep your voice up, uh, gets a little choppy if I interrupt you it's because we've cut out. Uh, so, uh, if I cut out at some point, just ask me to repeat now first give the, uh, the board, the benefit of, uh, your relationship with, uh, the applicant Goldman Rutgers land. Okay.  
Speaker 7     00:15:28    Uh, I'm one of the partners in Goldman Rutgers land, uh, since 1986.  
Speaker 6     00:15:37    And your relationship with Piscataway as longstanding, is that correct?  
Speaker 7     00:15:42    That is correct.  
Speaker 6     00:15:45    Both you and family members.  
Speaker 7     00:15:47    Yeah, that is correct. The, the area in which this, uh, this lot is located, this is one of a few, lots that were developed by my father and, uh, partners in Rutgers industrial center. And through the years, dating back all the way to the sixties or late sixties, early seventies.  
Speaker 6     00:16:12    Now you're familiar with the application and with the site. And you're also familiar with the site plan that was submitted in the proposals for development of the site. Is that correct? That is correct. As a matter of fact, you actually approve those and we're going forward with, as I had characterized earlier, the development of that site less than half of that site will be actually, uh, disturbed to develop a warehouse facility. Is that correct?  
Speaker 7     00:16:37    That is correct.  
Speaker 6     00:16:39    Okay. Now we don't have a tenant for this site yet. Do we  
Speaker 7     00:16:42    Know  
Speaker 6     00:16:44    You're going to be leasing that out at some point after it's constructed? Correct.  
Speaker 7     00:16:49    That has, that is correct.  
Speaker 6     00:16:51    Now our engineer and the other professionals will address a number of the variances, but I want you to, if you would, uh, address one of the variances that we're seeking, which is the parking variance, uh, we're going to be providing, I believe 37 parking spaces. And that is, um, a variant situation, um, uh, to the extent that you know, that the tenants that are looking for facilities in this location of this size, is it also your belief that, uh, this will be sort of self-regulating in terms of what tenants will come here, meaning that if they need 75 parking spaces, because they have 75 employees, it just wouldn't be interested in this site.  
Speaker 7     00:17:32    Yes, I agree. I mean, I think the, the, the site has some limitations because of the quantity of wetlands and we made a decision that, um, you know, all sites are not all buildings are not for all, all time. And so, you know, we have multiple tenants in Rutgers industrial center with much fewer parking spaces than this. Of course they were built in the seventies and sixties, but,  
Speaker 6     00:18:04    And Mr. Goldman, you're up  
Speaker 4     00:18:07    Interrupt Arvin. Just a quick question. Do you have a court reporter?  
Speaker 6     00:18:12    Um, Ms. Reese should be on the line. Let me just double check, just making  
Speaker 4     00:18:16    Sure  
Speaker 6     00:18:17    She's showing us number 1 9, 7, 2, 6 X, ah, no name anymore.  
Speaker 4     00:18:25    Okay. That's all I wanted to make sure for Laura's sake when she does the minutes. Okay.  
Speaker 6     00:18:32    Okay. After your presentation. Thank you, Mr. Goldman. You're obviously not obligated to, to say, look, this is what we're going to do with this property for all time. But your general philosophy has been that you build the properties, you develop them, you lease them out and you actually continue to manage them, have a hand in those properties. Correct?  
Speaker 7     00:18:50    That  
Speaker 6     00:18:50    Is correct. So it's important to you who that tenant is going to be, because you'd like to have a quality tenant, not only that pays the rent, obviously, but you also want someone that won't be a nuisance to the neighborhood and so forth. Correct?  
Speaker 7     00:19:04    That is correct.  
Speaker 6     00:19:06    Um, and uh, if the board members have any questions for Mr. Goldman, um, I think, uh, I'll turn them over to the board. I don't have any other questions for Mr. Goldman at this time.  
Speaker 2     00:19:17    Okay. Does the board have any questions of Mr. Goldman? Could we, um, Laura, could you see if anyone from the public has any questions for this witness please?  
Speaker 3     00:19:33    One second, Madam chair. No, I do not. See,  
Speaker 2     00:19:37    Thank you. You're close to the public at this time for this witness. Go ahead, Mr.  
Speaker 6     00:19:43    Thank you, Madam chair with your permission. If I may call our professional engineer, go right ahead. Brian, are you on here? We are. Okay. I'm here.  
Speaker 2     00:19:58    Uh, Ms. Saunders would just wear this.  
Speaker 5     00:20:01    Yes. Um, can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give will the truth and nothing but the truth?  
Speaker 8     00:20:09    I do. Can you  
Speaker 5     00:20:10    Please state and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 8     00:20:12    Um, my name is Bryan Ennis, B R Y a N E H N E S.  
Speaker 6     00:20:21    Thank you, Brian. Uh, would you please give the, uh, the board, the benefit of your credentials, your educational and your professional credentials? Yes.  
Speaker 8     00:20:31    So I graduated from MIT in 2010 with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering. I've been working at bowler for approximately 10 years. And I've been practicing as a professional engineer for the last five years.  
Speaker 6     00:20:44    Now, this is your first time before this board in Piscataway that correct? Correct. Uh, but you have appeared in a number of boards throughout the state of Piscataway in the past, is that correct? Correct. If you can just give us a round number, an estimate of approximately how many boards have you appeared where your credentials were, uh, accepted as that of an expert in the field of engineering?  
Speaker 8     00:21:04    Probably about 25 to 30.  
Speaker 6     00:21:06    And you're being proffered this evening as an expert in the area of engineering, is that correct? Yes. Okay.  
Speaker 8     00:21:14    Mr. Anna says acceptable to the sport as an engineer. Thank you.  
Speaker 6     00:21:19    Thank you, Brian. Um, you're familiar with the site plan and the application that was submitted as part of a site plan application. Let's do that again. You're familiar with this is it was either produced by you or at your direction, is that correct? That is correct. And you're also familiar with the application that was submitted with site plan, correct?  
Speaker 8     00:21:40    That is correct.  
Speaker 6     00:21:41    And finally, you're familiar with the site because you've made not only site visits, but, uh, you you're, you've got a plot that site out on your site plan. So you're familiar with the, the site itself. Are you not? Yes. And the surrounding area, is that correct? That's correct. Madam chair. Uh, we have two exhibits, uh, that Mr. Uh, Brian will be referring to. Uh, I don't know whether we can give him control for those two exhibits. And if we,  
Speaker 8     00:22:07    It looks like I can just share, um, let me know if it pops up or not. You should see an aerial exhibit. Yes.  
Speaker 4     00:22:18    Okay. And are these documents that were submitted as part of the application, or did he, uh, prepare these for purposes of today's hearing  
Speaker 6     00:22:27    Other were prepared for purposes of today's hearing,  
Speaker 4     00:22:30    Then we'll mark them as a one and 82, please.  
Speaker 6     00:22:33    Thank you. So a one will be, uh, for the record, uh, will be the Ariel and a two will be a colorized version of the site plan. So it's the same site plan that was submitted, but colorized to make it easier for the board,  
Speaker 8     00:22:47    Just for the record to both exhibits are dated today and prepared by bowler engineering.  
Speaker 6     00:22:54    So, Brian, um, walk us through, first of all, an overview of where the sites located and then, uh, switching to, I guess, a two, if you can tell us what's being proposed on the site.  
Speaker 8     00:23:06    Yes. Um, so just for reference north is to the top of the page, uh, the lot size of approximately 10 acres, you can kind of see this shaded area, what the cross hatch is, the property that we are discussing this evening. Um, it's located in the  light industrial zone. Uh, warehouses are permitted in this zone and the adjacent properties and uses around the site include, uh, three buildings that are multi-tenant between warehouse, office and commercial uses, um, duke road, which you can see is the main access onto the property. And it has a cul-de-sac that connects to the site to the north. And then as mentioned previously to the south of our site is 2 87. In terms of what's on the existing site, it was mentioned previously, the majority of it is wetlands wooded or grass areas. There is a small dirt gravel trail, um, that goes throughout the whole property, but the majority is the wetlands and natural features.  
Speaker 8     00:24:10    The applicant and our office has filed and received a letter of interpretation from the DEP on October 30th, 2020, that LOI stated that the onsite wetlands are isolated, meaning that we are allowed to fill full fill up to one acre of the wetlands, which is going to be part of our proposal, which I'll detail a little bit as I get into more details on the proposed property. Um, the submission now has been made for the one acre filling, uh, for a GP six to the DEP and that is currently pending. Um, two more things I just want to mention is along what is the rear of the property or the south property line adjacent to 2 87 is a municipal easement for sanitary sewer. We are not impacting that easement at all with the exception of our sanitary sewer connection, which was recommended by the sewer department. In addition, there is a Buckeye pipeline for gas easement that kind of comes through this portion of the property where I have my cursor and then goes parallel and adjacent to the adjacent property. So that does have a gas line in it. And we have been in discussions with Buckeye regarding this, not only the easement and the work we're doing within that. Um, but the work we're doing on top of it for our parking lot. So those two existing easements have been coordinated prior to this development. So we are taking their requirements into consideration.  
Speaker 8     00:25:44    What are we proposing on doing with the site, which is essentially vacant at this time? Yes. So as mentioned before, this is the same site plan that was submitted, but colorize for presentation purposes, again, it's dated May 12th today, and it's prepared by Bohler engineering. So north is, is actually the bottom of the page, correct? Yep. Yeah. I was just going to say, north is to the bottom for your reference. Um, as stated previously, the proposed development includes a 78,410 square foot building made up of 75,410 square feet of warehouse and 3000 square feet of office also included in the improvements. As you can see our parking loading area, their storm water management facility is proposed underground and then landscaping and lighting. This building will have approximately 13 loading spaces. And as you can see, adjacent to the building here are where the 13 loading spaces will. There's a 70 foot concrete area from the base, from the building out for the actual loading spaces and then an additional 45 feet of heavy duty pavement. Um, for the remainder of the truck area. There's also this circular area in the back here where there will not be any loading docks and that's for trucks to circulate and turn around in case that's needed.  
Speaker 8     00:27:07    Um, as stated previously based upon conversations with the professionals and in order to not request a variance, one charging station will be added to the development. Um, and that will be resubmitted as part of any revisions to the plan that we make. In addition, it was also discussed, um, sidewalk being installed along the frontage of duke road. Uh, the applicant has also agreed to that. So that would also be a revision to the plan made and resubmitted to the team. Um, it was mentioned earlier as well, but this has been submitted and approved by the, by the fire commissioner. And then I'm going to zoom in to kind of get back to the easement I was discussing.  
Speaker 8     00:27:54    So this, these parallel dashed lines, and then going along the property here and then out through the wetlands, that's the gas easement. You can see, we actually have, that's why there's a corner cut out of this building because in discussions with them, obviously they would like us not to be within their easement or close to the pipeline. So we made sure we cut out that portion of the building and they were okay with the way this lays out. In addition, you see, we do have parking on top of the pipeline and we are working not only making sure we know the exact depth depth, but making sure that cover requirements are met for Buckeye. Um, this application is a major development. Um, according to the DEP regulations, uh, being such, we are proposing a significant sized underground basin, which is this dash line here that my cursor's highlighting.  
Speaker 8     00:28:47    And we also are proposing a water quality unit, which will be right in this area as well. The installation of both the basin and the water quality unit will meet the requirements for the DEP for major development as part of what we are doing overall on the site as mentioned previously, the site is 10 acres in size, and we are only developing 3.15, 3.5 acres. And the remaining 6.5 will remain either wooded, grass or wetlands as it currently is today. So again, less than half of the develop, the site is being developed, um, due to minimizing the impact to the natural areas and the access to the site basically being right in this one corner, um, because due to duke road, basically ending here with the cul-de-sac and the adjacent property taking up the rest of the area. So between that, and again, minimizing impact to the natural area on site, the development is focused in the bottom left corner of the plan or the Northeast of the property.  
Speaker 8     00:29:53    So due to that, um, there is a setback variance being requested. Um, it's 50 feet for both the side and the rear yard. We are requesting 19.6. Um, we had originally listed it as both the rear and a side yard, just because this 19.6 goes to this corner of the property and we just wanted to make sure whatever variance is needed, we are requesting. So we did request both a side and rear yard depending on how that lot line is, uh, delineated. Um, in addition, it was mentioned that we front yard, um, is only allowed to have half the parking. All of our parking is located within the front yard and it's 18.8 feet back from the property line where 25 feet is required. Um, again, this is to make sure that we're limiting impact to the natural areas. And as I stated before, the only people as accessing duke road, theoretically, are people going to the rear of the adjacent site or coming into our site. So in terms of setbacks and things like that, and the parking lot being in the front yard, one, it's beneficial for the natural areas, but two, it doesn't have too much of an adverse impact because the majority of the traffic will be for the site only. Um, I do also want to mention that this adjacent property does have two driveways to the main road further to the north. So this is actually to the back of their property.  
Speaker 8     00:31:24    Um, relief is also being sought for a 35 foot wide drive aisle where we're proposing 50. Um, this is just to provide a little bit of extra room in the circulation, make sure that if a truck is sitting there waiting to leave that another truck can turn in. So this is just to give a little bit more maneuverability for in and out access of the site. And as depicted on the plan, there is currently no freestanding sign proposed, uh, whoever winds up being the tenant for this property will come in with its own application, either to the board for a variance or to the zoning department for assigned that conforms with the regulations. Um, as mentioned before, we also are requesting a parking variance. We show 37 proposed spaces in this area here in the front of the building between duke road and the building itself, um, based on the warehouse size and the 3000 square foot office portion about 166 spaces are required.  
Speaker 8     00:32:28    And again, we're proposing 37, but based on, um, our opinion and the, um, research we've done, we feel that this is an adequate number of parking spaces for what we're proposing. And we do have our traffic engineer here tonight who can go into a little bit more detail, um, regarding the actual numbers themselves. Um, just real quick. I think it's pretty straightforward, but just to kind of highlight the internal truck movements. So a truck will come in off the duke road, make a left in, continue straight into the site, either utilize one of the loading docks or circulate the site. And if he needs to, after loading at the, at the dock circulate turnaround and then exit and most likely making a right onto duke road as again, duke road ends, um, just to the west of our driveway. And it just goes to the adjacent property. Um, similar movement cars would most likely come from the east on duke road, make a left in, and then they would make an immediate right and access the parking area. Um, the, the way this is laid out, obviously promote safety of limited interaction between the trucks and cars. We just want to make sure, um, as much as possible there isn't as much interaction as cars and or trucks circulate the site in terms of landscaping.  
Speaker 8     00:33:59    There we go. Um, we are proposing, uh, 14 trees, 35 shrubs, and then leaving everything else outside of our area disturbance as existing today. So there are plantings along the Eastern property line here. I know there was a comment about the condition of those plantings and certainly if they need to be replaced, um, the applicant wouldn't have a problem doing so. And we are working with the township and the landscape architect, as we do have a deficit of proposed trees due to the amount of trees that are being cut down for the proposed development. Um, we are going to maximize as many trees as possible to be proposed and installed, um, and then work with, uh, both the township and the landscape architect to determine the remaining fee for the deficiency of trees planted. Um, I do want to mention though, too, um, the majority of the trees obviously are also staying so about 1500 trees are staying and around 500 are being cut down.  
Speaker 8     00:35:07    And again, we're gonna, uh, install as many as possible and then work with, uh, the township for the fee that's required for the remainder. Uh, there is a waiver that was mentioned in the design guidelines. Uh, 20% of the parking area is to be landscaped and two and 12 trees are supposed to be proposed based on the size. Um, we obviously to maximize parking, uh, do not have landscaping or the room to meet the requirement for trees and the landscaping. So again, this is pushing everything closer to duke road. We'd rather keep the existing than push everything back, take up more wetlands and things like that. So again, we'll maximize trees, but keeping everything condensed to limit impact to, uh, the existing conditions at the rear of the site, in terms of lighting, we are doing all led lights. There will be seven single head pole mounted lights at 25 feet in height, which is, uh, permitted and allowable by the ordinance.  
Speaker 8     00:36:10    We do also have 10 wall mounted lights. The maximum height of those is 25, which is also allowable by the ordinance. Um, we have at least 0.5 foot candles throughout the entire property where there is pavement concrete or sidewalks, um, which is the typical engineering standard that we like to design to. And again, a waiver is needed for greater than 0.5 foot candles at the property line, but the only location of that deviation is at the driveway driveway itself, connecting into duke road. And that's essentially, we want to make sure all the way up until the property line that we have it properly illuminated both for traffic and for safety purposes, that we can't meet the 0.5 requirement and meet what we would want, um, safer standards in terms of illumination in that area. Um, there was also a mention of trash, uh, as of right now, trash will probably be more, uh, directed by whatever tending comes in, whether it be internal or a dumpster at the rear of the property. Uh, we don't have that answer yet. It would basically be the operation of when ever tenant comes into the building.  
Speaker 6     00:37:24    So Brian, just to touch upon that before you, we may have the trash and compactors inside, or we may have it at the dock door, is that correct? Correct. Yep. Okay. And, uh, it'll be private haulers, so it won't be the township that's going to be coming into.  
Speaker 8     00:37:38    Yes. It all will be private and they'll make sure the hours make sense with their operations.  
Speaker 6     00:37:43    I'm sorry, go ahead.  
Speaker 8     00:37:46    Um, I think that's all my direct, I think I've covered everything that I want in terms of big picture existing and proposed conditions. Just a couple of,  
Speaker 6     00:37:54    If I may. Yeah. Approximately now you talked about how many trees were trying to say, can you give us a little bit of an idea in terms of what kind of screening there will be? Both from 2 87 and on duke road in sort of the site itself?  
Speaker 8     00:38:11    Yes. So in terms of the screenings to do, uh, to 2 87, I should say is there will be pretty dense wooded area that is there today between the building and 2 87. And then in terms of the front, we will be planting and keeping existing vegetation that is there currently to buffer and screen the parking as much as possible. There also will be a retaining wall in that area to provide additional from duke road.  
Speaker 6     00:38:37    Now I went through the, uh, the list of staff reports, uh, and professional reports that we would be referring to this evening. And there were a number of conditions that the professionals, uh, indicated the board should consider if they were to look favorably upon this application in terms of, uh, those staff reports and your review from an engineer's perspective, is there any condition in any of those reports with which we can not comply?  
Speaker 8     00:39:01    No, we can comply with everything.  
Speaker 6     00:39:03    Okay. And specifically to Mr.  report, uh, he's asked us to, uh, uh, to provide an environmental impact assessment and we can do that. Is that correct? Yes, that is correct. Okay. Um, Madam chair, I have no other questions for this witness of the board members have any questions at this time.  
Speaker 8     00:39:22    Thank you. I'd like to open it up to the board. Do we have any questions of this witness?  
Speaker 9     00:39:29    Um, Madam chair, it's council or Mikhail. Thank you. Madam chair. Just a couple of questions I have. Um, so, um, first I just wanted to ask about that lack of street plantings in the arch area. Um, is it my understanding that where I do see trees on either side of the  
Speaker 10    00:40:01    Entrance into the building, that there is not an opportunity to extend those trees, uh, in front of that parking spot? Or is that being, is that like a lawn area being left there for potential signage? Or is it, am I not looking at the land properly to understand that there would be enough or those little circles, some sort of shrubs,  
Speaker 8     00:40:29    Uh, you're talking about in the front ditch right here, correct.  
Speaker 6     00:40:38    Councilman, uh, kale. This would be, uh, the front of the property by duke road. Is that correct? May have lost her.  
Speaker 8     00:40:49    Yeah, I think she's referring to this area, but yeah, there's nothing vegetation here that we're looking to keep. And the other issue we have is we have to have a wall here due to some grading restraints and the gas line. So we do have some screening just on that wall, on its own. And then also in between the two dash lines where the easement is, we are not allowed to plans anything there based on the gas company requests.  
Speaker 9     00:41:15    Okay. So I apologize. I got kicked out of the meeting, so I probably didn't hear the very first part of you. So on the frontage piece, in front of the parking lot, that is a fence and then does not allow for enough space for any,  
Speaker 8     00:41:38    I was going to say, this is a wall here. So it's a wall I'm about three feet in height and then the existing vegetation here. Um, we can certainly plant in here depending on the condition of that vegetation. And then, um, the last bit was in between two dash lines. We're not allowed to,  
Speaker 10    00:41:57    And I know that doesn't quite solve the issue of how we, we like to have the plantings within the parking lot. Um, but I just thought perhaps in lieu of that, because it is limited parking, um, maybe some additional plantings on the perimeter could be done. So if you could, you know, just work, um, with Henry on that, that would be, you know, much more desirable at least to try to offset that. Um, my other question, um, it's really sort of two parts. So, um, you know, when we have, uh, tenants who come into these existing buildings that are created, um, depending upon what it is that they have in their warehouse, you know, some, uh, look to have, you know, a security gate or a guard of some sort, does this plan allow for that? Um, I mean, if an applicant is to come in and finish potentially talking about trash pickup or the, the sign for the building, um, what I'm concerned about is that if potentially it is a client, who's looking for some sort of added security, um, is there, is there an option here to add that whereby the applicant would not have to come in for a variance?  
Speaker 8     00:43:29    Um, we can look into that a little bit further, but you can definitely do a swing gate. I don't think would be a problem to make that work. If it was a sliding gate, you would have to have it slide into this area here or slide into this area here. So obviously we can't go to the property line. I do believe there is enough with to do that, but I can certainly confirm that  
Speaker 10    00:43:55    I'm  
Speaker 8     00:43:55    Not just going to say the other option could be to if they want just the trucks gated off. They could put one up here and have a little bit more room or one here, so they can do a combination of both.  
Speaker 10    00:44:07    Okay. So I just, I kind of want to make sure that before, um, you know, any attendant comes in, I mean, we can do out the sign thing based upon ordinances. I'm not really concerned about that, but if, if some other structure needs to be built, uh, you know, um, uh, I'm not looking to grant variances and then have neighbors say, Hey, you know, they got it. Um, the other piece of it is, um, you said that the garbage would be are the, the, uh, the garbage pickup would be potentially, or the trash bin would be located towards the back of the lot and potentially located inside the building. Or did I miss here that,  
Speaker 8     00:44:53    Um, there's a couple of different options. Um, the tenant will make the final decision, but you have a couple of thoughts. Uh, there is a ramp up, so the four feet dock here, there is a ramp up into the building, which a lot of times is used for the garbage collection and completely outside. We would think they would want one put back here and have some type of door access. Okay.  
Speaker 10    00:45:15    Okay. Okay. I got you on that. Um, and I know this is going to sound like a silly question because based upon the size and scope of this particular building, um, there is going to be no opportunity for two tenants in this location, correct. The applicant will only be looking to fill this with one tenant.  
Speaker 8     00:45:39    Um, uh, that might be a better question for, uh, for,  
Speaker 10    00:45:44    Okay. So I'll wait on that. Um, one other piece I would like to just talk about is, um, the existing area now, um, this is going to be owned by a one tenant. I just want to confirm, can we just go back to make sure, um, how much land and space are you utilizing for the structure parking lot, et cetera. And what was the maximum that you said that the DEP was saying was allowable and the reason for my question, just so you know, is the concern for somebody to come back in and want to build extra on this, on this land?  
Speaker 8     00:46:38    Yeah, so the short answer is, and less, um, current regulations changed significantly. This is the maximum that can be developed. So essentially we're filling one acre of wetlands and that is all you're allowed on one site so that you already have the site as wetlands. And there wouldn't be anything else that you could do.  
Speaker 10    00:46:56    Okay. Um, fair enough. Um, I, okay. I think those are all my questions then. And I'll wait to address the other one. Thank you very much.  
Speaker 8     00:47:07    Thank you. I'm sure I know that you're going to open it up to the public.  
Speaker 2     00:47:12    Any questions? Any other questions from board members? I mean, the board may have other questions of this board. Is there, are there any other questions from any other members of this witness? Okay,  
Speaker 6     00:47:31    Sure. If we can just recall, um, Mr. Goldman to address Ms. Cahill's question.  
Speaker 7     00:47:39    Hello, greeting sport. Um, uh,  
Speaker 6     00:47:47    Yeah, let me ask the question. So, uh, uh, counseling Cahill had, uh, asked whether we are proposing having more than one tenant it's possible. We could have up to two tenants in this facility. Is that correct?  
Speaker 7     00:48:00    That is correct. It's possible. Yeah.  
Speaker 6     00:48:05    Unlikely, but still you want to keep stability? I hope,  
Speaker 7     00:48:09    Right. I would not want to commit again. It would be possible if it, if it can be worked out by the tenants, uh, that it could be subdivided or shared, but I don't, I don't expect that is going to be the case and it's not designed for that purpose. So we wouldn't be,  
Speaker 6     00:48:34    And Mr. Goldberg  
Speaker 7     00:48:35    Would not take the building would just be too big.  
Speaker 6     00:48:39    Right. And Mr. Goldman, uh, the tenants that are interested in the facility, if there are two tenants, for instance, they understand that they would not be able to have more than total 3000 square feet of office space. Correct?  
Speaker 7     00:48:54    That is correct.  
Speaker 6     00:48:55    You'd have to allocate that between the two tenants. And so essentially the parking demand, which is driven by the number of office workers and so forth being the greater use or the greater, uh, requirement under the ordinance that would still remain essentially the same.  
Speaker 7     00:49:15    Correct.  
Speaker 6     00:49:17    Ms. K hill. And I'm sorry, did that sort of answer your question or did you want to follow up?  
Speaker 10    00:49:23    It does for our till I guess my, my concern is if there were two tenants, just about the point that you made about the, um, parking lot, count and believe you may, I'm not looking for more McAdams for sure. Um, I, you know, my concern is for applicants coming in and then looking for, you know, variances that, you know, really push the envelope, you know what I'm saying? So I guess my question is, um, that the variants for these spots, uh, what was the requirement for this, if you don't mind? Um, Mia and I do apologize. I'm going to, I'm trying to look through the paperwork, but I, don't  
Speaker 6     00:50:09    114  
Speaker 10    00:50:12    And we're doing 37,  
Speaker 6     00:50:14    That's correct. 166,  
Speaker 10    00:50:19    And we're doing 37. I mean, again, I'm, you know, I know that we don't, you know, a lot of people working from on my concern and I, and again, this may not be the basis for, you know, any reason to vote against it, but my concern is, and I, and I would appreciate the applicant taking this into consideration as they do have tenants coming in is that, uh, if we're approving these 37 slots and the rest of this land is wetlands, we're not approving it. At least I'm not going to vote to approve anymore. That, let me just put it to you that way.  
Speaker 6     00:51:00    Uh, Brian, just to follow up on that, Ms. Cahill, Brian, we, we can't build any more parking lot. Is that correct? That's correct. Yeah. We're, we're maxed out in terms of development area. So that remaining six and a half acres that's existing natural conditions will remain,  
Speaker 10    00:51:17    Was made aware of those conditions.  
Speaker 6     00:51:19    That's correct. So even if we had a tenant that wanted to come in and they wanted 50 spaces, Mr. Goldman had testified, it's sort of, self-regulating, they understand 37 is all you're going to get a spot for you.  
Speaker 10    00:51:33    Okay. Fair enough. Thank you very much for the explanation.  
Speaker 2     00:51:40    Yeah. Yes, yes. Go grabbing, kidding. Yes.  
Speaker 11    00:51:44    I have questions in regards to the warehouse. What type of commodity are they looking to a house in this warehouse? I'm certainly not at anything as mad, uh, can be, uh, in that area.  
Speaker 6     00:51:59    Um, Mr. Reverend, Kenny, uh, at this point we don't have a tenant. So, uh, the, the ordinances that govern what kind of materials may be stored, and we can't, we obviously can't store a certain hazardous material that would be off the table.  
Speaker 11    00:52:21    Right. Okay. All right. That answers my question there. Okay. Thank you.  
Speaker 2     00:52:27    Any other questions from the board? Uh, for either of these two witnesses. Okay. Um,  
Speaker 6     00:52:35    Um, Madam chair, I'm not sure since we recalled Mr. Goldman, whether we need to open it up to the public for Mr. Goldman. Again, I defer to your attorney. Of course, it certainly can hurt,  
Speaker 2     00:52:49    Um, that being the ruling, um, Ms. Buckley, would you open it up to the public for any questions for me? There are these two witnesses.  
Speaker 6     00:52:59    I do not see any in the chat room.  
Speaker 10    00:53:03    I did not anyone's hands.  
Speaker 2     00:53:06    Okay. Thank you. Close to the public.  
Speaker 6     00:53:09    Thank you, Madam chair, with your permission. If I may call our architect right ahead, Larry I'm here. Can you hear  
Speaker 10    00:53:16    Me?  
Speaker 6     00:53:19    He's actually going to have two more exhibits of his own. Uh, so if we can, if we can, uh, allow him to share his screen.  
Speaker 12    00:53:28    Okay. Larry, you want to share your screen? Or do you want me to have him pulled up here? Well, since you have them up, if you just I'll just tell you which one to go to while you've got them and that'll probably save time. Okay.  
Speaker 2     00:53:38    We need to swear him in first. Right? Ms. Hernandez, can she hear us?  
Speaker 6     00:54:04    The Laura you're muted also.  
Speaker 3     00:54:07    Hi, Carol is not muted  
Speaker 2     00:54:14    Ms. Sanders.  
Speaker 3     00:54:19    Um, you could just swear, man.  
Speaker 4     00:54:22    Sir, could you raise your right hand? Swear the testimony you'll give before this board will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God. Yes, I do. Could you state your name and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 12    00:54:35    Yes. Larry Valensa L a R R Y V a L E N Z. A.  
Speaker 4     00:54:43    Thank you, sir.  
Speaker 2     00:54:46    Go ahead, Ms. Dodson.  
Speaker 6     00:54:47    Thank you, Larry. Would you give the board members the benefit of your education and your professional critique?  
Speaker 12    00:54:53    Sure. I'm a principal at MNH architects in St. Louis and I'm, uh, uh, in charge of our industrial project, uh, market. I have a bachelor of architecture from the university of Kansas, 1988. I've been practicing architecture for 33 years. Um, I'm licensed in the state of New Jersey in good standing, along with 15 other states. Uh, we've done approximately, uh, 80 million square feet of this type of building nationally, but 30 million of it is in the state of New Jersey. And I've personally been responsible for about 20 million of that. Um, and I have testified in Piscataway before for the Rockefeller industrial park project buildings.  
Speaker 2     00:55:37    What's nice is acceptable to testify in this capacity.  
Speaker 6     00:55:41    Thank you. And, uh, Larry, you're also familiar with the application and the not only the engineering plans with the architectural plans, which were prepared by you or under your direction,  
Speaker 12    00:55:50    Correct? That's  
Speaker 6     00:55:51    Correct. Visited the site as well? Yes. Okay. Um, and, uh, I'd like you, if you would, uh, you've got let's um, Mr. Barlow, perhaps we can mark this as a three,  
Speaker 12    00:56:07    Actually I would start with the elevation, the colored elevations.  
Speaker 6     00:56:11    Okay. So go back to eight. There you go. This would be a three  
Speaker 4     00:56:16    And this is the colorized elevations.  
Speaker 12    00:56:19    Yes. And this is the exhibit that was submitted as part of the, uh, the planning board submittal that was reviewed by the professional.  
Speaker 6     00:56:26    Okay. So why don't you talk us through what you've got up as a three at this point, which is, uh, obviously a cross section of the building itself.  
Speaker 12    00:56:37    Yes, yes. These are the elevations. So this has all four sides of the building. Um, the building since constructed of three panels, uh, painted in three different colors, uh, neutral colors, we use a light gray, a medium gray, dark gray. Um, we like to keep it neutral because then any tenant that would take the building, their signage and so forth would, would not, uh, uh, clash with the, with the building colors and, and the, the new neutral colors tend to blend with the surroundings better as well. Um, there are reveals in the panels, uh, rustication joints, um, to separate the colors and, um, why the colors and blocks to sorta break the building into smaller pieces. Even though this is relatively small for a warehouse building, um, you know, a lot of these buildings are several hundred thousand to over a million square feet. And this one is less than a hundred thousand, so it's small, but it's still a large building.  
Speaker 12    00:57:40    And so we, we try to break it up into smaller pieces, by the way we apply the paint. Um, we have closely spaced reveals wherever there's a dark gray panel. So that gives it even a little bit more depth. And, uh, um, the, the north elevation faces duke road and that's the office corner at the Northeast corner. Um, one of the, one of the questions in one of the review letters was explain why we called it a future office, uh, that is the location of where the office will be, but the office will actually be designed to meet attendance needs. So we know where it's going to be in the building. We just don't know how it's laid out until a tenant comes along. And, and we know their requirements as far as office space. Yeah.  
Speaker 6     00:58:25    Let me, before you go on with the rest of the elevation, I just want to clarify one additional point. This is a single floor warehouse facility. No, mezzanines proposed,  
Speaker 12    00:58:33    Correct. That's correct.  
Speaker 6     00:58:35    Okay. I'm sorry. Go ahead.  
Speaker 12    00:58:38    Um, so Brian, if we could switch to the rendering, that gives you a little better idea in 3d of how the building actually looks. So this is the,  
Speaker 6     00:58:47    Before you go on Mr. Barlow. Oh, it should be marked this as a four. Yeah. Okay. Referring to a four. Tell us what this is  
Speaker 12    00:58:55    Th this, this is a rendering, a 3d view, uh, of the Northeast corner. So this is the driveway entrance from duke road. And what you see when you pull in that driveway, and that is the office entrance. Um, the darker panels above the office, uh, glass and entry doors kind of signalizes that that's a, a different part of the, and sets it apart from the rest of the building. Um, we've got a metal clad canopy that extends over the door, uh, the glass storefront with the doors, and we're kind of wraps around the corner of the building that provides cover for people coming and going, and also provides shadow lines to give that, that corner some depth. Um, um, one that, that closely spaced reveal pattern is in that, that darker part over the wall. So that, that gives it the, the corner, some more depth.  
Speaker 12    00:59:54    Uh, one of the things that we, um, we do on these buildings is we make sure we hold the rooftop equipment. All of the HPAC equipment will be on the roof of the building, and we hold it in one column bay from the perimeter and given the height of these buildings with a small pair pit wall, and those units setback, you know, 50 feet from the edge of the building, the parapet wall, effectively screens, the rooftop units from the adjacent roadway. So they're not visible from the road. Um, uh, and, and one of the, one of the other comments in the review letters was, uh, to testify testimony, whether it covers less than 5% of the roof, and it will be significantly less than 5% of the roof. And none of the units will be more than, uh, 12 feet tall. And probably the biggest units will be about half of that height, probably around six, uh, six feet tall at the most.  
Speaker 12    01:00:56    So we, we should conform with the ordinance in, in every way, as far as screening rooftop units. Um, the elevation drawing shows assigned doesn't show on the rendering, but it's basically right above the canopy above the, uh, the entry doors. Um, you can see, uh, on the north elevation, there's some dimension lines it's kind of small, but it's right above that canopy. We don't know what the sign looks like, of course until, uh, uh, till a tenant comes along. But, um, it's 150 square feet of proposed signage area, and that's the maximum allowable. And, uh, and the actual tenant sign will vary from what the ordinance requirements are. So, um, the ordinance allows to, there's really no place to put a second sign on this building. If we put it around the corner, it really wouldn't be visible from the road anyway. So, um, I think one sign is the only will be the only one that's effective on this building. And that's a nutshell of the building. I'd be happy to answer questions,  
Speaker 6     01:02:03    Larry, I just have one question for you as a followup. And I think that, um, Brian May have said this, but I want to touch on that. We're proposing 13 loading docks,  
Speaker 12    01:02:12    Correct? Correct. Okay.  
Speaker 6     01:02:17    Um, Madam sheriff, the members of the board have any additional questions.  
Speaker 2     01:02:21    Are there any questions from the board at this time of this business hearing? No response. I would like to ask if we can open it to the public. Is there anyone requesting to be heard at this time?  
Speaker 3     01:02:42    I do not see anyone. Madam chair.  
Speaker 2     01:02:45    All right. In that case, it's close to the public back to you, Mr. Anton.  
Speaker 6     01:02:50    Thank you. Madam sheriff, our final witnesses, Steve Dean will be our traffic engineer. Paul, are you on? Yes.  
Speaker 13    01:02:57    Can you hear me?  
Speaker 2     01:02:59    Yes, I can say great. Ms. Sanders or someone or Mr. Barlow was swearing then.  
Speaker 4     01:03:06    Sure. Ms. Saunders, are you un-muted now she did put a message in the room that she got muted.  
Speaker 3     01:03:14    Yeah, I saw it. Doesn't say she's on mute, so I don't know what's going on.  
Speaker 4     01:03:18    Okay. Um, uh, sir. Oh, there you are. You raise your right hand.  
Speaker 2     01:03:26    Yeah, she is.  
Speaker 5     01:03:28    Okay. Can you please raise your right here? Yes. Do you swear that the testimony about to give way to truth and nothing but the  
Speaker 13    01:03:35    Truth? I do.  
Speaker 5     01:03:37    Can you please state and spell your name for  
Speaker 13    01:03:39    Sure? My name is Paul going. The last name is G O I N J. Just like the word going. Okay.  
Speaker 5     01:03:45    Thank you.  
Speaker 13    01:03:46    Thanks  
Speaker 6     01:03:48    If I may. Madam chair. Thank you, Paul. Uh, give the, uh, members of the board benefit of your credentials, your professional credentials and your educational credential.  
Speaker 13    01:03:57    Sure. I'm a 1993 graduate of the Cooper union union for the advancement of science and art where Hello.  
Speaker 6     01:04:09    And we can hear you, someone is just as muted.  
Speaker 3     01:04:12    Yeah, I can't see everybody for a second, please.  
Speaker 2     01:04:17    Could you mute yourself now? It wasn't Carol.  
Speaker 4     01:04:20    It wasn't mine. Can you share your screen?  
Speaker 3     01:04:23    Yeah, I can't see everybody with the shoe. Okay. Go around and you people.  
Speaker 6     01:04:29    So Paul, if you can continue to tell us, uh, your credentials, if you want.  
Speaker 13    01:04:33    I earned a bachelor of engineering degree in civil engineering from Cooper union in 1993. Uh, since that time I've been working as a crappy transportation engineer, I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey, as well as, uh, several other states. And I have been accepted as traffic expert in the town of Piscataway, as well as other municipalities across the state of New Jersey.  
Speaker 2     01:05:01    Yes, he has accepted as a traffic expert.  
Speaker 6     01:05:05    Thank you, Paul. You've had an opportunity to look through the, uh, the plans itself and the application here, the testimony that we provided this evening, is that correct? Correct. And based on your expertise, the area as a traffic engineer, do you have an opinion as to number one, the location of this site, number two, the traffic impact that it would have, and finally, number three, uh, Vanessa several times, but to parking and onsite circulation.  
Speaker 13    01:05:34    Sure. Um, starting with the location that the sites on duke road, that's a, that's a short, uh, cul-de-sac road. We're at the cul-de-sac end of it. And that, that comes off a circle pride north to the west circle bribe, north intersects that are crafted signal with positive town road. And of course from posse town, you can, you can get down to I 2 87 Feb bounty southbound on, on 2 87. So the, the site is within, uh, an industrial park or business park. Uh it's it's therefore, in my opinion, an appropriate location for the site and the site has, has great access to the interstate system. So that's, uh, that's a second, uh, piece where that makes it a great location for this type of use.  
Speaker 13    01:06:22    Um, then in terms of traffic, we, I calculated the amount of trips that would be, would be generated by the site and to do that, I used a reference that traffic engineers, uh, generations published by being student transportation engineers, or the ITE. And, uh, it has trip data for all kinds of land uses, including warehouses. And one thing I want to point out is that for a warehouse use within the it data, they don't break out the office portion of a warehouse, separate from the warehouse in use. Um, all warehouses have some amount of office space associated with them. So that, that use is inherent within the warehouse and use for the ITV. So using the data from the ITE, the latest version is the 10th edition published in 2017. Uh, we calculated that this site would generate 35 weekday morning, peak hour trips. That's total preps entering and exiting 39, a weekday midday, peak hour trips and 37 weekday evening peak hour trips.  
Speaker 13    01:07:34    So basically it's, it's less than one trip entering or exiting every one and a half minutes. It's what we call low traffic generator. Um, an increase of less than 100 trips is not considered significant by the ITE or N J, D or T. So it can be concluded on that basis that the practice would not have an impact on traffic moving on to parking. Uh, there are 151 stalls required for the warehouse component of the use. That's, that's a rate of one per 500 square feet. There's 15 stalls required for the office component, which is at a rate of one per 200 square feet. So total, total of 166 that's as has already been stated and testified to, uh, so looking at the parking demand for this use, I use another reference, which is from the same, the same group, the  Institute of transportation engineers, it's called parking generation.  
Speaker 13    01:08:38    Uh, the latest fifth edition came out in 2019 and for warehouse and similar to, um, traffic generation for warehousing, the, the warehousing use includes the office. Um, so the average peak demand rate for warehousing is 0.0 0.39 stalls per thousand square feet, which is one stall per 2,564 square feet. So that's, that's, um, 20% of the, the town rate, um, at that rate, the site demand would be 31 parking stalls, and we propose 37. So the demand for 31 would be accommodated as, as Ken testified, uh, different warehouses, different tenants and different users may have different ratios of employees, um, to, to warehouse space. Uh, and this, this site would, would still satisfy the average warehouse.  
Speaker 6     01:09:42    And is that earlier and, um, uh, also in it, there would be some sort of self discrimination in terms of, uh, potential tenants saying, you know, this site just isn't going to work for us because we need more parking. So they, they would, uh, sort of filter themselves out of the running for this site, if  
Speaker 13    01:10:02    Or more is that correct? Yeah. Some tenants use, um, more automation within the building and they, and they have fewer employees.  
Speaker 6     01:10:10    Okay. And, uh, council, woman, Kay hill had, uh, brought up a number of tenants that might come here, even if there were two tenants. Would that change your opinion as to whether the parking would be sufficient to meet the demand?  
Speaker 13    01:10:26    That that wouldn't change my opinion, but it's based on the square number of Sparky. So whether it's two tenants or one tenant, um, that the same would, would apply  
Speaker 6     01:10:39    Madam chair. Um, I have no other questions for Mr. Goin. If the board members have any questions,  
Speaker 4     01:10:47    The board members have any questions of this witness at this time manager. I just had one question for Mr. Rifle say, Carla, is the applicant willing to work with the municipalities, um, traffic professionals at Dolan and Dean, if they have any concerns, if the board were to act favorably upon the application,  
Speaker 6     01:11:10    Uh, that would be our ongoing obligation and now we would not have a problem working. Okay. Thank  
Speaker 2     01:11:14    You. Any other questions from Boardman? It's probably. Would you ask, um, I'd like to open it up to the public now to question this witness.  
Speaker 3     01:11:28    Um, no one is raising their hands, Madam chair,  
Speaker 2     01:11:31    Therefore it's close to the public. Mr. Righto, I turn it over to you.  
Speaker 6     01:11:37    Uh, Madam chair, members of the board that concludes our presentation for this evening. I'm not going to be labor the, uh, the application itself. Uh, you've heard it. I believe that we put on the proofs that are necessary most important. Okay. That we'll continue to work with the professional staff in perfecting the application or the, the site plan itself. Uh, when we get to actual construction phase, uh, to ask for it, to look on this application favorably, um, uh, with the conditions, obviously the professional staff have indicated through necessary.  
Speaker 2     01:12:11    Thank you. Uh, all the information is in, do I have, um, a motion from the board as to whether they be at this applicant,  
Speaker 10    01:12:25    Madam chair, this has counsel and then Cahill. Um, I'd make a motion that this board consider approving this application based upon, um, the applicants, um, willingness to work with the township for, um, all of the items mentioned in the staff report, uh, the concerns that were brought forth tonight, specifically a security gate, just looking into that, um, the additional trees, uh, making sure that's taken into consideration on near the parking. Um, and I don't know Mr. Barlow, is there any other specifics we need to add onto this motion?  
Speaker 4     01:13:04    Pretty, uh, specifically laid out in the borough professionals reports, which the applicant has agreed to comply with. So I think that would take into account the professional's concerns, counseling.  
Speaker 10    01:13:20    Okay. That's my offer then?  
Speaker 2     01:13:27    Yes,  
Speaker 11    01:13:29    I'll second that motion science with all our staff report.  
Speaker 2     01:13:39    Um, thank you. Do I have, can I have a roll call? Madame buckling,  
Speaker 3     01:13:45    Councilman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Ms. Saunders, Reverend Kenney. Mr. Espinosa. I try now Dennis.  
Speaker 2     01:14:09    It says he's muted.  
Speaker 3     01:14:11    Yeah, I know. I asked you a few times already. I don't know. You asked them  
Speaker 2     01:14:26    To  
Speaker 3     01:14:26    Call me. Yes, I did a manager. Yes. Thank you. Okay.  
Speaker 2     01:14:34    Thank you. Thank you. If the application has been approved. Thank you. Thank the board. Thank you. Good night, everyone. Um, item number 10, 20 PB, 10 slash 11 V sent us corporation.  
Speaker 4     01:14:58    I believe Mr. Valenti is on behalf of the applicant various  
Speaker 14    01:15:05    Good evening. Thank you. I was going to say coming out, but I gotta stay home. It's nice to not have a mess. Uh, my name is lucky. I'm a partner at  representing since house corporation. I have with me this evening. Uh, Mike Long was a former, uh, PC and Keller testify on behalf of the application. I also have with me, uh, available, uh, Pete shepherds, general manager percentiles corporation, the arrives. Um, I would like to ask the board that it's received the evidence of, uh, notices.  
Speaker 4     01:15:52    Yes, we've received the evidence of the notice in the affidavits and the board has jurisdiction.  
Speaker 14    01:15:58    Um, this application is for preliminary and final major site plan approval for an accessory structure. That was the position this morning. The application requires pointing north setbacks, property, front yards. Um,  
Speaker 14    01:16:27    Um, the application has been heading for a period of time. It's even having a period of time and it's evolved over, uh, over that time first to, uh, include an addition, uh, to the principle structure and accommodate operations, potential operators, as well as expanded parking facilities. Um, it then was, has retracted, um, or contract that I should say, um, as the impact of the pandemic became obvious, uh, last, last summer. Um, so that we're now asking more of the letter request to modified application. If you only go to preliminary approval for a site plan approval or the issue and we additional partners. Um, the, uh, what I would ask to share is if I made a whole, uh,  
Speaker 4     01:17:27    With Mr. Valenti before you do that. So just so the board's aware, you're only seeking preliminary site plan for the addition and the parking, correct? That's correct. And then eventually depending on the timeframes involved, yeah, it will be coming back before the board at a later time for final approval As to those two. Okay.  
Speaker 15    01:17:55    Mr. Valenti, you may call,  
Speaker 14    01:17:58    Um, hi, uh, she, you, you're working on second.  
Speaker 5     01:18:08    Um, Michael K, please raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give the truth and nothing but the truth?  
Speaker 15    01:18:15    Yes, it will be my Lonza pharma. That's L a N Z a F a M a. I'm a licensed professional engineer land, surveyor and planner licensed in the state of New Jersey. I'm a principal with the firm of Casey and Keller Inc. 2 58 main street, Melbourne, New Jersey. Uh, I've testified before this board on numerous occasions, both as an engineer and a planner. Thank you, Mr. Linda Fenn is acceptable.  
Speaker 14    01:18:50    Um, so, uh, can you just start in with a, uh, a description of the application?  
Speaker 15    01:18:58    Certainly. Um, the, uh, I'd like to share my screen, I guess I have permission to do that, correct? Yes. Everyday when I've put up, um, as an exhibit, uh, we would have to mark this as a one, since it was not part of, uh, the initial submission, I'm going to have two exhibits. Uh, one is the aerial photo giving you a sense of the neighborhood and the area surrounding the property. And the second, which we could mark as a two is a colorized rendering of the site plan that was submitted as part of the application. Um, what you see on exhibit a one is a, an aerial image of the subject property, which is 51 new England avenue. It's a tax lot, two and block 47 0 1. And it is located in the ally five zone. It's a five acre parcel, uh, fronting on new England avenue.  
Speaker 15    01:20:04    As you could see on the south side of the property is to the left. Um, on the north side of the property is old new Brunswick road. And then we have, uh, route 2 87 also fronting on portion of the property. And you could see the lawn has an extremely unusual lot configuration narrowing as it goes towards new England avenue. Um, uh, this property was created as part as the Centennial industrial park, which my firm did back in the 1960s, excuse me. Um, and this building was built, um, sometime in the seventies, uh, back in the, um, late eighties, 89 to be exact Cintas, purchased the building and had an addition placed, uh, on the building got approval by the board and the construction of parking, uh, associated parking surrounding the building. Uh, there are, um, commercial uses completely surrounding the property and mixture of warehouse and office uses going on to, um, the site plan exhibit.  
Speaker 15    01:21:32    Here we go. This is the site rendering, uh, of the site plan showing the existing facility in a light tan colors, the existing building, um, the items that are subject of this application this evening are the outdoor storage area that was constructed without the benefit of approval by this board, excuse me. And it was an after the fact application, um, the, uh, Cintas did not realize that they needed to secure site plan approval for that use. And the purpose of that use is to provide a storage area away from the building for, uh, soil, uh, laundry materials that come into the building that could potentially have either toxins or some pollutant on them, or be, um, it could possibly, uh, have flammables on them. So they have to be stored away from the building. So that's the reason we couldn't put the, uh, outdoor storage area immediately adjacent to the building.  
Speaker 15    01:22:49    So the required setback for an extensor restructure is 100 feet. The structure is 75.02 feet from new England avenue. Um, so we're looking for a 25 foot variance on the setback. The enclosure is approximately 987 square feet. It's cut into the slope, the topography from old new Brunswick road down to the parking area. It's about a 10 foot grade differential. So there's retaining walls that were constructed to notch this, and it does have a roof and we are proposing an evergreen screen, uh, around the unit. And we're also proposing gates solid gates that would hide the material, uh, in, in the structure.  
Speaker 15    01:23:51    So the variants in my mind, this is a C1 variance that could be granted, uh, based upon the fact that, um, we have certain practical difficulties in developing the site due to its configuration due to the fact that it has frontage on three roadways, that we have a lawfully existing building on the site and the need to separate the enclosure from the building. So I don't see any significant impact, uh, to the public good. The negative criteria is met because as I said, it's low in the topography. It's hidden from the roadway. It'll be screened with, uh, evergreen plantings, uh, immediately around the structure. So I believe this could be granted under the C1 criteria of the municipal land use law. Then it advances, uh, certain elements of the ML UL by, uh, providing appropriate location for a variety of uses both commercial and residential in this case, uh, it allows Cintas to safely function, uh, at this facility, uh, in addition to, uh, the outdoor storage structure and what Mr.  
Speaker 15    01:25:15    Valenti was, uh, alluding to is there is a, uh, an addition that is proposed. This is not been constructed yet. It is an 1,140 square foot addition that would be used for maintenance purposes within the building. And in addition, um, we were proposing to expand the parking area from an existing parking, uh, space count of 149 spaces to 178 to do that. We would be adding about 9,700 square feet of new and pervious area to mitigate that we are proposing an underground detention system that would control the runoff from the site so that the peak runoff rates are maintained.  
Speaker 15    01:26:17    Landscaping is proposed throughout the PO the new parking area, as well as, um, appropriate lighting. There'll be led light fixtures, appropriately screened and directed downward. So what we're asking for this evening is that this parking area and the associated lighting and landscaping, obviously as well as this building be deferred, in other words, grant us preliminary approval. And if the economy comes back, as we all hope it will Cintas would come back for final approval at that time. Um, there are an existing, there are a number of existing non-conforming conditions that are not being exacerbated by the construction activities proposed. Um, the existing building, um, has, uh, a setback of side yard setback of less than 50 feet, 49.7, nine feet. There's an accessory structure that was built, um, some time ago on the Northeast corner of the building. That should also be 50 feet from the sideline. It's 35.61 feet. The building there, excuse me, the lot itself. Um, if, if you look at the lot with as measured along new England avenue, we are less than the 300 feet required. We're approximately 217, but if you look at the lot with as measured from all new Brunswick road, we're well over the 300 feet required.  
Speaker 15    01:28:08    In addition as part of the circulation pattern, the driveway on the east side comes in is a one-way driveway. And we've posted one way a site sometime ago. And apparently there's a section in the ordinance 21 dash 1203 0.4, that requires directional signs be 10 feet from the property line. We are only five feet from the property line, so we would need that variance as well. So again, all of these variances that we just enumerated are existing conditions, not being exacerbated by the proposals before you. So I believe they could be granted without substantial detriment to the public. Good. Now, can I just ask a quick  
Speaker 4     01:29:01    Question, the preexisting nonconformities that you just outlined what wouldn't they have been addressed? I think you said back when the addition was put on  
Speaker 15    01:29:17    And 1989, that was, that was my feeling, but the designer had identified him. So just, you know, just to be super cautious, we had identified them, noticed for them and have explained.  
Speaker 4     01:29:32    Okay. But I assume the building hasn't moved since when it was constructed, so that's correct. Okay. Okay. So the only quote unquote new variance is for sensory structure at 75.02 feet when you need to be a hundred, correct?  
Speaker 15    01:29:53    Correct. Now, just, just to be clear in deferring the parking parking expansion that we're proposing, let's take a quick look at the zoning table. Um, and the parking analysis under your current ordinance, we're required to have a sub 178 parking spaces. We currently have 149 with the expansion. We would be compliant. So we're asking for preliminary approval to expand, to become compliant, but at this time due to the economics of it, we don't want to put that in right now. So the 149 spaces is basically the status quo. This is what exists at the site. Now it's been functioning very well since 1989. And we would ask that the board acknowledged the fact that we could continue this existing non-conforming condition. And then at such time that we came back for final approval, that variance would basically go away.  
Speaker 16    01:31:07    Um, Mr. Lanza farm, I'm sorry, this is Dawn Corcoran. How are you? Do you have any, I know in the staff report, there was a comment regarding trucks on the site and perhaps the, um, lack of area for these trucks to be parked. Is that, is that an, I know you said that the site seems to be working and there's no issue, however, um, based on an inspection, it does. In fact, seeing that there may be an issue with the truck parking, um,  
Speaker 15    01:31:41    Part of the Cintas operation, as you are aware is they, they deliver uniforms to different facilities. They laundry them, and then they, they collect them and then distribute them back. So there is a need for these, um, step type vans and kind of like panel trucks, similar to ups type trucks to be available at the site to execute their, their business. Um, the workers as they come in, we'll pull the truck out, park their vehicle, and then move on. I know that there is some congestion, um, within the, the site circulation, as it exists. However, um, we believe that it could continue there, there has been a reduction, um, in the number of shifts, they were working three shifts. I believe they're ground to two as a result of the pandemic. So there's somewhat of a lesser demand right now for that parking. And as they re mobilized and we all come out of this pandemic, I believe there'll be back for that approval. That final approval to install those parking space is to provide adequate parking for the facility. I don't know if that directly addresses your question, but yeah,  
Speaker 16    01:33:07    It does. And as you had indicated earlier, this has been, this application has been sitting around for some time, um, may of, I believe it may have even been filed prior to around the time of the pandemic. So yes, it does answer my question. You know, now that you're saying it's been reduced to two shifts and so forth. Um, okay. Yeah. Thank you.  
Speaker 15    01:33:32    Let me just switch back to the site plan. So, so to, to summarize, besides the variance for the setback to the accessory structure, I think in our preliminary approval for the addition and the expanded parking, I think there has to be some acknowledgement by the board that the 149 spaces at this time are, are acceptable or adequate. Um, and that should be acknowledged. There was one other, I forgot to mention. There was one other existing non-conforming condition, and that's our loading bays. We have sufficient number of loading bays, but it's a design waiver. Basically the ordinance requires that the, that the loading bays be 50 feet deep, we're about 36 feet. Deep is the way they're currently configured. And that's because of the types of trucks we use. So we, we also technically need that design waiver as well.  
Speaker 4     01:34:43    There's two lines of, so besides the existing structure that needs the variance, what exactly is the other addition for  
Speaker 15    01:34:54    The, the other addition is for, um, uh, operations within the building. They want to centralize their maintenance staff into a single location, and they want to use, uh, this area of, of this addition, uh, to do that. Um, the addition is compliant as to its location and size, so there'll be no variants associated with that.  
Speaker 16    01:35:22    Gotcha. Okay.  
Speaker 15    01:35:27    So to summarize again, um, we've, we've addressed the lighting, the landscaping, there's all, um, uh, really a minimal amount of disturbance in that, uh, Northwest corner of the site to expand the parking in the future. Um, it, it will be a hairpin striped. We will comply with all of the review memos that we received, uh, from the various, uh, departments, um, including CME as well as, um, Mr. Carly and Mr. ,  
Speaker 16    01:36:01    Um, Ms. Mr. Lanza pharma, if I may go on, and again, um, this, this morning, or this afternoon, there was a report issued by Joe Herrera, supervisor engineering with regard to the existing sidewalk log located along old new Brunswick road. Um, TNM and associates had been working on a road improvement project, um, along that stretch of old new Brunswick road. And what it appears is that the existing sidewalk will not be able to remain in the, in that location due to the elevation of the roadway. So, um, the T the town is asking that the applicant install the sidewalk in conformance with the TNM roadway.  
Speaker 15    01:36:52    It's, it's not going to be installed as part of roadway improvements. There's not, there's not a, a plan in the TNM design to replace the existing sidewalk.  
Speaker 16    01:37:07    Will you eat the applicant is before us tonight. So the, the,  
Speaker 15    01:37:12    You want it to be clear, is it already designed? And you're just asking us to  
Speaker 16    01:37:17    The w plans are completed, um, there, I'm sorry.  
Speaker 15    01:37:22    So the plans are completed  
Speaker 16    01:37:24    Near completion.  
Speaker 15    01:37:25    Okay. I understand. And then we are showing new sidewalk along new England avenue as well.  
Speaker 16    01:37:35    I did see that. And again, I do apologize this report came out today. Um, I just wanted to be sure that you saw it and to see if the applicant could comply with that report.  
Speaker 15    01:37:47    Uh, another point of clarification that I just want to get on the record. I know Mr. Valenti has sent him a letter, apparently Cintas Corp. The, the, the head office, um, is, is concerned about the dedication of this 40 foot easement along, uh, 2 87. And then we match that that'd be deferred and, um, that, um, it not be dedicated at this time and pulled off of the application.  
Speaker 4     01:38:17    Well, that's number three of Mr. Hinter Steen's report. And we are in receipt of the letter, um, with the exception of that item, it sounds to me, and I just want to confirm the applicant will comply with the other recommendations of the DNR report of 1 27 21, the CME report of 1 26 21, the hinder steam report with the exception of number 3rd of January 12th, 2021. And Mr. Herrera's a memorandum of May 12th, 2021, but excising, the one you raised Mr. Lonza  
Speaker 15    01:38:56    Fama that that's my understanding.  
Speaker 16    01:38:59    And, and Mr. Barlow, if I may, um, with regard to Mr. Herrera's report, we do in fact, need a temporary construction easement along old new Brunswick road.  
Speaker 15    01:39:10    Okay. Okay, Mr.  
Speaker 4     01:39:12    I assume that's acceptable, but temporary,  
Speaker 14    01:39:19    I don't think I've seen that, um, position to do that.  
Speaker 15    01:39:26    Um, Dawn, would you be able to share, uh, in any way that the extent of the easement that they need?  
Speaker 16    01:39:34    Um, I do not have that. I do. I'm not in the office. Um, we do have the plan though. Mr. Lands of pharma that we can share with you tomorrow. I can ask Mr. Herrera to send you that TNM plan. Okay. Thank  
Speaker 15    01:39:47    You. This is just a temporary easement. It's not a permanent,  
Speaker 16    01:39:51    Correct. It's a temporary construction, isn't it?  
Speaker 15    01:39:52    Yeah. So, Paul, I don't see that as an issue And I,  
Speaker 14    01:40:05    I may, um, can I ask you to walk through, again, the exceptions to the three professional reports that were, or the exceptions to what, uh, symptoms is being asked to implement?  
Speaker 4     01:40:23    Hold on, huh? I've lost. I went to look for something else on my screen and I've lost everybody else. Hold on. All right. There we go. The reports, the professional reports of the CME report of 1 26 21,  
Speaker 15    01:40:40    Correct.  
Speaker 4     01:40:42    And the DNR report of 1 27 21. It's Mr. Franklin and Mr. Lonza fam I believe testified that there were no issues with complying with two reports, correct?  
Speaker 15    01:40:55    That's correct. There  
Speaker 4     01:40:56    Is the, um, hinder scene report of January 12th, 2021, and indicated that the applicant would comply with all of them with the exception of number three, which is the easement that your letter of April 19th, 2021 address, correct. Salons of Fama. That's correct. And then finally, the Herrera memorandum of May 12th, 2021, um, with regards to the sidewalk on old the Brunswick road.  
Speaker 15    01:41:32    I'm not sure  
Speaker 14    01:41:35    We have seen this.  
Speaker 15    01:41:38    We have this point.  
Speaker 4     01:41:41    And, and in addition, we just asked for a temporary construction easement also, but again, it's a temporary construction easement,  
Speaker 15    01:41:49    Correct.  
Speaker 14    01:41:50    Okay. So Mike, if I may, um, w we're, um, moving quickly, but I understand why, uh, the sidewalk, do we have an idea of the extent of problems there?  
Speaker 15    01:42:07    Yeah. The sidewalk, it basically runs along our frontage. Um, we're looking at about two, uh, about 350 feet, about 400 feet of concrete sidewalk. Uh, I assume it's going to be four feet wide, um, so that we would have to absorb that cost.  
Speaker 14    01:42:32    I understand  a report also indicates I don't know whether it's a potential or actual retaining walls as well. Let me just have a sense of store.  
Speaker 15    01:42:45    No, I, I think what if I refer to Mr. Herrera, as he says, um, that we shoot, we need to look at the TNM plan. Uh, I don't think, and, uh, the board can correct me if I'm wrong there. They're asking us to pay for the sidewalk, not for retaining walls and, and guide rails. Is that correct? Uh, Dawn,  
Speaker 14    01:43:13    That's a concern with it. Donuts. Great concern to me.  
Speaker 15    01:43:22    Um, in case the elevation sidewalk, including construction of any retaining walls. Um, we, in other words, we, we don't know what extent you're, you're asking us to, um, to get involved. Is it, are we just paying for the sidewalk or are we,  
Speaker 17    01:43:41    Can I, can I jump in and cut this short? You're going to pay for it either way, either through special, this is marijuana either through a special assessment or you do it yourself. My advice is it's going to be cheaper for you to do it because if we're getting involved, you're going to be paying more through a special assessment, so you can pick your poison.  
Speaker 15    01:44:00    Um, well, that's, that's what I was alluding to when I asked Don about the plans. So you're, you're actually looking for us to construct it. In other words, if it's part of the road improvement bid package to does TNM put it out to bid the municipality gets a number from a contractor and you tell us our share is X number of dollars, or you're allowing us to actually implement the plan.  
Speaker 17    01:44:27    That's correct.  
Speaker 15    01:44:28    Okay. So if we implement the plan ourselves, we have the potential of a slightly less cost because we don't have to necessarily do union wage and things of that sort correct mayor. That's what you were alluding to.  
Speaker 17    01:44:45    That's correct. We normally give an option to the companies.  
Speaker 15    01:44:49    Gotcha. Okay. Understood all. Is that a R  
Speaker 14    01:44:54    Yeah, absolutely. That might, all I ask is possibly is that we can work with tem dish. It's not, we're not objecting to the suit in the costs. Um, like to be able to just see what they have proposed in terms of the, the, uh, retaining walls. And it may be an engineering adjustment that reduces the costs and still accomplishes the same thing.  
Speaker 8     01:45:21    I'll get I'll have Mr. Herrera send you those plans tomorrow? No problem.  
Speaker 15    01:45:24    Sure. I can meet with TNM and say, Hey guys, if you did this change or that change, we don't need walls. I think that's where we're going.  
Speaker 8     01:45:42    Is that, uh, everything from your perspective is salons to find in terms of your testimony? Yes,  
Speaker 15    01:45:48    It is Mr. Barlow  
Speaker 14    01:45:51    Very quickly. Um, I think the answers are obvious, but just for the record, um, uh, Mike, can you tell us, uh, whether you're familiar with the township board minutes, the master plan, whether you've read the experts reports that's accurate, that's a tough  
Speaker 8     01:46:13    Madam chair. Uh, are there any other questions, have we, should we open it now to the public? Excuse me, Madam chair. This is Steve oddly. Um, I see a state. I have a question for Mr. Barlow. Um, it was actually the first I was hearing that they were kind of bifurcating the application from, uh, and splitting the preliminary and final, um, I don't mean to throw a monkey into the wrench, so to speak, um, but, uh, with the storage structure already being built and we want that, and the township I'm sure wants that whole area cleaned up, uh, without final, technically they can't, they can't be doing anything.  
Speaker 15    01:47:11    Well, we, we were asking for final on the outdoor storage area, including the landscaping surrounding it and the improvements to close it off the gate. We're asking for final on that aspect. We're asking for preliminary on the addition and the expanded parking.  
Speaker 8     01:47:30    Okay. Thank you. I, I did not, I did not hear that part of it that I can see  
Speaker 4     01:47:37    Neither. So the resolution wasn't going to potentially say any of that, so, okay. Thank you for clarifying.  
Speaker 17    01:47:48    I would like to put a time limit on when they have to come back in like say three years, cause I don't want this going on forever and ever, because we've had other applicants before this board that's come back 15 years later only to be forced in. So I'm looking for a three-year timeframe where they have to come back before the board for final on everything else  
Speaker 4     01:48:14    Understood mayor that the statute, I believe hauls for a three year timeframe and then the applicant can apply for two, one year extensions. So there is a finite amount of time. It won't be 15 years and that's by statute  
Speaker 10    01:48:39    Madam chair. This is Councilman kale. So just thank you, Madam chair, chairman, uh, just to, just to, to, to put it to bed and to make sure is that with this bifurcated application we're taking care of that, uh, structure that was built without the variance approvals. Is that correct?  
Speaker 15    01:49:06    That is correct.  
Speaker 10    01:49:07    Okay. So we'll approve that piece based upon what was already done. I mean, we may, we may not, but that is what's being done in terms of final, the preliminary on the other you'll come, the, the applicant will come back for final on that, uh, by that three-year mark, is that what we're saying here?  
Speaker 15    01:49:30    That's correct. That, that we, we would hope that in three years, we're all out of this, uh, downturn in the economy due to the pandemic emic and they'll be back up to their full operations and would then have the funds to expand the building and put the new parking in  
Speaker 2     01:49:57    Any other questions or concerns, details we need to iron out. Okay.  
Speaker 14    01:50:06    The, um, I just want to make sure, um, it was the, this is a question for tomorrow. Um, I think it's item three in the interesting report that we're, that's being accepted for the time being on, on the, uh, correct. And I referenced job number three.  
Speaker 2     01:50:44    Well, I think it's time for us to open it to the public if there is no more board questions this specifically,  
Speaker 14    01:50:55    I do not see anyone. Madam chair.  
Speaker 2     01:50:58    All right. Close to the public. Mr. Gottlieb.  
Speaker 8     01:51:02    Yes. Just one final item that, um, while it's not in my, uh, report, um, with the, uh, expansion of the, uh, the parking area later on, uh, the applicant should, uh, install the required electric, uh, charging stations that are required by the ordinance.  
Speaker 2     01:51:36    It still ends up them.  
Speaker 15    01:51:38    Um, I'd have to defer to my, my client on that one. Um, when we, I believe when we originally submitted back in, I think it was 2019, we submitted, um, I don't, I don't think that ordinance was in place. Um, but, um, you know, knowing how things are progressing with electric cars, it probably would be prudent for my client to do so, but I have to check with him. Uh, Paul, would you be able to reach Pete, get an answer on that?  
Speaker 14    01:52:06    Yeah, but, uh, actually, um, yes.  
Speaker 17    01:52:17    Uh, I'll tell you what we'll do. This is mayor Walla. We'll give you a two year timeframe to install whatever the ordinance is for approval.  
Speaker 16    01:52:27    And this is Dawn Corcoran, just so, um, just so you're aware, we do require one charging station for every 50 parking spaces, just so you know what you're looking at.  
Speaker 15    01:52:38    So we're looking at about three or four charging stations  
Speaker 14    01:52:42    And Mr. Mayor, the clarification for the awkward is that have two years from the date of the approval of the parking expansion, that installs there's charging stations.  
Speaker 17    01:52:56    Well, I'm talking about what you're getting approval for right now. I'm not talking about what you're going to come back in at a later date.  
Speaker 2     01:53:09    Okay. Um, uh, board, are we ready to proceed to emotion?  
Speaker 4     01:53:17    Just to be clear, there was nobody from the public lore. Correct. Okay.  
Speaker 14    01:53:23    And I'm sorry, Madam chair. The answer to that question is yes. We, we will, uh, uh, exceed to the mayor's request or requests on charging stations.  
Speaker 2     01:53:37    Okay. There's a lot of details. We need a motion. That's going to incorporate all the details of this discussion. Can we get a motion?  
Speaker 17    01:53:55    I make a suggestion. Have Mr. BARR, some board member make the motion had Mr. Parlo read off all the, uh, things to make it a little easier for everybody  
Speaker 16    01:54:07    Matt and share this is Dawn co-worker and I'll make that motion.  
Speaker 4     01:54:11    Okay. For approval of the application for preliminary and final, uh, for the built accessory structure, including the variance for side yard, setback, and preliminary approval for the parking lot. And prospective addition, uh, complying with all of the staff reports as previously cited with the exception of Mr. Hector, Steen's January 12th, 2021 report number three, that's the exception. The applicant also agreed to comply with the electric vehicle charging station ordinance, uh, within two years from the date of approval of this, um, application and resolution adoption that along with the other representations made by the applicant during the hearing that about,  
Speaker 10    01:55:09    Does that include the sidewalks Mr. Raul?  
Speaker 4     01:55:11    Yes. The sidewalks, including the report of Mr. Herrera that was previously cited dated May 12th, 2021. And the applicant will work with T and M with regards to the engineering portion of it, but have agreed to the sidewalks as set forth therein. Thank you, Ms. Davis,  
Speaker 16    01:55:30    And the temporary construction,  
Speaker 4     01:55:32    Temporary construction. We'll get it.  
Speaker 10    01:55:37    And then based upon that, it sounds like we've caught everything Dawn, then I  
Speaker 3     01:55:43    Second it,  
Speaker 2     01:55:45    I believe we did. Can that include the two year limitation suggested by the mayor? Yes. Yes. Okay. Then that's the second. Um, can we have a roll call please?  
Speaker 3     01:55:59    Yes. Woman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Saunders. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Mr. Espinosa. Yes. And Madam chair. Yes.  
Speaker 2     01:56:15    Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, I welcome Item number 12, 19 PB 34 17 Plainfield avenue, LLC. Excuse me, 19 PD 34 and 19 PB 35 V 17 Plainfield avenue, LLC, for pulling preliminary and final site plan.  
Speaker 6     01:56:54    Thank you, Madam chair, uh, RPI tall again, attorney representing the applicant. Uh, my, my opening is going to be a little bit longer than it normally is. Uh, only because I think that this requires a little bit of explanation. We were last before the board in October 14th, where we had testimony that this board heard with regards to, uh, the operations, uh, the proposed improvements, which were essentially just adding a second story to distinct building that is being used as a not-for-profit charitable, uh, facility. The current use is on a single floor bias, a physical therapist who comes in every morning at six 30 and works until five 30 or six o'clock. Uh, on certain days we wanted to the upstairs so that we could accommodate physicians to come in, not at the same time, but when the physical therapist was not there by limiting the physical therapists hours, uh, some concerns were raised by the board.  
Speaker 6     01:58:03    Number one about the massing of the building, because the second story would be built essentially right on top of the first story. So it would go right to the, uh, you know, the massing would create as Mr. Henderson had indicated a sort of a crowding effect to folks on the sidewalk. Uh, the second concern as expressed by the burrs upstairs being used or potential for being used for residential purposes, legally at some point in the future. So we took all of those concerns to heart and we submitted ended architectural plans, an amended site plan that addressed those concerns. So let me go through the, um, the first concern that was raised about, uh, the number of physicians that would be there at any given time, because we're limited on parking is that say to the early, we'd provide a testimony that we'd have a physician, uh, a physical therapist and an assistant that's there every, every day, uh, Monday through Saturday, um, at six 30 in the morning.  
Speaker 6     01:59:08    And we'd go sometimes until six o'clock at night or so. We've agreed to, uh, start, um, any medical, uh, patient visits at 7:00 AM and ceased by 6:00 PM, Monday through Saturday, the seventh days available to us as well, because we are commercials. We're going to agree if the board looks at this application favorably, we would certainly agree voluntarily to a condition of the approval that only Monday through Saturday 7:00 AM, six PA permissible. The second day that was brought up was about the number of physicians or medical practitioners that would be there at a time. We would agree to a condition certainly that there could only be one practitioner with an assistant there at any given time. Now in furthering that the physical therapist will be there Monday through Saturday with an assistant from 7:00 AM to 2:00 PM. And we would have a combination on the other days, but never more than one other physician between three o'clock in the afternoon and six o'clock at night, when we would agree voluntarily to stop seeing patients for either general practitioner or speech therapist or an optician slash optometrist would be there. Uh, the parking being the issue. We would agree to that as a condition of any approval. Uh, if the board was to look on this favorably,  
Speaker 4     02:00:37    Just so I'm clear. So there's always going to be a PT and an assistant there, and then there'll be one doctor and an assistant. So for Portland Metta, no,  
Speaker 6     02:00:48    Um, no, what we're going to do is we're, the physical therapist will be there from 7:00 AM, rather than six 30, and we'll stop seeing patients and we'll leave the facility by two o'clock know between two and three, maybe, you know, they're cleaning up April 4th at three o'clock until six o'clock, just one other practitioner, whether it's a general practitioner, a therapist, optometrist, or optician, those are the folks that we've lined up currently, but we may have other, uh, uh, specialty areas being represented, but it would only be one other physician that will be there at that time. The physical therapist will no longer see patients. And the only physician that will be seeing patients will be, uh, this additional, uh, healthcare practitioner, whether it is a general practice or a speech therapist, optometrist. So you'll never have more than one physician seeing patients there at any given time  
Speaker 4     02:01:47    Doctors won't be there at eight o'clock in the morning when the physical therapist is  
Speaker 6     02:01:51    That's correct. Okay. So we would agree to that as a condition and we would, uh, uh, certainly welcome any inspections and site visits by the township to make sure that we're not violating that because we, we just don't have the, the physical room in terms of parking and inside to really accommodate more than one physician. And we don't plan on doing that in terms of the changes that we've made. Uh, Mr.  latest report is revised on February the fourth. And, uh, Mr. Gottlieb's report is revised as of February. The first we, uh, will agree that we will mill and pave and Stripe the parking lot, the ice plain, when an average, and that's on the site. I know that the staff report is not updated to reflect that. Uh, but it is in fact on the plan I have, uh, her bladder who's here. If you take your,  
Speaker 4     02:02:48    And then you cut out, I didn't hear the, I heard milling and striping  
Speaker 6     02:02:53    Milling and striping the site plan, Mr.  report indicated that, uh, the site plan to show the average light illumination on the site plans that were made it actually to show that and the ladder wall to amended the admitted it wishes to hear from him. Uh, but I think those, those have been included in the plans, um, the handicap ramp, um, Mr. Interesting indicated does not comply to the ADA and needs to comply. We will comply with the ADA. So we'll meet that condition. And finally, the sidewalk that is in front of the handicap spaces need wide. Uh, and we agree that we would have to do that to accommodate the ADA ramp. So the ADA, uh, so all of the conditions that Mr  has brought up in this report as being still open items have either been addressed or will be addressed by way of the revised plans that will be submitted, uh, as part of resolution compliance, Mr.   
Speaker 6     02:03:58    steams also indicated that a county approval letter or county letter needs to be provided. And this was 2021 report. I believe that there was a 2019, uh, exemption letter that was provided by the county. So that's still operative here. I think we've met all the conditions of Mr. Hinter Steen's report. Now on the interior, I'd like to call Mr. DRUGA recall him. He did testify before he's our architect to just go through very quickly, some of the changes that he's made, but to highlight the changes that he's made. So, uh, the board members are aware of it in relation to the concerns that they had back in October. One of the concerns, the overriding concern was that the facility could be easily accommodating to folks living there. So we've eliminated the shower that was shown there and we've reduced size of the room. So it's the same.  
Speaker 6     02:04:49    It is just a bathroom. A shower can not fit in there at all. Uh, we've eliminated the closets in the upstairs offices. We've pushed back the second floor. So it's off the street and thereby reduced the massing. And we've also reduced the size of the conference room. And overall, the second floor, uh, Floria has been reduced. Now we will agree to a voluntary condition on top of that, that to a deed restriction, that there will be no residential use of this property unless the zone permits it. And we come back to the board and ask for the board's permission that should, uh, procreate assurances to the board. Now this the commercial zone. So we can't have residential there. So if it's occurring, if it does occur, which it shouldn't, but if it does, it would be illegal. It's not permitted right now, but we would certainly agree to a deed restriction. It says, even if it is permitted, we'll come back to the brewer. Uh, Madam chair, if I can call, uh, Mr. DRUGA to provide additional testimony.  
Speaker 2     02:05:52    Yes. You can do that, Mr. Droga.  
Speaker 18    02:05:56    Yes.  
Speaker 2     02:05:58    Um, you will be sworn in again, uh, for the night.  
Speaker 18    02:06:03    Okay. Um, can you please raise your right hand? Okay. Do you swear that the testimony about to give we the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, Mr. .  
Speaker 6     02:06:14    Thanks, Steve. Here heard my summary. Uh, first I want to insert in wholesale fashion. Anything that I said that was inaccurate?  
Speaker 18    02:06:22    No, actually everything was accurate. Okay. We did more. I did my work well, I'll help reinforce it. Yeah.  
Speaker 6     02:06:32    Uh, reasonably I had to put you on there is because I can't testify. I just want you to endorse what I said, if it was true. And if it's not true, I want you to say, Nope, he's a liar. Here's what it is. Okay.  
Speaker 18    02:06:43    Okay. Based on needing your board's concern, we reduce the size of the second floor and set it back so that it's like 12 and a half feet back from the front of the building. So the front of the building will not have a two story elements. There'll be 12 and a half feet back reduce the size of the officers. We reduced the sizes of meeting room, reduce the bathrooms. So it's just a toilet and a vanity or a sink. And the kitchen that is just a kitchenette and we're normal, like a coffee break area, basically on the second floor, um, that reduces the impact of the two story element on the street. And I think that should help, uh, the concern in that respect. Uh, is there anything else that  
Speaker 6     02:07:33    I think that's it or members, any questions  
Speaker 2     02:07:35    For you? Any questions from the board of Mr. ,  
Speaker 10    02:07:39    Madam chair, its council and Mikael. Thank you. Um, so, um, Mr. Dhruvin just to confirm that reduction in the bathroom and, um, I'm sorry, I'm have a lozenge in my throat. Um, and the, um, sort of the, the reduced, uh, use of that sort of kitchen kitchenette area, that means that there would be, um, no sort of, um, gas line brought up to that area for a stove and potential use. I mean, I just want to confirm, okay, fair enough. Thank you.  
Speaker 18    02:08:26    It's basically just a coffee break room, like a break room, like could have in any office in, within, within the office, within the town or where the offices that are in the town. In fact, my own office, I have the same thing. I have the area bathroom and that's it.  
Speaker 10    02:08:42    Okay. Thank you very much.  
Speaker 2     02:08:43    Any other questions from any other board members,  
Speaker 4     02:08:45    Mr. Idle, just in case the board has concerns about the limited amount of parking, would the applicant agree if the user ownership of the property changes that as a condition of approval, that will, the new owner or use will have to come back before the board so that this board can make sure that any future use, um, has enough parking because you can't park on Plainfield avenue.  
Speaker 6     02:09:17    That's true. And I have spoken to my client who is present and, uh, uh, I'll represent that I've spoken to him and that he has agreed, but I'm going to get him on the record as well, right after Mr. DRUGA and the public event, an opportunity to ask any questions of Mr. Drew. Again,  
Speaker 4     02:09:30    Thank you.  
Speaker 2     02:09:31    Okay. Any other questions from the board then we can open it up to the public if there are any questions, Ms. Buckle.  
Speaker 10    02:09:51    Sorry. I was muted. There's a WM for girl who would like to speak.  
Speaker 19    02:09:55    Yes. Can you hear me?  
Speaker 2     02:09:58    Yes. I can hear you. Would you come for a state, your name and your address, and then, uh, you can pose your question, sir.  
Speaker 19    02:10:04    Yes, I'm. Uh, my name is William Vergara, uh, 16 bound Brook avenue in Paskataway I'm the property directly behind 17 Plainfield avenue.  
Speaker 2     02:10:20    You may present your question.  
Speaker 19    02:10:22    Uh, I was, is this the, I want to make comments about the whole thing in general. Is this the appropriate time?  
Speaker 2     02:10:31    Well, do you have any questions specifically Mr. DRUGA Lee person as divided at this moment at this point in the application? No questions for that individual. I'm sorry. Well then what, perhaps you would like to make a wait until all the witnesses have been, um, presented for this application and you may come back and then make your statement generally then. Yep. That's fine. Thank you, Mr. Uh,  
Speaker 6     02:11:01    Thank you, Madam chair, if I may recall Mr. Harshaw Patel, who's also on the line and had previously testified as the representative for the applicant.  
Speaker 2     02:11:14    Oh, Mr. Patel, can you please raise your right? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth and nothing but the truth? Okay. Thank you. Would you state and spell your name, Mr. Patel, sorry  
Speaker 20    02:11:29    For short Patel. First name H a R S H a L, last name P a T E L.  
Speaker 2     02:11:38    Thank you, sir.  
Speaker 6     02:11:43    Thank you, Marshall. You testified back in October, uh, regarding this application. Do you recall that? And do you recall the concerns that the board members had in terms of number one, the size and mass of the building? Number two, the improvements that needed to be high? It, especially the ADA handicap ramp and number three, the number of, uh, physician practitioners that would be there and the ability to have a residential upstairs or in the building itself to recall those concerns. Now, as a result of those concerns, we've reduced the scope of the upstairs. That's correct. Correct. And we've agreed that we would, uh, uh, be ADA compliant in terms of the ramp, which means it would have to redo that entire ramp in the sidewalk. Correct. And we were gonna redo, we're gonna redo the by milling and paving and striping again, the entire parking field, correct?  
Speaker 6     02:12:40    Yes. And we've also agreed to eliminate certain, uh, accoutrements upstairs so that it would be, I'm not going to say impossible because anyone can do anything, but your goal is not to have people living there, correct? Absolutely very difficult without a shower or any way to bait, no kitchen, no gas line, so forth to, uh, to have anyone living there and you're be managing the property. So you'll make sure that doesn't happen. Correct? Absolutely. Okay. Now on top of that, we've agreed to a couple of voluntary conditions. Number one is a deed restriction that says that, uh, that, uh, it will not be used for residential purposes, even if the zone changes would have to come back to the board. Do you understand that? And do you voluntarily agree to that condition? Absolutely. The second condition that the board may consider, and I'm going to you, if you would voluntarily agree to that, is if there's any change in the use or change in the tenancy, or if you sell the property to the new motors or you would have to come back to this board, you understand? Okay, so you couldn't have another occupant come in there until the board actually had an opportunity to consider that. Yes,  
Speaker 20    02:13:51    We absolutely  
Speaker 6     02:13:52    Understand. Okay. And we have a number of physicians who would like to have a dedicated their time free of cost to providing the charitable care that you would like to provide here and there on the line today, is that correct? Say, okay, now you're going to be managing their schedules. Are you not?  
Speaker 20    02:14:11    Absolutely no practitioner will be there unless I have approved their times to be in that.  
Speaker 6     02:14:17    And the most important part of that is we've agreed Monday through Saturday, correct? Correct. No physician can see patients before 7:00 AM, correct? Correct. No physician or no health care practice and see patients after 6:00 PM, correct? Correct. And you will never have more than one of healthcare practitioner there and an assistant at any given time.  
Speaker 20    02:14:41    Absolutely. That is correct.  
Speaker 6     02:14:45    The board members have any questions for Mr. Patel,  
Speaker 2     02:14:49    Mr. Um, anyone have questions from the board regarding this witness, um, hearing no one will open it to the public for questions from the public on this, to this witness. I don't see anyone. Madam chair. Thank you. Close to the public, Mr. I told you have any other witness  
Speaker 6     02:15:15    We don't, uh, at this we'd asked to, uh, serve, uh, I know that there's a member that would like to make general, so we may have,  
Speaker 2     02:15:25    Okay. We've clarified everything from the board. So we'll, um, have open it up to the public for comments on this application.  
Speaker 4     02:15:39    If you realize you did, you stated your name and your address is 16 bound Brook avenue. If you're going to comment generally about the application you need to be sworn in and then the applicant can address. Is that okay?  
Speaker 19    02:15:55    Yes, that's fine.  
Speaker 4     02:15:56    If you want to raise your right hand and miss you and  
Speaker 5     02:16:01    Oh, hi. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give with the truth and nothing but the truth?  
Speaker 19    02:16:07    Can  
Speaker 5     02:16:08    You please state and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 19    02:16:10    William for Gora F as in Frank, I G U R a 16 bound Brook avenue, Muscat away the property directly behind, uh, 17 Plainfield avenue.  
Speaker 5     02:16:22    Okay, thank you.  
Speaker 19    02:16:27    Um, so my initial comments, I was actually glad to hear about the hours and the days because presently there's activity there at 6:00 AM in the morning, uh, every morning, the, uh, in the parking lot, I get the light, the light shining right through my window. Uh, so you know, that is somewhat good news. Just, I want to give you an idea, some of the impacts on this medical practice, since it's been there as compared to the prior medical practice of Dr. Lisa Herbert, who was, uh, you know, initially went there with, uh, an obtain variances years ago. Uh, I'd been the owner of the property since 1999 here. So I've been through, you know, that first variance as well. Uh, so basically, uh, in relation to that my property, uh, and in the variance, it says, you know, uh, the parking lot is supposed to be 50 feet.  
Speaker 19    02:17:25    Uh, uh, it can be no less than 50 feet from the neighboring property. Uh, and that's definitely true. And it's like, it's, uh, uh, 10 to 15 feet from my property where this, uh, parking lot starts. Now, there was supposed to be a privacy wall originally, uh, of arborvitaes around there, uh, all along that that would protect it. Uh, and, you know, I saw a lot of the protective presentations earlier on landscaping and things like that. No problem, you know, these are wonderful as they present them, but the owners don't ever seem to maintain the, uh, landscaping and the, uh, uh, the shrubs that are supposed to be there and so forth. So, you know, that's, you know, one of my concerns is it was never maintained from the way it was supposed to, to originally abandoned. If you went back and looked at the pictures, then, uh, and now you, you would see a major difference.  
Speaker 19    02:18:20    So, uh, just, I have, uh, you know, just the closeness of the property. I have a concern about the parking, the number of spots, um, from what was said, I, I guess who's gonna, you know, monitor ensure there's only that number of people in there on any type of regular basis, not only in the, in the near future, but two, three years down the road. I mean, it's something very hard to monitor. And then just some of the impacts since this practice has taken over, that I can tell you about, you know, constantly during the summer and the good weather they're smoking in the back of the parking lot, while people may be waiting for a patient to come out, uh, there's cars, idling in the winter for heat in that parking lot and summer for air conditioning, uh, grounds workers coming in to clear the parking lot, many times are blowing the dirt and debris onto our property.  
Speaker 19    02:19:14    If we're not watching closely, because it takes them extra time. If they blow in and then have to sweep it up, there just, it's much easier for them to blow it onto ours. And, you know, this is a constant thing in the summer. Uh, that second story addition is going to reduce, uh, both light and air circulation to my property. Uh, we're already, uh, you know, with, with the, uh, the landscaping that all died and was cleared out the back of the property is nothing but dark. Uh, I continue to continually get rainwater runoff on every, uh, you know, heavy rain that we have. Uh, so just, you know, I'm totally against any additional variants approval for this. Uh, you know, just, you know, I have concerns with additional activity and traffic. I just know what's going to happen. That's that's the end of my time. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.  
Speaker 2     02:20:17    Um, anyone else from the public has have wished to make a statement in this portion?  
Speaker 10    02:20:27    No, there's no one Madam chair. Okay.  
Speaker 2     02:20:29    Close to  
Speaker 10    02:20:30    The Madam chair. I do apologize. Cause you did open it up to the board, but, um, just hearing the testimony of this resident, um, you know, and we, we do talk about these other, uh, applicants with their, um, landscaping. Um, Mr. I talk, can we get any sort of testimony as to the landscaping that the owner of this property that he plans to put up for buffering between the business and the residents and then the planned upkeep of that?  
Speaker 19    02:21:04    They're not dependable.  
Speaker 10    02:21:06    Okay. Could people please mute your line if you're not talking, I hate to sound nasty, but mute your line.  
Speaker 6     02:21:16    Uh, Madam chair, her bladder, Walt is our engineer, and I'm looking at our site plan. Uh, if I could ask him to turn on his camera and unmute himself,  
Speaker 4     02:21:30    And while we're waiting for her to do that, or Mr.  report, the revision of October 9th, 2020, he called for three giant. Our providers are Leland say per Cypress is six to eight feet in height, along the northeasterly corner of the parking lot for buffering. And I assume the applicant has no problem complying with Mr. Interesting's requests.  
Speaker 6     02:21:55    That's correct. We've actually shown it on the revised plans that were submitted. There are three, six to eight foot high at planting, uh, Leland, Cypress.  
Speaker 4     02:22:05    And applicant's aware that the continued maintenance of those items is, is part of the ongoing duty of the applicant.  
Speaker 6     02:22:14    Uh, he is aware of that. Uh, herb, if you come on,  
Speaker 19    02:22:20    Can you hear me? I don't know how to do. It's not.  
Speaker 6     02:22:26    Okay. We can hear you.  
Speaker 21    02:22:28    How do I turn the picture on? Yeah.  
Speaker 4     02:22:30    Bottom left-hand corner. It should say video, click it on.  
Speaker 21    02:22:36    I go to video, won't click it covers up with a thing that says rename.  
Speaker 4     02:22:45    Do you ever, well, you muted yourself.  
Speaker 21    02:22:56    Camera. One-on-one on click.  
Speaker 2     02:23:00    Okay. Is that him?  
Speaker 6     02:23:02    Yeah. Uh, Madam chair, may we proceed with just the audio for Mr. Uh, lateral wall? We are having some technical issues and it would be with  
Speaker 2     02:23:14    As long as he's heard, I guess. Can we hear him?  
Speaker 21    02:23:19    Can you hear me? We can  
Speaker 6     02:23:20    Hear you.  
Speaker 21    02:23:23    How do I, how do I get the picture on?  
Speaker 2     02:23:26    We've got to proceed the picture. Um, so we can hear you.  
Speaker 5     02:23:30    I swear, man. Correct. Can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the test to give will be the truth and nothing but the truth?  
Speaker 21    02:23:41    Yes, I do. Can  
Speaker 5     02:23:42    You please state and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 21    02:23:45    Herb loader Wald, L a Lau T E R w a L D Jr. 18 Hamilton street in bound Brook.  
Speaker 2     02:23:57    Yes. You may go proceed. Mr. Johnson.  
Speaker 6     02:23:59    Thank you, Mr. Latter wall, you testified before on this application and you were accepted as an expert in the field of engineering. Am I correct? That's  
Speaker 21    02:24:06    Correct.  
Speaker 6     02:24:07    And, uh, you prepared the site plan and also the revised site plan that was submitted with this application? Correct. Okay specifically with, in terms of screening with the adjacent neighbor, and that would be directly behind the facility. Uh, we've indicated that we would have three Leland Cyprus, six to eight foot high at planting to be, to be included as part of our land plan. Correct?  
Speaker 21    02:24:32    That's correct.  
Speaker 6     02:24:33    Uh, I'm not an engineer. I'm barely an attorney. So tell me what it is. Can we add, in addition to that, along that fence area to provide additional screening or buffering for the neighbor's benefit?  
Speaker 21    02:24:49    Okay. The only thing you can screen because this property is on a retaining wall and it's quite a bit higher than the gentleman who just testified. And the only thing that's going to protect him is a slanted fence across the top of the retaining wall. And that would shield him from the headlights, which he was concerned with. And it will also, uh, direct noise straight up. It'd be similar to a barrier put on the highway. So he would be protected by this fence, which wouldn't be, it would be like a chain lake fresh with slats in it, and that would protect them from the headlights and from the noise. And it would also prevent people from blowing the, uh, dirt and debris over onto his property. I don't think landscaping thing will work. Their offense would work.  
Speaker 6     02:25:36    Um, now this, this would be a slatted fence on top of a retaining wall. So there may be a height variance that's going to be required, uh, from, with, uh, our client marshaled, thumbs up or thumbs down. Are we okay with doing a, a slotted?  
Speaker 20    02:25:54    We can do this.  
Speaker 16    02:25:56    Um, this is join Corvin Arvin if I may. I mean, again, having some concerns with the slats and offense and the maintenance, and sometimes these fences tend to fall apart. I mean, is there any objection with just doing a nice solid fence, whether it be wooden or vinyl, just so we don't have to, again, worry about the upkeep and the impact on the neighbor.  
Speaker 6     02:26:17    Yeah. So a vinyl fence may actually be the most durable then I would imagine. Is that correct herb?  
Speaker 21    02:26:24    Uh, well, it's like anything else it's questionable. Uh, the six foot vinyl fence would provide him with full, fully closed and a place, but the six foot vinyl fences, if they don't have metal posts inside of them are not secure. They can bend over, they can blow up in the wind, but we could design one to fit their,  
Speaker 8     02:26:44    The vinyl fence is known to be more secure than the chain link fence with  
Speaker 16    02:26:49    Slats.  
Speaker 6     02:26:53    Mr. Patel, are you okay with adding a fence to the rear?  
Speaker 20    02:26:58    Yes, we can go.  
Speaker 6     02:27:00    Okay. So we would work with the municipality and with the neighbor to put that fence up and it would fence vinyl fence. Uh, I don't wanna limit him to just vinyl, but it would be a solid fence that that would work and provide them the screening and security that I think he's looking for.  
Speaker 20    02:27:22    Absolutely. We can work with the municipality and the neighbors to ensure that that has completed.  
Speaker 6     02:27:28    And little as long as I've got fun. You've heard his concerns about the landscaper who clears out your parking lot. It's time for a new landscaper.  
Speaker 10    02:27:40    Sorry.  
Speaker 6     02:27:42    You want to have that discussion with your landscaper to make sure that he he's more mindful of the neighbor.  
Speaker 20    02:27:48    We'll get that done.  
Speaker 6     02:27:50    Okay.  
Speaker 16    02:27:54    Okay. Is there any other concerns that we can address?  
Speaker 21    02:28:01    No, that sounds good.  
Speaker 6     02:28:03    Thank you. Ma'am that's our presentation this evening  
Speaker 10    02:28:07    And, and Madam chair. I just, I want to thank the applicant for, for working with not just the township, but the neighbor as well. We, you know, we want our businesses and local neighbors to get along as they, they can.  
Speaker 20    02:28:23    Absolutely. And we're happy to provide everything we can to ensure that everyone around us is happy as well. We're here to work with the neighbors. We're here to work with the township, whatever we could do to make sure we're following every single guidelines provided. We're happy to do so.  
Speaker 2     02:28:42    Okay. Then we're ready to proceed with a motion on this application.  
Speaker 10    02:28:53    Madam chair is this council and McHale. Um, I'll make this motion provided, um, that the applicant abides by, um, the, um, the, uh, professional report, uh, the additional, um, items requested on, uh, tonight's meeting the, um, fence in the, at the back of the lot, uh, working with the township, um, and the residents on that, um, making sure that they will always maintain their, um, the, the trees that they are going to plan to also buffer that, um, the timing, the doctors, um, all the good things that will make them a great neighbor and to be able to continue to do good work over there. But, you know, again, we want to make sure that the applicant, um, I'll, uh, I'll, I'll put this out, but provided that all of the requirements are met.  
Speaker 2     02:29:55    Thank you. Um, is there a second  
Speaker 10    02:29:57    Carol Sanders second  
Speaker 17    02:29:59    Before we vote, we want to make sure we got Mr. Barlow's, uh, comment on the records for the, uh, it's a condition, uh, where the, uh, uh, the applicant, we know if they sell the property that a new owner would have to come back in.  
Speaker 4     02:30:14    Absolutely. I have that in my notes and the applicant agreed to that on the record as well. So I have that all also in, thank you. Ma'am  
Speaker 3     02:30:29    Marijuana Waller. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran? Yes. The Saunders. Yes. Berberine Kenny. Oh, I think he's muted. Alright. Try to unmute Reverend. Thank you. And Mr. Espinosa and chairperson  
Speaker 10    02:31:01    Smith. Yeah.  
Speaker 2     02:31:02    Yes. Thank you. I believe. And finally, uh, item number 13 21 0 1 slash zero two, the grandson's LLC preliminary and final site plan.  
Speaker 6     02:31:29    Thank you. Madam chair. I still remain Arvind. I taught a licensed attorney in the state of New Jersey. I represent the applicant Bronson's LLC. I have two witnesses on this application as a housekeeping matter if I may, uh, confirm with the board's attorney, that the notices are proper and there is a jury, the board to hear, okay. I can see they are  
Speaker 2     02:31:48    Acceptable.  
Speaker 6     02:31:50    Thank you. One fire, keeping that or the staff report and the professionals reports will be referring to where the, uh, February 10th approval of the plans from fire Marshall gore with the fire prevention bureau, April the 21st, uh, no comment memo from Mr. Gasparian DPW 27 CME planning, uh, planners letter from Mr. Gottlieb, the April 28th staff report for Mr.  and the March the 16th zoning review by Ms. Corcoran is revised on April the sixth.  
Speaker 6     02:32:29    Uh, if I'm, if I may proceed. Thank you. Uh, as I stated, we have two, uh, witnesses this evening to orient the board members. This is a 1401 Stilton avenue, which isn't GVA zone, uh, block 86 0 4 lot one. This used to be the former Philly pretzel factory, which was sort of a fast food place. Uh, there is access to the facility or to the, uh, the building that's there, um, not off of Stilton, uh, but off of the side street, uh, and that's going to remain what we're proposing is an Invisalign orthodontics office with one professional there. And one assistant there's limited parking there. The size of the lot itself is also, uh, an issue here. This is a 3,400 square foot lot with access to four parking spots off of international. And the building that's, there is 665 square feet, no room to expand, and that would be inappropriate. There's no room actually to acquire property with adjacent property owners, either your permission. I'd like to call our, uh, dentist, who's going to testify about the operations, and then I'd like to call our engineer slash planner.  
Speaker 2     02:33:47    Okay. You may proceed the first witness.  
Speaker 6     02:33:49    Thank you. Uh, let's see if we have, uh, Mr. Uh, Patel, are you on? Yes. Okay, good.  
Speaker 2     02:34:02    Yes.  
Speaker 5     02:34:03    Mr. Patel, can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony about to give you the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Please state and spell your name for the record needle Patel and I are a  
Speaker 23    02:34:18    Patel, P a T E L.  
Speaker 6     02:34:20    Thank you. I'm sorry, Dr. Patel, may I proceed?  
Speaker 23    02:34:26    Yes.  
Speaker 6     02:34:28    Thank you. Doctor Dr. Patel, you currently have a practice in orthodontics, is that correct?  
Speaker 23    02:34:36    I'm working as an associate.  
Speaker 6     02:34:39    Okay. Where are you working  
Speaker 23    02:34:41    Right now? I am in Connecticut and Massachusetts.  
Speaker 6     02:34:44    Okay. So you're familiar with the day-to-day operations of a dental office and you'd like to open one up in Piscataway,  
Speaker 23    02:34:50    Correct? Yes, I'm working since last six years.  
Speaker 6     02:34:53    Okay. The type of practice that you want to open up is the Invisalign. Some folks may have heard of it, but if you could just briefly tell us, it's actually a, a clear implant that you can put into your mouth and you wear it and it straightens your teeth, right?  
Speaker 23    02:35:10    Absolutely. So, uh, I haven't done like general dentistry and then I did my orthodontic residency. So I'm a specialist and a specialist clinic is very different from the general dentistry. Um, I'm only going to focus on the straightening teeth mainly by aligners. So that is going to be, we are not going to do any kind of cleaning root canal, crowns, nothing. It's only focused on the straightening teeth,  
Speaker 6     02:35:36    Right? So the, the facility that you'd like to move into at 1401 Stilton avenue is only 665 square feet and has four parking spots. You're aware of that. Okay. So when you're not bumping into yourself, who else is going to be there working with you?  
Speaker 23    02:35:54    One more assistant.  
Speaker 6     02:35:55    Okay. And how are you going to get there? And how's your assistant going to get there and how are you going to park your vehicles?  
Speaker 23    02:36:02    Uh, so we have like four parking spaces. And at one point of time, we are only going to be two employees, me and the assistants. And we have like appointment schedules. So no patients are going to come on without appointment.  
Speaker 6     02:36:17    So we don't do general dentistry. They've got to come in because it's their scheduled appointment to do the next phase of their teeth straightening. Correct.  
Speaker 23    02:36:25    Exactly. And the focus is more on the alignment aligners. So it's going to be like very quick and easy appointments for most of the patients. Uh, so I'm quite aware of that.  
Speaker 6     02:36:38    How long has an average appointment in terms of duration? How long will it be?  
Speaker 23    02:36:42    Usually 15 to 20 minutes.  
Speaker 6     02:36:45    And how do you stagger the appointments so that you don't have people waiting?  
Speaker 23    02:36:50    Oh, we usually schedule like two patients in one hour. Uh, and, uh, the operation is such that because it's mainly focused on clear aligners. We are not going to, the appointments are going to schedule like out three to four months. So at one point of time in one day, we are not going to see a lot of patients. Okay.  
Speaker 6     02:37:13    Madam chair. I have other questions for Dr. Patel. If the board members have any questions,  
Speaker 2     02:37:20    Board members, do you have any questions of this witness of Dr. Galaxy, Dr. NRF?  
Speaker 4     02:37:26    I've been, I just have one question. If you want to pose it to your client as with the previous application and parking, being at a premium here, if there's any change in use ownership or transfer of the practice, um, as a condition of approval, will the applicant agree that that whatever the new use is we'll have to come back before the board, again, to address the parking concerns and make sure they're being addressed appropriately.  
Speaker 6     02:37:53    Absolutely.  
Speaker 2     02:37:59    Thank you. Any other questions from the board hearing? No questions. We'll open it up to the public. No one Madam chair. Thank you. Any questions? Did I hear someone say something? Okay. Mr. Rachel, do you have another witness?  
Speaker 6     02:38:23    I do, uh, with your permission, if we may call our, uh, engineer slash planner, Mr. Fletcher.  
Speaker 2     02:38:35    Okay. Uh, would you be sworn in please? Yes.  
Speaker 5     02:38:38    Mr. Fletcher, can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony about to give would you truth and nothing but the  
Speaker 6     02:38:43    Truth? Yes, I do.  
Speaker 5     02:38:46    Can you please state and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 6     02:38:49    Yes. Paul J. Fletcher, F L E T C H E R.  
Speaker 5     02:38:54    Thank you.  
Speaker 6     02:38:56    Thank you, Mr. Fletcher, you were both a licensed engineer and a licensed planner in the state of New Jersey. Is that correct? That is correct. Yes. And you have appeared before this board and the zoning board in Piscataway, as well as a number of other boards as both and been accepted as both a planner and an engineer in the past, have you not? Yes, I have. And since the last time you appeared before this board, have your credentials changed in any way this board should not consider you to be an ongoing professional in both of those fields? No. My credentials are in good standing in New Jersey, except Mr. Fletcher is both an expert in area of planning and an engineering. Yes, I will. Thank you, Mr. Turner, you've heard the testimony of Mr. Dr. Patel also had an opportunity to review all the staff reports and memos that were prepared, uh, by the professional staff with regards to this application.  
Speaker 6     02:39:51    Have you not? I have. Okay. And there are a number of variances that are existing variances that we're not changing, but their existing variances and there they are correct. That is correct. And the one variance that we've created because of a change in use would be for parking because there's a different parking requirement for medical practice, correct? That is correct. Yes. Okay. Uh, now based on the assertion that, or, or the, uh, the condition that we've agreed to, uh, that there is no change, if, if there is any change in the use or if he sells the building, or if there's a change in tenancy, we'd come back to this board. I'd like you to first go over the application itself, the site, um, and tell us what planning justifications, if any, there are for granting of the variances.  
Speaker 24    02:40:41    Certainly, uh, the subject property, common commonly known as 1401 south road slot one in block 8,604. It's located in a general business GB zone, uh, existing property surrounded by, uh, a carwash property, uh, in the GB zone. Uh, the minimum floor area for a building is 2000 square feet. We have an existing building that's 666 square. Uh, the minimum lot size is 10,000 square feet. And there are a lot sizes, 3,400 and an existing condition, a minimum lot widths required as a hundred existing as 66. That's required as a hundred existing is 54.71. And then on front yard setback required as twenty-five existing as seven. Uh, I would point out that that was, uh, exacerbated by the, uh, taking of some of the frontage along stealth when the county widen that road. Uh,  
Speaker 6     02:42:04    There's an awning that we're proposing. So the front yard setback with yawning is Delton is four feet, correct? That is correct.  
Speaker 24    02:42:12    Okay.  
Speaker 24    02:42:14    Uh, and lastly, there was a variance for, uh, off street parking required, uh, is 11 because of the medical use, uh, proposed for the justification for the, uh, the variances. Uh, I believe that the board can grant them under the C1 criteria, uh, where there was a hardship. Uh, this is an existing building, existing, uh, property, existing conditions. Uh, there's no way to alleviate, uh, uh, short of knocking the building down on doing something well, you couldn't put a new building on the property without these same variances. So I think it was a hardship. It runs through the land. Uh that's for all the existing conditions was regards to the off street parking. Uh, I believe that that can be granted because, uh, the doctor has shown that, uh, and testified, uh, that the parking will be adequate. Uh, there is also on-street parking on international, but we're not justifying the various, uh, on that basis.  
Speaker 24    02:43:33    We're justifying it on the fact that we believe that only four spaces, uh, would be required for our, for our proposed use. Uh, I've read all the reports, uh, we can comply with, uh, all the requested the, uh, revisions. Uh, there were a few questions, uh, raised, uh, one was, uh, uh, we did not label a right away with, uh, the area in front of the property on international is actually 45 foot wide, but there is also a five foot right away easement, which will be shown on a revised plan. Uh, with regards to signage, there'll be no freestanding signs, uh, but the applicant will have a sod sign, which will comply with the, uh, Paskataway ordinance requirements. And the applicant has informed me that the, uh, garbage pickup would be, uh, via private, uh, holler, but we can comply with all the other requests of the various professionals.  
Speaker 6     02:44:38    And, uh, Mr. Fletcher, just one additional, uh, just for clarification purposes, the front yard setback, we actually have two front yards because we also front international. That's correct. The setback there is also required to be 25 and we're close we're 24.9. Is that correct? That is correct. And your analysis that, that variance, which is an existing variance can be granted under the C1, hardship analysis and news land use law. Would that still?  
Speaker 24    02:45:07    Yes, that's my, uh, that's my opinion.  
Speaker 6     02:45:11    Okay. Madam chair, if the board members have any questions of Mr. Fletcher as either an engineer or as a planner,  
Speaker 2     02:45:18    Do you have any questions of Mr. Fletcher? Okay. Here, none. So I'm going to open it up to the public. I don't see anyone. Madam chair, thank you. Close to the public. Do you have any other witnesses Mr. Orban?  
Speaker 6     02:45:38    Um, we do not. Uh, and if I may just in quick summation as Mr. Fletcher indicated the hardship, even if we tore down the building, there's no way we could put something up that would be conforming because it's just not possible. So this lot itself can either be a complete, you know, vacant building that would slowly deteriorate or put to some use. And, uh, I would humbly propose to the board that by granting, uh, or continuing the variances that were previously granted and granting the parking variance and permitting this productive use, that this would be a great use of property that could not otherwise be utilized without some sort of relief from the board.  
Speaker 2     02:46:21    Okay. Um, that being said, um, when someone likes to propose a motion with reference to this application,  
Speaker 16    02:46:31    Matt and chair, this is doing Corcoran. I'd like to make a motion that we approve the application subject to the board professionals reports, and also subject to the condition that any change in use or occupancy would require the applicant, um, or the new owner to reappear before the board.  
Speaker 2     02:46:51    Um, do I hear a second? Did he second? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Kenny Roco. Marijuana.  
Speaker 3     02:47:06    Yes. Yes, yes. Cylinders. Yes. Reverend Kenney. Mr. Espinosa. Adam chair.  
Speaker 2     02:47:19    Yes. Thank you. Oh, I think your evening is over. We'll still be 40 or for a few more minutes. Um, item number 14, discussion to a point for site planning, guests to prepare an end need study four 40 Kingsbridge road designated as block 67 0 2 lots 6.02 to Skagway township text met  
Speaker 17    02:47:58    Madam mayor Waller for those. No, this used to be the old Deutsche bank site, um, to which a bank is no longer using the site that used to be the recovery site that they use, uh, when nine 11 happened. Uh, since then they have a different recovery site. Uh, I believe stationed in New York city now.  
Speaker 2     02:48:23    Okay. Are we going to have a discussion?  
Speaker 17    02:48:32    Yeah, basically, you know, you know, it's, it's Jason at 2 87. We need to figure out what we're going to do on there. It's an industrial area. We need to figure out what w w what we're going to do with the site. It's fake it. Hmm.  
Speaker 2     02:48:46    Okay. Would you like to discuss putting it out for prepare and study and someone like to make a motion to do study  
Speaker 16    02:48:57    Madam chair, Dawn Corbin? I like to make a motion that we appoint for site planning to prepare this area needs study for 40 Kingsbridge road.  
Speaker 2     02:49:07    Second. Thank you. Roll call.  
Speaker 3     02:49:14    Yes. Council woman. Katie hill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Miss launders. Yes. Reverend Katie, Mr. Espinosa. And that I'm sure.  
Speaker 4     02:49:28    Madam chair, there's a resolution also. That's been prepared in anticipation of, um, the boards, um, um, discussion on the matter. So, um, it would be appropriate also at this time to move the resolutions that can be executed.  
Speaker 2     02:49:49    Um, yes. Can I hear a motion to approve that resolution?  
Speaker 3     02:49:56    Madam chair, Councilman Cahill. I will make that motion.  
Speaker 2     02:50:01    You're a second. Go ahead.  
Speaker 3     02:50:09    Marijuana. Yes. Councilman Cahill. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. The Saunders. Yes. Kenny Mr. Espinosa. Yes. And Madam chair.  
Speaker 2     02:50:24    Yes. Item for 15, uh, discussion revised download ordinances, chapter 21, zoning section three, definitions and section 13 prohibiting uses prohibiting the operation of any class of cannabis business.  
Speaker 4     02:50:43    Just so the board understands that the council has, um, proposed changes to the land use ordinance to limit, um, cannabis uses in the municipality, and because it deals with, um, the land use ordinances, it's been referred to the planning board, um, to advise and give their opinion back to the borough council as to whether or not they support, um, and approve the proposed changes and amendments to the municipal land use ordinances. The mayor may be able to also,  
Speaker 17    02:51:29    If I may, to the rest of the board members, um, you know, basically the way the state set up, uh, they haven't set up all the rules and regs yet. So they're basically saying, uh, townies either opt in or opt out. Uh, and then after the 180 day period, which is coming up towards the end of August, and then they're going to decide to come out with the rules and regs, if you don't, if you opt in you're in for five years, even though you may not know what the regs are going to be, if you opt out, um, you can always opt back in any, any point in time wants to regs come out.  
Speaker 2     02:52:13    That's his preference.  
Speaker 17    02:52:19    The council voted to opt out at this time because they could not, uh, an advisory council that could not, you can't, a lot of towns are doing it because quite frankly, that'd be no different than on the planning board, like in a use. You don't know what the uses are going to be, and you grant an approval when you don't know what's going to go on. Um, I let's just put it this way. It's not the state, government's finest hour here.  
Speaker 10    02:52:51    And Madam chair, if I just may, because I just want to make sure that everyone on the board, you know, you should feel free to comment on this and to, you know, if you have an opinion or a discussion, but just to be very clear is that, um, the, the mayor and council felt that if we were to opt in and not sort of be able to, uh, manage this situation as a township, right. Um, you know, then, you know, things happen and we all know on this board, you know, if an ordinance is on the books and somebody comes in Carson and said it, and, and we feel it's a terrible use, but they're able to do it. Our hands are tied. So what this affords us is some breathing room. So if we vote now, again, like the mayor said, you know, if we agree that this is the right way to go, then when, and, and we, we have to do it by a certain time when the state comes out with the rules and regulations, we can come back and revisit this. Um, whereas, uh, if we don't the opposite, you know, the opposite is, um, you know, wouldn't be true. We wouldn't be able to, you know, uh, have really, um, the town's best interest in mind if applications came before, before the board. So,  
Speaker 2     02:54:22    Well, I have a question. Um, if we opt out and, um, didn't have the opportunity, they, they propagate whatever the standards are. Then do we have, uh, the ability to make our own or make adjustments according to our township, um, you know, the desires of the, within our township, can we amend them? Can we adjust them after the state makes their standards?  
Speaker 17    02:54:48    I believe so. Madam chair, um, but you know, the problem is nobody knows what it is. Um, Mr. Barela knows it's been a, it's been a moving target. Um, even as we see it, the legislature and the governor have had four and five bites at the apple on this so far, and I'm sure they're going to have another dozen or so, I think that's why you haven't seen any rules and regulations promulgated yet out from department of health.  
Speaker 4     02:55:17    Yeah. And also there's different classifications right now. You could opt to like, just manufacturer it to be a retail outlet, and there's going to be different regulations apply. And you don't know, within those regulations, they may have something that doesn't allow a municipality to change it if they make it part of the municipal land use laws. So it seems as if opting out gives you the most flexibility to address your concerns, as opposed to, if you opt in, you're really, you're going to be stuck with whatever they decide to pull out of their hat down the road.  
Speaker 10    02:56:00    And Mr. Barlow, just, if I understand Manimal chairman's question is that let, so we opt out now and let's say we revisit this. Um, the township would have in its ability, as we do for, you know, most of the zoning laws, we wouldn't be superseded by the state rules and regs. We could still, uh, have some wiggle room. I think, I don't know Madam chair. Is that really what your question was? That  
Speaker 4     02:56:35    That's the problem. Since, since they're not written yet, you don't know if they will adopt a set of regulations that will not allow a municipality to tailor them for their own needs.  
Speaker 10    02:56:48    Oh, I see. So even that regulation could come into play, meaning that if you've opted in, you have to live in, breathe by what the state says.  
Speaker 4     02:56:58    Yes. That potential certainly exists because none of us have ever seen the regulations. Right. Did it as an amendment to title 48 and put it in there as a state statute, you know, you can't really, um, change title 40 a. So you'd be, you'd be opting into something that you don't know what your hands are going to be tied. So, you know, the, the approach the council took was, I think let's opt out, see what comes down the pike and then see if it's something that the municipality can amend, wants to adopt, but at least see it first. I think that you could certainly speak to that. I think that was the municipal, the council's approach was let us see it first. And then we can have a legitimate discussion as to whether or not we want to participate or not.  
Speaker 10    02:57:58    Yes, precisely,  
Speaker 2     02:58:01    Precisely as right. We can't have a legitimate discussion without knowing anything about what they're going to promulgate. Uh, Reverend,  
Speaker 11    02:58:13    I mean, Kenny, yeah, you gotta remember that. They're going to base this on various different, uh, municipality. Every municipality is not the same. This, this has been going on for quite some time. They were trying to change that so they can have control of that. But we're, we're unique at the scale way. Some other municipalities up north, they don't have what we have here. So you gotta be careful what you're going to agree to all in regard to this. So I, I, my opinion, mostly I would have thought right now until I find out exactly what they're going to disclose to us, because if you agree to it, you'll read something that say, wow, how do we get here? You know? So you gotta be very careful, uh, to various different municipalities are different and that's what they're going to base it on. And overall, am I right about that misting?  
Speaker 4     02:59:15    Yes, I, I, there, well, part of the problem is they're going to take kind of, they're going to try and shove 562 different municipalities into one set of rules. And as you indicated, what may be good for one municipality is not going to work for another, but I think, you know, to, to say you have six months to opt in or opt out, but we're not going to tell you the rules. It's a little,  
Speaker 2     02:59:41    Well, I think it's  
Speaker 4     02:59:43    Indicated this has a torture history.  
Speaker 2     02:59:49    All right. Any other discussion? Um, can we get motion?  
Speaker 17    02:59:54    I like to make a motion that, uh, we, uh, affirm what the, uh, council did last night, uh, for this,  
Speaker 11    03:00:07    Uh, second Reverend Kenny.  
Speaker 2     03:00:10    Thank you, Ms. Bucklin.  
Speaker 3     03:00:13    They are water. Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Corporates. Yes. Yes. Saunders. Yes. Reverend panic. Mr. Espinosa and Madam chair.  
Speaker 4     03:00:28    Yes. And again, Madam chair, there's a resolution that's been prepared. Um, because I know that council is under some strict guidelines, um, to address however, the board to act on it. So it would be appropriate, uh, to move a resolution memorializing, the board support of the opt-out so that the council can act within the timeframes that they're required to  
Speaker 2     03:00:57    Let someone like to make that motion to approve this resolution that you Reverend Kenny.  
Speaker 3     03:01:08    Second, second, Carol Saunders. Their wallet. Yes. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Ms. Sanders. Yes. Reverend Kenny and Madam chair. Yes.  
Speaker 2     03:01:36    And finally, motion to pay the bills.  
Speaker 3     03:01:41    So moved second. Harold Saunders. Roco. Corcoran. Yes. That's founders. Yes. Berberine Kenny spinosa. Yes. And Madam chair.  
Speaker 2     03:02:05    I have a motion to adjourn  
Speaker 3     03:02:09    Motion. Madam chair.  
Speaker 2     03:02:13    We are adjourned  
Speaker 3     03:02:15    All in favor. Aye.  for tonight, everyone. Bye. 


	

Minutes for Piscataway Planning meeting on May 12 2021