Transcript for Piscataway Planning meeting on August 11 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     00:00:00    Recording in progress whenever you're ready. Madam chair.  
Speaker 1     00:00:07    Okay. Challenges planning board meeting will please come to order and appliance 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 will now have, um, the, um, the open public meeting. Notice Mr. Bartlett.  
Speaker 2     00:00:42    Thank you. Madam chairwoman, this meeting is being held virtually in conformance with the department of community affairs guidelines on virtual meetings during the COVID epidemic. Um, the, uh, appropriate zoom notice was sent out with all of the notices and it's appropriate for the meeting to go ahead and the virtual setting. Madam chair.  
Speaker 1     00:01:02    Thank you. Roll call please.  
Speaker 0     00:01:09    He's here. Councilwoman Cahill. Dear Ms. Corcoran here, Ms. Saunders here, Reverend Kenny Barbara was on earlier. Mr. Espinosa. Hi Dennis. Um, Mr. Foster was going to be a little late, but he will be here and chairperson Smith  
Speaker 1     00:01:38    Here, uh, pledges legions, and the flag is over my right shoulder. I pledge allegiance  
Speaker 3     00:01:46    To the flag of the United States of America and to their tablet, One nation under God, indivisible with Liberty and justice for all.  
Speaker 1     00:02:02    Can we have the swearing in of the professionals?  
Speaker 4     00:02:06    Yes. Um, can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth and nothing but the truth? Thank you.  
Speaker 1     00:02:17    Uh, we do have one change the agenda tonight. Item number 10, um, 20 PB zero six. Nathan Gates will be adjourned until September meeting. If anyone is here for that application, um, they will be heard in September and our September meeting  
Speaker 2     00:02:36    September 1st, Madam chair. We're a little, uh, meetings, not at its normal, uh, month, but  
Speaker 1     00:02:42    September 1st at Tampa first. Um, we'll have adoption of the minutes of the regular meeting of July 14th, 2021. Ms. Saunders,  
Speaker 4     00:02:56    Madam chairman. I like to memorialize the minutes from the regular meeting with July 14th, 2021.  
Speaker 1     00:03:10    Yes. Roll call please.  
Speaker 0     00:03:15    Excuse me, council woman. Kay hill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Ms. Saunders? Yes. Reverend Kenney. Mr. Espinosa? Yes. And Madam chair.  
Speaker 1     00:03:32    Yes. Minus subdivision category item number 9 21, PB 15 Abdul and Shazia acid minor subdivision.  
Speaker 2     00:03:46    I believe Mr. Bassett is on. He just has to unmute and turn his camera on. Hello, sir?  
Speaker 1     00:04:03    Yes, I'm here, sir. Okay. You may proceed Mr. Bassett. You may proceed with your request for the board,  
Speaker 2     00:04:17    Mr. Bassett. Yes. You have to address the board. You're here for two lots of division, correct? Yes, sir. Okay. And this is property that you own? Yes, sir. Okay. And do you have, um, uh, uh, an expert with you today?  
Speaker 1     00:04:37    Yes. Mr. Paul Fletcher engineer engineering  
Speaker 2     00:04:40    Company. Okay. And I assume you want to call Mr. ? Yes. Okay. So Mr. Fletcher you're present, correct? I am. Okay. You'll need to be sworn in, sir.  
Speaker 4     00:04:56    Um, can you please raise your right hand, Mr. Fletcher? Yes. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give with the truth and nothing but the truth, please state and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 1     00:05:12    Yes. Paul J. Fletcher, F L E T C H E  
Speaker 4     00:05:16    R  
Speaker 2     00:05:20    It's. Before you go, Mr. Fletcher, Mr. Bassett? Yes. Yeah. We're going to swear you in also you may testify. So Ms. Saunders is going to swear you in, okay? Yes.  
Speaker 4     00:05:33    Okay, Mr. Bassett, um, please raise your right hand these, whether the testimony about to give with the truth and nothing but the truth, please state and spell your name for the record.  
Speaker 1     00:05:45    Uh,  
Speaker 4     00:05:49    Can you provide the spelling?  
Speaker 1     00:05:52    B D U L H B a S I D Bassett.  
Speaker 2     00:06:02    Okay. Mr. Bassett, you're going to have Mr. Fletcher give testimony. Okay. Mr. Fletcher, why don't you proceed?  
Speaker 5     00:06:14    Thank you. Uh, the subject property, you have to  
Speaker 2     00:06:17    Give us your credentials.  
Speaker 5     00:06:19    I apologize. Certainly. Uh, I'm a licensed professional engineer, licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. Uh, my credentials are current and have not changed. Uh, since the last time I was recognized by this board, um, several months ago.  
Speaker 1     00:06:34    Where did you, what year do you, uh, did you get your engineering degree, Mr. Mr. Fletcher?  
Speaker 5     00:06:39    Uh, I graduated in 1971 from the university of Toronto. Um, I, uh, moved to New Jersey in the eighties and have been practicing here since,  
Speaker 1     00:06:52    Um, sir, would you just give us an idea of how many times you've testified before a board, such as this before?  
Speaker 5     00:06:58    Uh, approximately the last time I checked there was approximately 50 different boards across, uh, New Jersey. Uh, but, uh, clearly, uh, I've been in front of the Piscataway board, um, the Woodbridge Edison board on a, on a monthly basis. Um, uh, personally I'm boys. So fan boy, um, the scout or, sorry, uh, Parsippany chore Hills have done a lot of work up there. Um, Westfield, um, uh, numerous other boards. Um, I have been accepted as a, uh, an expert in both engineering and planning all those boards.  
Speaker 1     00:07:36    Thank you, sir. Are, you may testify as an expert in this field.  
Speaker 5     00:07:40    Thank you very much. The subject property, uh, is, uh, is known as, uh, lots 4.0 1 28 and 29.01 in block 1, 1 3 1 7. Uh, it is a parcel that has a tool, a dual fundage, uh, it's got frontage on John Lane, uh, and also on Morris avenue extension. It's essentially a through property. Uh, it, uh, is also known as a 5 85 90 and 5 96 hose lane west subject is in the 15 single family. Residential zone, uh, has a total area of 30,762 square feet. The applicant proposes to consolidate the three lots and then subdivided into two conforming lots. Uh, each lot would be, uh, an excess of a 15,000 square feet, uh, specifically 15,000 for 35 square feet. Uh, that would be for the lot, uh, facing, uh, Morris avenue extension and lot 24, 28 0.01 would be 15,327 square feet, which would have frontage on whole deal hose lane.  
Speaker 5     00:09:02    Yup. Then further proposes to sub, to construct a single family dwelling on each of the properties, uh, was access to the respect of, uh, uh, roads that they front on a one to hose lane. Uh, and one to Morris avenue extension, uh, the, uh, uh, home that fronts on Morris avenue extension. This is the first property, uh, south of the, uh, state route, uh, 18, uh, highway, uh, the, uh, uh, proposed driveway. Uh, uh, it's a, it's a proposed circular driveway, uh, with the entrance, the main entrance coming in, uh, on the north side. Uh, and that would be, uh, approximately 90 feet, uh, south, uh, or distant from the, uh, curb line. The extended curb line of route 18 would be a full 60 feet from the stop bar at the, uh, signalized intersection, uh, state rating. Uh, we put in a circular drive because we felt that it would be safer for the, uh, the occupants of that dwelling to be able to, uh, clearly enter an exit, uh, headfirst and not have to, uh, be concerned about backing into, um, uh, Morris avenue extension, which is quite a busy, uh, a busy road.  
Speaker 5     00:10:33    Uh, as I mentioned, the two lots are fully conforming, uh, all, uh, bulk standards of being, uh, being met with regards to, uh, the size of the lot, lot area with depths. Um, the setbacks for the building are fully conforming with regard to front yard side yard, rear yard. Uh, there are no accessory buildings being proposed, uh, and the coverage by building, uh, is, is less than the allowed. So there are no variances associated with the application. Uh, we do have a couple of reports from, uh, uh, from the board professionals. Um, most recent report from a preschool getaway, uh, dated August, um, has three comments, uh, it notes and the applicant, uh, is cognizant and, uh, understands that both, uh, old hose lane, uh, and, uh, hose lane west, uh, are under a moratorium because of, uh, uh, paving, uh, done on those roads.  
Speaker 5     00:11:40    Uh, one until, uh, 7 23, uh, that's old hose lane. And, uh, until 1123 for hose lane west, the applicant acknowledges and understands that those, uh, those roads are under Metoric under moratorium from, uh, any road openings permits. Um, that is, uh, the first comment in the, um, uh, Skyway letter of August the fourth. Um, the second talks about street trees, that location of those and the species and the applicant will revise the plans to suit those comments. We have no problems with that. Um, and the third comment, uh, requests a, uh, Middlesex county letter, which I believe we received yesterday or today, uh, it was declared exempt, uh, by Middlesex county planning board. And we will ensure that a copy of that exemption letter is submitted to the board. Uh, there was a letter, uh, sort of report, uh, from, uh, uh, Delaware, uh, engineering, sorry, Delaware valley, I guess it is from Charles Carly. Uh, yes, I have reviewed the report. I have no issues with any of his comments. Uh, I concur with this with conclusions about storm water management, uh, and by the way, we are in compliance with the, the stormwater regulations, uh, uh, should provide a seepage fits for, uh, any new homes. We're also providing, uh, sidewalks on both front edges of cross the full frontage of the properties. Um, we also have a report from CME associates. Um, there's only one comment that I, that I would take exception to. Um, and that is on a,  
Speaker 5     00:13:56    Um, on page six paragraph F uh, requests that we, uh, really do use the driveway access to a single curb cut at the south end of the property. Um, I w I would urge the board not to, uh, require us to do that. Uh, the reason being, uh, as I mentioned, we're quite a distance from the curb line of state route 18, uh, and also the stop bar. And the other problem with this particular site is there's quite a difference in vertical, uh, grade from the highest to the lowest it's about a nine foot vertical difference. Uh, so it could come in at the low end or the subtly part of the property, uh, while it would be further away from state route 18. Um, it would come in at the most, at the lowest part of the property that would be problematic to have a home with a conventional garage would probably have to be under, uh, it would interfere with the drainage issues on the site.  
Speaker 5     00:15:00    Uh, so I would urge the board to allow us to, uh, construct the property the way it's been shown on the, um, on the subdivision plan that's been submitted. Uh, I don't see any, uh, issues of safety with regards to access to a Morris avenue extension. It is a signalized intersection. Uh, so, you know, when there's a red light traffic will have stopped, uh, we'll allow, uh, ingress and egress from the property quite safe. Um, as I mentioned, there's no, uh, there's no variances being requested as fully conforming subdivision. The applicant acknowledges the moratoriums on both streets. The only other point I would like to bring out is we do have, I don't believe the township had a problem. We're showing an easement across the property on a hose lane, old hose lane, uh, uh, a utility easement that would allow connection to the, uh, water, uh, Sanitarium and gas, uh, in all those lanes, uh, from the property that has frontage on Morris avenue.  
Speaker 5     00:16:08    Um, and it's, it's that easement is shown on the north side. Uh, we would like to move that easement, um, excuse me, to the south side of the property, uh, because it's at a lower elevation, there'll be easier to connect to the utilities and hose lane. And, uh, since there's, no, we had originally talked about a driveway, let's do that easement. Uh, but since that's been eliminated with the, uh, access from, uh, Morris avenue extension, uh, there's no need to have it on the high side. It's gonna be a more advantageous, uh, from an engineering point of view to have it on the lower side, which will be on the south side of the property. So that's the only, only change we would, uh, uh, propose with the exception of agreeing to the street tree, species and locations. Uh, and essentially that's the applicant's case.  
Speaker 2     00:17:02    Mr. Dutton, Mr. Barlow, I was just going to ask Mr. Gottlieb, um, if he wanted to address Mr. Fletcher's comments about the curb cut on.  
Speaker 7     00:17:18    Yes, Mr. Barlow, you know, my thought was, um, that you eliminate two, uh, curb cuts on a busy road, and you provide a turnaround on the premises, which would allow, uh, you know, the furthest from the intersection as possible. However, I will defer to the engineers, um, Mr. Mr. Carly and Mr. Horary, um, you know, as far as their thoughts, the other issue that I heard Mr. Fletcher indicate was the easements and I, uh, across the one lot for utilities to the second lot. And, um, I mean, I, I just thought that rather than providing any encumbrances on one lot, you, you get the, uh, all the utilities off the street that the lock is fronting on without encumbering a second lot. However, again, I will defer, you know, I defer to, uh, Mr. Carly and Mr. Herrera.  
Speaker 2     00:18:34    Um, do you have any issues with the easement being on either side?  
Speaker 8     00:18:38    No, actually after our workshop meeting, I did speak with, um, Joe and I did speak with Henry and we did not have an issue with the utilities being run through that easement,  
Speaker 2     00:18:51    Moving it to the south side from the north side,  
Speaker 8     00:18:55    The first I'm hearing about this night, but, um, I don't foresee there being issue, but again, I agree with Steve that we could defer that to, um, Mr. Carly and Mr. Herrera.  
Speaker 2     00:19:06    Okay. And the same with the, um, the, do you, from a planning perspective, have an issue with the curb cut  
Speaker 8     00:19:17    Again, I understand seed's position. Um, engineering did look at this. Um, Henry also looked at this, we, they didn't have an issue, but again, look, I'd rather just bring the time, bring it back to them one, one more time, um, just to get their final opinion on that.  
Speaker 2     00:19:37    You could always do it as a condition of approval. The applicant is required to work with, uh, the borough, uh, the, excuse me, the township engineer and the township professionals with regards to, um, the driveway and the curb cuts. Would that be acceptable, Mr. Fletcher?  
Speaker 5     00:19:55    Yes. On behalf of the applicant that is very acceptable, we will work. Uh, we feel comfortable that, uh, uh, that we can, um, come to a conclusion that it's satisfactory for them.  
Speaker 2     00:20:07    Okay. Can we can always do that as a condition.  
Speaker 5     00:20:12    Agreeable, are  
Speaker 2     00:20:13    There any other questions from the board we've referenced application,  
Speaker 9     00:20:17    Madam chair, this is a mayor Waller. I just have a brief question in regards to the easements for the utilities. Uh, the only concern that I have is that we've been getting a lot of requests from homeowners to run fences decks and sheds over, over these, uh, easements throughout the town. And what we've been doing is, uh, putting deed restrictions on that. So there would have to be a deed restriction, um, Mr. Barlow regards to that for no fence sheds or decks or anything on these easements, because if they ever have to get serviced,  
Speaker 2     00:20:55    No fence sheds decks, basically any structure, any structure. Okay. So Mr. Fletcher, if we're going to move the easement, the applicant would agree to a deed restriction in keeping with the mayor, his concerns.  
Speaker 5     00:21:12    Well, I would, I would suggest that, um, that, uh, the applicant clearly would, would be agreeable to no sheds, no structures, uh, be constructed, uh, but to have a, uh, a fence, uh, cross an easement. Um, I most fences are an eight foot sections that can easily be removed. Uh, uh, if it's important, that's not going to be a make or break for the applicant, but to restrict a fence across an easement, I think is not necessary. Although the deed restriction could say that it's, uh, up to the owner to remove if necessary words to that effect, or if you're very feel very strong about it, the applicant will comply with the request  
Speaker 9     00:22:05    Mr. Barlow, Madam chair. If I may, a lot of times, a lot of times we do have the restrictions in there, but however, uh, properties do change ownership and the new owners find out that there's these restrictions. And when say DPW has got to go in and do something to the sewer line, then they start coming to demand that the town take care of whatever has to be done out there. And when it's actually in essence, the homeowner's responsibility. So we're trying to get out of the, uh, situation where homeowners, um, several homeowners down the line, um, don't understand the Genesis of how this happens. So, um, Mr. Barlow, I'm going to ask you to work something out, whatever, but, uh, I'm the one stuck having signed these, these bins out there at length, and I've been around long enough to know, to see that several of these properties have changed hand over the last couple of decades. And then the new homeowners come in and say, I don't understand why this restriction is, or as Councilwoman Cahill knows w Y Y the town should be picking up the cost of removing my fence when it's clearly on this policeman. So I'm just trying to avoid a problem for future departments and, uh, leaders that don't have to go through this. That's all  
Speaker 2     00:23:26    Understood where, so I think one of the conditions of approval would be a deed restriction to the satisfaction of the township. Um, so that future homeowners are aware. I think that's a good idea, and we can work. We can work with the applicant and the, and the townships concerns to address that. So you don't run into that problem. Like you said, three homeowners in eight years down the road.  
Speaker 9     00:23:51    Okay. And as you know, Mr. Subar a lot of times the new homeowners don't, don't get to read the deed restriction until they're signing on the dotted line.  
Speaker 2     00:24:00    You're right. At closing. What do you mean? Yeah. Yep. Okay.  
Speaker 1     00:24:07    Okay. Does the board have any other questions of Mr. Fletcher?  
Speaker 5     00:24:12    If I may make one more comment, the proposed easement is actually a private easement. It's not, uh, for any, uh, utility, that would be the responsibility of the township it's for, uh, a private water line gas line and a center sewer line. Uh, so I don't believe that the township would get involved with any obligation to repair or make good. Uh, that's my only comment.  
Speaker 2     00:24:39    Sure. But I, I think the mayor's concern is when these properties get sold and there's two strangers living there and somebody needs to enforce the easement and the outcome they show up at the council meeting.  
Speaker 5     00:24:52    Understood. Understood. Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:24:55    Okay. May I get  
Speaker 7     00:24:58    To the mayor's point? Why, why not prevent this entire potential issue and just put the, just to eliminate the, the need for these men and connect utilities from each street that each lot France on.  
Speaker 9     00:25:22    Yeah. See, I don't think they're there there's utilities on hose lane on the Morris avenue extension.  
Speaker 7     00:25:30    Thank you mirror. I did not know that.  
Speaker 1     00:25:35    Okay. Are there any other issues that we need to clarify before weekends for emotion?  
Speaker 2     00:25:41    We need to just open to the public manager.  
Speaker 1     00:25:44    You're correct. Uh, um, this matter is now open to the public for any comment. Is there anyone in the public who would like to make, uh, ask a question of this witness? Um, Ms. Laura, are you, is there anyone there requesting to make comments? Yes.  
Speaker 2     00:26:04    Could you identify Mr. Reader? Yes. Okay. You have a question, sir. Could you state your name and spell your last name and your address, sir? Okay. Ms. Sanders, can you swear him in, in his, since he may be giving testimony or I can,  
Speaker 1     00:26:39    She must been blocked down,  
Speaker 2     00:26:41    Sir. Can you raise your right?  
Speaker 10    00:26:43    Okay.  
Speaker 4     00:26:43    I'm sorry. I was muted. Can you please raise your  
Speaker 10    00:26:46    Right hand? Yes.  
Speaker 4     00:26:48    Um, do you swear that the testimony about to give with the truth and nothing but the truth?  
Speaker 10    00:26:52    Yes.  
Speaker 4     00:26:54    Please state your name for the record. Thank you,  
Speaker 10    00:27:00    Mr.  
Speaker 10    00:27:04    Well, I wouldn't concern. I live in the property next door and when they built the Jose Morris avenue center behind me, it be greater land is about six to eight feet higher than it used to be. And now every time it rains the back of my property floods, and I'm concerned that they built two houses next to me with the amount of land is being taken up for the physical house itself. There's nowhere to wait for the water to go into my backyard. And based on the grade of the land, that's there now I'm missing the only place you can seem to go. And I'm just wondering if there's anything being done about that because I don't see where two hours would be good for that. Mr. Fletcher, do you want to address that?  
Speaker 5     00:27:54    Uh, well, I will point out that the, uh, uh, all the roof leaders, uh, are being directed to, uh, underground, uh, seepage pits, uh, the, uh, runoff from the, uh, driveways, uh, as being directed to, uh, to the right of ways into the storm systems. Uh, there is a kind of a swale along the rear of, uh, of this gentleman's property, uh, in the Morris avenue extension, uh, right away. Uh, and, uh, it's our intention to maintain that swale, such that the water drains, uh, to the, uh, uh, the structure that's, uh, to the south of, uh, Mr. Reader's property.  
Speaker 10    00:28:43    Well, I'm not sure if I quite understand that what is a square,  
Speaker 5     00:28:50    Uh, a swale is a, uh, it's like a gentle ditch, uh, where w where water runs.  
Speaker 10    00:28:57    Well, that seems to be part of the problem now, because, because based on the greater property, well, the water runs there now, and it floods my backyard. Every time we get a decent, heavy rain,  
Speaker 5     00:29:14    Well, perhaps there's some obstructions in that area, we'd be happy to meet with the tantra professionals and, uh, uh, rectify any, any, any problems that are in that soil.  
Speaker 10    00:29:29    Okay. Some way that some kind of drainage we put in there,  
Speaker 5     00:29:37    But the, uh, the board, uh, the township professionals Henderson and Mr. Herrera are quite concerned about protecting the, uh, the adjoining properties of any, uh, development. Uh, we will have to, uh, provide, uh, grading plan. So their review for their review prior to construction, uh, quite a building apartments. Uh, and as I mentioned, I'll be happy to meet with them on site, and if there's some other, uh, drainage, uh, solution that they would like to see happen at to protect your property, you'd be happy to do that.  
Speaker 1     00:30:10    Okay. Well, that's my, that's my only real concern. Thank you, Mr. Thank. Okay. Are there any other questions from the public Ms. Buckley, do you see any other people requesting to address this witness? Thank you. All right. Um, this is now closed to the public. Um, there, are there any comments from the board, or w would you like to propose a motion board members? Hello,  
Speaker 3     00:31:04    Sorry, Dawn. I was, I couldn't get, I was hitting on mute and it just was not cooperating. Um, so Madam chair I'll make a motion that we approve, um, this, um, applicant's plan for the subdivision. Um, however, with the, um, stipulations that we've laid out, which include, um, the moratoriums on old hose lane hose lane west, um, I do believe there may be one or more on the, um, providing that the applicant works with our professionals, um, and to, uh, with the driveway, with the curb cut. Um, and then also, and Mr. Barlow, you can correct me if I'm wrong, um, to come to an agreement with regard to the deed restriction on the easement. Um, have I covered all of what we were discussing in terms of, um, conditions of the application?  
Speaker 1     00:32:15    Yeah. So anything else that the apple can agree to on the record counsel,  
Speaker 3     00:32:19    Correct. Anything that was in the, um, in the reports that the applicant received, um, and that, uh, the applicant has agreed to.  
Speaker 1     00:32:31    Correct.  
Speaker 3     00:32:32    So that is my offer.  
Speaker 1     00:32:35    Thank you. Do I hear a second?  
Speaker 0     00:32:42    That's okay.  
Speaker 1     00:32:45    Mayor Wallace.  
Speaker 0     00:32:48    Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. The Saunders. Yes. Reverend Kenney, Mr. Espinosa and Madam chair. Yes.  
Speaker 1     00:33:03    Thank you. The Bassett. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Item number M eight, item eight is adjourned. Um, number 11, number 11 is our next matter, which is a site plan Skiles avenue and Sterling drive, urban renewal known as power back. Uh, is there anyone here to present that matter, Mr. Harrison?  
Speaker 11    00:33:40    Good evening. Um, Batam chair members of the board. My name is bill Harrison from Genova burns here on behalf of the applicant. This is an application to allow the facility to accept both long and short term care patients. When this facility was originally approved by the planning board, um, a question was asked of a witness as to whether the facility would be accepting short-term care patients. The answer was yes. Um, and the township took the view that that meant that was not allowed to accept long-term care patients at the time of the planning or the applicant had an active or 98 of the 124 approved beds in the facility, uh, to be long-term care beds, that number and we'll present testimony tonight has increased all 124 beds. And the facility will remain as a overwhelmingly short-term care facility, but we'll present an explanation as in circumstances where some short-term care patients become longterm care patients for Medicare, Medicaid billing purposes. Um, but, um, we have two witnesses tonight, one a representative of the applicant who explain, uh, what the facility has done in its operations and its parking demands. And we also have the engineer know site improvements are proposed, but if there are questions, the board has concerning the existing facilities on the property, you will be here to answer those questions. I just have a few questions for him. So, um, I'm ready to call my first witness. If succeptible to the board,  
Speaker 1     00:35:27    You may proceed  
Speaker 11    00:35:30    The Mercado.  
Speaker 0     00:35:34    Okay. Hi, Wanda, can you please raise your right hand?  
Speaker 4     00:35:39    Do you swear that the testimony about to give with the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes. Please state and spell your name for the record.  
Speaker 11    00:35:49    Okay. And what is your educational background?  
Speaker 12    00:35:53    Sure. I have a bachelor's in nursing and administration.  
Speaker 11    00:35:58    And how long have you worked at this facility?  
Speaker 12    00:36:01    One year and eight months.  
Speaker 11    00:36:03    I mean, what is your current role at the facility?  
Speaker 12    00:36:06    I am the administrator for the belt. For the building.  
Speaker 11    00:36:10    And how long have you worked in the healthcare industry?  
Speaker 12    00:36:13    A little over 20 years.  
Speaker 11    00:36:16    Okay. And how long has this facility been in operation?  
Speaker 12    00:36:20    It will be on operation for years in November, this November.  
Speaker 11    00:36:24    And what services does this facility provide?  
Speaker 12    00:36:28    We are strictly short-terms skilled rehab services.  
Speaker 11    00:36:33    Okay. And the current operator, the facility, um, is ProMedica, is that correct? Yes. When did they take over the operation of that facility from Genesis,  
Speaker 12    00:36:47    April 1st, 2021.  
Speaker 11    00:36:50    You were first employed by Genesis and now by ProMedica, is  
Speaker 12    00:36:53    That correct? That is correct.  
Speaker 11    00:36:56    Um, and are the services ProMedica provides the same, that Genesis power back provided. Okay. Could you explain for the board, what is the difference between a long-term care patient and a short term care patients?  
Speaker 12    00:37:11    Sure. So a short-term care patient, their main purpose and goal is to just receive skilled nursing services. We have a higher acuity level, and the main goal is to go back home to their baseline. A long-term care patient is more custodial, so they would be coming in and would need 24 hour nursing assistance. Um, typically activities of daily living, feeding, dressing, eating toileting. Um, so it's the same type of care, but the goals are different. The short-term would be, the goal will be to go home and long-term, or would be a goal to stay in a facility for 24 hour nursing services.  
Speaker 11    00:37:46    Okay. Um, does the facility initially only accept short-term care patients? Okay. And under what circumstances, a short-term care patient become a long-term care patient.  
Speaker 12    00:37:59    The only time we strictly only accept short-term care rehab patients, a patient that would end up staying with our facility for a typical longer stay would be someone whose disposition might've changed. So someone who comes to the building for short-term stay for rehab and family realizes that they just are no longer capable of going home. Their baseline has changed, or they haven't met their goals. Those individuals within need long-term care placement. So we would continue to provide their care until we can find proper disposition for them somewhere else. So we would continue to provide that care until we can find place there for them at another long-term.  
Speaker 11    00:38:36    Okay. So the goal would not be to retain them indefinitely as their patient placed them, as soon as they,  
Speaker 12    00:38:44    Yeah. We would still provide the care because they're with us and we wouldn't mom, not just kick them back home if they are, if they're not appropriate to go home. So we would continue caring for them until we can find placement. Okay.  
Speaker 11    00:38:56    Um, does the presence of long-term care patients have any impact on the facility's overall operations and ability to treat the short-term care patients? Um, and can you explain why not?  
Speaker 12    00:39:17    So, uh, technically a long-term care patient, um, typically would require that services. Um, the fact that we provide short-term skilled services, our clinical capabilities are very high. So, uh, if we had to provide just long-term care services for, let's say a handful of patients, it's actually less needs and less services because the individual wouldn't need all the clinical capability that a short-term or would need. So we can handle age short term rehab, patient, and long-term care patient is much more or less complex, clinically complex.  
Speaker 11    00:39:50    And, um, is the note, what has been the effect of COVID-19 on the number of patients at the facility?  
Speaker 12    00:39:59    Oh, well, unfortunately we've had a huge decrease in census. I think that's overall and our, um, census is pretty much running at 40% capacity.  
Speaker 11    00:40:10    Okay. And do you expect that to improve at any time soon or is that going to last as long as COVID is with us?  
Speaker 12    00:40:16    Yes. We're praying that it doesn't improve. We're thinking most likely post pandemic it's hurting the facility, obviously, but we're hoping after the pandemic, we returned back to our normal average census.  
Speaker 11    00:40:29    Okay. And you were working at the facility before COVID, is that correct? Correct. And when, when the facility was operating at optimum capacity, what would be the maximum number of staff members that would be present at the site at any one time?  
Speaker 12    00:40:46    Um, typically when we were full or close to being full of census, we would average probably about 120 staff members a day. Um, maybe about 80 or 85 on the day shift. We are running about less than half of that right now,  
Speaker 11    00:41:01    But there would be at most, in any one time, 80 day, 85  
Speaker 12    00:41:07    At one time.  
Speaker 11    00:41:09    During what periods of time would that day  
Speaker 12    00:41:12    During the day shift during normal business hours are between nine and five.  
Speaker 2     00:41:17    Mr. Harrison, I don't mean to interrupt, but you're Ms. Mercado. A couple of times it said, is it consensus or census  
Speaker 12    00:41:24    Census? Do you  
Speaker 2     00:41:25    Just mean the capacity? Okay. So 124.  
Speaker 12    00:41:34    Yeah. So our average daily census right now is we're running year to date about 55. So that's what I mean when I say census, it's just how many heads in the beds, if that makes sense.  
Speaker 11    00:41:46    And I assume staffing levels have decreased since your census load is lower than it was the COVID. Um, if the facility, um, accepts, um, more long-term, you know, if they're more long-term patients at any one time, does that increase or decrease the staffing levels at the facility? Okay. Can you,  
Speaker 12    00:42:13    It would decrease. Yeah, essentially, if we had more long-term care patients, our staffing ratio would change. Uh, we could technically take care of one to 30 right now it's one to 10. And, um, also there would be less staff in the building. We wouldn't have the need for so many clinicians. We run an average about five or six clinicians a day, because they're all high acuity, short term patients. So we have multiple physicians, specialists coming in. If there were long-term care, we would not have that need.  
Speaker 11    00:42:43    Um, and was there any change in staffing when the facility switched over to ProMedica? Um, um, at, at the time of the planning board approval, um, how many beds did the board permit the facility to have?  
Speaker 12    00:43:03    I believe it was 98. That was prior to me. And when I got there, it was 108.  
Speaker 11    00:43:09    Okay. Now I'm not asking about licenses. I'm asking the board to approval for the facility  
Speaker 12    00:43:15    124.  
Speaker 11    00:43:16    Okay. And then when, um, at that time, um, how many licenses had the then applicant obtained for long-term beds  
Speaker 12    00:43:30    At that time? I believe it was 98 initially. Just start.  
Speaker 11    00:43:33    Okay. And then, um, when you arrived at the facility, how many beds were licensed as longterm care beds?  
Speaker 12    00:43:42    108.  
Speaker 11    00:43:43    Okay. And since you arrived, has that number been increased?  
Speaker 12    00:43:47    Yes, we licensed additional 16 beds to total hour or 124 beds.  
Speaker 11    00:43:53    Okay. And were those changes as a result in expectation of having more long-term patients or was that just a simply to make sure all beds were equally licensed for?  
Speaker 12    00:44:07    Yes. It was just to finalize and ensure that all the beds became officially licensed. It was a slow process.  
Speaker 11    00:44:19    Okay. And do you know how many parking spaces are around the  
Speaker 12    00:44:22    Building? Sarah? Approximately 112.  
Speaker 11    00:44:26    Okay. And, um, and did the original approval have a provision for overflow parking?  
Speaker 12    00:44:37    Yes. And Sterling village, which is directly behind us. And I believe, or my, I think we were approved for about 30 overflow parking spaces.  
Speaker 11    00:44:47    And, um, what's an Eastman attained from the township to allow that overlook 12 parking on that parcel  
Speaker 11    00:44:56    When the facility was operating at optimum capacity, did do at my request. Go let me explain to the board we were in the process of having Menlo engineering go out and do, um, uh, traffic, uh, parking study, which would have been requested by the boards professionals, um, before they could get out. Um, COVID struck while pending they're going out. I had asked this Mercado to go out and just do a survey when this, during daytime, when the staff was a peak to see if there was available parking. Um, uh, and Mr. McCarthy, can you tell what the board?  
Speaker 12    00:45:38    Yep. So I did that, um, I did it actually two times and I did it during the peak hours. Um, during weekday hours, I did it usually, um, in the morning after the breakfast time, around 10 11, and then again, around our peak time, which is two to three. And at no point did we not have parking spaces left? In fact, we had many, many parking spaces. My office is directly in the front of the building. I have a very large sort of bay window where I could see every single ambulance and parking spot in front of me. And, um, I don't think that I've ever in my year and a half, that I've been there a year and eight months looked out that window and not seeing a parking space available. Um, even when we were off full, pretty much filling to capacity early in the year,  
Speaker 11    00:46:23    The, you know, you've indicated that, um, the long-term care patients, if any, would recreate in decrease staffing, uh, would you expect there to be more or less visitors is there for long-term care patients versus short-term care patients?  
Speaker 12    00:46:40    There would be far less visitors. Um, I've been in this industry for a long time. I ran long-term care centers prior to the skilled short-term center. And on average with long-term care patients, visitors typically come in on the evening hours and most of the time on the weekends or holidays. So you would not have the amount of visitors that we have in a strictly rehab center.  
Speaker 11    00:47:04    Okay. I have no further questions for this witness,  
Speaker 1     00:47:08    Um, from the board. Uh, are there any questions of this witness from the members of the board? Uh,  
Speaker 13    00:47:22    I live on one Sterling drive in the, and the city's a senior building and I visited this, uh, facility quite a bit there because members from a once Shirleen dry are in that facility. And there are times when they don't have room to park. And I know they have permission to use our parking lot, but on the weekends and sometimes during the week, our lot is full also. And our visitors don't have room for the visit, the people here at once Sterling drive. So that statement that she's made that, uh, there's times there is no parking in that particular lot during the week. I've seen it. I, I live here, I see it every day. So that's my concern. So she stripped the lady that she's never seen where there's a, not a parking spot is incorrect.  
Speaker 12    00:48:16    May I jump in? Yes, you may. You may respond to that question. Thank you. So, um, there would be no ability for me to be outside 24 hours a day or seven days a week for me to see if there's ever a time where we do not have parking to my knowledge. I have never seen a time in my year and a half that we have not had parking. We've also never had to touch the overflow parking since I've been there. And we do have parking on the side of the building, which is around the corner of the building. Typically no one parks there and typically no one even goes around that bend. So there would be parking on that side. Um, participant I have not to my knowledge seen that. Um, and if there was a, a time or a moment where there was no parking, it could have been for, you know, a half hour or an hour, but typically there is parking to my knowledge,  
Speaker 3     00:49:09    Any other questions from members of the board? Um, council, president, I just had one concussion, um, the city council, woman KL. Um, so, um, I I'm I'm, I don't quite understand I'm not in your best in your business. So, um, this application is, um, to get approval for long-term care. Is that correct?  
Speaker 11    00:49:37    Yeah, let me answer. It's to allow long-term care patients to be there. It's not to make it into a long-term care facility and it will remain the people.  
Speaker 3     00:49:47    So, um, so then, um, this is just, you know, this is curiosity cause I'm learning. So, but when you see that you have licensed beds for that is that that's already happening and this is more of a formality to make sure that the facility is following all of the township ordinances. Um, is that what I understand?  
Speaker 12    00:50:17    Yes. If I can jump in bill. So all of our beds are duly certified. We are already certified for long-term and short-term care patients. We have always been since the building opened, we are licensed for Medicare and Medicaid. There is no facility with licensed beds that would not be licensed for Medicare or Medicaid. Um, typically Medicaid would be first, all of our beds are in licensed. Um, I think what, um, they'll is trying to say initially in the beginning is we were told that we would not be able to house longterm care patients in the building because we were strictly short-term care, a rehabilitation center. We only accept short term care patients, but there are instances, as I mentioned earlier, where someone may stay long-term care until we can find placement for them because they were not able to return home. I think the concern initially when the concern came to us was they were concerned that we would not have enough parking if we had long-term care patients, but in explaining we would actually have more parking if we were more longterm care patients, but we are dually certified and we are able to take long-term and short-term care patients.  
Speaker 3     00:51:29    Okay. And just so I'm very clear on that when you say able to take long-term patients, essentially you are still only looking at as long-term, because they're not able to, uh, rehab during what might be the standard short-term period of time. So you've extended beyond what would be, let's say the standard rehabilitation, but the intent of the facility is to essentially eventually place that person in maybe what some of us might call. I don't want to call it a nursing home, but a longterm facility.  
Speaker 12    00:52:07    Yes, you're absolutely right. That is correct.  
Speaker 3     00:52:10    Okay. I just want it to be clear. So I understood. Understood. Okay. Thank you so much.  
Speaker 2     00:52:14    And counseling KL, just to clarify one thing, essentially, the prior resolution talked about short term, so because they want to be able to house longterm, it's ineffective, a change of use. So they need to come back before the board, just to, um, essentially add long-term to short term so that the resolution, if the board acts favorably, um, they wouldn't be in violation of the prior resolution. Is that a fair statement, Mr. Harrison? Yes. Yeah. So that trigger, they didn't want to be in violation essentially of the prior resolution. So that's why they're back before the board.  
Speaker 3     00:52:54    All right. I thank you for that clarification. Thank you.  
Speaker 2     00:52:57    And then just while I have the Mr. Kenney, uh, Reverend pen, I was unaware that you lived at one Sterling and since that's within the 200 foot radius, in this matter, you have to recuse yourself from this application. Okay. So when it comes time to vote, you have to recuse yourself. Okay? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Harris. I didn't mean to jump in the middle of your presentation. That's fine.  
Speaker 11    00:53:24    I don't know if there are other questions from other members of the  
Speaker 1     00:53:27    Ask the board. Now, are there any other questions from the board? Well, I have a question I'm sort of a little bit, um, concerned about the definition of a long-term and a short-term patient. Is there any goal you, if you long-term patients can stay a little longer, is there any outside goal, um, of long-term? Is that indefinite or is that within a year's time or is there any limitation on what happens when a patient has to stay longterm? The length of time that they stay? Either one? Mr. Harrison, Ms. Mercado?  
Speaker 11    00:54:06    I don't know. Um, let me just see if,  
Speaker 1     00:54:11    I mean, could a patient come in short-term and then stay indefinitely for as long as the facility was open, suppose you couldn't find an adequate, uh, replace, um, another facility since these are Medicaid and Medicare patients.  
Speaker 11    00:54:23    Yeah. This, let me see. He's trying to get back in. Uh, her power went out. Um, let me suggest why don't we proceed with my next witness and hope that she can re-establish contact. Um, um, we're going to tell her, she can just call in is, um, let me do that. So my talking in typing,  
Speaker 1     00:54:51    Well, I didn't open a, we can, we can also open it to the public for the previous week.  
Speaker 11    00:54:56    Yeah. Except she's not here so  
Speaker 1     00:55:00    Well, she's not finished with the testimony, right, right.  
Speaker 2     00:55:04    Back on Madam chair. And I think what he's proposing is to let Mr. Lane his engineer testify while we try and get her back. Is that what you're saying  
Speaker 14    00:55:13    At Mercado joined the meeting?  
Speaker 11    00:55:18    Uh, Adam chair. You want to ask the question again? Since  
Speaker 1     00:55:22    Is there a limitation on the long-term the person who transitions from the short-term to long-term patient? Is there any limitation on the time that they can stay in the facility? Ms. Mercado, can you hear me?  
Speaker 0     00:55:46    Sometimes it takes a minute for them to catch up to the audio. Okay. I don't know her phone number, so I don't know which one she is.  
Speaker 11    00:55:54    It's a 2 0 1 3 6 2 number muted.  
Speaker 0     00:55:59    And she has to hit star six to unmute Laura. Yes. Star six  
Speaker 14    00:56:07    Easier. And you hear me now? All right. Sorry about that guys. I lost power with the storm. So I called in real quick.  
Speaker 1     00:56:17    Sorry.  
Speaker 11    00:56:18    Oh, they did. While did it hear here? Asked?  
Speaker 14    00:56:23    I did not hear any. I just jumped in. What was the question?  
Speaker 1     00:56:27    Yes. I have a question. I want to know if there's any limitation on the time that a long-term patient can stay.  
Speaker 14    00:56:35    No, we have not had any limitations. We've never had that. Um, typically would never be yours. Um, leave on average somewhere. We might stay for about 30 days, maybe a little longer, as long as it takes to find them placement in another long-term care facility.  
Speaker 1     00:56:53    But the goal has always defined them another placement. Okay.  
Speaker 11    00:56:59    And as, as the time been somewhat longer, recently just was a difficulty finding a placement due to COVID-19.  
Speaker 14    00:57:07    Absolutely. And in fact, we have intentionally held on to a few, um, with the family's permission due to COVID, uh, we felt that it was less riskier to start moving patients during the peak of COVID. Um, with the cohorting, all of our rooms are private rooms and the families preferred not to move them during the COVID crisis into facilities where they would be placed into semi-private rooms. So that was by choice of the standing members and ourselves. But the goal in the end would be ultimately,  
Speaker 11    00:57:38    And, and absent COVID with the goal would be to move them as quickly as possible to another facility. Is that correct?  
Speaker 1     00:57:51    Okay. Uh, any other questions from the board? I'll open it up to the public from this MoCADA Ms. Buckley, are there any members of the public want to ask Ms. Mercado some questions? No, ma'am okay. Close to the public. Uh, Mr. Harrison, you may call your next witness  
Speaker 11    00:58:11    William Lane.  
Speaker 4     00:58:22    I'm Mr. Lane, can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony about to give booty truth and nothing but the truth? Yes. Can you please state and spell your name for the record?  
Speaker 16    00:58:34    William Lane, last name.  
Speaker 4     00:58:37    Thank you.  
Speaker 11    00:58:39    And you give the board the benefit of your educational background.  
Speaker 16    00:58:43    Yeah. Um, I've been with Menlo engineering for 36 years. Been a licensed engineer in the state of Jersey for 24 years. Uh, testified in front of probably 80, 90 boards throughout the state of New Jersey. Many times Scott away. I worked on this project since 2012, um, many other jobs throughout this getaway and all across New Jersey.  
Speaker 1     00:59:07    Thank you, Mr. Lang, you make testify as a witness, I mean, as a,  
Speaker 11    00:59:14    Okay. Are you familiar with the hands that were approved by the board for the facility? Yes. And are you familiar with the variances, the planning board granted? Yes. Can you describe what those variances were?  
Speaker 16    00:59:29    Yeah, there were three. Um, one was for the number of beds where 115 was allowed and we propose 124. What's the size of the, uh, parking spaces, which 10 by 20, where or required we did nine by eighteens. And the third was, uh, we were required to have three loading spaces and we provided two.  
Speaker 11    00:59:50    And was the site developed consistent with the approved plans? Yes. Okay. Can you just give the board a quick overview of what what's precedent at the property currently?  
Speaker 16    01:00:03    Yeah. Uh, the, on the site pretty much in the center of the property is a, three-story about an 87,000 square foot, total, uh, 124 bed skilled nursing facility. Uh, the site has an entrance off of Skiles avenue. That's the main entrance. And then there's a circular driveway that goes all the way around the building. Um, off that drive is the 112 parking spaces, um, off to the Northern side of the building as your criminal Skiles is the main entrance as a drop-off area. Um, there's also an emergency access path back out. So I believe it's river crest drive, um, uh, just as, uh, from the emergency services and we have a, uh, designed to detention basin down along Sterling drive to help attenuate the flow on this site after, um, we developed it, um, also as noted before, there's an agreement with additional parking where we have, uh, next door on the senior housing and we also provided a access pass over to that area. So in case anyone ever did park over there, they can meander up on over to the, to the nursing home.  
Speaker 11    01:01:04    Um, and, um, do you know approximately how many, I mean, there are, so there are 112 spaces onsite and you know, how many spaces offsite or available for use under the easement that was granted?  
Speaker 16    01:01:22    Yeah, there's approximately 97 spaces for one week at the easement granted.  
Speaker 11    01:01:27    Okay. So there, there roughly 200 spaces total that could be available if the circumstances arose. Is that correct? Yes. Um, and, um, could any of the parking spaces be converted for use for electric vehicles?  
Speaker 16    01:01:47    Yeah, it is not to run the electricity outside and the post for, uh, for a charging station for electric vehicle electric car. Um,  
Speaker 11    01:01:56    And with that in any way, alter the number of available parking spaces?  
Speaker 16    01:02:00    No, the spaces where remain the same.  
Speaker 11    01:02:02    Okay. Um, and could you give the board the current status of the application to the county planning board?  
Speaker 16    01:02:10    Um, we're we, we made our application it's pending. We just need to finalize us, uh, stormwater maintenance agreement and then we'll get our county approval.  
Speaker 11    01:02:19    Okay. And that's with the applicant to sign currently  
Speaker 1     01:02:23    The stormwater. Okay. I have no further questions for Mr. Lane members of the board. Do you have any other questions of this witness? Uh, would you open it to the public, miss Buckland to see if anyone has questions of this witness? I do not see anyone. Madam chair. Thank you. Close to the public,  
Speaker 2     01:02:45    Mr. Gottlieb, do you have any comments with regards to your report?  
Speaker 11    01:02:50    No, I think they, I believe they've addressed, uh, all my, uh, questions.  
Speaker 2     01:02:56    Madam chair. Just wanted to comment, Mr.  issued a report July 22nd, 2021. Mr. Harrison, you're in possession of that, correct? Correct. And, um, of the two items that was listed, they have addressed the Middlesex county planning board and, um, Mr. Harrison submitted the operating licenses, which, which we are in possession of, um, indicating, uh, addressing Mr. Hester scenes concern.  
Speaker 1     01:03:34    Mr. Harrison, did you hear that?  
Speaker 11    01:03:36    Yeah, so we provided the licenses, showing the facility is licensed, licensed for 124 short long-term beds.  
Speaker 2     01:03:51    I just wanted to put that on the record chair.  
Speaker 1     01:03:54    Thank you, Mr. Harrison, do you have any other witnesses?  
Speaker 11    01:03:58    No.  
Speaker 1     01:03:59    Okay. You may make your closing statements. You'd like,  
Speaker 11    01:04:03    Um, the, uh, the facility, um, is a permitted use as both as a skilled nursing facility, both long-term and short-term care facilities are permitted by the redevelopment and the facility will continue to operate primarily as a short-term care facility, but wants to be able to have patients' needs precluded being discharged while it is still classified it as patients. So class. So I have short-term want to be able to retain that patient until a safe location can be found to relocate. It is not intended to become a long-term care facility. However, the staffing needs for long-term care. Patients are less than those for short-term care patients. So the board granting this approval will not increase the parking demand on the property, uh, in any way. Um, and I hope the board will approve the application as submitted.  
Speaker 1     01:05:03    Thank you, board members. Um, would you, I'd like to entertain a motion Madam chair. This is council woman Cahill. I'd like to make a motion that  
Speaker 3     01:05:17    Approve this application, um, for this longterm, uh, facility, um, uh, piece of the application, um, and provided that the applicant, um, um, who has agreed to all of the comments and the reports from the professionals does. So, um, um, with this, uh, approval,  
Speaker 1     01:05:43    I have a second Madam chair. I'll just go ahead and discover if you're a second day. Okay. Roll call please.  
Speaker 0     01:05:56    Marijuana. Yes. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. The Saunders. Yes. Mr. Espinosa. Yes. Madam chair.  
Speaker 1     01:06:09    Yes. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate your attention to this matter. Okay. Um, item number 1221, PB 20 slash 21 V Corp development group, preliminary and final site plan.  
Speaker 17    01:06:35    Hello, good evening. Members of the board and Madam chair on Dana hall. I'm here to represent the applicant.  
Speaker 1     01:06:42    Yes. Ms. Hall, you may  
Speaker 17    01:06:43    Proceed. Thank you. Um, so as I stated, my name is Dana hall. I'm general counsel for core development group, which is a solar energy developer. And I'm also attorney of record for this application. Our client is digital Realty who is purchasing the installation of the proposed solar generation facilities for their property at 365 south Randolph field road. This is a 27 acre lot zoned as L I five light industrial. It has office buildings and parking lots. Uh, digital Realty operates, uh, a data center on this property. They actually operate 280 data centers in 49 cities across 24 countries. Um, they employ 2,500 employees worldwide and in New Jersey, they operate data centers on 10 different properties, occupying a total of 1.8 million square feet and employing 104 individuals in the state of New Jersey. Uh, data centers are increasingly having become critical infrastructure, particularly in the days of COVID.  
Speaker 17    01:07:54    As you can see right now, we are using a data center above by, by this meeting. Um, the, uh, the D Realty is very concerned about their carbon footprint and has a sustainability objective of reducing emissions as much as they can worldwide. And they sought to maximize the installation on this facility using as much available square footage on the roof and in-car ports as they could. Um, so, uh, the, the carports, uh, here, uh, is what we're reviewing with the board tonight. We are seeking relief, uh, for variances from the code, um, there's provision 21 dash 5 0 1, which is related to the minimum of setbacks and also 21 dash 10 14 for AF would with regard to the maximum height of a structure supporting solar panels. Um, we're also going to be presenting. I have one witness that I'll be calling shortly, um, but we'll be presenting testimony also that displays compliance with a prior requirement to install electric vehicle charging stations. And, you know, that was something that was raised in the review letters. Um, so the testimony that I'm going to present today is, is intended to show you that, that, uh, solar energy is a significant benefit and these deviations, um, will outweigh the detriments. So, uh, to that effect, I would like to come my witness, Mr. Chris Rosati,  
Speaker 1     01:09:23    Mr. Wiles out of you'll be sworn in Ms. Saunders would just wearing in place The Saunders. Mr. Barlow, would you swear this witness  
Speaker 2     01:09:40    Or served? You could state your name and spell your last name for the record?  
Speaker 18    01:09:45    Christopher P Rosati ROS, ATI with MWH associates, Toms river, New Jersey.  
Speaker 2     01:09:51    Okay. Raise your right hand. You swear the testimony you will give before the board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. Yes, I do. Thank you. Your witness, Ms. Hall.  
Speaker 17    01:10:00    Thank you, Mr. Rosetta, can you please tell the board your level of education?  
Speaker 18    01:10:06    Yes. I am a licensed professional engineer and professional planner in the state of New Jersey. I have a bachelor of science degree from Rutgers university in civil engineering. I graduated in 1994. I have been licensed as a professional engineer in New Jersey since 1999 and as an, a professional and a planner since the year 2000. I'm a principal with FWA.  
Speaker 18    01:10:30    I'm the principal with MWH associates and I'm responsible for various, uh, land use projects throughout the state, including, you know, going from single land, a single lot subdivisions on up to multi-family developments, the solar panel, uh, projects as we're showing tonight. I have testified before this board, uh, previously I think about a year and a half ago on another solar project on hose lane. Um, and I have, uh, testified before various sports throughout the state. And in a past job, I was actually a board engineer and assistant township engineer for the township of millstone in Monmouth county, New Jersey. Thank you.  
Speaker 1     01:11:06    You may testify as an expert persecuted.  
Speaker 17    01:11:10    Um, thank you. Um, so Mr. Rosati can please explain to the board, uh, why we are seeking the variances and tell the board about our project.  
Speaker 18    01:11:19    Sure. I'm going to share the screen. I have several exhibits I have. Let's see. Why is it not bringing them up? Why are you trying to get that to work? Are these the plane that you're going to be putting up that have already? I have, I have several, I actually have an aerial photo. I'm trying to get the first thing I'll do is I'll bring up, um, basically a colored, uh, or, uh, the site plan sheet of what we submitted to the board seems like you get the bigger we go. So this is everyone seeing that on a, on a full screen. Okay. One more. That is a one services is the colorized version. This is actually just a direct sheet of, of one of the plan sets. We actually did it in color where you see the blue, um, the array in blue. So this is actually a, um, a direct exhibit.  
Speaker 18    01:12:21    Okay, here we go. And here's an aerial photo, I guess this'll be a one. Mr. Barlow. This is an aerial photo. I'll start with this because this gives us a better feel for, for the, um, for the property itself. We are in block 5,002 lot, 1.03 we're in the  light industrial zone district, as stated previously were approximately 27 acres in size. That's the overall development. The application that we're talking about right now is for 365 south Randolph Ville road. The track is bounded by Centennial avenue to the south corporate place, to the north and east and Randolph Vil, uh, road to the west. Our surrounding uses our office in warehouses within that  zone. And the site contains multiple structures that support the data center use as part of a previous approval. The site required one Evie charging station for every pit 50 parking stalls. Currently there are seven Evy charging stations on the site to serve 316 overall parking stalls.  
Speaker 18    01:13:30    So that approval condition has been met. They are on onsite. Let me see if I'll zoom in on this a little bit, the area you can't really see them the best on the area, but I'll point them out on exhibit a one. If you see on long Centennial avenue in the south section, there's a couple spaces you can sort of see in blue. That is, uh, I believe four forestalls there's an additional, um, I'm sorry. That's that might that's three here. There's two along the handicap access parking on the west side of the building. And then over on the Northeast corner, there's two additional adjacent to the handicap or ADA stalls. So the, the previous condition has been met. So there's no need for any variance for this approval regarding those Evie, uh, stations.  
Speaker 18    01:14:27    The, I will go back to the right here we go. Now here's a color, I'm sorry, here's a color rednecks. I guess this will be a to of, of our, um, of our exhibits. This is essentially a colored rendering of the site plan drawing that we submitted. So the applicant is proposing to install both carport and roof-mounted solar panel arrays with the core boater rays being located adjacent, um, along the, uh, intersection of Randolph Ville road and Centennial avenue. The system is slated to provide 1.4 1.15 megawatts of electricity to the, to the existing use, to help offset the nearly power consumption of the utility. The proposed arrays will meet less than 1% of the yearly load. Uh, you can imagine a site that's a data center is very, uh, demanding to, uh, the electrical utility. So even with the 1.1 megawatts and what we're proposing with the next application, we're, we're kind of just scratching the surface with what we need.  
Speaker 18    01:15:32    We have, um, 0.1, two megawatts will be supplied by the car Porter raised with the balance of that 1.15 being supplied by the roof Mount. We maximize the roof Mount as much as we can. Um, it's more cost-effective for us. And actually if we had just roof mounts, we wouldn't be before this board because we would simply be going to the, um, to the building department for permit. So we try our best to maximize, um, what we can do on the building. And then, uh, where we need to, we, we propose the, um, solar rays for the carports, the, uh, car, the modules themselves, the individual panels are roughly six and a half feet by three and a half feet in size. And they're wired together in what we call strings. And then they're tied to inverters under the array on the steel frame. What the inverters do is, is, uh, change the direct current, uh, uh, flow to alternating current flow or AC current, which is what you and I have in our homes.  
Speaker 18    01:16:35    So once it hits the inverter, it's just standard AC electric and it's, uh, uh, and the applicable codes are the NDC codes that would apply to either residential or any sort of commercial development from the inverter. The electrical feeds run, uh, via Berry conduit to a, the equipment pad on the, um, the easterly side of the building. And once it hits there, then there's a tie in point where he ties in with the general, uh, electrical, um, a room of the, the a, again, being at the AC current being that we're an under AC current, once it hits that point, we're under standard NEC codes, and we will be, uh, constructed in accordance with all applicable codes. And additionally, all safety measures and signage will be in accordance with the applicable codes. The carport arrays themselves will be built on steel frames, mounted to steel columns.  
Speaker 18    01:17:31    And those columns will be mounted to, um, uh, a concrete footings with a height of approximately three feet above grade, and to adept, to be determined, uh, with structural calculations, they will be placed at the head of the parking stalls. So only a certain, uh, like half radius of the, of each co of each column footing will be in those parking stalls. So there'll be no loss of parking spaces. The minimum clear height of the carport will be 13 feet, six inches at the lowest structural member as required by local emergency services with the highest point being approximately 22 feet above grade. So we have to hit the lowest, uh, clearance per, uh, emergency services for life safety issues. And the, the arrays themselves are tilted toward the sun. So we get the most sun capture. So that's why you have the, um, the, the different in difference in differences in Heights, the array structural be kind of labored set up with a support column, again, being placed at the head of the parking stall.  
Speaker 18    01:18:35    Uh, the applicant is requesting variances for the height of the arrays and the front yard setback of, of, of the two arrays as well. All the panels are fixed in place, uh, that their parking lot lighting will be under the canopies. And it's provided by a ceiling mounted, led fixtures firing directly down to the lot surface, uh, canopy lighting will be tied to the remainder of the site, lighting for the, um, uh, for the entire facility and will be the runtimes and will be controlled by facilities management, uh, detailed structural drawings and calculations will be part of the building permit package, should the board act favorably, and there will be no additional impervious surface with the implementation of the proposed a solar system. Therefore stormwater management facilities are not required. A typical issues that we discuss with solar facilities are, um, weather issues. Um, the, the panels themselves, aren't, it's not one long, uh, sheet they're individually mounted, and there's some space between each panel.  
Speaker 18    01:19:36    So it's not a water tight situation under the canopy. So rain water actually drips down between each pant panel. So it doesn't flow at a concentrated matter at the end of the array. The same with, uh, uh, snow melt, snow melt, uh, typically happens on a, on a panel by panel basis. And the other issue is that the panels themselves are typically 20 degrees warmer than ambient temperature. So the snow melt happens a little bit quicker on the array than it does on surrounding, uh, surrounding surfaces. Useful life. We talk about these panels is 25 years minimum, and it's typically longer, especially the more we get, uh, uh, um, technology, uh, enhancements. And did the panels get manufactured to a tighter standard? So we say 25, but it's typically 30 years or longer. Um, the ref reflectivity of these, uh, res is very low. They're an absorptive material we're trying to capture as much sunlight as possible.  
Speaker 18    01:20:38    So any reflection is, is a loss that we would, we would call, uh, from getting, uh, electrical, uh, generation from these panels. As far as sound levels, the sound level from the switch gear, that's going to be mounted on the, um, on the frame on the structure itself is analogous to a window air conditioner at any appreciable distance. You wouldn't be able to hear it, um, and noise, therefore noise emissions at all times will be compliant with applicable noise standards at the property lines. As far as once the facility is up and running, as far as, uh, visits by a maintenance personnel, typically it's on the order of, uh, once a quarter. Um, there is a telemetry system for the, uh, array. What that does is it lets the operator know down to a panel basis on the functionality of the system. So you will, they will know down to the, if one panel is malfunctioning, they will know that, uh, via telemetry and if needed a repair crew will be dispatched, uh, to, to render that, uh, um, panel operable, as we stated, we need several, uh, we need two variances for this application.  
Speaker 18    01:21:58    One per section 21, 5 0 1 requires a minimum front setback for an accessory structure to be a hundred feet in the  zone at its closest array. A is 30.3, five feet. If you can see the hand waving in the, uh, on the exhibit, it's 30.3, five feet, uh, to send to the Centennial app right away and becomes compliant as we get further south on that array. So once we hit about, I guess, uh, I don't know, three quarters of the way down array becomes compliant with respect to its setback from the right of way. Uh, Ray B has front yard setbacks of 88.9, six feet and 89 to 89.48 feet along the Centennial, uh, avenue right of way. We also need a variance from section 21 dash 10 14.4 F uh, that states that the maximum height for structure supporting solar panels is 10 feet. The maximum height is 22 feet.  
Speaker 18    01:23:07    Again, based on that tilt of the array and the requirement of the 13 foot six minimum, uh, for emergency services, uh, is my opinion that the board has the authority to grant the variances under the C2 criteria. We're specifically talking about 365 Randol mill road in the Skyway township, Middlesex county. The applicant is proposing to install green energy, where it can fit onsite to offsite the, your yearly electrical demand from the grid. Solar installations are listed under purpose and of the municipal land use law, and are also noted as being inherently beneficial in the definitions interviewing the 2020 master plan reexamination. It was noted that in 2011, Piscataway adopted his solar systems ordinance to encourage and regulate solar energy projects. It goes on to state that such system should quote, uh, continue to be encouraged regarding the height variance. It is, excuse me. It is in the supplied reports that emergency services required that minimum, uh, clearance of 13 foot six for life safety.  
Speaker 18    01:24:09    And again, with the required tilt of the arrays, uh, the, the high point is 22 feet as we were providing the increased height for both safety and circulation. In my opinion purpose, a general welfare would be advanced. The increased height also allows for the efficient use of land, which advances purpose am of the land use law has permits installation of solar arrays in areas already developed and paid portions of the site and preserves the berms and green space along the periphery, uh, of adjoining roads from a practical perspective there nowhere on site to install compliant, ground amount of res. So the car port is a good alternative to support renewable energy and has the added benefit of providing covered parking shading vehicles during the hot months for the front yard setback. It is my opinion that purpose a of the land use law would be advanced with the granting of the variants at the reduction of the required setback allows for the, again, the installation of the carports and the use of solar to help offset offset the power demands of the site, uh, regarding the intent and purpose of the ordinance.  
Speaker 18    01:25:10    I would argue the height limitation in the ordinance was put in place without, uh, the thought of carports, which have recently or more, more recently have become standard support structures and office parks and industrial facilities where there isn't sufficient, uh, roof or ground space to support a system of adequate size. Again, we, we did our best to get as much, uh, on this roof as possible. So to get every last bit, we feel the, um, the best thing to do in each will. These car ports in the area was showing, uh, for the front yard setback is my opinion. Setbacks are put in place to regulate light air and open space. That would be purpose of the land use law, and to provide adequate separation between uses here, given the limited nature of the intrusion and at the array itself is an open structure, partially shielded by the Birming and the on, on the corner. Uh, it's my opinion that intent is met and not, uh, substantially impaired, uh, for the negative criteria. We look to the effect, the granting of the variance will have on the surrounding properties and whether the granting of that variance will cause such damage to the character of the neighborhood as to constitute a substantial detriment, the existing character of the surrounding area, as we saw on the Ariel, it zoom out a little bit is definitely a mix of, of uses that you would say would, would fit in with a light industrial type zone.  
Speaker 18    01:26:43    The, um, the existing berm and landscaping that are installed, we'll provide screening and the landscape as the landscaping matures, even further, it will continue to screen the arrays in the future. It's an entirely non-residential area and given the mass of the surrounding buildings and the S the one on the site itself, the car ports will not have a substantial, uh, impact visually also as previously noted, the structures are an open frame, not a wall building, so that tends to limit their impact as well. The front front setback variances, uh, only for localized section of the overall project frontage, as you can see from, uh, exhibit a one. And again, the open nature of the structure would do the visual impact. So therefore, it's my opinion. The granting of the variances will not constitute a substantial detriment and the positives of the location outweigh the negatives.  
Speaker 18    01:27:36    We had, uh, several, um, review letters from your professionals. I believe I touched on a lot of the issues, but if we want to, uh, go to, um, your planner's review letter of July 22nd, I can go to page six, item seven, planning comments, um, item seven, a I believe I just, I handled that, uh, seven B. Um, there is a small area on the site that is called out on the firm maps. You can see, uh, where the hand is. There's that shaded, uh, like tan area. There's a small little stream that actually is piped almost the rest of the way on south Randolph Ville road, that it exits out a culvert and then about a hundred feet away. It goes back underground. So there's an area there that's mapped on the flood zone. Uh, as a flood area, we will be outside of that with any sort of, uh, structure or any sort of calm.  
Speaker 18    01:28:42    Um, we will be within any sort of, uh, improved area or curved and sidewalk area in that, um, in that part of the part of the site. So in my, in my view, we will have no impact on that, uh, small little map, that flood zone area, um, the, the next item C has to do with the existing loading and truck parking on the south side, the, in the area of the array, there's actually no, um, parking, I would go to the aerial photo that shows that a little bit better on zoom in the part of the building where we're proposing the array. There's no, uh, it may look like a driveway in this area, but it's, it's, it's a dry way for small trucks, but there's no overhead door. The overhead doors are off this entrance and exit at Centennial avenue where there's a gated entrance and exit. So that's where tractor trailers and larger trucks will be, uh, going onto the site. So there'll be no, um, issue with the, uh, arrays getting in the way. The other thing, as far as a travel aisle, the high side of the array will be along that, um, that travel way. So at the 22 foot height, that will be no, uh, infringement on any sort of, uh, tractor trailer traffic. Should they even use that, that area?  
Speaker 18    01:30:13    Um, we agree that should the board act favorably, there's some, uh, things we need to do on the plan as far as calling out exactly where the support columns would be. Um, uh, as far as the impact of the support columns and underground utilities, before we started the design, we actually, uh, had a, a geotechnical engineer out there and we did a ground penetrating radar to make sure that this array would not be in the way of any, uh, subgrade utility. The last thing we want to do is, um, is hit any sort of, uh, underground utility, especially something like a, um, a fiber optic line or something like that, the gas and everything. We usually get a pretty good mark out, and we usually know where they are fairly easily. It's the other things that go in a site over the years where we used the ground penetrating radar to really get a good picture of what's underground.  
Speaker 18    01:31:04    So we don't hit anything when we put the foundations in, um, uh, we already dressed on the EVs, uh, stalls, the charging stations, all the other comments are general in nature. And we, we agreed to meet them, uh, switching to the landscape architects review letter of July 23rd. Um, we are pretty much in agreement with everything. Basically what they're asking us to do is, uh, put some, a little bit more detail on, uh, the plans as far as landscaping, anything that's going to be remain. Uh we'll we will, um, we will show it to be so and anything to be removed will be so, and if there's anything removed, we will either move it or replace it in kind, uh, proximate to the arrays that we will be, uh, hopefully installing the other issues, have to do with, uh, details that we will, we have no issue with, um, with changing and a dead or missing landscaping from the original approval.  
Speaker 18    01:32:07    Uh, we're okay with doing that. There are some, uh, uh, plants throughout the site that look like they're in a little, uh, uh, in a bad way. And if they're in the area of where we're proposing to work, we, we agreed to, uh, change them out and put new new plants in, uh, as far as the chain link fence around the enclosure, we agreed, uh, uh, black vinyl, including the post rails, et cetera. Um, and we also have, um, an approval letter from the, um, we have approval from, um, sorry, DPW, and also from the emergency services again, the emergency services specifically notes that the proposed height of 13, 13 feet, six inches, uh, last letter you received was the Wednesday, August 11th, a letter from, uh, Delaware, route and engineering. Uh, again, uh, generic in nature, we agree that we can meet the, uh, the intent of Mr Carly's letter. Uh, some of it has to do with some details, um, uh, issues pertaining to pre-construction meetings, uh, outside agencies. And we agreed to supply the board with whatever's needed. Should the board act favorably in compliance? Uh, no, no further testimony for me. I'm honestly open to questions. We'll stop sharing at this point.  
Speaker 8     01:33:35    Um, members of the board, do you have any questions of this witness? I'm not in Sharon's on Procrit, if there was one additional comment, um, that had been admitted from the staff report, um, it was recently brought to the attention of the township that several of the trees along Centennial avenue have been cut most likely due to the overhead wires, um, and maybe even some have been removed. So just one additional, um, condition of the approval. Should it be granted would be that the applicant worked with the township landscape architect to either replace those trees, um, perhaps setting them back in anticipation of, you know, maybe sidewalk being installed in the future or, um, at the applicant's cost, um, removing those trees entirely. But again, that would be just, um, something that you could work out with a township landscape architects.  
Speaker 18    01:34:34    Okay. Do we know, is that what the, when a utility came through to do a line maintenance or something like that,  
Speaker 8     01:34:40    It may very well been. So again, we just don't want either, you know, we don't want to ask you to replace them, put them in the same location, knowing that sidewalk will be eventually installed. Um, so we just want to take a look at that, you know, if in fact we can move on back, that would be great. Or if we have, if you have to take them out entirely then, so big. Okay, great. Thank you.  
Speaker 1     01:35:06    Any other concerns by the board? Want to talk to Mr. Zody about,  
Speaker 3     01:35:11    Um, Madam chair, Councilwoman hill, Mr. Rosati, just a quick question. Um, I think your aerial photo may have answered my question, but, um, and this in no way is meant to disparage the, um, you know, the carports, but that other piece of roofing, I guess, it's too low or not, um, you know, uh, uh, a good location for additional solar panels.  
Speaker 18    01:35:48    Yeah. Um, I'm not sure of the specific reason as to why that's not a candidate for the panels. It may be what's underneath in the building. Um, but again, if, if it was, they would be there because it is a lot more expensive to do the carports versus just mounting them on the roof. So we, you know, the, the, the engineers, the electrical engineers and mechanicals the HVAC, uh, the MVPs, they all look at this to see what we can do and what can fit where, and some spots it's just, it's just not feasible for some, for various reasons.  
Speaker 3     01:36:23    Okay. And then I, I understand. Um, and, um, I thank you. That, that was really my main question.  
Speaker 17    01:36:31    Oh, goodness. I might be able to speak to that. Um, my understanding is that the aerial photo may not currently show or be visible that there is actually some cooling equipment on that and obstructions related to HVAC that are on that portion of the roof.  
Speaker 3     01:36:47    Oh. So that they would need like all of the, um, that to be accessible without  
Speaker 17    01:36:54    Yes. There needs to be minimum clearance to access that equipment and construction.  
Speaker 3     01:37:00    Okay. Gotcha. All right. Thank you.  
Speaker 1     01:37:04    Um, do any of the members of the board have any other questions? Um, Ms. Buckley, would you see if there were any, um, questions from the public, please?  
Speaker 3     01:37:17    I don't see anyone. Madam chair.  
Speaker 1     01:37:21    Okay. I'm close to the public at this time. Um, how does the board feel about this application with someone like to make a motion? Unless you have other questions?  
Speaker 13    01:37:36    I am chair Reverend Kenny I'd make a motion that we accept this application pending the, uh, the tree setbacks. If there has to be, uh, comparing with the, uh, Mr. Henry street and, and the, and, uh, any other, uh, uh, issues, uh, in regards to the applicants that the applicant, uh, comply with it.  
Speaker 3     01:38:09    I will second that Madam chair, this is council woman. Kay hill. Anytime we can put solar up as a good thing.  
Speaker 1     01:38:18    Thank you, Ms. Buckley,  
Speaker 0     01:38:21    Mayor Walter Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Ms. Saunders. No, she's not muted.  
Speaker 1     01:38:39    Carol.  
Speaker 3     01:38:45    Maybe she needs to hit star.  
Speaker 0     01:38:49    She's not, she's not muted again. Oh, to everyone. I've not muted, which is not working. She chatted, she said yes. Okay. So I'll make sure she's okay. Reverend Kenney, Mr. Spinosa and Madam chair. Yes.  
Speaker 1     01:39:08    Yes. Thank you.  
Speaker 18    01:39:13    Thank you. Thank you for your time.  
Speaker 1     01:39:19    Okay. Item number 13. Um, PB 21, PB 2021. The core development group.  
Speaker 17    01:39:34    Yes. Um, good evening, Dana hall for the applicant core development group. Um, so this, this building is at three corporate place.  
Speaker 1     01:39:47    Yeah, that's it? Yep. Okay. I got it. Thank you for the record. Three corporate place, not the other one.  
Speaker 17    01:39:56    There are two. We do have two applications. And so this is number 13, uh, with a different application number on your agenda. Um, so this, um, similarly, same block, 5,002 lot, 1.03, also zoned light industrial. And, um, I'll just go ahead and, and call Mr. Rosati again to address the, uh, review letters and any items related to the variance. So,  
Speaker 1     01:40:25    Yes, I'd like to swear him in just for clarification on the record, please.  
Speaker 4     01:40:28    Okay. Um, can you please raise your right hand? Do you swear that the testimony about to give will be the truth and nothing but the truth? Okay. Please state your name for the record.  
Speaker 18    01:40:40    Rosati ROS, ATI with MWH associates, Toms river, New Jersey.  
Speaker 17    01:40:47    Thank you. And if it, if it meets with the board's pleasure, I would like to accept his credentials as prior, previously from the prior  
Speaker 1     01:40:55    That's okay. With the board. Thank you very much. He's he's still accepted as an expert.  
Speaker 17    01:41:00    Thank you. Okay. So Mr. Rosetta, can you please take us through this application?  
Speaker 18    01:41:04    Sure. I'll share screen again. I have a, let's see, here we go. Let's do it three corporate. I'd like to bring up my heroin free corporate Ariel, similar photo. Then you just, that you just saw just a different, uh, area outline. Everyone can see the screen. Yes, yes. Okay. So this is a one Mr.  against an aerial photo for three corporate place. Uh, same situation. As far as the site, we are the same actually lot and block. We're still in the  zone, still the 27 and a half acre site. Again, the site is, uh, has, is the office, uh, and warehouses uses all around it. We are proposing, I will go to the, uh, rendering of what we're doing for three corporate. This is slightly different in that we have one array that is actually going to be spanning both, uh, parking stalls and the access aisle in the north parking area of three corporate place that in itself brings in, uh, two variances, one for front yard setback, one for the fact that it is covering the access aisle.  
Speaker 18    01:42:29    And then we also have the height variance, as we discussed previously with the, with the other application, uh, same situation where the Mo the size of the modules, how they're mounted to the, the array, the array, a, which is the one that spans both, um, uh, parking areas. And the access aisle is going to be a little bit different. It's not a cantilevered structure. It will be a structure that's supported on either, uh, edge of the parking area and will, uh, tilt towards the building. So the high side will be along a corporate place, same situation, as far as the steel frames, uh, being on, on foundations. The difference here is the, uh, conduit runs will be again, sub gray, but they will, uh, interconnect, uh, within the building, not to a, uh, uh, to some concrete pads on the outs, on the, on the building.  
Speaker 18    01:43:25    Um, uh, same again, same issues. I don't want to have to rehash everything over. It's the same issue as, as far as frequency of visits to useful life, the weather issues that we, that we encounter, the big difference here is the relief testimony is a little bit different. Again, due to that, a bulk array we'll call array, uh, to the north. Again, we need a variance for section 21 dash 5 0 1, uh, for the minimum front setback for an accessory structure where a hundred feet is required in the LA five zone at its closest array is approximately 29 feet from corporate place. And then it's far, this is 64 and a half feet, uh, from the right of way, a section 21 dash 10.1 4.4 F again, states at the maximum height of the structure of a supporting solar panels is 10 feet. The maximum height proposed again is 22 section 21 dash 10 14 dash four F.  
Speaker 18    01:44:24    Also states that structure supporting solar panels will not cover obstruct any parking access access aisles proposed array will cover the north parking area access aisle. Uh, when we looked at the master plan, we talked about that before. Um, the ordinance was written in 2011, and the maximum height was set at 10 feet. Again, that wasn't really looking at, uh, uh, parking, uh, parking structures. Obviously I would have parking structure even at a 10 foot height is very low. Um, and I don't think the ordinance anticipated, I guess, the popularity of what these parking structures, uh, how they would be so popular and how they would become. So in my mind, that was a, it was written again in 2011 before solar really got hot in New Jersey, and didn't really foresee and nor could it, the, the, um, the popularity of it and the requirement for that height actually to be, uh, increased significantly, especially due to the fact that we need it for emergency services and for, uh, for clearance under the array for an ambulance firetruck.  
Speaker 18    01:45:34    What have you. So again, it's my professional opinion. The board has the authority to grant. The variance is under the C2 criteria. This time we're talking about three corporate place in Piscataway, Middlesex county, New Jersey. Again, the applicant is proposing to install green energy, where it can fit it onsite offsite, it's yearly electrical demand. Uh, we talked about the master plan. The master plan, uh, wants, uh, solar systems to be encouraged regarding the height variance. Uh, the supplied reports again, say that they want the 13 foot, six foot, uh, the height for life safety. And as we provide the increased height for both safety and circulation purpose, a general welfare would be advanced again, uh, in my opinion, uh, purpose M of land use law will be advanced as it allows for efficient use of land. The permit, this permits installation of solar rays in already developed, paid portions of the site and preserve the Berman green space along the periphery along corporate drive.  
Speaker 18    01:46:35    Again, let's go to, uh, the Ariel there's really no, or we can put a standard ground Mount or any more, uh, roof mounts. Um, again, the, the Ariel is, is accurate to date, and we have this large building to the south of us. There is a again cooling equipment and other mechanicals, a top that building as well. So we maxed out the, um, the rooftop with this small, smaller array at, at, uh, three corporate, again, from a practical perspective is nowhere else to put it. And we do get the benefit of shading vehicles in the summer months. We find that once we put these, uh, carport arrays up, they become like the most popular sites to park in for employees and, um, and users of the facility, especially on a day like today, it would be a great thing to have, um, uh, shade structures for the vehicles, um, for the front yard setback.  
Speaker 18    01:47:38    Again, it's my opinion that purpose a, the land use law would be advanced as a reduction in the required setback allows for the installation of the carports and the use of solar to help offset the power demands of the site. Again, we're, we are just scratching the surface with what we're doing with the solar here, as far as what the demand is, uh, for this facility, uh, regarding the intent and purpose of the ordinance, I would argue the height limitation again, was put in place without the thought of carports and given the screen that exists, uh, the intent of regulations, the height is met, and the potential visual impact is reduced for the front yard setbacks. My opinion that the setbacks, again, are put in place to regulate light air and open space, which has purpose see, and provide adequate separation between uses, uh, given again, it's a limited nature of the intrusion.  
Speaker 18    01:48:27    And if you look at the aerial photo of where that array will be relative to the other uses on site, it will definitely not be a situation where it would stick out like a sore thumb. In my opinion would fit in well with the established, uh, nature of the indoor light industrial zone, uh, regarding again, the negative criteria. We look to the effect that brang the variance will have on, um, on the surrounding properties and how it would affect the character of the neighborhood. And it's still my opinion that it would fit within the character of the neighborhood. The character has obviously light industrial commercial in nature, and that will not change with the implementation of additional solar rays on site.  
Speaker 18    01:49:13    Um, also, uh, this touching on the fact that they are open structures, not walled structures. So from a visual perspective, and if you've driven the site, those berms on corporate place are substantial. Yes, will be a little bit higher on the, uh, on the corporate place side. But again, in my, in my view, being on the site, driving the site and looking in the general area, it will be, it will not stick out and it will be, uh, in, uh, in concert with the established character of that area. So it's there, for my opinion, the granting of the variances will not constituted substantial detriment, and the positives outweigh the negatives. Uh, we had the same, uh, group of review letters from your board professionals, uh, much similar comments. Um, again, I could probably just go on record to say that we will, um, agree to comply.  
Speaker 18    01:50:08    Um, I think on the, your planners letter, I think I touched on everything, um, in, in direct testimony and, um, and discussion, we have similar, um, memo from your board landscape architect that will, are similar to the previous application that we can go on record that we will, we will comply with, uh, revising the plans for some details, for the landscaping, for providing the, um, uh, landscaping where we were going to be removing it, we'll replace it in kind and in the approximate area of where the removal will take place, we will change the details, uh, where appropriate, and we will, um, uh, agree to, uh, replace any debtor or dying or missing trees, vegetation. What have you, from the original application, we also have the same approvals from your fire department, and you can w we only got one letter from your engineer, but I'm assuming they, that will cover both. And again, those comments should be similar, and we agreed that, uh, should the board deck favorably in compliance, we will satisfy the concerns of, of your board professionals. And, uh, that would conclude my testimony.  
Speaker 1     01:51:29    Thank you, board members. Do you have any questions of this witness on this application?  
Speaker 8     01:51:35    Um, Madam chair, Dawn Corcoran, Mr. Rosati, I would just ask the same condition as before with regard to those trees. Um, along Centennial avenue being included, there'll be a condition in this approval as well. Um, you know, whether they have to be removed or relocated.  
Speaker 18    01:51:57    Okay. We will, we will work with your, uh, with, uh, township staff to make sure everyone's happy.  
Speaker 8     01:52:02    I appreciate it. Thank you.  
Speaker 1     01:52:06    Um, Ms. Buckley, would you ask I'm opening the public portion. Would you see if there were any questions from anyone in the fog?  
Speaker 8     01:52:23    Oh, yeah.  
Speaker 1     01:52:24    I do not see anyone. Madam chair. Okay. Thank you. Close to the public. Um, this all, do you have any other, any other matters or not witnesses? I should say no. Mr. Rosati is our only witness tonight. Thank you. Uh, what's your pleasure, boy. Does anyone have a motion,  
Speaker 3     01:52:52    Madam chair? This is Councilwoman Cahill. I would move that, um, that the board accept, um, this application, um, provided that the applicant again, does work, um, with the township, um, in terms of the planting, the trees there that either may have to be setback or removed because of future sidewalks. Um, and any of the other conditions that the applicant has agreed to in the reports.  
Speaker 1     01:53:29    Well, I have a second. Um, Ms. Buckley, would you call the roll please?  
Speaker 0     01:53:40    Mayor Waller? Yes. Councilwoman Cahill. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. Ms. Saunders? Yes. Reverend Kenney. Mr. Espinosa. Yes. And Madam chair.  
Speaker 1     01:53:55    Yes. Thank you. Ms. Hall, your application is approved.  
Speaker 0     01:54:00    Thank you very much.  
Speaker 18    01:54:02    Thank you so much for your time. And I'm glad the power didn't go out.  
Speaker 1     01:54:07    We were lucky tonight.  
Speaker 18    01:54:09    I was watching the radar. I keep seeing this red blob going towards your town and I'm like, oh, but  
Speaker 0     01:54:13    We made it. So thank you very much.  
Speaker 1     01:54:18    Thank you. Have a good evening. Thank you. Do we, can I have a motion to pay the bills second?  
Speaker 0     01:54:32    Yes. Yes. Ms. Corcoran. Yes. So unders yes, Reverend Kenney, Mr. Espinosa and Madam chair.  
Speaker 1     01:54:45    Yes. Motion to adjourn.  
Speaker 3     01:54:49    So moved.  
Speaker 1     01:54:52    I second it, thank you very much, Everyone.  
Speaker 3     01:55:04    September 1st,  
Speaker 0     01:55:07    The rest of your summer vacation speeds.