Transcript for Piscataway Zoning meeting on
Last updated
Transcript generated by rev.ai and may not be fully accurate. Use the audio player to verify any passage.
Jun 11 2026 · Zoning
0:00
–:––
Steven Weisman You can start.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay, thank you.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting will please come to order.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in the following ways.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Notice published in the Carrier News.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Notice posted on the Bulletin Board of Municipal Building.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Notice made available to the Township Clerk.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Notice sent to the Carrier News and the Star Ledger.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Will the Clerk please call the roll?
Speaker 2 Mr. Weissman?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Here.
Speaker 2 Mr. Tillery?
Speaker 2 Hi.
Speaker 2 Jeff's here.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I see him.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) He's muted.
Speaker 2 Here.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you.
Speaker 2 Mr. Patel?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Here.
Speaker 2 Mr. Reggio?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Here.
Speaker 2 Mr. Blount?
Speaker 2 Mr. Mitterondo?
Speaker 2 Mr. Ali is out.
Speaker 2 Chairman Cahill?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Here.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Well, everyone, please stand.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) We'll salute to the flag.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Mr. Keneally, are there any changes to tonight's agenda?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) There are no changes that I'm aware of.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay, let's proceed.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'm going to start with 26-ZB-22V, Christopher George.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Is Christopher George present?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Is Christopher George present?
Speaker 2 He's here.
Speaker 2 He's trying to unmute.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Okay.
Speaker 4 Yes.
Speaker 4 Present.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. George, I need to swear you in.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Could you raise your right hand?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Thank you.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) You can put your hand down and explain to the board while you're here, please.
Speaker 4 I'm here.
Speaker 4 I applied for a variance.
Speaker 4 I have an existing pool that was put in about 20 years ago on our property and we're in the process of selling the property.
Speaker 4 And I found out that this pool was installed without permits and
Speaker 4 I let the authorities know on that.
Speaker 4 Joe Hoff, I did write a letter to Joe and explain the situation.
Speaker 4 But the pool is about 34 inches too close to the property line.
Speaker 4 So I needed that 10 feet.
Speaker 4 It has to be away from the rear of the property line, but it's about seven foot two.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Jonathan, can we clear up this a little bit?
Speaker 3 yes certainly uh so just to clarify mr george uh the pool was installed 20 years ago you were the owner at that time i was not okay uh and can you tell us the condition of the existing shed that's located too close to the property line yeah the shed is on the property line that was installed in about 2022
Speaker 4 Yeah, it's set right up to the property line, in a fenced-in backyard.
Speaker 3 Good condition, needs to be repaired, replaced.
Speaker 3 What's your opinion?
Speaker 4 Oh, no, it's in great shape.
Speaker 4 It's pretty new.
Speaker 4 It was brand new.
Speaker 4 It's one of those lifetime vinyl sheds.
Speaker 4 It's on a wooden platform, and it's in good shape.
Speaker 3 Okay.
Speaker 3 I think, Mr. Cahill, if we could get some sort of agreement with the buyer of the home that if the pool needs to be replaced, it needs to be relocated in a conforming location as well as the shed.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I think that's reasonable.
Speaker 3 That's all our comments.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Keneally, can we make that part of the approval?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes, we can include that as a condition of the approval.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Any other board members have any questions or comments?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Hearing none, I'm going to open it to the public.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Anyone in the public have any comments or questions about this application?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) No one, Chairman.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I closed the public portion.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'd make a motion to approve this application with the restrictions that Jonathan mentioned.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'll second.
Steven Weisman I'll second.
Speaker 2 Roll call.
Speaker 2 Mr. Weissman?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 2 Mr. Tillery?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 2 Mr. Patel?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 2 Mr. Reggio?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes.
Speaker 2 And Chairman Cahill?
Speaker 2 Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. George, your application has been approved.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) We'll memorialize this in a written document at our next meeting.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) You don't need to be present for that.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) We'll mail that document to you.
Speaker 4 Thank you so much.
Speaker 4 I appreciate it.
Speaker 4 Have a good evening, sir.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Have a good night.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Item number 7, 26-ZB-15V, Harold Israel.
Speaker 0 President.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Good evening, sir.
Speaker 0 Good evening.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) It's been a couple of weeks.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I understand you didn't have the opportunity to converse with Jonathan about some alternative plans for the defense.
Speaker 0 We had the opportunity to exchange emails.
Speaker 0 Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) In the next two weeks, if I was to put this off for another vote in two weeks, would you have an opportunity to talk to him during business hours?
Speaker 0 I did propose a date that I'll be available, which is the 19th.
Speaker 0 But the 19th was before tonight.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Are we off on Juneteenth there, Jonathan?
Speaker 3 Yes.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yeah, so that's not going to work out for you either.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Right.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Well, what about any time after that, the 19th?
Speaker 0 Um...
Shawn Cahill (Chair) probably june 29th what day of the week is that that's a monday jonathan you have to check your schedule maybe you can convert yeah i got it in front of me right now i'm just checking 29th monday the 29th i'm available all day okay let's do that then let's uh make a plan for you two to get together and uh talk and uh explain the options that we have at this point and then we'll uh settle it for how many meetings are in july one
Shawn Cahill (Chair) And what date is that?
Speaker 2 9th, I believe.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay, so we can possibly- July 9th.
Speaker 2 July 9th?
Speaker 2 Yeah, and he's good on time.
Speaker 2 He won't need an extension, so we could do July 9th.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Perfect.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) So, Mr. Israel, set up an appointment with Jonathan for the 29th.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Try and iron it out.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) And then on July 9th, we'll convene again and vote to see how we're going to proceed.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) No further notice.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Anyone here on the Israel application, it is being carried to July 9th with no further notice by the applicant.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) The only notice you're receiving is this announcement here tonight.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Hopefully we can get this resolved.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you, Mr. Israel.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Have a good evening.
Speaker 0 Thank you.
Speaker 0 Take care.
Speaker 0 Have a good night.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Let's move on to item number 826-ZB-08V.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'm already free hour.
Tim Arch (Atty) Yes, good evening.
Tim Arch (Atty) Tim Arch, attorney licensed in the state of New Jersey here, representing the applicant, filling in for David Persaud, who actually had his first child a couple of weeks ago.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I will.
Tim Arch (Atty) It actually said its first word.
Tim Arch (Atty) You know what it was?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I guess it's a lawyer joke.
Tim Arch (Atty) Approval.
Tim Arch (Atty) Oh, yeah.
Tim Arch (Atty) Yeah.
Tim Arch (Atty) It's a curse word on this board.
Tim Arch (Atty) It's an omen.
Tim Arch (Atty) I know.
Tim Arch (Atty) So anyway, I'm here for let me get my script up.
Tim Arch (Atty) I am here for 41 Chicago Boulevard, block 3003, lot 17.
Tim Arch (Atty) This is an application that's gone through several iterations with your staff.
Tim Arch (Atty) We're proposing a single family house on an undersized lot.
Tim Arch (Atty) We've made a couple different submissions and with working with the staff, we were able to sort of dial back the size of the home and we've been able to eliminate all variances, all bulk variances as they relate to the home.
Tim Arch (Atty) The only variances that we are seeking are those that are created by the undersized lot.
Tim Arch (Atty) And so that is lot frontage, width, and lot area.
Tim Arch (Atty) Those are existing.
Tim Arch (Atty) There's really nothing we can do to make the lot larger.
Tim Arch (Atty) The surrounding lots are all fully developed.
Tim Arch (Atty) And they're actually slightly nonconforming on either side.
Tim Arch (Atty) So if we were to propose to take a portion of that, it would only exacerbate a nonconformity to the
Tim Arch (Atty) to the left or to the right of ours.
Tim Arch (Atty) And so short of that, there's really nothing that we can do to make the lot larger.
Tim Arch (Atty) So what we are proposing is a fully conforming single family home.
Tim Arch (Atty) And despite the smaller lot size, we've designed it to fit all the bulk standards and setbacks, including height.
Tim Arch (Atty) Uh, we do have the following reports, a DPW report dated for 1726.
Tim Arch (Atty) Uh, we totally agree with the DPW report.
Tim Arch (Atty) And then we have a tri-party staff report that was last revised on June 2nd, 2026.
Tim Arch (Atty) It consisted of four points.
Tim Arch (Atty) Um, we agree with all of those with the exception of, uh, number three.
Tim Arch (Atty) However, subsequent to the report being issued, uh, I did have an opportunity to speak to, uh, Mr. Herrera, uh,
Tim Arch (Atty) Don and to Jonathan.
Tim Arch (Atty) And actually, my understanding is that point three is now going to be eliminated.
Tim Arch (Atty) That was a prohibition on having a basement.
Tim Arch (Atty) I was able to provide some additional reports, soil bore, water table testing.
Tim Arch (Atty) And my understanding is that the township staff does agree that a basement would be appropriate now for this for this spot.
Tim Arch (Atty) So I believe that that comment is removed.
Tim Arch (Atty) There was also another comment that I had an opportunity to speak with, who I'm going to call the newly appointed borough architect, Mr. Clarkin, as to the height of the home.
Tim Arch (Atty) And we are agreeing, given the fact that this is an undersized lot and we don't want to have the home be too overbearing, we're going to limit the maximum height to 25, even though we can go up to 35 within the zone.
Tim Arch (Atty) So we're going to do that as sort of a...
Tim Arch (Atty) um recognition that it is an undersized lot and we don't want any uh additional massing or appearance um so with that said i do have one uh witness tonight unless there's any preliminary questions for me um i do have uh one witness tonight and that's mr mike bignell uh he is uh both an engineer and a planner although we probably aren't going to have too much engineering testimony we'll probably just focus on the planning but he's available for uh to be sworn in good evening board members good evening could you raise your right hand
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Do you swear the testimony you're about to give should be the truth?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) I do.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Thank you.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Can you name and address, please?
Speaker 1 Mike Bignell.
Speaker 1 I work at Daystar Engineering.
Speaker 1 The engineering company address is 31 Clyde Road, Somerset, New Jersey.
Speaker 1 Would you like my home address as well or no?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) No, that's fine.
Speaker 1 OK.
Speaker 1 I am a licensed professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey.
Speaker 1 Both of my licenses are active and in good standing.
Speaker 1 I'm also a certified municipal engineer, and I graduated from Rutgers School of Engineering in 2013.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Mr. Arch, please proceed.
Tim Arch (Atty) Okay.
Tim Arch (Atty) Mr. Bicknell, just to confirm everything I said in my introduction, you agree that was correct, correct?
Speaker 1 Yes, everything was correct.
Tim Arch (Atty) Okay.
Tim Arch (Atty) And so the only known conformity is really related to the existing lot, having it be undersized, which affects the width, the frontage, and the overall area, correct?
Speaker 1 That is correct.
Speaker 1 There are no variances requested for any setback relief or anything like that.
Tim Arch (Atty) Okay.
Tim Arch (Atty) And so I'm essentially going to let you go and focus on essentially what the planning justifications are for what we're proposing today.
Tim Arch (Atty) Awesome.
Speaker 1 All right.
Speaker 1 So as the board is aware, the property is located within the R10 zone, where a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, a minimum lot width of 100 feet, and a...
Speaker 1 Minimum lot frontage of 100 feet are required.
Speaker 1 The subject property is an existing lot containing approximately 6,533.87 square feet of lot area with approximately 50 feet of lot frontage and 50 feet of lot width.
Speaker 1 As a result, variance relief is required for the lot area, lot width, and lot frontage, as Mr. Arch just said.
Speaker 1 I think it's important to recognize that these are deficiencies that aren't being created by the applicant.
Speaker 1 They were longstanding conditions inherent to the property itself, and the applicant did not subdivide the lot or otherwise create these nonconformities.
Speaker 1 The applicant is proposing a single-family detached dwelling, which is a permitted principal use within the R10 zone.
Speaker 1 As Mr. Arch and I mentioned before, despite the substantial dimensional deficiencies associated with the lot itself, the applicant has been able to design a home that complies with all of the remaining bulk requirements of the ordinance, as well as limiting the height to be more in line with the surrounding houses in the neighborhood.
Speaker 1 So the only variances that the board...
Speaker 1 need to grant or relate to the existing lot characteristics themselves.
Speaker 1 In my professional opinion, the positive criteria can be satisfied pursuant to both a C1 hardship analysis and alternatively under a C2 flexible C variance analysis.
Speaker 1 Under the C1 analysis, the hardship arises from the physical characteristics of the property.
Speaker 1 The lot contains only approximately 65% of the required lot area and only 50% of the required lot width and frontage.
Speaker 1 These are extraordinary physical conditions unique to the property that were not created by the applicant.
Speaker 1 A strict application of the ordinance would create practical difficulties in developing the property for the very residential use contemplated by the zoning district.
Speaker 1 The hardship, therefore, stems from the existing law configuration and not from any action by the applicant.
Speaker 1 Alternatively, I believe the positive criteria can also be satisfied under a C2 analysis.
Speaker 1 The proposal advances several purposes of the municipal land use law by promoting the appropriate use of land, encouraging development consistent with the surrounding residential neighborhood, and allowing an existing residential lot to be put to productive use with a permitted single-family dwelling.
Speaker 1 I reviewed the surrounding neighborhood and the township tax maps.
Speaker 1 Based upon that review, I observed there are several nearby properties along Chicago Avenue that appear to possess lot areas and lot widths that are smaller than those currently required by the ordinance.
Speaker 1 There are at least two other lots that are deficient in lot area and at least three other lots that are deficient in lot width.
Speaker 1 And that's just all within the same block alongside the property side of Chicago Ave.
Speaker 1 While I have not completed a complete zoning analysis of every property in the area, the review demonstrates that the subject property is not an isolated anomaly, but rather reflects an established residential development pattern within this portion of the township.
Speaker 1 Accordingly, approval of the requested variances would not introduce a new development pattern or alter the character of the neighborhood.
Speaker 1 Turning to the negative criteria, it's my opinion that the requested variances can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good.
Speaker 1 The proposed use is a single family detached residence, which is exactly the type of development contemplated within the R-10 zone.
Speaker 1 The dwelling has been designed to comply with the applicable setback requirements, height requirements, and other bulk regulations.
Speaker 1 As a result, I don't anticipate any substantial adverse impacts relating to light, air, open space, privacy, traffic, public services drainage, or neighborhood character.
Speaker 1 It is my opinion that the requested variances can be granted without substantial impairment of the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance.
Speaker 1 The Board is not being asked to permit a prohibited use.
Speaker 1 Rather, we're requesting the Board allow us to construct a permitted single-family residential use on an existing undersized lot.
Speaker 1 The proposed development remains consistent with the residential planning objectives of the R10 Zone and the Township Master Plan.
Speaker 1 The requested relief simply recognizes the reality that the existing lot is undersized and predates the current zoning standards.
Speaker 1 Based upon all of that, it's my professional opinion that the positive and negative criteria have been satisfied and that the requested lot area, lot width, and lot frontage variances can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantial impairment of the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance.
Speaker 3 um accordingly i recommend that the board approve the application uh that's all i got thank you guys very much uh well let me see if anybody on the board has any questions for you mr bignell before we let you go no problem jonathan anything you want to throw on top of this i don't have any questions i think staff has a few conditions they'd like to apply uh should uh should this be granted this evening okay
Speaker 1 I know that we spoke previously with staff.
Speaker 1 We are proposing a seepage pit that the roof leaders and some pumps will connect to.
Speaker 1 So there shouldn't be any drainage concerns on that.
Speaker 1 But if we were very happy to work with the town, if they want something different or something changed, we're very happy to work with them and make sure they're satisfied.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you, sir.
Tim Arch (Atty) Tim, you have anything to add?
Tim Arch (Atty) I'm sure that we'll agree with whatever the conditions Mr. Misrahi is going to indicate if he wants to just put those on the record, I can just quickly indicate that whether there's any issues with any of those.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) No other members of the board have any questions?
Steven Weisman I'm going to open it to you.
Steven Weisman No, I do.
Steven Weisman I do.
Steven Weisman Steve Wiseman.
Steven Weisman Go ahead, Steve.
Steven Weisman The expert just now said that there are other houses that have also been built on undersized lots.
Steven Weisman I'm curious, this is a 35% differential.
Steven Weisman Are the other ones that you mentioned also in that range?
Speaker 1 They weren't quite as substantial, but they were undersized compared to the zoning standards of 10,000 square feet, 100 feet, and 100 feet.
Speaker 1 I don't have the tax map directly in front of me right now, but I believe there was one in the 75 range for lot frontage, so it varies.
Steven Weisman You good, Steve?
Steven Weisman I understand the answer.
Steven Weisman Jonathan, are you familiar with that area?
Steven Weisman How does this compare with the other smaller lots?
Speaker 3 I would say the proposed changes and the comment on the reduced height would make a structure of 25 feet in line with the other heights of the buildings in that area.
Speaker 3 There's a lot of Cape Cod's ranches structures.
Speaker 3 It is exactly like what Mr. Bicknell said.
Speaker 3 It is definitely a very small lot.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Weisman, the case law on undersized lots is the applicant has to try and obtain land to make a conforming lot.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) In this case, there is no adjacent land available because the other lots are developed.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) So that creates a hardship for the applicant and the hardship merits variance relief, regardless of the size of the lot.
Steven Weisman I understand.
Steven Weisman Thank you, Steve.
Steven Weisman No other question.
Steven Weisman Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Any other members of the board?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'm not hearing none.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) I'm going to open it up to the public.
Speaker 2 No one, Mr. Chairman.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Close the public portion and I would make a motion.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) You've got an outline of the Jonathan.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Yes, I'm sorry about that.
Speaker 3 Thank you.
Speaker 3 I just want to make sure there will be no discharge of the sump pump or the roof leaders into the right-of-way.
Speaker 3 100% of site drainage will be managed through the seepage pit.
Speaker 1 Yes, I can confirm.
Speaker 1 The seepage pit's proposed in the rear yard and all of the roof leaders and sump pumps will be tied directly into that.
Speaker 1 So there will be no discharge into the right-of-way or into any of the storm sewer.
Speaker 3 Great.
Speaker 3 If the board moves forward tonight, we would like a revised set of architecturals confirming that height of 25 feet, as well as an opportunity for staff to review the design.
Speaker 3 Absolutely, we can agree with that.
Speaker 3 And a note on the plan along the lines of the staff report item four with the broken sidewalks and curbs.
Tim Arch (Atty) Yes, we would agree to that as well.
Tim Arch (Atty) That was...
Tim Arch (Atty) one of the things we did not take issue with.
Tim Arch (Atty) We will replace all broken curb and sidewalk.
Speaker 3 That's, that's everything.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Thank you for adding that to the record.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Now I'll make a motion to approve the application with those caveats.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Can I get a second?
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Okay.
Speaker 2 Mr. Tillery.
Speaker 2 All right.
Speaker 2 Mr. Weissman.
Speaker 4 Yes.
Speaker 2 Mr. Tillery.
Speaker 4 Yes.
Speaker 2 Mr. Patel.
Speaker 2 Yes.
Speaker 2 Mr. Reggio.
Speaker 4 Yes.
Speaker 2 And Chairman Cahill.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Arch, we will memorialize this in our next meeting and send a copy to you.
Tim Arch (Atty) Thank you very much.
Tim Arch (Atty) Everybody have a wonderful evening.
Tim Arch (Atty) You too, sir.
Speaker 1 Thank you very much.
Speaker 1 I appreciate it being here tonight.
Speaker 1 Hope everyone has a great night.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Take care.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Item number nine, adoption of resolutions from the regular meeting of May 28, 2026.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) First resolution is Angeline Mappa, which you voted to approve.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Weissman?
Steven Weisman Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Tillery?
Speaker 4 Yes.
Speaker 4 Mr. Patel?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Areggio?
Speaker 4 Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Minerondo?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Chairman Cahill?
Speaker 4 Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Next is Christopher Yelise, which you voted to approve.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Weissman?
Steven Weisman Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Tillery?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Patel?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Areggio?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Mr. Minerondo?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Chairman Cahill?
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Yes.
James Kinneally (Zoning Atty) Those are all the resolutions for the team.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Item number 10, adoption of the minutes on the regular meeting of May 28th, 2026.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) All in favor, say aye.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Aye.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Item number 11, adjournment.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) All in favor, say aye.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Aye.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Good night, everybody.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Sorry it was a long one.
Speaker 2 See you in two weeks.
Speaker 2 Thanks, everyone.
Shawn Cahill (Chair) Let's go, Nick.
Speaker 2 Good night.