yeah need ele oh yes yeah yeah I just you to [Music] be got oh I don't know one way [Music] right Okay so oh yeah and I made yes but yeah got himself wait a minute Sor wait okay okay okay so and then what about over here okay all right so we good all right thank you okay bye bye being sorry are we recording yes in accordance to the open public meetings act please not the following all Burnville B planning board meetings will be held in person in the meeting Hall on the second floor of the Burnville mville building at 166 mind Road meetings will be live streamed on YouTube with no opportunity for public comment on YouTube members of the public wishing to over comments or ask questions will be required to attend meetings in person YouTube live stream AC access for all meetings is uh you to verners willb streams this link will also be available on the agenda for each meeting which is posted on the bulletin board website which is bard.org and on the B Hall public bulletin board at least 48 Hours part of meetings notice of these changes has also been emailed to the Burnville news and The Courier News by posting a copy on the burough website and by following a copy with the municipal clol on January 16th 2024 it's the intention of the board not to continue any matter past 11:00 p.m. at any regular or special meeting of the board unless a motion is passed by the members and present to extend to a later specified C off time and same shall be announced at the opening of each meeting in addition the board does not intended to begin a new hearing after 11: p.m noing in testimony of a new witness after 10:30 p.m. any hearing conducted by the board is a quasy Judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision the Corum appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at all times my privilege to uh give the oath of office uh to our class three planning board member councilman Chad McQueen if you'll repeat after me yes please stand and raise your right hand uh I state your name I Chad Queen do solemnly swear do Sol far that I will support I will support the Constitution of the United States the Constitution of the United States and the state of New Jersey and the state of New Jersey and that I will bear and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to S true faith and allegiance of s and to the governments and to the governments established in the United States established in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people and that I will Faithfully that I will faithfully impartially and justly impartially and justly perform all of the duties perform all of the duties of the office of plan board member of the office of planning board member according to the best of my ability according to the best of my ability that I will not and that I will not use my office that I will not use my office to Grant preferential treatment to Grant preferential treatment nor to seek personal gain nor to seek personal gain favor or Advantage favor or Advantage not available to the general public not available to the general public so help me gu so help me gu congratulations and welcome back okay roll call Mr DeMarco Miss Gardner Miss Geller president Mr Graham here Mr Horowitz here Mr McQueen here Mr simov here Mr Walden here and Mr zazarino here you have a qu Mr chairman and a full board thank you um okay so we have uh next item is the appointment of professional traffic expert to the board and the corresponding resolution second motion to the resolution I'm resolution number 20248 appointment of J Troutman and re Associates board traic engineer second I'm sorry second see do that first we did we did okay okay sorry to to please board members speak loudly so the microphones can pick you up the court reporter can accurately transcribe and the members of the public who are here uh can hear you thank you um St do we need Voice or it's a resolution a roll call vote Please Mr DeMarco yes Miss Gardner yes M I'm sorry Mr Demarco is accusing himself from this my apologies no on the appointment of the it's for this one matter only my apologies Mr Demarcus recusing thank you Miss Geller yes Mr Graham yes Mr Horwitz yes Mr McQueen yes Mr sim yes Mr Walden yes and Mr zazarino yes the motion carries 8 Z cor you yeah yeah okay meeting minutes October 26 sepm 14 I re the minutes and discuss some of the minor changes with but um since I was not attending at this meeting anyone who was might go through it briefly to uh just make sure that the content is correct that's just the 26 or also the 14 I don't have I I didn't get all makes sense thanks anyone else comments on the 26 minutes all right take a motion I'll move the minutes St there all in favor I any oppos okay Denise will reflect the extensions for those who were not present on the list thank you okay received a request from the council for an ordinance uh 20 2024 1998 to um concerning affordable housing set ass sides um and amend meting the ref code um essentially just changes the formulas for how the obligation uh for COA instead of units there um or with units and or financial obligation change of the formula it's really just the rounding aspect of the formula we don't have context for it but U John before we do Mr chairman I apologize but with the chair's discretion we can move that item up and he could do his master plan consistency review right now if you'd like it's it's okay because it was Communications I you're that's a great idea we could we could do it now Mr chairman you have that yeah just knock it on Let Go uh uh our planer will speak to the substance of it and advise the board whether in his opinion it is not inconsistent with the master plan uh and we do have a resolution to that effect if the board so desides what he say the the ordinance is being referred the planning board under a d26a review under the municipal land saw development regulation that amends uh the ordinance needs to be at least referred and a consistency need the statutory language is that the ordinance is not inconsistent with the master plan of the burrow the ordinance does two things it it creates a uh methodology for rounding so that if your half you go up or down depending on on what the closest number is that that clarification is not in the current ordinance of the portal Housing section the second aspect of this is the provision that allows for an in payment for certain size development from six and the reason being is that when you have smaller scale projects to set aside a 15 or 20% problematic in terms of the the financing and the economics of of the project which could then frustrate the provision and construction of affordable housing and what I'm noticing is that in situations where there developers not deliberately going under the thresholds that trigger these kinds of requirements so this will this will certainly uh clarify and encourage uh smaller scale projects to move forward and to contribute to the portable [Music] housing stock of housing for the bur so in that respect is not Inc consistent with the the housing B okay any discussion okay and you have a resolution prepared we do if the board is of the uh if the board concurs with the expert planning opinion of Mr Sabo with respect to this particular ordinance being not inconsistent with M plan the resolution we drafted provides as such and the board could simply go right to a motion second and roll call vote to adopt the resolution I'll make a motion I'm sorry who was second thank you Mr DeMarco yes Miss Gardner yes Miss Geller yes Mr grah yes Mr Horwitz yes Mr McQueen yes Mr sim yes Mr Balden yes and Mr zazar yes the motion C great so at this point in the meeting uh is the first chance that any visitors who want to discuss anything that's not related to what's on the agenda they can uh be recognized and describe what's under mind that's not related to the agenda we proceed and there's a second chance see okay all business we have two um applications that have been approved and the resolutions are to memorialize the resolutions cor that's correct Mr chairman and if I may on the first one the Minebrook urban renewal uh uh uh SP 242 uh what I refer to as Minebrook Minebrook Road uh the uh I did uh notice uh with help from a friend uh the they uh I did notice that we had some uh inadvertent errors in the conditions what happens is uh as we convert conditions from comments in usually the most part Mr Bright's memo as there are so many we usually change the word should we always change the word should to shall and the word comment to condition uh in candidly we missed about a half a dozen or so on in pages 26 uh through 28 uh and so I made those changes I could walk through them but probably not efficient for the board to do that I don't want to take time from other matters from other people and from members of the public uh so with trust in that uh we'll get it back to our uh uh uh to Denise um uh and I did there were a couple where we had uh good faith effort uh and that term unfortunately provides it's a difficult standard to quantify uh and enforce uh so with on page 27 condition 20 rum 26 uh where it says the applicant shall work in good faith with the burrow engineer uh to provide fully enclosed roof TR roofed trash enclosure with man access to the back or side of the enclosure we change that to the applicant shall subject to the discretion of the burrow engineer as to the viability of say and then the rest proceeds so this way uh and we did the same thing on page 28 uh condition sub 38 I'm sorry 33 uh where uh we we uh uh did something similar with respect to the need for test holes uh for uh storm drain Crossings uh as well as actually I think that is that is it on this on this particular resolution uh there what I would call essentially nons substitutive changes to the conditions um but I just wanted to point those out to the board uh since we caught him again with the uh appreciation uh to the assistance of the person who Ed us to those um board members help also on Pages there's a couple Manford roofs which I think is supposed to be manard roofs ah thank you it's on page 9 and 11 okay no the spell check probably helped us cause that eror but we we'll make sure those are man you um I think that is all we have on that particular resolution at least all that I have on the particular resolu any other comments no okay motion actually who qualified members are Miss Gardner Mr Graham Mr Harlot Mr McQueen and Mr Z on uh are you sure it says something different on the uh on the agenda that I have did I hold on this is Minebrook mbrook Road are we looking at the right G SAR the same on both yeah I didn't hear you say those names maybe I Mard you so I think board members zarino made a motion yes okay and second yes I'll second okay thank you Miss Gardner yes Mr Graham yes Mr harwitz yes Mr Mr McQueen yes and Mr Zarina no Mr okay wa minute yeah yeah you're saying McQueen you meant Simon yeah you said McQueen for McQueen oh your lists aren't matching up okay I highlight WR line like what I did okay hold on a second here so M bartner yes Mr Graham yes Mr harwitz yes Mr s yes and Mr zarino yes okay all right and then um Steve the next one sure Mr chairman my pleasure the U the next one we had some of the simar same type of uh errors where we changed uh good faith the best effort to subject to the discretion of the burough engineer as to the viability for same that's on uh there with me that's in uh Pages 24 and one on page 26 and I think that's it for those uh so those relate to on page 24 uh number five ran numeral one two and four you'll see good faith or best effort of both uh those changed as I just stated uh as well as uh 26 on uh page 26 number 15 same thing uh they repeat earlier on in the body of the resolution where we talk in the fact section where we say those stipulations were made we've got them changed in both uh so that's been reconciled uh and then uh as I said before there are a couple in particular on page 28 uh Roman numeral 30 uh and 31 you'll see where we have the word uh comment instead of conditions because it was carried over verbatim from Mr bry's memo where it should have been modified uh so again the same type of non-substantive changes as well as page 30 number 37 I'm getting good at reading those Roman uh the the uh where we had the comment set of conditions so we've made the appropriate changes there um in addition to those nons subsi of I know there uh we received a letter from Council for the applicant with respect to a particular condition and I'm aware that we have Council for the applicant here if necessary uh because we have a condition uh on page 24 number five Roman numeral 5 with respect to JC pnl access um maybe I'll very quickly read the condition uh for the board as it presently stands uh it reads the applicant shall confirm that no right of way easement or other similar similar incumbrance is needed or held by Jersey Central Power and Light for access to the staff portion of the property and to the extent necessary should jcpnl require access on or through the property for access to the light utility poles in the railroad right of way which requires a significant modification to the site plan as approved then the applicant shall return to the board to demonstrate accesses provided that is sufficient to both jcpnl and the board and the board shall retain jurisdiction for such purpose um I believe the applicant from the letter that we received uh does not take issue with that condition um but they want it to weigh in uh uh on that issue and uh I I don't know if the board as a whole is comfortable with that condition as worded or not um I believe it satisfies the concern as a condition subsequent all these are conditions subsequent to approval that it provides for a concern that if and when jcpnl needs to come get access to those UTI polls on through the subject lot even though they are the polls are offsite um that either they will do so or if there needs to be a modification to the site plan applicants going to have to come back to us at that time if when that occurs um but uh it's for the board with the Clause um and that's okay and that's what the we want to get done we want to get the approval accomplished with the appropriate contingencies the applicant should just be aware that jcpnl does need access to the Flag Staff officially and they should deal with it as they say they are going to do and as now required by condition to do yeah they're they're going to deal with the fact that jcpnl does require access to the F staff Mr chairman with your permission I think it would be appropriate to at least allow Council to entered appearance on the record and candidly for the record to reflect the council was here uh on behalf of the applicant to hear everything uh uh uh uh prior to the adoption of the resolution so I think we have Council here sure thank you board Luke pontier of the law firm D Pitney here on behalf of the applicant my firm did submit a letter to the board earlier this afternoon as Mr Warner indicated we do not take any issue with the condition as worded uh we do believe that that accurately reflects the agreement uh that was made by the applicant during public hearings so thank you uh to the extent that are concerns about that condition I may have further comment uh but we are are satisfied with the condition ised do we need them um when they have to readjust to adjust slightly their building footprint because of jcpnl do we need them to return to us I would think that if it's going to be that type of a modification yeah and actually by definition what we're saying is anything beyond the what we refer to sometimes or at least the engineers do dominous field change um then in my mind it rises to the level of an amended site plan approval and it would be prudent to happen come back I don't want to clear the deal that's all so I just wonder what they will have to adjust uh their building to establish a 10 foot access for apparently they're they're uh uh they do not object to the condition as drafted I agree we have to assume uh they the council for the applicant has taken into consideration and has made the determination that it's not going to have a negative impact on moving forward I don't want it to have a negative impact on I want the fact that I want to be sure that when they have to change their footprint to allow for the 10 put access that um they aren't inhibited and I guess worst case scenario they're wrong and and and they do need to uh uh make a modification to that condition because it's inhibiting something they certainly have the right to come back and ask the board to make a modification to the condition that they're they're consenting to right now they can always come back and say please change that condition if they need if they felt the need to all right in other words I think everybody's cover covered I want them to be able to proceed that's the point and I want to proceed with this when they have to adjust their buildings for PR I want to be sure they can continue to proceed I don't want that to screw up funding or anything like that so we we appreciate that we are we are happy with the condition is drafted and again thank you for your time all right Steve I have one other clerical change sure um on page three on the top begin reses to the east on the opposite side the resid uses on the west so so it should read residential uses to the east open print on the opposite side of Mount AR Road Clos print and then pick up with west and south No No it should be residential us to the east west on the opposite side of road east of um two oh oh it's in the wrong place right that's what I'm saying parent in the wrong place it should be on West so it's East K right then West and then the parenthetical explanation for West West okay got it and I'll make sure all these get back to Denise yep got it all right anything else that that was it right yes okay any other [Music] coms motion think we need a motion that's what happens when we have 33 page single space resolution with probably 155 conditions yes I'm move the adoption of resolution approving application number sp223 second I'll second okay roll and M Gardner yes M Geller yes Mr harwitz yes Mr Simo yes and Mr Zarina you skipped me for some reason I'm the wrong line again Garder Graham Harwood Sim I'm sorry I'm sorry Graham yes Mr it's 5 uh Jord Graham Harley s off SAR thanks yes yes okay um for the context of the audience um should be aware that those two were the last two of three applications by us applicant for OPM to do affordable housing in verville so it's a fairly significant Milestone to get through them for the applicant and all so anyway uh new business we did it the consistency review so now we have payment of the bills any fund on bills forward to me yeah go ahead Ken I we pay bills in the amount of 3 2625 second voice a voice h y all in favor I any oppos any abstains no okay all right well that was all the opening acts so now we're here for the main event which is the continuation of the public hearing for AR at Bernville um 39 square3 125 can I get um board member DeMarco as before is recusing himself all right so this is our Contin ation welcome again Mr before you begin justest that watched all the previous record and so did I I want to make that statement okay so umse needs they should be both track is eligible yes okay how and Chad and Mr wal yes all three sign the certification attorney Warner the previous hearing was held on February 8th and it was continued to two weeks after that which is tonight so hi good evening everyone uh John wies scalin on behalf of AR Bernardsville LLC it's a pleasure to be back before the board this evening uh as a chairman indicated this is our second public hearing with respect to my client's application for the proposed Redevelopment of the Palmer Square Redevelopment Area Property is located at 35 39 Ott square and five marown Road identified as block 125 Lots one two and three uh this property is subject to the Palmer Square Redevelopment plan uh this is a plan that was adopted through a very deliberative process under the New Jersey local Redevelopment and Housing law uh it was reviewed by this board and ultimately adopted by the burrow Council on May 8th of 2023 you're all familiar with the plan uh the proposal that's before you is uh for a mixed use project consisting of 68 residential units uh and approximately 9,230 square feet of retail space complies with the plan we believe that amount of commercial retail space uh is the appropriate amount of space uh for a project of this nature and size based on a property its location uh this is a plan that's going to transform uh the property as it currently exists uh several dated buildings and and a large asphalt surface parking lot uh and what we're looking to create here is a project that he's going to Pro promote the Burrow's master plan vision for this site uh which does call for a vibrant pedestrian friendly uh Community Development with a mix of both residential and Commercial uses it's also a project that's consistent with Somerset County's master plan it's actually recognized in the Redevelopment plan itself uh the County's master plan also established goals uh for the Redevelopment including repurposing of existing downtown areas promoting mixed use commercial and residential development and really in a town center with easy access to mass transit and creating pedestrian uh friendly uh amenities while still utilizing your existing infrastructure in a manner that's really intended to revitalize these downtown poor areas including the property that we are uh we're looking at uh the that is before you tonight uh is the plan that was envisioned more than a year ago and the Redevelopment plan started uh and in fact it is the very plan that was actually appended to the Redevelopment agreement uh that was entered into uh between the burrow uh and the redeveloper in August of 2023 uh as I mentioned two weeks ago when we we were here uh we've got a project before you that is fully conforming uh to the Redevelopment plan we do not have any variants released we had a couple of minor deviations we El eliminated those design waivers uh a lot of the leg work uh and and design that is in this project is actually done during the Redevelopment plan process it's really kind of the the whole core of going through that process of of developing a plan which for all intents and purposes is the zoning ordinance that's that's applicable here uh and that is what allows us to come here with a fully compliant plan uh in in improving the plan just like any other zoning ordinance your bur Council looks at it they consider the impacts that are associated with the project uh that was included uh everything from use to density imperious coverage setbacks Building height uh and it also takes into account the fact that projects such as this is going to generate a certain amount of traffic it's going to generate a parking demand and that's all incorporated into the the Redevelopment uh just as a reminder we were here two weeks ago uh you heard the testimon from our first witness uh Paul mut he's our civil engineer Paul went through all aspects of the the existing site put up an aerial uh went through the the overall site design and touched on all aspects of the project uh we also reviewed the reports of the board professionals and it indicated a number of technical comments engineering planning uh and we advis the board that we would comply with with all of those comments uh to their satisfaction uh before we got to like real questioning of Paul and we didn't actually reach the public questioning uh we were provided with what I'd say is a rather long laundry list of of suggestions uh comments questions concerns were articulated um and I can tell you we we appreciate comments uh it is part of the process uh I've been doing this for uh the better part of 30 years 30 plus years uh I am accustomed to projects being being modified uh through the deliberative process of the board and that's whether it's comments from the board or comments from the public uh and that's even when I have the fortune as I do now of coming here with a fully conforming plan um they can always be made better and and we're happy to hear those comments and continue to go through it uh over the course of the past two weeks uh we have looked at that list of comments and suggestions that were offered um and chairman I know you made those comments uh you know with the hope and the goal of of optimizing and and trying to improve in the Pro on that project um we're GNA we're going to review those comments as we go through our with our Witnesses touch on them and where where we think we can we can work with those uh we are in review and receive as well of reports from uh some of your advisory boards we got historic preservation commission we got your fire fire prevention committee uh report uh I would tell you that we have been in touch had had direct communication with Glenn Miller uh who's made certain suggestions I think I touched on this when we were here two weeks ago um we do have a project that actually not only fully compliant with your Redevelopment plan but fully compliant with your with all applicable fire uh codes and subcodes uh but there are certain areas we discussed with Mr Miller uh where we are certainly willing to enhance that and go above uh what the fire code requirements are and we'll continue to work with him I'm sorry Mr to interrupt with the chair's permission Mr wol but was there a written report for Mr Miller no no no we haven't got a formal written we've had discussions will this be put on the record as to exactly what conditions have been requested and will be stipulated to yes they will just want to make sure we get it as soon as we can yep so we're continuing tonight um we would ask that the board remain patient would ask if the board allow us to present our Witnesses and and hear all the testimony our Witnesses uh obviously there'll be opportunity for questions of our Witnesses both by the board and the public uh in terms of this evening I intend to call back Mr mut um pick back up where we left off because he was still subject to questions uh I am going to have him do a little bit of redirect on some topics uh we did just receive reive two days ago an environmental Commission report I'm going to have him speak to that and some other issues thereafter I do intend to call John corak he's a traffic engineer I know the board just retained Mr trapman uh this evening uh to uh uh to to serve as the board's professional um I think it is important that the board hears the testimony and the public as well we we're at a busy we're in a busy area certainly in the morning and evening peak hours uh and considerations of traffic and understanding what those impacts are important so we're going to have Mr corak testify we know Mr trouton's not here tonight we will provide Mr trapman with whatever information documentation I assume he's probably been provided with the reports so far and synchronized testing and so forth uh he can contact our our traffic engineer finally we get to him uh we've got Kevin Smith he's a project architect we'll go through all aspects of uh of the overall design for this project that he came came up with you know and again through the course of our professional testimony we do intend on touching on those comments you had made chairman um any additional comments and suggestions we have along the way we will we will consider uh and where we can um do things improve the project we're happy to do so so long as they don't intend you know impair the intent of the original Redevelopment plan or violate the terms or conditions because some things would would require modification so with that I'd like to call Paul John Just J there's an awful lot of questions potentially for the engineer do you want to just consider bringing your traffic engineer up and and having his testimony because I don't want to bog down on the youve got people that I know you want to present well I do us to try that I would like to just this is what I would suggest chairman he's gonna be here throughout if I can just have him touch on a on a few items fine as long as move it along too because I do want to get you give you the opportunity to have your traffic engineer speak I appreciate that chairman of yes I think the last exhibit was 83 statement s the last exhibit was hard to hear I get any louder well when Paul stands here as soon as I get in the way um so I'll share the exact I don't remember what we marked the site plan rendering but I'm going to share that same exhibit no changes have been made uh site plan ring a colorized version of the site plan was A2 yes so A2 is what is on the screen currently no changes have been made it's the same exhibit as the previous meeting and Mr M I see you have exhibit 82 up um if if you wouldn't mind I would like you to speak to the efforts that were made regarding pedestrian accessibility of the project because it does go to some of the commentary regarding setbacks and and how this project came together and was designed yeah certainly and it was certainly a a an objective and a focus as part of the Redevelopment plan to enhance the public space along the frontages primarily along alot square and Morristown Road for this development just for some just for some existing conditions um there's about 2500 square fet of usable um space out there today there's 5 foot sidewalks in some cases the buildings are set back only 9 ft from the curb so it's very compressed in that area today and obviously we're looking to open that up and provide some more usable space to pedestrians in that area because we're also dealing with the steep slopes of the area as well so how do we introduce those um usable pedestrian spaces and I'll get into that overall We're Just a Touch under 10,000 square ft of pedestrian area comparison to that 2500 that includes all of the sidewalk areas the driveway areas the loading areas as well as the onproperty um usable public space as well where we have now is the buildings especially if you look along Morristown Road um there's an average setback there of 22 a half feet um in comparison to where the previous building was extending closer to 9 ft and all of that has been filled in with pedestrian usable areas specifically the lighter hat pch in the lighter areas along the curve line that you're seeing that is your public sidewalk and your public basically where you'll see pedestrians traversing the area but we've also leveled out and introduced areas on property one being at the northwest corner the other being along the building towards the north of the page here um these are areas that will be able to be utilized more directly by pedestrians because they're going to be leveled out there'll be some unique landscaping and things to attract customers pedestrians into those areas to to use the the residential or the retail space as well as of any restaurant space or anything like that so it's meant to encourage the use of that space in in in direct um addressing the existing space that's really not usable in any way very very very um short sidewalks that are not really usable for pedestrians in a significant way um I think that's it and uh Paul uh you're in receive the most most recent report from the environmental commission is that correct we did yes uh commission raised some issues regarding how storm water management would be handled and I believe they question calculations on a prvious coverage if you could just speak to that I know you testified to this uh on the 8th but if you can just go back over it very briefly yes very for the record this is the February 19 20204 environmental commission report is that correct that is correct Mr Warner thank you Mr match is that correct yes that's correct okay thank you yeah so just to touch on that again um I think the key takeaway from this project there is there is a slight reduction in impervious coverage overall which is which is a positive benefit and allows us to naturally comply with local and state regulations with regards to storm order but the key takea away from this project is we're taking away a large swath of what DP calls motor vehicle surfaces which are the most impactful to the surrounding environment right now we we have a large parking lot that's allowing debris and pollution to enter the system what we're replacing that with is what's considered clean runoff by the D which is roof runoff that doesn't have the motor vehicle aspect to it the oils the debris the trash and things like that and we're also introducing a courtyard that has substantial Green Space to reduce the overall load and reduce the overall Rush of water to those public facilities so overall it's a it's a significant net benefit from just the pollution the TR and the things coming off the site and the introduction of some green space Also reduces our load on the system and this much uh would you say that this project is consistent with the plan goals that are set forth in the Palmer Square Redevelopment plan particularly Pages 21 to 22 of the plan yeah I certainly would uh in your opinion is this project fully compliant with the uh Redevelopment plan as adopted on May 20123 yes that's correct um the plan presented this evening is it also consistent with the redel vment uh with the plan that was appended to the Redevelopment plan approved and executed in August of 2023 yeah substantially I'm sorry you said appended appended if I may Mr chairman appended to what appended to the Redevelopment agreement good um well answer the question now it's been clarify yes yes yes that's correct very um does the project meet the parking uh demand in your opinion and the requirements set forth in the Redevelopment plan yes it meets and exceeds slightly to offer some flexibility as well uh as it relates to loading Mr much the proposed loading space is located entirely on the site is that correct yes that is correct uh in your opinion as as the project engineer is a designating loading area suitable to address for commercial and residential deliveries yes uh is it also suitable to address residential movein and move outs it is resal sorry I'm sorry residential movein and move outs tenants moving in and tenants moving out so so deliveries was so describe residential deliveries so residential deliveries we've offered two areas uh for loading there there's a 49.8 by 24 area that's uncovered as well as a 40 by 24 area or 26 area that's covered under the building so the the that space is can be utilized for the deliveries here the deliveries the movein the move outs all of the functions of the loading of this site are accommodated by that space that's roughly 100 by 25 provided along that road you describe more explicitly a residential delivery please yeah residential delivery is anything you would see delivery BS as far as Amazon or food deliveries can all be accommodated in that area off Mount area that stretches credibility in my opinion okay I understand your position thank you uh I have nothing further chairman uh did you did did you feel that you addressed each of the points in the um letter from the environmental commission I think the only one I didn't touch on was they also were asking about some of the Bedrock and how that was going to be handled as part of this project and I'll just elaborate on that a bit there was a detailed geotechnical study with borings um conducted to in excess of 30 ft below grade to assess where the Bedrock is where the groundwater is and things of the like and we are confident that the the proposed underground parking and any underground facilities will not require the blasting in the things of the rock we've specifically designed it to avoid those bedrock and fortunately here the groundwater in the Bedrock is very deep in excess of 30 feet I'm sorry if I may sure are you going so far as to stipulate and no blasting I mean I don't know well I don't know if we're going to go that far Mr Warner I think uh well listen we've got we've got Geo we' got Geo Tech work it is not our anticipation uh if we did have to do any any Rock ripping or blasting we would have to comply with requirements it is not expected um there was also a question about the courtyard and the um whether it was going to be used and maybe it hasn't been used in terms of recharge or any of that yeah so that's a that's an interesting one as well so I'll touch on that in two ways I remember these two points so first of all we talked a little bit about the last meeting that area is going to be is going to be incorporated in conveyance system so the runoff associated with that will be collected by small yard drains and things like that and then direct it off site so that is that one that's probably half the comment you're speaking to the other half is as far as recharging because this is a Redevelopment I drink a lot of myself for the benefit of the board members certain court reporter and the members of the public I think everybody wants to hear what you have to say absolutely um so the secondary piece to that answer is that because this is a Redevelopment Plan and there's a significant area of pavement we're also in a planning area one area where there's no requirement for recharge in an area like this because there is no recharge um associated with the existing property it's nearly entirely impervious so that will be maxed in the in the proposed condition it complies with all local and state regulations for storm water management so in a sense it'll be treated essentially the same way the parking lot's treated today the parking lot has storm water runoff which goes somewhere and this will be collected and redirected somewhere also in in a very similar way yes the end point of the runoff is certainly very similar to the existing condition what's what's good about and the benefit of this project is it's clean roof runoff and and and treated by Landscaping in the courtyard so it's a substantial cleaning of the runoff coming off the site I'm sorry Mr chair if I may I thought I just heard Mr match say we're in planning area one oh we're planning we're in planning area too yeah [Music] so that's your testimony is your testimony but I don't know if that changes his opinion or not but I just want to make sure the record's clear we're not planning area one we're planning area two yes does that change your testimony it does not change my testimony there is not a recharge requirement for this Redevelopment plan um I think the direct benefit is the cleaning of the run so on the subject of luck um how are you planning to resolve or mitigate the uh abandoned gasoline fuel tanks that are in the Southeast southwest corner of the property what do you intend to do with those fuel checks they'll have to be removed and it's part of Environmental remediation for the site the site will have to be but would REM okay and then second to that how if anything are you going to do to remediate the oil spill under the Palmer building anything that happens as far as an environmental Factor this site will handled by an LSR lsrp and we have to meet all state and local regulations for that absolutely and do you have a plan for that yet i' have to ask the client do we have a do we have an plan for any of that we'll respond back chairman that's a question it's a someone outside my per okay I never really know uh question I'm sorry was this what you wanted to cover and then you I've covered what I wanted to Chairman so so whatever questions you want to ask we have a ton of questions but I want you to be able to go to the other witness and call but sir but I have a question in some inconsistency between the architectural plan and engineering plan this is the architectural plan on the this is a colorized version of our site plan well because this shows the grading of the ramp oh that's a very good point and we touched on this a little bit in the last meeting we submitted documents prior to this hearing addressing some refinements that we've made those include we've lowered the slope of that driveway and also extended the flat portion at the bottom to make that entrance to the the garage a little bit easier we've also expanded the public space along Morristown as well so we've been using this as an exhibit and you'll see it in the exhibits for the architectural as well they all match these were submitted to the board um but we did make some refinements over time before this meeting or before the previous meeting and we wanted to show that to show the refinements and show some of the improvements and are those updates being submitted and because we're we're working with the Baseline stuff right so those adjustments are being those will be incorporated into the full plan set what we've prepared and submitted uh was roughly 10 days before the previous meeting is this exhibit was was a site plan that wasn't colorized with these features on it was submitted as well as architecturals that match that you'll see from our architect this evening so the architecturals will match the engineering plan that's correct not the engineering match the architect yeah we worked in conjunction to prepare a slightly optimized plan prior to the previous meeting and that's what we're presenting to as part of these meetings so you made a statement that the plan of appendage to the development agreement do you know how was appendage it's it's in the document itself follow on that you have a whole pile drawings things pended agreement they were not no those are those are the specific design understand devel AG was two or three pages correct but but Council never saw this specific design of this project before they approve land yeah the fine details of the design comes for the you know the preliminary final site plan yes that was part of my question you said too so you know what they the traffic report before they adop plan what did they so people could hear do we have an answer I off hand i'm I don't know exactly what the uh what the council saw that time so we don't know the council understood the impact of this project on traffic when they no council adopted the plan just like any other governmental action just like his zoning ordinance um on the deliveries you went over that very quickly I wonder if you could explain in more detail how particularly uh parcel deliveries will be made to the project and how the parcel once delivered will move within the project yeah I think that's better testimony for both our traffic engineer and our architect there's some internal pieces of the building all of that I think you'll hear that as we go through the application SE um as far as the voting and I'm just again maybe this something that'll be brought up later uh I'm assuming there'll be an overhead door on that north side of that uh bump out will that allow vehicles to get inside the building that's correct so they'll be able to get in yes and you'll you'll see what that looks like as we move through the application right okay and then one other question about this land here on the South Side between those two uh bumps in the building there it shows grass will that actually be grass there or again I'm looking at the the parking plan the lower level that would be a roof right there yeah I don't I think the intention is that will be sunk under that the uh the grass there so This Grass up be on top yeah so that's that area yeah how the last question so the will be grass on top of the yeah and and there's there's some elevations that we'll work through again with the architect you'll be able to see that in true color and how it'll look from that side so if that's the case and there will be grass in between those two uh bump outs in the building you have a zero set back on one side and 1 fo4 in set back on the other side is there some plan to be able to maintain that grass area yeah I think it I think it'll just be M I don't think we have but you'll have to you'll have to come on else to get yeah there's and I think as you see the elevations you'll see there's an opportunity to trim that up from the inside of the garage as well so we'll go through that okay are you fil the yes and you hear that from Sor we need to have a question finished and then an answer given court reporter is probably gonna appreciate that as well but uh and everyone needs to hear both okay so please if everyone can cooperate in that regard well I'm sorry can you repeat the question I asked if the dot application has been filed it has been yes can we see a copy of it yes and our traffic engineer will speak more to it okay so John I'm going to withhold questions from the public I've got about 60 more for the engineer um but I do want you to be able to introduce your okay witness that's fine corre I'm sorry already forgotten if I swore an all the witnesses last time we're not 100% sure I'm swear it again please raise your right hand you swear to God orm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you Mr cor can you please provide the board with a summary of your educational and professional background and licenses you hold of course again for the record my name is John quak last name spelled c o r a k with Stonefield engineering and design with my office located at 92 Park Avenue in Rutherford New Jersey I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey I hold a Bachelor of Science and civil engineering from the College of New Jersey Jersey I'm an expert in the field of traffic and transportation engineering I've prepared over 200 traffic studies for Land Development applications I've appeared before over 90 boards within the state and I serve as a board expert board reviewer uh in front of four municipalities in the state well except thank you thank you chairman M corak um you your office prepared the traffic impact study that's uh before the board in conjunction with this application is that correct that's correct I'll just turn the floor over to you to speak to uh your findings with respect to this project of course that can you just confirm it's the September 26 20203 traffic impact study and that traffic study was dated September 26 2023 correct thank great so it's part of our traffic study we do a comprehensive review of the site itself the surrounding roadway network uh UL Ely looking to assess the impacts of the proposed development as it relates not only to vehicular traffic in and out of the site and at the adjacent traffic signal but of course The Pedestrian realm and how it fits from the movement of people perspective um in this downtown uh setting Village core if you will um that this property resides on and has a lot of potential to become so that existing condition today um several buildings on the site a little bit tired and a large asphalt parking lot we have two existing access points one on Mount AR Road and one on Route 202 and so on Mount arog Road where you're constrained is that because you're so close to this traffic signal um the existing access is frequently blocked by cued vehicles and so making any sort of left turn movements in or out becomes problematic and making even right turn movements in and out means you're going to have to wait it's not so much a safety concern but it is a timing concern if you will at the route 202 driveway that presently exists uh it is shifted much more to the left uh more abouts where the uh the courtyard Plaza is and between the the curvature of the roadway both horizontal and vertical so the curvature and the hill the crest of the roadway um and of course the buildings that are very close to the uh the property line what you've got at that driveway is a pretty substantial site distance issue meaning if you're trying to leave that site um looking toward the traffic signal it is very difficult to see oncoming Motors especially coming from Mount ARA Anderson Hill Road uh that direction right so those Vehicles traveling on 202 if you're trying to make that turn out today it's somewhat of a Flor and prey yeah it's it's you're you're essentially uh trusting that in that little window that you can see no no additional Vehicles going to come through and it certainly doesn't hold up to any of the modern-day site distance standards or guidelines that are that are provided to us um by the American Association of State Highway Transportation officials ashto which is also used by the NJ do and most uh engineering review agencies as well so as it exists today um you know a a site development that uh you know from that vehicular perspective is a little bit lack lust there and then on a pedestrian perspective especially in the fabric of the downtown core um the the sidewalks and the the equipment in the the right of way um essentially the traffic signal equipment creates a condition where you really can't walk by without kind of tiptoeing around a uh a traffic signal pole if you have a stroller or you're in a wheelchair you simply can't get around some of the existing infrastructure on that sidewalk area it's about 3 ft wide in its narrowest point with the traffic signal pole sitting right there it completely does not conform to um Ada accessibility requirements proag and the like and so know that's it's a major constraint especially in an area that is intended to be very walkable right south of the railroad tracks is additional parking for the downtown you simply come across the bridge and then you're met with uh you know an an impediment from a pedestrian standpoint that's it's not very positive it's not very prent and so as part of this design what we're looking to do is obviously conform to the Redevelopment plan and part of that um performance with the Redevelopment plan includes a number of benefits and attributes that are related to improving both vehicular and pedestrian mobilization and circulation um around the property and in the property itself so the first component of it starting with the the vehicular is locating the vehicular access those going to and from the parking area on Route 202 because the Turning movements on Mount AR are challenging to make anytime there's a queue so you want to push it on 202 as far away from the traffic signal as possible and what this does is it affords us much better sight lines it affords us less impact through any cues that are on 202 any any lineup of cars um and and ultimately creates a safer condition one where you can move Vehicles more efficiently on and off the site itself uh the second piece is by locating um the loading to mount ARA Avenue loading generally being infrequent and the way this loading area Works um is that essentially because those left turns to and from Mount ARA are very difficult especially if you are uh using you know a larger van or a box truck that that's that's what we'd expect for this uh type of development essentially the the movement for the loading operation is you're coming up mount a um headed Northbound you essentially turn in making a right turn in pulling all the way up and then you back into the uh the loading dot area that's covered and so when you want to leave then you simply leave that loading dot area pull out and essentially uh slide over to the left to make the right turn out of the site and continue on Mount Ary and either up to uh to Anderson HIll or on to Route 202 so the the intent here is to make very simple Maneuvers right turning type maneuvers not being obstructed by those those cues and locating this loading in an area that's away from a lot of the other pedestrian activity the downtown activity on Route 202 and and outside of some of the internal pych BOS as well as part of our you just said something you said outside of the downside downtown pedestrian accident what makes you think pedestrian activity isn't right there for that loading well the main storefronts and businesses well you know travel yeah the travel paths they're all fronting rout two of two yours right but But continuing on the corridor it's it's much more substantial in 202 and and sure across on Anderson Hill Road and off Square you're saying we're just not going to have pedestrian activity on the Mount Erie side of this that's not my testimony my testimony is that it's the Lesser pedestrian area you have to locate your loading access on one of the two streets and this is the preferred location based on that now you've chosen it allocate and you've been allowed to put your loading area on one of the two streets correct and that's by ordinance basically by the agreement that was given you were given permission to do this it's not standard for ver but your the agreement is allowed you to consider putting a loading zone on that area normally be illegal the entrance to the loading zone is on Mount AR there's no backing in for Mount Ary there's no maneuvering that's on Mount Ary except the right turn in and a right turn out that doesn't matter keep I'm just clarifying that's all how does that loading area conform to the counting requirements in terms of driveway openings things like that it I'm not 100% sure on the the curv line opening um it's possible that it needs a labor I'm not sure and the count also requires 66 RightWay along M Aras dedication dur e for Road Ling is that in the plan at present consideration uh does not appear to be no because this is a minor arterial the county master plan so they require easement or a dedication 33 ft through Center Line sure but that doesn't seem possible with the bump out yeah can you speak a little louder please that that is not it appears that that's not possible for new bump out along Mount ARA with the loading bump out 33 foot from Center Line what it's either an easement or a dedication and that's something we can discuss with the county I think one of the considerations here is that uh Bridge directly south of us that would would at least taper um you know the extent that the the county would look to widen this area in the future but that's defitely disc being replaced it's a good idea but bridge is being replaced so not it's something to discuss with the county it's their master plan right away with we can do that the county yes resp I'm not sure I'm sorry I I can't speak yeah who's speaking someone's t we have to know who they are one at a time we do not have a formal review letter from the county he said that when trucks left the loading zone U they would make a right turn need go off Anderson or 202 are trucks permitted on Anderson Road right now A Truck above a certain size coming down through a two that wants to go up uh uh now Road it's got to go down to claremount trucks cannot go up Anderson Road that was correct right so it could doesn't have to be a truck necessarily could be one of those Amazon Sprinter vans could be the smaller delivery type vehicles but right but what you do if you have a box truck which I don't think can go up Anderson can it's going to be by way I think it's five tons yeah so how big box truck yeah empty might hit five tons a small what's that truck going to do if he wants to he have to make the left turn on to 202 that's a left or a right yeah he needs to go up gonna have take a left turn on two2 [Music] South's one time board members please crosses over the traffic course you got it to the left turn yes exactly or make a right turn goes the right way can't make another turn until gets down to I I have a question about the the trucks themselves you had mentioned a van or a box truck can go in and out of there maybe I'm getting a little ahead of myself but you have some of the units are three bedroom units what kind of of moving van in and out is that the only place where there would be accessibility for Vans or trucks and if you have a three-bedroom apartment you've got to have more than a box truck so how how have you so the this area is the area for loading the move in the move out um three-bedroom apartments would utilize larger trucks but that can be a larger size box truck it doesn't have to be an articulated tractor trailer uh there are uh U-Haul type trucks that that are uh you know large enough to accommodate and move a three-bedroom unit and know one bedroom is going to be a smaller truck typically but they they do those box trucks do exist and and would be the kind of move in move out vehicle U that' be specified here so that that would fit that wouldn't fit underneath that would just be the outdoor area no The Underneath the clearance for trucks as well yeah yeah it's it's the 14ot clearance and and all that I would just stipulate I think it might may have said it on the eth all the residential movein move outs they're all managed and controlled or would be managed and controlled by building ownership so it's not a it's not a free-for-all we have multiple movings I'm talk about the space itself Y what are the uh what are the number of deliveries that you've used in your model to describe all the different types of deliveries you mentioned one there's the post office there's Amazon there's FedEx there's ups there's thehl there's Uber which may be different lift taxi you know all the other types of deliveries um I don't know if you're expecting GrubHub or door Dash to do deliveries there uh Licor groceries pharmacies what I guess it's what kind of deliveries do you expect to be done I know I asked you this before there's a lot deliveries is a big a big cloud of stuff and I'm wondering what quantity of deliveries you use in your traffic assessment of that loading facility and I I appreciate the move in move out would be scheduled but what did you use right so so the move in move out is one component of it and and once the the building is leased up that's a pre minor amount right your your leases are typically leased the year and you you hope for renewals because that keeps the residents in the unit longer um it keeps you know the rent coming in um the other deliveries we'd expect there are mostly related to the retail components um you know related to deliveries for those retail pieces and any I would guess box truck deliveries of the residential so so what I would expect to be able to use some of the parking areas the internal circulation would be those passenger vehicle type deliveries door Dash Uber Eats your pickups for Uber work um you know those types of um you know residential type deliveries can utilize that those areas on site where the circulation is open and available um instead of mixing that type of use uh in a in a loading Corridor that that prominantly serves the box trucks yeah you brought up a great Point there's the retail um replenishment that I I left off my list for you how many delivery trucks you see it arriving what was your assumption being frequency of which delivery trucks making deliveries to Apartments would be during the uh well building during the daytime yeah so over the course of a typical day you might see um you know two to three box truck type the smaller box trucks that the know FedEx uh ups are delivering with um you know Amazon may have a little bit more free see but when you're delivering two apartment buildings um you're able to essentially put more packages in for more units and handle the deliveries um you know at a at a more singular time than spreading out numerous trucks throughout the day what was the number of trucks you expected dri every day model this it was for the residential portion two to three trucks two to three okay I think we should answer I'm sorry can't hear you we should defer answering that question we can we can revisit that certainly yeah I mean I get more than that just in one house you know five deliveries a day so and you got mail you know gu that's a separate delivery it right course I'm talking I'm talking the box trucks the larger trucks you know when we're talking about the Amazon Sprinter vans the mail those are additional additional components of it asking about the truck and the size of the truck like the smaller box is 30 ft no the the smaller ones are more like 23t like the movement sure but then there's the discussion of the larger box truck which is 40 ft have you plotted I saw a plotting of a 30t truck have you done the 40ft truck at this point I have't plotted the 40 um have plotted the 30 though so we'll need to make sure that 40 can be accommodated okay and the expectation would have been 30 depends that that loading zones in our town are supposed to be 30 ft capable supporting those trucks and so you're saying in addition to that you'll PL out of course so when a truck when the Amazon truck arriv where does it go it goes into that 30 that 30 uh it would likely be in the outdoor loading zone understanding how they they typically aren't going to enter buildings now when the second truck comes at the same time where would it go it it' likely be in that area as well room for the trucks to be there at the same time the two could stage it might take a little bit of uh jostling to to get the second one out but but yes youit you could park to and that same okay so now now the guys in loading zone and he takes his packages out how do the packages move through the building I would defer that's the architect good question for the architect can we just back up and just clarify this I don't know if I I heard it correctly if um was Uber or that kind of a pickup a taxi would that come down in the parking area or at that same pickup location where your your delivery are it would not it would certainly not be in the pickup delivery location the you know an Uber taxi pickup is not likely staging there typically what you see with with any Uber pickup is they stage on the street um if you have something like a a a grocery delivery service you have like the uh the Shoppers that do it for you in their own personal vehicle they're probably coming into um you know the the parking lot area uh the Uber can also be directed by that the person ordering it if they're not ready hey don't wait on 202 come and park in the lot and I I'm sorry I'm sorry if I can't hear probably other people members of the public can't either so In fairness to the members of the public if it could be a little quieter and the board members can speak a little louder um so I'm just trying to figure out if if youve got say a an Uber taxi and and they've been called from one of the units now that that vehicle actually comes down that driveway that goes into the underground parking is that what you're saying they could it's it's a shared um parking area that's open to the public because some of it is retail some of it is residential and so those retail spaces being open to the public are an opportunity really in a case where and this this happens from time to time you order the Uber they arrive quicker than you think they will um and that you can basically call or text the Uber and direct them either to your pickup location or where to Stage it's you know the the app technology there exists for that type of communication because they can't they can't save on right so are you stimulating to the fact that I guess you use the word um typically residential vehicles will not stage or pick up in the loading zone and will only be do so in the I mean that our intent is not to have them stage on route two ex but are you stipulating that be managed by the management company that that won't happen that's correct I I think the other thing you said you said someone else should be answering these questions right that it's that in terms of the those Ty to the app and deliveries and so for not about the loading zone it's somewhere else that was related to packages move through the building and they need to answer whoever those Witnesses need to answer those questions when when Uber comes downway will there be a stop there that for them to stand uh or um that it doesn't block access the uh you have like a standing Zone in the garage so that he doesn't block garage up standing come down no they usually use a parking space is your scope supposed to be on turn circulation circulation is part of it yeah on circulation question to ask is okay yeah vehicular circulation I I do know Mr cork actually has a lot more direct testimony because he going to speak to trip generation and so forth so we can just maybe we'll roll through that and then we'll come back to to some of these things if that's okay great so getting back into the direct testimony laying out the reasoning for the driveway locations we actually need to do then the analysis of the impact related to the site itself to understand uh are there you know further improvements that need to be made um related to vehicular impact pedestrian impact the life and so what we do uh as part of our traffic studies we conduct traffic counts um we conduct those counts during uh the typical weekday morning weekday evening and Saturday midday heak periods uh those periods generally represents uh the the peak volumes on the roadway Network and when your traffic is most likely to be affected by a development like this so we conducted those counts narrowed them down to a peak hour for the analysis purpose that's how Traffic Engineers conduct these traffic studies they look at a peak hour analysis uh and then we evaluate the levels of service at that intersection itself we then move into a future year condition um where we essentially grow the traffic we account for a little bit of background traffic growth whether that's just from overall population growth um growth from other developments in the area which we've included one um and uh and generally speaking there a background growth factor that dot recommends as a conservative measure to increase the volume you know for a you know for a future year growth the next component is to add in the actual traffic generated by the site the way we do that is with the trip generation manual H by The Institute of Transportation Engineers for this manual it's industry standard uh it provides uh trip forecast for a number of different land uses here we have both residential component and the retail component and we also have proximity involved to the train station we have a walkability we have a little bit of interconnected play between residents using the retail uses um and so what that ultimately shakes out to is for the 66 units um a total of 68 I'm sorry 68 units a total of 47 peak hour trips in the morning peak hour uh 52 peak hour trips in the evening peak hour and 58 peak hour trips in the Saturday midday peak hour so you see the retail going up a little bit there um on that on that Saturday period and that's also um pretty consistent with the roadway volumes um in terms of how they scale both morning evening and Saturday being one of the higher um you know roadway volume conditions uh throughout the week and just when you're when you're speaking to trips U Mr corak an in is a trip and out as a trip correct corre so we're not it's not double correct and so in in the uh morning you'll see a higher rate of out trips as more people are leaving to go to work um you know it's a similar phenomenon the other way in the evening where you have more people coming in um returning from work and then Saturday is a pretty even split uh as people are running errands visiting retail and like where it's a it's a broader distribution throughout the day and and you get closer to 50/50 is it based on um parking spaces or residents or what it's based on unit count for the residential and it's based on uh floor area for the uh retail JY can I ask you a clarifying question based on something that was just testified to with your permission because you gave numbers uh Mr cor uh 47 week day morning peak hour 52 weekday evening peak hour and Saturday weekday peak hour uh for the benefit of the public a couple of things number one can you give what those peak hours are yeah of course so those peak hours occurred from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. that's weekday morning weekday morning weekday evening is 5: to 6 Saturday midday was 11:15 to 12:15 based on the actual volumes that we counted and the numbers you gave 47 52 58 those were on page nine your adjusted uh uh post proposed CP generation correct correct and those adjustments were from page eight and they included something called internal capture trip reduction and something called Lu I'm ass that's land use code 822 34% 26% pass by trip reduction right those are not what I would call Gross proposed trip generation numbers those are net per these adjustments that you made is that correct that's correct and would it be I think the chair commission might be appropriate to explain for the benefit of the public those adjustments because I want the public to be aware of the fact that you've made adjustments these numbers that are based as I understand it on these codes uh on the it 11th Edition manual right so with so the first component of those adjustments the internal capture um you have essentially residential uh use on the same site as uh retail use and so some of those retail trips are often times generated from the residential unit so there's a you know a modest reduction because you don't have to leave the site you basically just walk over to that use um so are you in in essence saying saying some of the customers are going to come from the 68 units themselves so therefore some numbers going to be less is that the point that's correct okay uh and I guess you have a column in there that during certain periods of time okay yeah we don't forecast it much for the morning it's more that evening and Saturday peak hour conditions um same thing on the on the pass by trips those are for know retail trips that are uh already on the roadway Network retail frequently captures traffic volumes from the roadway Network and so those volumes are routed from the roadway in and out of the driveway for the analysis they don't actually constitute new vehicles on the road itself um what's not captured in here is uh reductions related to Transit use where we would expect you know given the proximity to the train station a number of residents in particular to foro driving to work and instead take take the train to work and that would reduce peak hour traffic volumes especially on the uh the morning and the evening period that I have a question but you when you did the projections you for midrise you use the you didn't take advantage of the adjustment the calculation the land use code that you use because there is a land use code that says your train your public transportation you didn't do that I would need to double check it it may incorporate that it's not specified in here I need to confirm that well I checked it great I appreciate that and it doesn't the land use code that you used was not one within a half mile train station right and so the ones within a half mile obviously incorporate that that Transit in reality they're about the same so how are you suggesting that their estimates are higher than what they could be suggest or take the other way if you if you use if you use the category within a half mile of a a train station it ends up being about the same number because the the the environment the number of studies that were done for the train station category were a lot different there were like 200 studies done for the midrise and only like half a dozen done for within certain distance half mile train right so it ends up being the same do you sa yes uh what version um this one was done in Synchro 11 and of 12 was published recently right I just would suggest that you do that since in 12.2 there was a correction the right turn computations of course so yeah happy to take a look at that in in the latest version of Synchro which of course wasn't published when the study was yeah prepared but happy to look at that so moving on with um you know so you you took no credit mass transit being in [Music] proximity all right he took a different credit I'm sorry can you I'm sorry he took a different credit instead of the mass transit credit he took the one for the internal shopping yeah that's how okay I just that clarification correct well can we talk about that the internal trips sure you reduce the trip Generation by about 22% based on the internal trip so you think that you it's a judgment decision based on the it um trip generation handbook Third Edition quote but 9,000 square ft broken up into what pieces sections that are 2200 in the Palmer building and then what 3,000 in each of the less than 3,000 in each of the new buildings they're going to draw 20% of the traffic from the res ential I mean that's that's just in my opinion that's a little conser too conservative sure so again that those numbers are from that trip generation handbook they are also adopted by the NJ do they use the same uh internal capture percentages we've done the supported industry standards and and that level of reduction on a on a mixed use project I don't think is is uncharacteristic I also don't think it's uncharacteristic to say that that um some of those trips would be captured by people already walking on the street in part of the downtown an urban infield type uh trip reduction as well now there's a lot of different um analysis that can be done to essentially correct the data from a standalone Suburban development totally car Centric to a development like this or in a downtown core why didn't you use that because we the internal capture was appropriate so I guess I'm going to ask question differ is it your assessment that the trip count that you're is really a maximum trip count is that your testimony based on the fact you didn't take several of the credits I think was theed we took some of the credits not all of the credits we could have taken no credits that would be the maximum well I'd like to if you could present there's a there's a method calc because you calculated based on the methodology for the internal trips could you present that could you bring that back the next Mee look yeah of course yeah there's the standard um you know spreadsheets that that help calculate it but yeah we can Prov that it it's possible um with no credits that you test that would be the maximum that you can find that on table two page eight okay or yeah the the residential stays at 47 the uh the Saturday and sorry not the residential stays at 47 the morning stays at 47 okay the Saturday and PM get to these are both at 88 peak hour trips for that I questioned the calculation the internal TR okay I think it it may be a benefit to the board if we were um you know also able to just look at the analysis without any of the reductions right instead of trying to again that might be the more practical way sensitivity analysis but we we would expect reductions but we're happy to look at them without yeah I think that's the statement is right the expectation is that there are reductions based on where it's located how it's located I think understanding the maximum is an important thing yeah of course can you describe how in the guide B that you referenced Traffic Engineers how they have in the last year or two um adjusted for the societal changes that have swer people to this type of deliver delivery orientation for these Vans and Ubers and so forth what have they got in their manual that describes the factors that need to be considered as opposed to residences and units and so forth right so the know the the trip generation rates are still going to be based on either units bedroom count uh a development type plan tenant trip rate essentially essentially for residential use now um you know with recent publications of the generation manual parking generation manual um there's there's a constant um you know every few years now they're making these updates with with new data and they're essentially eliminating the old data from um you know from the reference guide and you can further filter out that data um but in terms of the the way that they categorize the data and include it in the trip generation manual it essentially gets separated out cars and trucks and there's no real distinction made about delivery services and the like within that trip generation sounds sounds like a problem and and certainly deliveries uh you know they they can happen in the peak hour they often times happen outside of that as well I understand you're picking Peak it's true the methodology is picking peak hours and it's not like oh well from 7:30 to 8:30 that's what all my deliveries are going to happen including Pizza that I need deliveries but um but nonetheless it seems to me that there actually needs to be explicit discussions of that especially in Suburban Urban you know settings that these and I know it's new and there there's not a lot of studies but there are a lot of trips being generated by deliveries and pickups and so so Mr can I question on that the concern expressed the well the the issue that you're the issue is that oh no no I understand the issue I may I ask a question or two I'm curious the the uh you for traffic you're using it uh 11th generation correct love of addition uh the the the um when did that come out is that published in the I think past two years I don't know I'm trying to recall I might have piece of documentation that tells me I think within the past two years but I don't need to confirm to assume any any studies that were Incorporated in the it uh uh 11th Edition uh if it came out say two years ago the studies preceded of the publication of course okay the the uh and do we know when the it fifth generation is that the it fifth generation report oh we're up to six now ah we know when that one came out believe it was last year was recent second half last year the um same thing though right any any any TR any study that is Incorporated in the publication of each each Edition would have to preced the publication of each addition right to my knowledge but the the it both both trip generation and parking generation are now published online so it is possible that they have updated provided updated studies so I don't outright say it has to proceed it but did you use the one online or did you use the publish the one on okay so we call half the time of you know the September 26th date we know off hand whether they actually add a new studies on before publishing the next Edition I've seen them revise land use codes I've seen them revise the way the studies are delegated um without releasing a new addition um I don't know offand if these particular uses that were used have had that happen do we know whether or not uh uh do we know when from what range of time uh the studies were uh that appear in the it1 Edition for for trip generation the it5 Edition for parking six sixth I keep doing that uh sixth edition uh uh we know the rate of time uh from when the respective editions studies were done are you asking time of day or year or like decade or both range of time between meaning the year years I don't know hands but that information can be obtained do they keep old ones or do they to each Edition do they just use a whole new set of uh uh studies uh that were subsequent to the prior Edition uh but precede the current edition now they do use some studies that were in Prior editions they determine they look at the data and determine if there's a need to cut off um old data for example a bank land use has had a substantial difference in traffic generation parking generation due to technology changes the way that people Bank direct deposit probably being the biggest piece of it where you no longer have to go to the bank caps the check um so so the it make the the people who do it they they make those decisions as to what to keep what not to keep yes with some sort of basis for doing engineering judgment I add to that thank you nothing further because I I was part of I submitted material to the it as it related to convenience stores with gasoline because they were using old and I presented the material and then I spoke so they assign an Editor to the to the manual and he takes the it was a mail he takes he took the material from the last Edition and picked and worked on developing standards for the new edition so comes from Traffic Engineers in the field submitting to the it then they can find that I guess it's safe to say at least now we don't quite know the range of years when the respective uh uh uh uh studies were done for use with respect to uh each of these midrise land use and the uh uh retail strip retail Plaza land use that came out of the 11th Edition other than to know that for the most part not entirely they preceded a year or two ago it's correct but we can rain that information well those two uses are new with are New Uses in the 11th Edition oh the 10th edition didn't have those I think the mid-rise was still in the 10th but the the strip retail strip retail was not and New Jersey do doesn't recognize the 11 addition correct um they're last I talked to do about that they are uh they're too busy to even contemplate looking at the rates just with the so yeah newey do still uses the the 10th edition yeah the midrise are in the 10th the strip retail is in the 11th but what I I'm what I'm I don't want to speculate but if if we look back at some of the data for that strip retail use some of that may precede the 11th Edition because it likely came from the old shopping center land use or specialty retail land use previous land uses that uh were in in earlier editions of the code and that's where the editor of the the manual comes in I guess the bottom line is that the board so desires since you said you could provide that information or get that information the board can decide whether it wants you to do so or ask you to do so or not so I was just curious I'm thank you um and I know you have to get to the impact of these numers but I wanted to know if you included in the model The Pedestrian Crossing at the northeast corner of the property I know it's not on your property but it did did you does the model tell you you have to do anything if there's a pedestrian Crossing for those right turns no we did not model um you know those those pedestrians at that Crossing no the counts were limited at the traffic signal it balanced through so we don't have those it's really then it's conventional stuff it's all about trips and a traffic signal who as opposed to Turning which is fine okay yeah that has to be figured out include the pedestrians at the signal as well right right which course must have been fun modeling that um but what about turning in and out of the driveway isn't that part of the I mean concern is the trips in and out of the driveway yes and the traffic there yes not the signal the vehicular um components of of that review yeah are part of this traffic St I think I think you make a great point about The Pedestrian Crossing we're located close enough review where you say and this is where it's just about our drive and people turning in and out on to 202 thanks still the plan soon that they're making both lefts and rights out of the parking parking that is that is the current plan yes it does fall to njd jurisdiction um but but that is that is the plan what what type of permit did you apply major access permit so subm a traffic studies no okay so continuing on once we've calculated that trip Generation Um what we then do is Route it to and from the subject site um that vehicular trip generation is course using forom only using that uh the main driveway along Route 202 um we route the left turns right turns coming in and out of the site and then also continue those routings over to the traffic signal itself and as we look then in our level of service analysis that we conduct from existing to no build to build we look for degradations we look for impacts related to uh basically in between one analysis and the next and what the analysis shows is that the additional traffic created by the driveways at the traffic signal do not have a material impact on level of service and what do I mean by material impact in this case we're looking at the increases that are um very much consistent generally speaking less than a 1 second increase as a result of um additional traffic volumes uh and and to that end we that's generally speaking imperceptible to motorists who are traveling through the corridor on a on a daily basis um at the driveway also we conducted the level of service analysis uh those turning movements operate at acceptable levels of service they meet the njds criteria for um level of service thresholds and and with that would not conclude any sort of adverse impact with those driveway we can see there there's no substantial queuing the sight lines are vastly improved and the the traffic impact there just does not have any negative impact on week2 So You me an interesting thing I just want to clarify so you said the loading zone I believe there was negligible change I was under the I guess na consumption that by removing a exit to the area that that would improve that situation that's not your assessment no the assessment at the at the traffic signal was negligible change and what we didn't do as part of this analysis was count the existing driveways and subtract off that volume it's it's as if that volume is still you know the volume that goes through the signal today if it's even it's going to the site it's as if it's still there in the analysis just just a little bit extra volume that in theory would would be directed elsewhere and not exist so I mean so you the assessment was no change either I'm driving north up the hill turning left into the existing lot or coming out of the existing lot going either right or left that was not the the the no change in level of service is at the traffic signal okay and the levels of service at the driveway operate at acceptable conditions for traffic engineering there's a statistic that I think you have probably that might be helpful and that is at the driveway in the PE hours what's the existing trip count at that spot you're saying that information I do not have like for the existing site well then you have to have it well I have the volume on the road that's what I meant I don't no I'm sorry I said it WR I I didn't mean the internally you know the volume in the driveway and then on the road itself you know you're saying there 47 in one case you know 47 in in or outs you know that are additional because you're not taking credit Printing and okay how many cars pass by that spot in both directions you know they both count right right at that hour you know so 47 is what you know do 300 cars pass by how many cars in that hour passed by that the front of that driveway sure understand the question now so um during the morning I'm headed on I'll do this by call 202 North which is East Stone right um in the morning it's 579 on 202 North 485 202 South sorry can I get the last one 485 485 particular page in your append it is you give the board and everyone else the benefit of the page notes this on page a 17 did you say a77 Okay and then uh in the evening when 52 incremental what's what's the same number 53 North 707 South so essentially a 5 to 10% change in volume yeah I was asking cling approximately a 5 to 10% change in volume correct correct and also a directional shift yes where you're now more headed south in the even and then that Saturday time period actually came out dead even during our counts at 597 and 597 579 no the the bracketed oh I'm sorry yeah yeah different Traffic Engineers write it out differently the bracket is the Saturday so all the counts that were uh taken into all the vehicle accounts taken into the study are just on 202 pass the driveway not taking into account the number of vehicles passing Mount AR Road past the uh no if that if you um if you go to that page on a77 and we have the the full complement of volumes at the traffic signal so headed up on Mount AR and then you could add in the rights and throughs coming down south as well uh you bring up a point so are are they counts at the front of the driveway or are they traffic signal counts at the signal so how do you handle the did it count the southbound till 2 traffic that there's to the right up to there is a signal there I mean there's an ancillary signal Does it include that Prim does so um the the figure itself just looks like a a t cross but you'll notice that the Morristown Road the rout 202 as the right turn volume it's because we did count that Al where you know the right turn we did count the all CAU square right volumes headed uh up and or that do not good question but sorry I've ask more time make the numbers that you're providing the 40 to 60 I'm give you the rank be the increase in volume does not account for actually is not including the volume that's currently coming in and out of that lot correct so it's so it may not be a net positive of 40 to 60 it may be somewhere in the middle because there currently volume that's going in and out you're not accountable could yeah it could be 20 to 40 it could be yeah know 35 to 50 depending on question when was the building empty was the building empty when you did your counts I'm not sure that's they not to take the credit so the same not take credit correct I think the bigger question is the one about what about deliveries it doesn't seem to me that the methodology has been updated the hand the societal changes of deliveries as they um as they relate to this particular um uh project where we do anticipate a lot of delivery activity so you could try to find out anything about I think we already knew that yeah but the point the point find out about the delivery track of course going back to your discussion of the traffic CHS did you look at other traffic in the area we did look at dot data in the area um the the the atrs that uh that I was able to find there's one further to the to the east uh by the shop right it's more than 10 years old I don't really find that to be reliable um there's another one up Anderson Hill Road that's a little bit closer that's from 2019 um and and our volumes were higher than those volumes whether that's you know it's not an Apples to Apples comparison because it's a little bit further away but um you know we didn't find any any ATR any any Counts from do that uh you know necessitated an adjustment on our part well I looked at the that is it like 11 years old account in front of the shop the 2011 count yeah and I the um in the in the morning the counts were about 11 years ago the counts were 33% higher M and in the PM the counts were about 10% higher I I can't spec I can't speculate on 13 you know what the traffic patterns were 13 years ago I don't know the other suggestion I have is your firm worked for I think it was TB Bank did a traffic study for that maybe you want to check those that was about five years ago okay so you're stating that the traffic there was more traffic 13 years ago than there is now there was more traffic 13 years ago than his thing was counted here more traffic in front of shoppr right than at this intersection sh k 13 years ago there's and you may get to this so maybe I'm justment but there there's another aspect about um congestion and it's like a rating there's like a rating system like this intersection has got a conjection rating of half or level of service like level of service is that yes so yeah and one of the reasons congestion is important if you're like heavily congested like I then you another 5% is way over the cliff you know it seems well that's reasonable 5% but if you're already at 100% or terrible and you add it it creates a problem conversely if you're not invested at all and you're put in 5% no big deal right what do you find as the congestion situation sens and did was there any way to get a congestion assessment at the driveway itself right so I'll start with more of an explanation of level of service okay so we can uh you make sure that we're all working with the same parameters here or level of service it's a it's a measure um you know of the the volume capacity on the roadway Network measure of theay and it rates from Level service a to F but not unlike a uh you know a report card where you're shooting for all A's and maybe a few B's uh Traffic Engineers we design for level of service c and d and that way we're not overbuilding our roadways right we're not widening uselessly um but we're also not inundating you know designing toward thef where you know that that is a congestion State um and so this intersection at overall when you look at all of the movements going through the intersection operates at a level service C and C C C isn't c um and would continue to operate at that level of service with the additional traffic um for this project now at the driveway uh we break it down um really looking at the movements out of the driveway because those are the ones that experience delay the turning movement's in the right turn is essentially no delay and the left turn is simply a wait for a gap uh but the Turning movements out operate uh in the morning at that level of service C and in the evening and Saturday a level of service d as in dog so those are still in that acceptable level of service range dot for driveways allows you to go up to level service e uh in this case we're we're not at that that level of service on the roadway network but that's with the lower volumes correct so we we could take a look at it yeah so you said the inpection of a traffic light is is C yes which is I'm looking at your appendex that's 202 delay the range to 35 correct um I have to say that anybody who's spr to come down M area in the afternoon especially about not when you time schol wait a lot longer than 30 to 20 to 35 second to get to that interance yeah fact that traffic is often backed up all the way up towards pth Prospect Street and yeah so there there's two factors there one it's of course the School dismissal crossing guards they play uh a little bit different role in you know protecting pedestrian safety as opposed to vehicular throughput two the mount Ary and Anderson HIll approaches are not prioritized by Dot so those in our peak hours right now with the crossing guards um you know dealing with tool dismissal but those approaches are at level service D whereas rout 202 is at a b as a Bo so B owning the signal prioritizes their corridors uh and so you end up with know an overall C but side streets that do a little bit worse and a main line that does a little bit better in the afternoon coming down 202 going onest yeah uh if you come out if you're coming down that section you can be delayed all the way back up to where uh the Old Kings was and sit there and gra it and what you know one of the things that drives people go a whole colony and avoid that interception but it's hard for me to believe that uh at the times that are actual peak times the level of service at on uh 202 that is a c or a d i waited minutes 10 minutes not 10 but five minutes to get through that intersection and and there's certain times where that can be the experience there's other times where it's a much better progression again it it is an average and it's the the analysis based on this configuration they want was really difficult people m is when it's not at the average when it's at the peak and and the r are the greatest of course if you added you add a couple more seconds to a d or E it becomes really annoying to get through that inter of course there there's another well when I I took quick look at your culations if you look at the signal timings there's an an all red for pedestrian [Music] so that all all four approaches go red when somebody pushes right correct which is not in your calculation I think that's the difference of why it just Falls over the edge of the capacity but your model we can examine that certainly we have The Pedestrian volumes we have the timing can make sure that's calibrated it's not just volume it's the cycles yes we'll make sure that's if there's it's a 902 cycle then you have 40 seconds per hour 40 cycles per hour then you have uh and then you take out two or three or four of those Cycles with that all red it it just creates that's where the problem is so presentation of L service C in in my opinion is not Val calculation got to add in all let you progress to whatever you're that largely concludes I think the direct we covered we covered the on-site circulation access covered level of service trip generation components pretty thoroughly here um happy to take additional questions what is the line of sight expectation at the driveway exit I mean sorry what's the line of sight expectation from the Department of Transportation at the driveway on this site just don't know have don't have it written down and I'm trying to make sure that I'm remembering the right Row in the column you can come back yeah I don't want the wrong answer on the rec I apologize I'd like to know that and and it may depend on the highway depends on it's design speed mostly nice to know what that is design speed and grade yeah understanding that the properties Chang ownership do we know um because brought the question we've been bacon for some time do we know what the ins and outs was do a traffic study done by the previous owners that got transferred that could be used for comparison not that we're aware of but we'll check on that I don't typically see those in in my transfers for what it's worth any any more questions from the any professionals also could you could you plot the available site distance can you plot the plus sectional the profile the crosssection to the left and to the right as you're coming out of the driveway yeah we can do that so we make sure that it meets the standard we can certainly do that I will assure you that there's not a better location for a site distance perspective but we can do that um professionals any but I'm sorry anymore there no more questions on the board right at the moment right so any questions from our professional go traffic engineer no chairman I would like to hear from the board's I would like to get a copy of these turning exhibits for the loading area and the driveway I think they were put up briefly on the board is that the lower driveway turning radius the one at the L1 or are you talking turning turning radius at the 202 well they had they had a truck turning template how truck would get into the loading area the loading area and then there was one how a passenger vehicle could get into the parking deck I'm sorry can I just yeah sorry thank you that was exhibit 83 yeah we'll get we'll get all the exhibits over to mrle direct you provide that Mr M will get all those exip [Music] over she can post them for the benefit of the public yep I I have one did you say that parking lots can be available for public parking besides the uh penants and the what I mean by public parking I mean publicly accessible parking right the it's it's intended to cover parking for the retail and for the residents but in providing parking for ret retail you have to make it so a member of the retailing public can come in so somebody who looking for wants to go for example to the Burnville coffee shop you can't find a parking space on 202 which is more likely not right he's going to be able to park in that parking line even though he has no Commerce whatsoever to do that would be it would be more of a management uh we just change his sign it says instead of parking in the Library Park you are going to meter it though as I understood you have testimony already metering which that's not questions about metering shouldn't be and that's more someone else correct okay but rsis has a provision for5 per unit for visit parking that's included in the 1.5 so is there is is there a component that includes visitor parking for the residential so our our plans right now don't have anything designated or Stripes but we would obviously have to comply with that requirement to do so the simplest way would be uh assigning the one space per unit and the remaining 0.5 per unit is available as visitor parking and the visitor parking doesn't have to be assigned visitor it just needs to be available for visitors yeah I want to go through all of the circulation the lower parking levels how we're going to handle these kind of questions but I didn't seem that it was exactly your responsibility I think that through that I think that the assignment and and how those spaces are going to be allocated is U more more toward the applicant right on that um okay certainly they like the Traffic Engineers input but right okay but at this point I haven't designed anything or or allocated spaces so I don't think it would be proper did you have any to the layout of the ramps on the parking level were did they ask you about how when they architected the ramps and L1 and lo2 did they ask you about that uh not directly I know that that AR consulted with Mr M from Office there's someone else I just don't want to tou all right may I inquire who the someone else is because we were told we're just going to hear from an architect and and the civil engineer there'll be a a management representative Mr B uh yes operation yep thank that would be that would be great um John I have the option I can either at for your convenance I can open this witness to the public for questions or we can stay the public questions of this witness on right uh you know J I think I think it actually would make sense you you because Mr kak's coming back we knew that coming in because you just retained Mr Troutman uh today uh we've got some homework uh items that we need to do and I'm sure you know Mr trapman's going to review things I suspect he'll the professionals will probably have some conversation between now and the next meeting as well so maybe we hold those questions Mr TR has further maybe we justart to the next meeting and makes available next that would be your pleasure okay the other side of the point would be if there are questions that could be answered at the next you know the next meeting like some of mine they could be done at the same time right so if you open it to questions tonight what do you guys want to do I got his opinion like theage open wit now I'm sorry the advantage open questions now that if the public has questions that require more research we don't have them coming back a third time you know yeah that's yeah why don't we just roll with questions then I ask chairman and I'm just going to ask your fingers okay right now all right all right so this is the traffic engineer p r o u t m yeah we take we just do our court reporter well I think probably a number of people can we just do a five minute break uh we can rest fingers for a minute yeah okay because we can still hear your next witness I I don't to violate our climate so all right try to make this a five minute break so that means 955