good evening everyone 7:02 I'm going to call the meeting to order March 26 202 4 bridgew Township Zoning Board of adjustment it's a regular meeting both adequate and electronic notice of this meeting specifying the time place in manner in which such notice was provided in accordance with the open public meeting Act njsa 10 col 4-6 specifically on January 9th 2024 proper notice was sent to The Courier News and the Star Ledger and filed with the clerk at the township of Bridgewater and posted on the municipal bulletin board Please be aware of the zoning Board of adjustment policy for public hearings no new applications will be heard after 9:30 and no new testimony will Taken will be taken after 10 p.m. I AEL please rise for the salute to the flat pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all good evening Joanne good to have you here could we have a roll call please here here here here here here here all right thank you very much we have a quorum all right at this point of the meeting I'm going to open up to members of the public that would like to speak on any land use issue that is not on our agenda this evening seeing none I'm going to close that portion uh we have no minutes for approval tonight and we have one resolution that's appointing our new board planner Katherine sarmad uh looking to the board for changes and comments on the resolution to appoint a new planner Mr chairman I do think we need to just correct the secretary name absolutely other than that I didn't have anything all right so one change can I get a nomination please I I'll nominate all right can have a second second that was Mr gaski yeah all right thank you can have a roll call vote please Joan yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes congratulations welcome we've ruined your Tuesdays for the next year other one all right Rich we have a couple of adjournments and postponements won we go through them real quick so the application for CX Towers which is on the agenda if anyone um from the public is here for that matter it's not being heard this evening that is being adjourned until May 28th and the applicant will uh provide new notice for that application that's it that's it for that yep all right so we have uh three presidents Drive who's here from come on down uh left side or your right and let me make sure I get your last name right Rakowski all right Rakowski family welcome why you tell us why you're here tell us uh what you're seeking from the board and maybe take us through your project and uh I'll just I'll sit down sure and before you do that if uh are you both going to testify I think I'll be right yeah okay whoever's going to testify just stand up raise your hand please you solemly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God and just for the record would you state your full name please M rowski thank you all right so um we recently purchased on President's Drive um we've been living in Bri for about i' say close to 10 years now my wife's um grown um grew up here uh went through the whole school system she's a teacher at the high school um we literally moved a couple blocks over plan to stay here you know through retirement hopefully taxes stay reasonable um but um we've been here so I said we've been here for about a year and right now there's no real outdoor storage on the property I had to put up a little 6x6 vinyl shed um in our last house we had you know Ample Storage for the pool I got another kid he's actually at lacrosse right now um but we have a lot of stuff and um you know when we were using the pool this summer we realized we have nowhere to put it um the previous owner was keeping pool equipment in the Gazebo um so we decided that you know while they're young we want to build a structure where we can kind of house all their stuff while you know all their bikes and their and their equipment stuff then we um so we went to get a survey done um and then we found out that we're actually um at our over our Improvement coverage I guess with the house the driveway and the pool um there's really no um allowance to to build anything else so um here we are now asking for variance for um for I guess lot coverage um that's the 1% right what you're seeking um less than 1% increase so right now like we we want to build into the existing concrete that's on the pool um there's a little mulch bed between the driveway and the pool so that mulch bed is something that we're looking to to cover over with concrete but everything else will be we're kind of taking it from the concrete space right now uh that's next to the pool did you get a copy of the March 21st letter that's from our planner and and from our engineer yes yeah I have they had some questions in there and I think if you were able to address them and I know they also had some questions on some uh yes I I I have notes for each they want to do some calculations that they didn't have all the information on so maybe you want to walk through that sure and then maybe when you're done you want to just walk us through some of the renderings sure okay great um so for for number one um with the uh Florida Air ratio so it wasn't on um Mr man's um survey but I did include on um there's a form number number four that has the calculations for for Florida area um I think the allowance is 15% we put I put us around 9% for Florida area so if you look at the application there's form number four for the calculation for that um for number two um the question was was the height of the structure um I was aware that the the maximum height is 16 ft so in the plans if you look at thing on page nine of the actual plans which I'll I'll walk through um it is set to 16 ft um so that that is in there um for number three in terms of uh concrete equipment pads so on the actual survey there is a line item for conc um concrete equipment pads U which is included in the calculation for lock coverage it's um 22 Square ft for the concrete pads so if you look at the at the table in the kind of middle of the survey it's the one two third item down oh sorry um fourth item down concrete equipment pad so that is included in the calculation um for number four um the question is around like are there any option or have I thought about any options to kind of reduce the the current lock coverage I mean they're they're there's only really two options it's either remove existing concrete um or like remove the Gazebo or tear up my driveway I don't have any accessories I mean that's there's a vinyl shed which will be removed because that's housing my mower right now um so it's either cut square footage off the concrete um or tear up my driveway um but it has Belgium blocks so I really don't want to tear up my driveway um it's pavers so if you know if it's a deal breaker I'd be will I mean I'd be willing to I mean I justess cut the back end of my concrete on my my pull decking if that can get us to like a net zero change um I'd hope not to have to do that CU I have to remove it put um put back some landscaping and and whatnot but again um I'm a reasonable person if that's what takes to get the deal done I'll I'll cut the concrete I mean I don't think the board's I I think you just want to put that on the record and we can come back to that if okay sure thank you um in terms of utilities uh there will only be electrical um there will be no heat or air conditioning um there's going be it's not a living space um there's already electrical that's run out for for the pool system there's um there's extra um an extra circuit there so I plan on just tapping into that it's just going to be to power um lights really um repeat for the board there'll be no water no Plumbing no water no Plumbing it's not a living space it'll just be electrical thank you um and then in terms of oh um the big question was you know there's there's there's on the plans there's two accessory structures right now I have a little 6x6 vinyl shed that I have to put in because I have to put my Mower and there's a gazebo the vinyl shed will be taken down I mean it's a little you know thing about on Marketplace um so ultimately there will be two accessory structures unless you guys asked me to take down the Gazebo um and then uh the question was around exterior lighting there's going to be four sconces um three facing the driveway so kind of one two three spread out and then one on the side on the side door um so that's going to be all the exterior lightings I mean no flood lights or anything just little accent lights to keep it pretty um and then obviously everyone's big question is around runoff so um the other items number one um if you if you take a look at the plans um in my survey on the whole Southern portion of the property there's a huge u-shaped drainage soil um that was put um put in by the by the previous owner um and actually the neighbor also has that put in it's all tied together so the drainage Swale actually um exits into a drainage eastment that's um neighboring my my neighbor's property so um the way it works is there's probably 6 to 8 Ines of um of what would you call it um recessed I don't know backfilled um Stone so it's to help really slow down um slow down the runoff and help U percolate um it's and it's around the whole Southern portion of the property there's my backyard is a slight um slight slope so everything kind of hits that drainage swell and slowly um gets absorbed and whatever extra kind of runs off into the drainage eastment so uh my plan was to um tie in the gutters directly into that um drainage soell right now there's an existing pipe next to the pool equipment that that F goes all um the exits at the drainage sell so my my plan was to tie in the gutters on um on the pool house to to go directly into that drainage swell so there shouldn't be any runoff that's actually hitting the neighbors properly at all because it all be captured kind of pushed into the swell to help um absorb into the ground um the one thing that I did want to mention in terms of runoff the um uh the Southern and Southwestern portion of of the the pool area the concrete decking it's all surrounded by essentially River Rock um so any water that comes off the concrete around the pool kind of hits the river rock slows down um you know helps with some absorption and then it goes into the sale so um it's not just like mulch it's it's just Stone everywhere kind of you planting in that there is planting there's there's Shrubbery there's trees there's there's a lot of mature U Landscaping there and none of that's being removed um it's all it's all existing so uh there's one concern about potentially needing a grading plan um where I'm um there is grading on the actual survey around um around the whole impacted area from corner to corner I think there's a 5 to 6 in change in um elevation the section where I'm putting the um the pool houses is really flat I mean it's right next it's flat with the um the driveway flat with the pool there's really not much not much slope there so um there um the the survey does include um elevation around around that area and I think I think that's everything that I that I noted was what is the floor area ratio uh uh for the whole property it's um 9.01 9.01 yeah the um uh zoning is 15 could you ask basically tell us what you're seeking from the board you know what it looks like some bulks you need why you just so the board through what you need here the um the main variance I'm looking at for um uh improved lock coverage um the the mention of bulk was um I guess was brought up because the they um U Mr bur had noticed that there's two accessory structures you might need another variance for having three structures but the the temporary sheds indicate is temporary on the survey that will be removed um because I'll be able to put my mower in the in the garage thank you board questions I have a question please Mrs where is the pool equipment located ated pump it's it's um directly to the left of the pool um so it's actually it's it'll be to the left of the pool house so the pool house kind of Shield some of the pool equipment from our view um so if you see there's a little concrete slab there at the end of this little walkway that's going to be removed um that's where the pool equipment is kind of where it says 147.5 it's not inside that uh it won't be inside the the building no it's it's it's existing none of that's going to be disrupted anyone else on the board board professionals thanks Mr chairman so just just a couple of quick questions um with regard to the concrete pads the reason I rais that as a question is I know Jim Manz on his plan showed the concrete pool equipment lab next to the pool next to the pool house where it's where it's proposed to to be situated what I didn't see was the air conditioning pads and the generator pad and the well there's looks like there's three or four different concrete pads on the far side they're not list they're not sitting on concrete they're not they're on concrete no there there's one generary that's just on the gravel um the air conditioners I think they're on plastic um plastic trays if you want to call them that they're not on concrete but they're they're not on concrete they're still technically structures um that's the reason I raised that I just want to make sure that you have an accurate portrayal of all the coverage that's on the property in the EV in the future you want to do something else you have an accurate Baseline so that's why I rais that that question um let me see yeah so the deck was correctly not not included okay and and the pool house itself that's being proposed so 22x 22 structure the front portion that faces the driveway is going to be used for equipment for lawn equipment and and kids storage kids stuff storage yep and and the only part of it that's technically considered a pool house is that the covered it's a covered porch is there any interior space that's going to be used for the pool house well the the storage area is going to be the um so they're going to they're going yeah I mean there's going to there's essentially a French door that opens up so I can bring all my pool com in into the storage area um and then the the cover patio is really just entertaining space okay and then um I did raise it because with lot coverage variances one of the issues that we look at is what the drainage impact is going to be I know 290 square feet is is rather modest especially for a property like this I think it it measures about an acre so that's why I raised the question of is there an opportunity to remove any existing Hardscape to kind of either lessen lessen that relief that's being requested or frankly eliminated altogether um I understand you have a block driveway that's Bound by Belgium Block curb the pool patio there is an opportunity there if necessary to to shave some of that down but would it impact the usability of of the pool in any way or or the pool patio is that is that going to cost C you a hardship if if you were to have to take some out the hardship would be obviously the the financial burden and um and just disruption I mean I'm not going to have the clean lines I had before we have a nice sharp cut so um that's that's really it but I mean usability now we still be able to to to use the decking I mean we'll make it we'll make it work honestly the for us the the um the storage and the the structure is more important than um than the patio and in in the time that you've lived there the the year that you guys have lived there the drainage swell in the back of the property have you ever seen that filled up with water to the point where it really raises to a to a higher level or is it PR dry anything the previous son I think a year or two prior actually had the the whole drainage swell red um and cleaned up so it's been working very well okay okay and La last question deals with Landscaping I guess there's there's some plants that would need to come down in the area where the pool house is proposed are you planning to replace them put more plants anywhere else or did you have any plans for kind of re yes so right now there's a row of these little um mini trees um knowing how expensive Landscaping is I actually want to replant them um along the um the fence line on the I guess on the right side of the plans um cuz I don't want to buy new trees um but yeah I plan on on Rec like maintaining the um those trees and we have some uh those uh decorative uh tall grasses that's all going to be replanted around the property okay very good thank you thank you Mr chair you're good I'm good bill just took all my comments he does that doesn't he yeah comments on the the drawing that he has the board secretary is not scotet doy you'll have to change the name to Gary lesp on the drawing here I'm sorry I didn't hear the comment yeah signature box yes where the signature block is Andrew Fresco oh okay it is prepared last year so and same thing here okay I can have them all redone thank you yeah just uh one thing with respect to the placement of the pool equipment um can you confirm that it'll be inside of and not violate the sidey yard setback the pool equipment yeah so the pool equipment um currently exists so it's not being moved you I thought you said you were putting it next on the opposite side of the pool house I just meant that's the current positioning so there's a little um kind of concrete slab on the left side of the pool housee um next to the number 1475 um that's the concrete slab where the pool equipment is sitting right now so that's going to remain untouched um it's kind of hidden behind some shrubs right now and it's within the sidey yard setback yes thank you members of the public questions on any of the test you've heard all right see none do you want to wrap it up or you you good with your testimony I I think that's that's everything I have sorry first time so I'm going to reopen it to members of the public that would like to speak for or against this application all right see none I'm going to open it up to uh Rich first off to go through the variances that we need it sounds like there's one so it's just one variance and that is the maximum improved lot coverage um he's seeking a 25.9 9% which is 10,367 square ft they currently occupied 10,078 Square ft um at 22 point 25.2% so it's just a 7% increase that's the only variance the others are not U the other items raised there are not variances all right thank you Mr kak why don't we open up deliberation with you sir I think the request is reasonable and I think it adds to the the overall um what's the right word Ambiance of the property itself and lends itself well to the existing use of a family pool and having some additional storage so I would be supportive of your application thank you Mr Sweeney um the only the only thing that jumped out at me was the lot coverage statistic I mean it's it's well over what's allowed today and you're increasing it granted by a small amount you've explained why you really don't want to make any offsets anywhere else on the property so I'm okay with that and overall I'm in favor of granting the application thank you Mr it's a very simple uh variance only one item here and even that is not not too much increase so I'm in favor of approving it Mr fresa uh you know some people say we're a tough board but you know 7% you know I'm there's no neighbors here um it looks like a nice uh a nice structure so I'm inclined to support I ask you yeah had it been 08 you might have had a problem but um yeah I think it's perfectly reasonable and enjoy it uh I have no problem with this application I think the proposed structure lends itself well to the property uh I don't think increases the overall uh um property as well thank you I'm in agreement with my fellow board members I'm going to vote in favor and with that I would seek a motion to approve the one variant that's being sought I'll make a motion Mr Fresco can I have a second please second Mr gki was the second and Joanne whenever you're ready we could roll call Vote Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes all right enjoy well thank you so much every apprciate thank you very much for let you guys over when we're done that's the easiest one we've had in a couple years all right Chimney Rock Storage you are next [Applause] Mr milck right that's right good to see you sir good to see you see everyone good evening thanks for having us um I'm GNA give a couple minutes for Mr Winters to set up his computer so we have exhibit all set up do we have microphones for everyone this one I think is what I'll use for [Music] for ready Mr CH ready when you are all right thank you for having us uh again this evening again we are Chimney Rock Associates LLC it's our third time before you and this is the third version of the plans we have uh testified uh before you on um as the board will recall we were last here uh in 2023 we came back in January with significant revisions to the plan that we felt improved the overall layout mitigated a lot of the variance relief that was being sought from the original application uh at the January hearing we presented the testimony of Matt Lang who's the operator um winters of course testified as well and we began the testimony of the architect and through that process as well as some of the comments we heard from the board uh even further uh analysis was made to to try to improve what the board was was viewing in terms of um the building footprint the gross floor area the storm water the landscaping and that resulted in what we submitted to you um a couple weeks back with respect to uh the application so what we're going to do tonight is we're going to start with Mr Winters again who's going to walk the board through the changes that were made in the most recent version and I think what you'll you'll hear is some significant movement in terms of the size of the building reducing both the footprint and the square footage by approximately 20% improving the storm water beyond what your ordinance in the state requires um to a point where it's actually going to reduce impervious coverage which is something we couldn't say before um from the original application to now hundreds of new plantings both in terms of actual trees um as well as shrubs uh reduced pavement coverage um but but I don't want to steal Mr Winter's Thunder but this is all to say we believe the plan in front of you is is a significant upgrade over what was previously provided the variance uh variance list when we originally applied for this as the chairman noted at that first hearing was in the 20s uh We've reduced that by approximately half we're down we're down and some of the variances we're still seeking have been mitigated um in terms of their intensity so we're excited to present this plan tonight we'll start with Mr Winters who has previously been sworn in and I will remind is under oath and I will pass the mic to him good evening thank you Mr mck good evening chair board members pleasure to be back um as uh as referenced in the opening um following our prior hearings in consideration of comments received from the board their professionals and as well as the public we worked with the applicant to prepare and submit revised plans which we believe are substantially change and improve uh the the site as was uh proposed and in the process of that we are resolving several non-compliant items so I'd like to just give a brief summary um of some of these changes and then uh like to at that point then transition into a discussion about uh the variances and the non-compliances the ones we've eliminated several that we are improving upon that still require variances but the relief is not as significant um and then uh give a kind of full accounting on where that stands so we can take care of that because there's a lot of little things that changed and uh I just want to make sure it's clear for the board's benefit so uh with that um I want to introduce an exhibit right now which is going to need a number so I'm going to put that up on the screen that's what I have yep A5 Mr Winters just before you get too far into that one would you just describe what A5 is in particular for the record please certainly so this is a color rendering of the site plan it is titled site plan rendering Chimney Rock Self Storage dated March 25 2024 and this is one moment I'm trying to put this to full screen here there hopefully that's a little bigger for everyone to see uh this is a very similar to an exhibit we presented previously but it's depicting the most recent version of the site plan uh and the Landscaping plan which we've done a color rendering of on top of aerial mapping of the surroundings so you'll see the site lot line is outlined in in red along Route 22 to our South Donahue road to the north um just to orient you on that um I'm going to zoom in just a little bit so we could see where the changes and where the site improvements are for the benefit of everybody here so among the changes that the biggest change with this application really is that we've reconfigured and reduced the building footprint uh somewhat significantly this footprint is 20% smaller than the one we had on our original plans uh with that footprint reduction since every floor is reduced we also have a total reduction of about 20% in the gross floor area of the of the building we had 129,90 squ ft of gross floor area in the original application we've reduced that now to 103,788 square ft so again that's that's a sizable reduction in that building um with that we've pulled the footprint in we've we've kind of squared off the building in places so what what you'll see is there's more pretty much more Landscaping on the site around the perimeter the building where it used to be building on on the west side of the building uh this is area that's been reduced from the building footprint along the front of the building building we've kind of set the building back a little bit so it's not one uniform uh wall along the front edge along the main Drive B and that that goes with us trying to make the inside of the building a little more efficient I'll let the architect talk about the building um but we've also cut back and provide a more distance to the Donahue Side by squaring off this building in the back so those those are some changes related to that we've reconfigured the parking lot to make it a little more efficient with this and the course of that we recognized the reduction in building meant we could reduce the number of parking spaces we needed to serve this building so the the great benefit of these changes is it's led to a net reduction in impervious cover on the lot and that's not just compared to the exist to the um what we proposed originally but we have a net reduction in impervious cover over the existing conditions so our project now proposes to reduce what's out there compared to the current condition in terms of impervious coverage uh as I noted uh we've taken advantage of the reduced footprint to increase our landscape on the site and with that we have additional Landscaping intended to meet the various Municipal requirements um and as I said we're improving certain uh places where we need relief where we're not maybe meeting all the standards but we're improving them along the Donahue road side of the property for example we still have a minimum 25 foot width on the uh landscape buffer on the northeast corner but that actually gets wider as you go from east to west along the plan as much as almost 48 feet on this side so this this is allowing us to do more things on the side of the property and in particular we're happy to report that we could preserve an additional nine existing trees along the Don Hue roads side these are mature grown trees Evergreens deciduous um you could actually see we identify these in the white outline in this corner so the those are just going to help support and and enrich the buffer that we're providing on this side which is already going to be wider we're still providing a compliant number of plantings we're just shifting them into the site a little bit more to further uh enhance this buffer on the site with preservation of those trees um as as noted in our original testimony um we provided a wider fire AIS Lane which was a requirement and a request of the Fire Marshall and that's that's still on the plan we've just moved it in further from Donahue so it stays closer to the building again to enhance and widen the buffer along the rear um other changes we've made since since the original submission we we have revised the site lighting locations and fixture selections along the Route 22 side of the building and the fire AIS Lane I'll provide some more details of those in a little bit um we have modified our storm waterer management design we're we're providing additional storage volume and we're enhancing the storm water controls to provide additional reductions above and beyond on the minimums required and again I'll provide some more detail of that in a little bit um we're eliminating the freestanding trash inclosure uh that was something that was talked about previously in testimony but this is It's demonstrated on this plan we initially had it in the parking area we we testified that we'd handle trash and recycling uh internal to the building uh that's already been discussed so just for a record that's now part of this plan we've eliminated that um minor but also important we've increased the setback for the freestanding site ID sign so that way we meet that requirement um and that's at the southeast Corner near the main entrance and we've uh provided wider parking spaces to meet the township standard with uh so that's that's a summary and and if you'll forgive me there might be a little repeat as I go through on how this affects the variances but I just want to be complete for the board's benefit and Paul before you go on to the next topic I want to hammer on some of these issues that you talked about so one issue you talked about is a reduction in the impervious coverage not from our original application but the existing condition so put let's put numbers to that the existing conditions impervious coverage um is about what and what are what are the current conditions going to be we we had approximately one and a half acres of impervious cover on the existing site and this whole site is about 3.44 Acres uh we're reducing that to approximately 1.36 Acres now with this Improvement so we're reducing about 0.14 Acres it's a little more more than 6,000 square ft and that area we're able to make perious and Landscape surfaces and that's important because perious surface generates more storm water runoff and that reduction is going to help uh with our with the additional reductions we're providing through our storm water design so reduction from 1.5 to 1.36 about 10% reduction in the impervious coverage over existing conditions correct yes okay to to me um the biggest change when I look at this exhibit that we've identified as a five is is clearly the change in color from that access road around the building from black to Green I know you're going to go into this but maybe you could you can touch on why that color has changed that's actually a good time to bring that up and I I like that order better when I had it so thank you uh the uh I just want to clarify for the board's benefit I I wanted to explain the Fire Road the the product we've selected for this is actually it's a it's a high impact matrix product which has a maximum void area what that means means is it's pretty much a web once it's installed most of this more than 90% of the surface is a void area which is filled in with top soil now this this Matrix and the soil sit on top of a stone bed so it's a stable surface for the firet trucks to drive on but we back fill this this um Matrix with top soil grass seed and grass actually grows up on this so if you're standing to the side looking down at it it looks like a grass area so I I thought for the board's benefit I just wanted to explain that product a little better it's not just a PA or driveway it's actually a grass surface that functions for when emergency access needs to gain access and that drains and it drains and we it's under drained and we have inlets along the back too because that's how our storm water design layout came to be we have with the slopes we put inlets in there but it's under drained as well okay and the fire department they recent their recent review provided no coms they were satisfied because we're providing them access to get to the rear of the building by this means um we'll touch on this a little bit as it relates to the lot Improvement requirement and the zoning um based upon we conservatively read that to include this in the lot Improvement requirement um and I'll I'll touch on that when I get there but it's as you could see the Fire Road does take quite a bit of the site so it it does have an impact on that number but again we're being conservative in in the accounting for that which uh in a moment I'm going to run through uh the update on the variant so as as I mentioned regarding compliance we've we're eliminating a number of uh non-compliances we're mitigating several variances uh based upon our count we had up to 24 variances associated with the original application and I'm happy to report that based on our count uh we're reducing that to 12 uh so I just want to go through first what's what's been eliminated for the board's benefit and again forgive me some some of these are going to be repeat from the the summary I just want to be clear uh we're providing The Wider parking spaces to meet the Township's minimum Dimension standard of 9 and a2t width for those parking spaces so that that eliminates that related variance um related to the parking although it wasn't related to a variance we are providing the compliant number of EV parking spaces were required to provide one we had some testimony about that it's now depicted on this plan it's near the front entrance of the building in this area here um I mentioned that we addressed the freestanding sign setback requirement we now comply with that to eliminate that variance um with the revised building design we are incorporating a parapet which is of a maximum of two foot in height which complies with the maximum permitted height of 3T for a parit so no relief is required for that any longer uh I mentioned we've eliminated excuse me we've eliminated the exterior trash enclosure um there were two variances associated with that trash en closure which we no longer uh require one was for a trash enclosure in the front yard and one was for the height of the fence around that trash enclosure with the uh reduced overall development footprint associated with the building reduction we were able to eliminate a retaining wall with a fence on it along the rear uh the northern side of the fire lane for part of that fire lanane there was a height variance associated with that fence at top the wall so that variance is eliminated uh We've provided a significant increase in the amount of landscaping from the original applications such that we're uh addressing all the landscape requirements so there were variances associated with um providing the required number of Street trees landscape trees landscape shrubs and Foundation plantings those were separate categories each uh and we're now complying with uh the ordinance on those and I'll have a recap of the kind of uh plantings but you could see on this exhibit we're we're providing those along the front edge and sides and I'll I'll talk more about those shortly um we have also uh addressed the requirements for the Landscaping buffer and the transition area buffer respectively along Route 22 and along Don Hugh road we are providing the required number of plantings in those areas to comply so again those are uh a variance related to those which we are eliminating um with that there are some remaining variances we need and again majority of these we are reducing the amount of relief we're seeking because we've improved those conditions and by our count there's 12 of 12 total that which also includes the use variance I'll have a total recap of the variances after this so here's here's what's improved generally um our setback variances have have changed a little bit we had a front setback to Donahue uh road which is slightly increased we had 49 feet in our original application that's moved up a little bit the 49.3 ft and this is where 75 foot setback is required um there's a change on the front setback and before I get to that I just want to reiterate this is the minimum setback which is of course what's always required for these variances but Ju Just to reiterate we are increasing the setback along the Northerly building line to Donahue as we go east to west West and that does increase to um as much as 77.7 ft on the west side so the very Corner actually does ex does meet the minimum requirement but again we need the variance because where it's closest it doesn't just again highlighting an improvement that we've made with the site layout even if we can't address that variance completely excuse me um the front setback to Route 22 has actually decreased slightly we've gotten a little a little closer we had a 54.1 ft setback excuse me a 56.8 ft setback originally we've reduced that to 54.1 Ft however I do want to note we are still increasing over the existing building setback today the building presently on the site is 44.9 Ft so our our new building will be no closer than 54.1 ft and again that's at the closest point which is the southeast corner of the building um with the reconfigured front of the building which is no longer one solid ID wall end to end and now has these places where it sets back a little bit we we have greater than that setback and we have Landscaping in a lot of those places so um lastly in the setbacks the rear yard setback which in this application is on the west side of the property um that has changed ever so slightly we had 50 feet it is down to 49.2 Ft at this little corner of the building here and M much like the front both frontages um that's the nearest point and we have increased setback as we move along the building but again we're seeking the variance for the minimum setback in each of these cases um I've mentioned Landscaping a bit and there is the landscape buffer conservation easement requirement um that applies to both frontages um in the original application we didn't identify any any particular uh distance for those but in reality our application is proposing a minimum of 28 ft on the Route 22 side which does increase to as much as 33 ft on the Southeast corner and uh along Donahue we have a minimum of 25 feet at this corner and again this is where 50 ft is required we have a minimum of 25t at the northeast corner which does ex increase up to as much as 48 by the time we get to the northwest corner of the building our proposed lot Improvement coverage has been reduced and again that's related to the fact we've reduced our building coverage and our parking coverage uh it's been reduced from 50 4% in the original application to 48% now our proposed floor area ratio has also been reduced because we've reduced our our total floor area so that's come down from 867 to 693 uh under the the change changes we've made here uh parking set back to Route 20 sir for one minute while you're talking about the floor area coverage and the reduction that you've made according to the numbers that I've got you're proposing about 104,000 Square ft of floor area compared to 28,749 which is allowed after steep slope calculations this Inc we we still require the variance and we're seeking it in this case we've improved it my point is what you're proposing is about times greater than what's allowed why why can't you remain closer to what the land use requirements propose as a maximum I I don't know if I can give an appropriate answer from an engineer perspective I can I can offer it's improved certainly um it does remain over as you've noted um but up from I'm more on the site side so I'm I don't really have an opinion on on that either way not mention layout of the site but you'll hear more from the planner this is you know the engineer not we'll hold off with the planner thank you along that same line is that a function of the number of stories therefore created in this plan you have three stories effectively is that what is the largest contributor to the excess floor area ratio directly it's a function of the total square footage and in this case it's the square footage divided by the lot area and square footage so that's that's where the ratio comes from right but I'm just I'm asking if in fact that's really what's driving that number and just one other comment you earlier you were talking about the reduction in impervious coverage and part of the gain that you you're achieving in um is by reducing the paved surfaces which had existed previously and essentially replacing them with the building and then of course you have improved your overall uh impervious surf surface coverage by doing some of the things you talked about earlier so whether it's the pervious coverage in the fire lane or the alternative um just by reducing the footprint and the building of itself you're achieving some gains there but those comments kind of make sense and J with with what you were talking about yes it's really from the building reduction and the parking that's that's where we're getting the most benefit in in reducing that so it's it's a net plus and we we just want to make sure it's clear that it's a reduction over the existing condition right thank you which is good because it's not always common that you redevelop a site and the coverage goes down so we're we're happy to report it is going down um I'm near the end of this so I appreciate the board's patience as we try and cut through all these these changes with the with the compliances um as IID mentioned the parking set backs to Route 22 remain unchanged at 28.5 ft and that happens near the uh near the southeast corner of the building here uh the set back to Donahue has increased slightly we were at a 30 foot distance from the parking we're now increasing at the 32 and that occurs at the northeast corner of this parking lot um we continue to propose loading spaces within the front yard where that is not permitted we've reduced the number of loading spaces though we had three designated we now only have two designated and they are located at the southeast corner of the building uh those are now simply surface loading zones they don't back into the building there's no more loading kind of dock configuration to that it's it's simply just spaces next to that entry point um we continue to require a variants for parking and drive aisles that remain within a proposed front yard where none are permitted although again the quantity of spaces and the amount of pavement has been reduced through this application so it's it's a little less uh than we had before that we're proposing in these areas um and just just lastly I do note there's there's no change in the building height in terms of the stories um it was the last item on the variance list um for for the board's benefit after all that I had wanted to just give a simple uh Point by point of the remaining variances which is uh honestly the corresponding directly to the the summary that's provided in the planner's current memo um now that we've gone through the changes um so here that list is and then we'll we'll move on and I can tell you about the balance of improvements and get past the variance part here um so the 12 variants I'm accounting for based on that are the the use variants for self storage in this Zone uh second I have the floor area ratio where 0.192 is permitted 693 is proposed about three times not seven times thank thank you for the math correction yes about about three times um thirdly uh the landscape buffer conservation eement requirement where 50 ft is required on the front edges uh we have uh a minimum of 25 upwards of 48 feet proposed on Don Hue Road and a minimum of 28 upwards of 33 feet proposed on Route 22 Frontage uh fourth the Improvement coverage where 30.6 per is permitted uh we are now proposing 48% uh the uh fifth the setback for the front yard Route 22 where 200 feet is required 54.1 feet is proposed uh number six the setback front yard to Donahue Road where 75 ft is required 49.3 feet is proposed seven setback rear yard which is our Westerly yard where 75 ft is required 49.2 ft is proposed eight the building height where two stories are permitted three stories are proposed uh nine where loading is proposed in the front yard where uh loading is not permitted uh 10 parking and dry biles are proposed in the front yard where none is permitted 11 the parking setback to Route 22 100 feet is required and 28.5 feet is proposed uh 12 parking set back to Donahue 75 ft is required where 32 feet is proposed so those are the 12 remaining variances um as as you heard from those a number of them have to do its setbacks and although it was mentioned earlier in testimony um looking to see if I have it on this plan I'm wanted to pull up briefly my site plan which has been which is part of the submission to the board uh just to again remind us all of the setbacks and where those are on the site and I'm going to be when my computer cooperates I'm going to be displaying sheet for the layout dimensioning plan of the plan set the layout dimensioning plan of the current revision of the plans dated March 8 2024 the the remaining building setbacks when I take the 200 foot front yard for Route 22 the 75 foot front yard from Donahue the 75 foot from uh the Western Property Line this tiny little triangle right in here is my remaining setback and I I just wanted to reemphasize the rationale for the number of setback variances is driven by the uniqueness of the lot and uh how those es measure up so um having said that um I'll put the other exhibit back up which is A5 all right so I did want to just give a summary uh a little more detail on some of the other improvements and and leading that discussion uh are the stormwater improvements and and we're we're happy to report that we we've made some some progress there we uh as noted in our original application we were compliant with the DP storm waterer standards we've made improvements though and now not only do we meet those but we we exceed those standards quite a bit um and that's that's for the benefit of of really everyone involved I think that we're we're doing this in a couple of ways um in in this area here that wasn't the plan I was going to open up but this will suffice um still on sheet four of the site plan set th this parking lot here is going to be a perious pavement parking lot which is underlain by a new detention system which is going to provide additional storage for storm water on the site we're actually increasing the existing storage on site by 21% with that additional volume that allows us the ability to do more attenuation and control of the volume which allows us to hold back the storm water rates greater than the minimum standards required so we're providing that to help in that regard the net decrease in impervious cover uh and as I mentioned we're this is over the existing condition we're reducing impervious cover by 0.14 Acres on the site this reduction which is being replaced with landscaped and perious areas is resulting in some decrease in storm water runoff from the site right there combining that with the additional storage and the attenuation of flows we're going to be providing significant reductions on Peak rates of runoff from the site which which we were very happy with um ju just to give you an example because because numbers help right um a a two-year event and we're as Engineers required to design for certain regulated events the two-year event where we're obligated under the rules to provide a 50% reduction over the existing Peak rate of runoff the additional storage we're providing we have that rate reduced to 7 by 72% so we're almost at a quarter of the existing rate coming off the site for that that storm event um so we're we're definitely improving that uh quite a bit I mean almost 50% on top of the 50% we have to do uh for the 10-year event where a 25% reduction in the peak rate is required we we have that down to a 56% reduction so again we're almost double we're almost d the requirement and that's that that's this is what this does is it translates to reducing these Peak rates is really creating more capacity in Downstream systems because it's holding this water back when water is running Downstream and and creating more room for the rest of the water to move down Downstream down through those pipes because we're providing this additional storage so this is more storage on site than we have existing it's greater reduction of rates than the minimum we have to provide so we're we're very pleased the 100-year event as well which is not it's often not considered a frequent event but we all know we've been seeing some significant rains lately but even the 100-year event where a 20% reduction is required we're we're doing a 33% reduction uh which which is significant because it's it's moving it's holding back that water it's creating more conveyance capacity Downstream um in particular I also wanted to speak to a comet that came up in uh board Engineers letter Comet 15 in section be uh a question was asked uh in particular about um the discharge point of the existing Basin which is on the east side of the site um in the current condition the site drains towards um most of the site drains towards the east there is a an off-site ditch to the north that runs north to south and we we discharge into a portion of that which is piped and then travels to the South and vosler Avenue so the question was um if what kind of effect our development has on and and I'm pleased to report that we have a an improvement uh an improved effect on this because of these reductions and rates that are being realized mainly on this side of the site but but throughout the site we we're cutting down on the existing rates quite a bit so that additional capacity we're talking about that's being created in that pipe that's being created Downstream of the site so um like I said it's it's a definite benefit the reduction of impervious coverage helps that the additional storage leads to that I've talked a lot about the reduction of impervious and and now I I want to just reiterate about some of the landscape improvements as well because that's also important to note and this time I'm going to try and open up the right exhibit um before you go on to landscape and for my edification you were talking about the rate of flow and the improvements you've been able to make by enhancing the existing retention of um runoff and so on on on the site and then you're able to essentially release it more slow um over time is that correct that that is correct that's that's how those systems work yes so even though you may be increasing the volume of water on the site I don't know if that's true or not but even if that were true you're able to reduce the rate of Flow by by increasing the retention of the water on the site is that true also that is true and one of the things we did review with this was how the site development was also affecting the volume and we are very close in in the less frequent events we actually are having slight reductions in total storm water volume it wasn't across the board it's just a function of how the calculations work but um we are we are at or near volumes we're very close to the existing volumes and that's again driven by the fact that we're reducing impervious cover and that's that's where these volume calculations come from the water hits a pavement and it runs off more quickly than if it hits a grassed surface or a wooded surface so with that I mean the rainfall on a site as the rainfall on a site it's whether the ground absorbs it or not and we're creating more ground to absorb it really by doing these reductions so um as as you release the water in the way it's being done currently and the way you're describing you feel there's an improvement to how it will be essentially received Downstream because we have members of the public here who I'm sure are going to be concerned about the the overall water that they receive on their property as it is currently and they're looking for um I think just a a common sense explanation of what's going to happen am I getting more water less water is I'm still getting the same amount but it's coming at me more slowly is there any way to describe that similar amount taking longer to get there so similar amount so when when the rainstorm hits the summer storm happens and it quickly fills the pipes we're still holding that water back longer and that that quick burst runs through the pipe and then we back feed over over a longer period of time into the system okay thank you thank you what we're on this so you you probably don't know this but I'll try AE day our town closed Bosler on 22 uh that I didn't know that I didn't know in 25 years I've never seen that happen it was pretty pretty interesting to me my first reaction is you know your project how is it going to impact that you mentioned vosler in your testimony and I'm curious you talked about impacts to vosler Avenue could you just take me back through that because it did sound like it was a net posit positive that you're going to reduce the flow that would go east towards vosler and like I said we had a closing for safety on Saturday and you know you provide a testimony I want to put words in your mouth could you just restate it I i' no I'd be happy to because that that really does highlight a benefit of the improvements we've made um yes we're we are providing additional storage and it's for the part of the site that's directed towards vosler that's where most of the site drains towards and that's allowing us to SL slow down the storm water discharge from the site we're reducing the peak rates which as I mentioned we slow it down it doesn't go out as quickly because we're storing that water on site so it's a it's an improvement on that existing condition because we're reducing those Peak rates the the maximum that's coming at we're slowing it down maybe spell out the fact yeah could you could you quantify that quany the speed in which the water travels and you're talking about that's what we're talking about is slowing it down it's the speed that deal addresses flooding happens because it's nowhere to go is that correct that that's correct and and the way storm is without getting two technical a storm is modeled kind of like a peak and what detention does is it kind of blunts that Peak and flattens it out and that same volume is there it just takes longer to get out so by doing that the peak comes down we hold that water back it takes the pressure off Downstream systems that's that's pretty much the way all the tension systems have always been thought of is take that knock down on that maximum and hold back that volume and that's that's exactly what we're achieving here so it it's taking that pressure off from when the event is happening and holding that water back over a longer time and we have the edit benefit here like I said since we're reducing impervious our our total volume running off this site is very similar in some storms it seemed like it was reduced but it's very similar to what we have today and the chairman asked quantify any of this and just the exent yeah I I think John summed it up best Mr kulak said you remember there's a public here and you know I've been doing this a long time I I still you know grapple with it and I can't imagine someone for the first time you know sitting in a meeting you know what does this mean what does this mean to my home what does it mean to property I love so you know if you could kind of you know bring it down to a Layman's understanding that someone you know is going to be better protected is there going to be more water in that retention Basin you know just just things like that because what you're saying is going to gather more water has more area more square footage but it's taking slower to deplete and you know how does that work in terms of the calculation if you could just you know run us through what's a percentage net benefit and then I guess naturally M my follow- on question is you know what's the risk that if this cleanout doesn't get maintained if the something happens to the system now you have essentially a lake and that makes me nervous and you know I'd like you guys to address how you plan to maintain this and make sure it works all the time sure thing I'll I'll see I'll try and do my best to simplify it it's it's always a concern about of mind trying to make sure we explain it way the public can understand and it's it's technical so it's always a challenge um and and I have numbers that I could cite from our report which is what I base my percents on but it's really what what it boils down to is we we squeeze down the hole that the water's coming out of so it comes out slower and that's why we need the storage um in this case the water instead of coming out at half the rate it's coming out at a quarter of the rate which is even better than we're required to do and that's again that two-year event um I'm trying to think of another I mean I if I talk cubic feet per second that doesn't translate to English for most people take aab sure no I appreciate thatp systems thank you not able to adequately store the water is that correct so if neighboring property owners are experiencing water during storms on their property what we are saying here is we are improving the storage capacity so it should hopefully reduce the amount of water that reaches their property because even though the same amount of water is happen we can't stop mother nature from delivering what she's going to deliver ever but we can hold on to it longer to relieve the pressure on the municipal storm water system and drain it so it hopefully doesn't reach their property to the same extent it is now currently that that's a good way to explain it and that's which is good I was having a hard time reaching it a simplified way to put that in English but yes that's that's a great way to explain it it's it's creating more room Downstream for everyone else to drain before we drain the second question byair was going to be there is going to be a maintenance manual which is uh required for all storm water improvements under the storm water rules um with the above ground base and that's it's always quicker to see there's a problem before maintenance is even done because if it's holding water for too long the owner knows it they're going to see it and realize there's a problem because these are not meant to be wet ponds but uh maintenance is a required function uh that we will be preparing and as as a condition of any approval we'll certainly be providing one to the board engineer um I know he he'd like us to provide one we wanted to do that just uh once we know we've locked the system in so we can give him one that demonstrates the maintenance techniques that will be required um prvious Pavements need to be flushed out and kept clean basins need to be uh uh observed and maintenance needs to be performed to ensure that their burm is has its integrity and that the outlet structure is not blocked so yes maintenance is a required function under the rules and it will be performed because the applicant's obligated to do so once that me yes it is and that's something the applicant will have to maintain Steve would the applicant agree to providing a certification to the municipality annually or whatever the manual requires in terms of when it's to be maintained there there's requirements that and the municipal engineer is is obligated in all municipalities New Jersey they have to keep records of of all the Basin so we'll we'll follow the requirements on that and ensure the town has a copy of of the maintenance manual and and any reporting that needs to be provided will be provided what I would like to see as a condition if this application is approved in addition to the normal reporting requirements in the onm manual is an annual either report or certification from the owner that those facilities have been adequately maintained throughout the course of the year in accordance with the manual that could be done what causes a system as the one you're designing to fail an underground system like this really as long as it's maintained and inspected and on the recommended intervals it it will it will hold up in the long term um failure can happen from excess silt getting into it and clogging up the things um that's that's a risk with perious pavement systems uh we do provide as as it's recommended in the design standards for these we provide an overflow Inlet so even if the the perious surface is is not picking the water up as quickly as it did for during a maintenance interval maybe it's getting near the maintenance point it runs off a little quicker the inlet will pick it up so we won't have standing water in the parking lot it'll still get into the storage component that'll function uh the storage component under this functions the way a traditional underground Basin does and those have been in practice for for decades and again it's the same thing there as long as they're maintained and kept clear of silt sediment um debris the they'll they'll perform in the long term uh above ground basins as long as they're they mode maintained um inspected to make sure there's no you know animal Burrows and things in them that might compromise them this Basin is mostly below ground it's not as much of a burnt Basin so that's which is a benefit um those are the kind of things to be cognizant of and those are all addressed in detail in our maintenance manual the kind of things that need to be checked and maintained thank you and just a production note we're having complaints online that you both can't be heard so one of you has to be on the wireless and one of you can use the uh the goose net there all right thanks thank you I I think you mentioned it uh before um in terms of a sort of a storm event uh what level storm event would fill up the the retention system our our systems designed were wouldn't be a two and a tenure wouldn't fill it up it would it wouldn't even be filled up in a 100 year it would still have freeboard which is storage above that okay we wouldn't under normal function we wouldn't have a a capacity problem okay so to clarify on on a 100-year event storm you're still able to discharge at the designed discharge rate yes we which would be less than what's currently there yes we will still do these additional reductions even for for that 100-year event correct all right and uh one last question at the southwest corner of the property are there any opportunities or is it you know is there any engineering Solutions where you can kind of also retain water at that location as well and discharge at a lower rate as you that I I had testified about this a little bit we have limited opportunities on that part of the site so what we have done instead is we've actually redirected a portion of the Westerly part of the site towards the Basin on the easterly side and we've accounted for that on our calculation so even with that we're still meeting these reductions um there's still less area and volume and and rate going off to the West Side so it's still an improvement over existing condition okay thank you yes um I did want to move on and talk a little bit about Landscaping um just just to emphasize that and and here I've put the the exhibit A5 back up uh because this this makes it easier to see everything in green um following the original application we uh we looked into the matter regarding the sewer easement along the front it's an ement with the township uh for that sewer line to run Traverse through the site and uh there was nothing that precluded the ability to landscape in that area as we found it so we saw an opportunity to provide more landscape in those areas and we also reviewed the planner's comments and the ordinance and sought ways to incorporate a significant increase in the amount of Landscaping on this site uh I mentioned we comply with all those standards and without going into more detail than need be I just want to key into some of the highlights and this is really a comparison of our original application to what's before the board right now um we've increased the number of proposed trees which includes deciduous and evergreen trees we had proposed 61 we've increased that number to 276 that encompasses the various Street trees you see along the Route 22 Frontage which run along the front of the building run along the front of the Basin and we've interspersed them along Donahue Road um as I've mentioned we're preserving a number of trees along the back and we found gaps in there to plant new ones as well this includes trees planted on the interior of the lot this includes evergreen trees that also pop up in the buffer and along the west side um the evergreen tree count itself has increased from 53 proposed to 238 proposed in this application that's in that total 276 number uh there's a number of requirements regarding foundation planting and buffer planting and as I said we we comply with those and in terms of again just to give you an idea of the counts of uh shrubs that are proposed on the site we've increased that from what was 21 proposed in the orinal application to 954 proposed in this application the majority of those are evergreen shrubs 768 of those 954 so um the landscape plan provides detail explanation and a table of compliance with the ordinances I just wanted to reemphasize the the numbers and uh happily report on the Improvement we've made on the amount of Landscaping on the site to meet those requirements um one item I wanted to touch on which which was an item noted in the planner's current report um we have included among these plantings a number of native species um to achieve the desired and and a thriving successful buffer and the different kind of planting types that the town wants we do intersperse a number of non-native and Native plantings because sometimes non-natives function better in those cases but we've sought to maximize the use of natives where we can there are are no invasive species I want to be clear of that they're either natives or there are some non-native species Incorporated in that but collectively we think it provides for meeting what the town requires and seeks to have with the kind of buffers along the frontages and the plantings that are required throughout the site um one other Improvement I did want to touch on with the revisions we made along the front uh we took advantage of a grade change along the Western third of the building and this is the third of the building here where the lower level The Cellar level uh of the of the building is is exposed at grade and there's a door uh that allows access to that level in the loading area um where the driveway is lower here we're preserving some of the grade along this part of the island between the driveway and Route 22 and that's allowing us to provide a little bit of a burm in this area of about 2 and 1 half to 3 feet high upon which we're planting uh a chunk of uh actually we're planting all of our our buffer planting uh which has a minimum planting height of 3 feet so I just want to note we're providing this additional burm to go with the buffer planting here which is going to effectively give you a 6 foot height above the parking area in this area here and give a little more buffer from the Route 22 side towards this face of the building where we're going to have these loading spaces these areas are already several feet higher than Route 22 and you're looking up on them so that combination uh we think is going to help provide enhanced buffering along that particular part of the building uh since the original application we made a number of improvements regarding the uh the lighting on site we've we've actually changed the arrangement along the front where we had a number of building mounted lights in the front of the building we've changed those to pole mounted lights along the Route 22 side mainly because we felt we could improve upon the uh and reduce the glare that would be associated with those lights on the Route 22 side of the site by directing them into the site um it was also a more efficient use of the light fixtures so we've made that change um we've also adjusted um in the controls notes on the plan we we talk about lighting levels um and while lighting operates From Dusk to Dawn after close of building it's all automatically going to be reduced to 50% of the normal operating business levels motion sensors are going to be incorporated in case a light level needs to come on if someone were to access the site after hours but um we have reduced light levels at night and speaking of reduced light levels along the north and west side of the building where we have the emergency access aisle for fire trucks um the building mounted lights on those sides are normally going to be off they're going to have a motion detector in case they need to be activated but the normal position for those will be off because normally there's no activity on that side of the building so that's just one more way we're trying to minimize the impact of uh of the project on the surrounding uh between that and providing the enhanced buffering we we think it's really minimizing the impact on the north and west side of the site um just to come back to an item we talked about with the material that this fire lane is surfaced with we um not to drag the variance list back into it but we uh we noted the variance for uh lot Improvement coverage where we're seeking 48% we conservatively accounted for this effectively grow fire lanane in that number because as we viewed it we said well it's a physical Improvement so we'll put it in the lot Improvement number um it does take up about Believe It or Not 8% of the site it's it's a it's a long fire lane um and that's notable because if we weren't conservatively counting it that lot Improvement number would be closer to 40% so we're we're not seeking that as the number we just thought it was worth mentioning for the board's consideration there's a spec for that where you can look at what the the the material rated at and what the impervious is going to be what's the translation I mean because I know you can't take 100% of the material so there has to be an offset there well there's two ways we look at that one is in the storm water calculation which which is a separate thing and we we looked at that like grass in that case and it is underd drained so we we were a little conservative in the accounting for it there again because we'd rather overestimate a little bit and control more water than underestimate this is this is discussion is solely about the lot Improvement requirement took all 8% sorry took all 8% we took all 8% we didn't want to underestimate so maybe we're seeking a little more variance relief because of that but I'm arguing against you here I'm saying that you know this material is impervious granted it has grass but there's a cement component to this that you can't take the entire area as grass you know there there has to be reduction in that and you know I'm not an expert but but clearly this material is not grass it's not soil it has a man-made component to it and you've taken 100% of it against your calculation yes we've taken 100% of that against our lot coverage calculation so instead of saying we only have 40% lot uh Improvement coverage we're saying we're taking all 8% we're saying it's 48% I think you're saying the same thing okay I don't know if I just let the planner decide on this because you know like I said this is a man-made material you're doing an improvement not grass we're calling it an improvement storm water calcul okay just as long it was accounted for in this on the safety component here and the Fire Marshall is okay with it correct yeah no I I'm sorry if that was unclear I'm counting it in the town's favor in both cases okay not in the applicant's favor thank you just only because when I looked at it I said it's going to look like grass so I just I wanted to bring that point up um I think we've covered the the main changes of the application um just just other points to note signage remains unchanged in terms of areas and and set except for the one set back we improved all the building signage the the free standard and that didn't trigger a variance no variances did you provide a sign packet I mean is there any kind of sign there was a sign packet in the original application uh the only the only change with the plans is the setback is increased and the only thing that and we will do this there's a requirement to put a number on the uh an address number on the main sign we can do that as a condition of any approval that's not a problem we just didn't update the whole thing for it you've been really good about giving the board the differential from the original plan can you give us the the differential in landscaping versus what is existing you know that because that that's really what I think a lot of the board looks at I'm sure the members of the public are going to look at is what do I have to deal with now and what I'm potentially dealing with and from a landscape perspective yeah this drawing looks like you've done wonderful job but what is existing there currently and versus and what the deviation going to be I guess is the question I I don't think I have the quantitative analysis on that but I could explain the differences on the site um one one number I can give the board which which is worth mentioning um in my prior testimony and I'm just looking to pull the number out so I give you the correct number again um Mr Winters let me help you why don't you pretend you live across the street from this like live on Donna here what do I see now and what am I going to see see potentially if this is approved uh from the Donna Hue side I'm going to continue to see a number of trees that we're saving now um there's a couple of big Evergreens that that are actually right in this area here and I I believe our architect is going to have an exhibit that shows a nice perspective of this and I don't want to steal his Thunder um but if I'm looking from this side I'm going to if I could see through this I'm going to see a building but there's a large amount of new Landscaping going here and it's at the top of this grade in this area so I'm getting the the best use out of this height by putting these trees and and Landscaping at the top of that I'm really going to have a hard time seeing this building through the existing and the proposed Landscaping these evergreens are pretty thick right here even though it's a higher building and what's existing well keeping in mind it is a three-story building when you look at it from the front of the building on this side of the building it's a two-story building and I was looking at these grades today and the grade standing here is about 135 up here I'm at about 143 so I'm already standing here a story higher so I'm really if I'm looking straight out I'm looking at a one-story building even to my elevation and now it's going to be behind all these existing trees all these proposed buffer trees it's down this little Hill so we're we're really limiting the ability to see the building especially in this corner now that we've set the building back even further than we had and and provided all this additional planting um if I go down further in Donahue today there there's actually a number of gaps where you could see right to this existing building you could see Route 22 as you get further down we're filling in all those gaps we're we're keeping the taller trees we're putting in a number of smaller shrubs we're we're providing it might not be the buffer depth the distance that is required in the ordinance but the number of plantings required in it are being provided so it's your testimony that residents on Donahue will see this building less than they currently see the existing structure even though it's a bigger structure it's going to be harder to see it is so yes that is my testimony on that excuse me Mr chairman if I might at our last meeting we asked you to show us a photo simulation of what this building is going to look like you got it who's got it okay thank you so that's the perspective from the Donahue side um and the number I was looking for I don't know if Mr melenic if that was the one you had but um I'm going to go from my memory I the original ah thank you that was wasn't originally I believe I testified that we were going to remove 21 existing trees which were within the footprint of development we've reduced the footprint of development that number has been reduced to 12 and those are mostly in areas right adjacent to where we're doing that where we're saving these additional nine treeses are actually along Donahue at the back which is helping our buffer and we are effectively offsetting those 12 trees with a what was my number 230 somewh 276 new trees evergreen and and uh and deciduous so that that's a number I can give and of the 276 238 yes the majority are evergreen which helps our buffering case I mean in terms of the view of this building otherwise we're we're getting more distant to the Westerly side Lot line there already is trees over here so we're not we weren't concerned about that side but we're providing even more Landscaping there than we had today the existing building from the Route 22 side it doesn't have Street trees it doesn't have a lot of landscaping in front of the building we're going to have that now and that building's going to be set back at least 10t further than the current building while the bigger building will be more visible from 22 we're we're doing our best to landscape it and make it less impactful visually um the architect will have again some exhibits to show the building from the front um and and if we think it's going to show a nice Improvement in that when you see those would you be willing to stipulate the plantings in front are going to be minimum Heights again what with the minimum Heights of the plantings in front that you've added new we already are meeting the the town the town has requirements for that all the all the shrubs have a minimum 3 foot planting height which is which is quite high and it's a benefit these look huge on the plant so they they're really Nots the the tree Heights and all I'll see I think I have that is not the one I wanted it's over here our initial planting Heights of these trees are you know in the 12 to 15ot height range and they're they're mostly quicker Growers so we we think these are going to take off quite a bit the the exhibit we show is going to show I think a fiveyear growth on them um uh let's open up to the board questions [Music] please I just have one question um are there any um generators emergency power standby power there be on the site no no generators no thank you residents due south that look up at the property could you take us through the similar analysis that you did from Donahue what will they see what will the differential be again we have a taller building but you have more plantings in front so what's your testimony to that in ter and again in terms of the height and it's three stories and part because that seller does become exposed here and the grade comes down on the site from on the east side I'm at 134 and I'm I'm closer to 124 so I gain 10 ft um the existing finished floor elevation of the portion of the building that's twostory is similar to the floor elevation of the current building so I I just want to if you visualize that really the two-story part is not going to be any taller it's going to be similar in height to the existing two-story building so there were a number of residents that talked about rainwater issues there were that's Glenn Road right yeah I believe so I don't want to speak for memory but what is your testimony on the the rainwater runoff situation with your updated plant tonight what can these residents expect in terms of capture and and their new conditions I I think I've addressed it with the Cur with the prior testimony but really the recap is we're providing more storage so we can slow down the rate that water runs off the site which is going to help the capacity of those Downstream pipes which means they'll have more ability to drain areas Downstream of us we're holding more water back for everyone else's benefits put simply this this proposal will improve runoff conditions this proposal will absolutely improve runoff conditions but we had residents you know effectively testify at the last hearing that they had bad conditions during severe storms so I you know you're making a very broad generalization I I I do from what you've presented yes I do think conditions will be better will they be better in Glenn Road I think is my question I I don't doubt they have problems now and there could be many sources of those but we are doing everything and we're going above and beyond the minimums we're we're providing much more than this property is obligated to provide for everyone's benefit and we're we're happy to do that with these improvements you're dancing around my question though it's going to be better okay thank you G to be better sorry there's another board questions I'm going to open up to our board professionals just one quick thing about the about the entrance and about the new uh parking configuration on the south west Corner talk about that so on the you're talking about this part that I just zoomed in on okay uh we made this a little more efficient it's it's a low demand parking lot it really is so we've we're allowing this to be a one-way entrance up to this point it allows us to reduce the pavement a little bit um customers can make a right turn in and there's parking spaces provided at the storefront uh there's parking spaces provided in this lot um the fire truck and we submitted a turning template and I don't need to pull it out right now but the the fire chief reviewed it um fire trucks get access through this way loading Vehicles proceed straight forward um we're providing just as we did before on the west southwest corner of the building we had two loading spaces that actually required a sort of a backend movement um I like the Improvement we have here where we have spaces where the trucks can pull directly in here now the largest truck size we anticipate as we previously testified as an s30 which is about a 30ft truck um there's a municipal requirement to provide up to a 50ft loading space and that's why we have up to a 50ft loading space next to the 30 32t one um we have ample room here to accommodate whatever Vehicles we're we're going to have there this is more than we need um but it's still we've reduced the amount of loading because we've reduced the size of the building so these trucks can pull in here um if they need to unload they can do so they gain access from a sidewalk to get to the lower level of the building when they're done they can back out and pull right out on 22 um was there any more specific question you had about the flow or you know it's just uh so somebody loading in that in the spot on the left there they go around I I suppose I'm I see where you've got the road striped um I mean they're are we worried about them in the flow of the of the uh I'm not because the 50ft space is longer than need be so I'm I'm not doubtful that people will be able to walk through the back of that but it's also a low volume low low demand low traffic use so this is not route 22s out here we're we're not we're not going to have those volumes here we're going to be it's also fire driver it it is and if those vehicles are coming in and and we do have a truck prohibition on this just because the turn is tighter than would permit the s30 truck and that's okay because we want them coming in from the other way um so if Vehicles do not decide not to come in the main entrance or miss it and then come in this way they may be coming in that way but this is a 24t wide aisle so there's there's ample room there but uh with this layout not concerned about access to this door um we have two loading spaces that doesn't mean we're going to have two trucks there at any frequency it may happen but um great all right that's it me thanks for professionals flip a coin who's ready thank you um so I just have a few questions um I guess I'll I'll I'll talk first about the um the bulk variants I know that the board had raised questions about the F requirement um and just for the board's clarification f is really a function of um rather than using building coverage calculations it helps to also uh factor in height so building massing so it's not just the footprint of a building but it's the height that so it calculates all it together as a ratio of the total property so basically you know how big is the building and comparison to the to to the total amount of land um so that's a way to think about it so it's not just the stories it's the building footprint So to that end um I was going to ask the engineer if he had um a calculation of the building footprint um or to make it easier are each of the floors the same the same size same footprint each of the floors are the same size so the footprint times three is is our gross floor area and our calculations so it's approximately 34627 34 629 was the number I I had yes so so just you know I think that's probably something good to keep in mind is that the footprint of the building is almost 35,000 square fet if that puts into perspective as it relates to the F and that's how you you know you arrive at the F variance in comparison to the to the allowance in the zone um for the um I know I don't know if we touched on the electric vehicle parking um but what I would recommend is that if there is an EV evse space or make ready space that is provided um that it be taken off any kind of public um they have like public databases or public mapping that allow people who have electric vehicles to search for the next aail available spot and I just don't want it this space to be utilized by Outsiders coming to you know charge the car as a revenue Source keep it out of Tesla's database what was that keep it out of the Tesla database whatever you know charger charge point or Tesla whatever uh if possible um can you just clarify if the if the site is um it has no Gates no gated access like some self self storage facilities have correct that that's correct there's no gated access okay thank you vehicular gated yes that thank you for that clarification no no vehicular gated access thank you um I just wanted to note um as the uh Mr winus was providing the number of variances I just wanted to clarify that the um in my memo I noted the the minimum conservation easement on page 8 of 10 um I noted it for both roadways for both Don and Route 22 and I think that should probably be two separate variances just to clarify that um because you know they are separate uh Dimensions um not it's not creating an additional variance it's just in the list version it should be one more uh so I think where he noted there was 12 there's probably actually 13 total um and then finally the Landscaping um as Mr Winters noted their plans have been updated significantly to improve the Landscaping um whereas I think they were deficient in almost every category under Section 126-1 191 they meet many if not all of the requirements um I did the table on sheet 8 of 12 right now um what the requirement under 191 B1 13-c um talks about the placement of the trees the spacing of the trees um and they do utilize existing trees so I just it it didn't show compliance in the table as far as um the spacing on center of the existing and proposed Street trees so I just wanted to confirm that the spacing has been complied with that's a good point it's more challenging to meet the spacing where we're trying to intersperse especially along uh the Donahue side where we see value of course in keeping existing shade trees um we've we're meeting it on the front I know we're meeting the space and requirements there it just I it may get a little regular in the back I do not have that number um but if if you would recommend relief be granted for that we would seek that relief I I think keeping in mind we're meeting the number of trees is is certainly important to note even if the spacing isn't perfect okay um yeah it's it's pretty flexible the ordinance allows 30 to 50 so it's not a strict number and you know I did scale it and more Western portion of Donahue I think he's correct that it probably meets it but I think as you get towards 22 it starts to get um a little bit deviate a little bit away from that so um I think it could probably be rectified by one or two more trees one or two more deciduous or evergreen trees if that could be possible we we we'd be in condition of any approval that the board May seek to Grant we uh we' be happy to work with the planner to ensure we address as best as we can given the challenge of trying to preserve as much as we can and and maximize what we can plant there so we we'd be happy to work with her for that okay and um as noted there they they did update the table for their planting schedule to include which species are native I just want to let the board know 11 out of the 27 total species are native so not all of them yet only 11 out of 27 what I will note is um I'll look more closely at that as this moves forward and I have no problem I know Scarlet was very you know she's a pro at at landscaping and I'm not as expert level as her but I do someday give it attention um but I did see that in under the Evergreens there's two pretty similar species there's a Leland Cyprus and a and a green giant the Green Giant is native the Leland Cyprus is not they provide very very similar you know attributes with the exception maybe of the color aland Cypress is a little more like blue gray green whereas the Green Giant is pretty green um but I would just you know I I I don't have a problem with replacing um more using more native using more green Giants rather than the Leland Cyprus um and if the applicant has no problem with that I think that's probably you have no problem with any condition of approval if if look if I ever lost an application over native versus invasive I wouldn't be allowed back in the office so bamboo problem yeah and um you know if the application is approved um I'm I'm happy to work with the applicant to ensure that you know the best top-notch Landscaping plan is implemented um yeah that's that's currently all I have right now thank you thank you thank you Mr chairman all right Bill a wild weekend here in Bridgewater yes talk about it everyone is wild so we'll Dive Right into drainage so we heard a little testimony about an existing drainage ditch and I raised it in in my memo excuse the typos I just realized there were a couple of grammatical errors but there is a drainage ditch that exists parallel to vas RAV and we're very familiar with it because that was a source of damage to the roadway in the aftermath of tropical storm ID so we have a large series of retaining walls directly adjacent to vaser Avenue between Route 22 and Hill Crest um that was damaged uh and we had to spend a little over a million dollars to repair that retaining o funded 90% through FEMA money but um still it was a big effort it is a big concern it it drains a a large area um comes down the hill adjacent to vaser right to the intersection where Donahue pulls off of Route 22 and then it drains under Route 22 the source of the flooding over the weekend was if you could picture where that open drainage ditch converges on 22 there is an open pipe that has a trash Rack in front of that pipe that's a constant source of maintenance for our public works department every significant storm event we have debris branches leaves rocks it all converges on that trash rack and if that's not maintained every hour on the hour what happens over the weekend tends to happen we had three inches of rain the rack got clogged the water over spilled that ditch flooded out the intersection um it's an issue that we're we're very well aware of I don't believe there's a capacity issue with the pipe that flows underneath Route 22 um certainly encouraged by some of the further enhancements that have been made to the plan for this particular project with the drainage design I think that actually is going to Aid if this project is is approved that's going to Aid in in in some of the functionality of the drainage that at that intersection because of the additional storage that is being offered on this property um so again it it's an issue that we're aware of it's it's just offsite of this particular property but I do have a couple questions that I want to ask Mr wyers um maybe to further just clarify some of some of the prior testimony so Paul as I understand and correct me if I'm wrong there are two storm systems along the frontage of this property correct along the rout 22 Frontage that is correct yes so you have you have a storm system in 22 that that captures the majority of runoff from this property that that flows towards vasar that's cor where it converges with the ditch that I was just speaking about yes from there that that storm sewer runs under 22 down voser Avenue into Bound Brook where it discharges I believe into the Bound Brook that leads into the ritton river you have a second system on the Westerly side of the property along Route 22 where you collect a much smaller area that goes Westerly along 22 down to the middle Brook which then drains down to the Ron River are you aware if at any point along your Frontage or just say within close proximity of your property are you a aware does that storm sewer cross under 22 and discharge into any of the southernly neighborhoods residential neighborhoods or is your understanding that that's wholly contained and then it makes its way down to larger systems I'm I'm not aware of where the state system in 22 goes it's the description you gave is is more or less my understanding um but that is correct that there's two different directions our site is draining towards and again the majority is towards the boster side okay and for the board's benefit I did do a little research into that and I I wanted to ask Mr wyers because he spent a lot of time on this plan as well but I researched it as well and I I did not come up with any information or mapping your databases that would show the system daylighting to to the subtly neighborhoods and and it's important because we've heard we've heard from the board as well as some of the residents that Glen Road neighborhood is definitely a concern and we want to make sure that if this property or project is approved we're not going to be causing any issues over there so I don't believe this is going to be a source of added run off to that neighborhood based on the way this is laid out now do you agree with Mr Winters that it will be net Improvement to the Glen Road Community I believe that there will be a net Improvement to the amount of water entering that storm system if for whatever reason in in an extreme event you do have Flooding at the intersection the enhancements here would improve that that condition so yes I I do agree if this is approved there's going to be an improvement there's going to be added Protections in place now one question I was going to ask Paul is because of of the concern with storm water because of of the concern with with the amount of water potentially leaving the site you had had mentioned that you in essence overdesigned the drainage you put in perious Pavement in the parking lot with underground storage in your opinion would there be any benefit to enhancing the size of the existing detention Basin to provide for more storage and more protection from the Overflow out to Route 22 or do you think that really wouldn't wouldn't improve or further provide more protection if that makes sense we actually did consider that briefly in the options we evaluated um but G given the layout we have and the there wasn't a appreciable amount of area we could add to the Bas and on that side of the site we just felt it was a a better option to provide a new uh and and for that matter a green infrastructure Improvement which is what the the pav perious Paving system allows us to do um to provide that system there um and it's it's really an ideal location to site one because it's it's sort of an offline parking lot it's it's separate it's it's uh flat enough in that area we can we can make that functionally work um either way it's additional storage we're providing that wasn't there before so it's we're still gaining that storage by whatever means and this case it's that system just to reiterate a question that I think Mr vesio asked earlier on that Westerly portion of the property I know there's a small part of the proposed driveway that leaves the site undet tamed and I understand that there is a reduction of coverage and and resulting runoff that's going to be leaving but is there any opportunity in that what I'll call southwesterly portion of the property to add a small isolated feature um you know I hate to I hate to say a rain Garden but anything anything along those lines that that could be tucked in there along that Westerly entrance that could help you know just provide the extra protections the there was a particular challenge trying to set anything else on that side because any system we put in will concentrate whatever we discharge and there's no um existing connection point to anything um the dot is notoriously sh more than challenging when it comes to modifications to their systems and unfortunately there's no connection point today and not only that but we have the sanitary sewer eement to contend with which is another challenge to that the way we mitigated against effects for this part of the site was we redirected uh a portion of the Westerly part of the site to the east so that way as a result and and to the point we were talking about with the downstream system regardless of where 22 is draining to on the Westerly side of the site less area is going to it less impervious cover is going to it less volume and less rate are going to that side of the site than existing so we're exceeding the standard there still even without providing anything and I if we had the opportunity then we we could have looked into that but there was no feasible way to make a make a connection to put any other system out so that was a reason why we opted instead to significantly upsize in a meaningful way of the storage on the Eastern side and and just provide all those reductions that we could there okay doing the most with our limitations really would there be any any benefit to putting in putting in a couple of isolated curb cuts and you know with the with the Landscaping along the frontage maybe incorporating some type of you know infiltration Swale or or anything else I know you have the sanitary sewer reement along the frontage there which is probably what you're going to say there's there's limited space but um yeah again I'm just I'm just looking for further opportunities um particularly along that Westerly side because that's the one area albeit a small a small portion of it that's that's currently unded okay without looking closer um I can't guarantee what we can do i' I'd be happy to look into it and see if we could work with with um uh with with Mr Burr's office and identify any opportunities we can to improve it if we do I would offer it could be a further above and beyond um I'm just hesitant if we can guarantee anything if if we can I would I would certainly be happy to understood thank you um just a couple more questions Mr chairman so Paul you had you had testified earlier that I think in the prior revision of the plan or prior version you had three loading spaces if I'm not mistaken and then this version that's reduced down to two along the Westerly side but I couldn't help but notice there's there's three spaces at the main entrance of the building that look like they're 20 are they 26 feet long or 28 feet long yes and thank you because that's a note that I did want to mention and I think I skipped over it in my summary [Music] regular uh passenger vehicle can so we just we saw an opportunity to provide that here these are not large enough to accommodate that su3 truck they're not intended to be they're intended to provide a little more flexibility uh whereas we had a full dedicated loading space on this side of the site which was probably more than we needed down here in the original layout uh it's providing an opportunity if someone does want to rent or use an oversized vehicle to park it on this side of the site maybe take a little pressure off the loading side the site so it's it's really just a flexibility they are counted as regular parking spaces and for that purpose and really they're intended for that use but if someone has a longer vehicle we provided a wider Drive aisle to facilitate access for those right here which also helps facilitate the firr access so um not loading spaces just slightly longer parking spaces a maximum of 26 feet uh but thank you for that note to um two more questions you also had testified that in an effort to eliminate I think two potential variances you eliminated the exterior trash enclosure correct that will now be accommodated we may see it on architectural plans but that will now be accommodated inside the building that is correct as I think was testify to you know how that operation will function or would that be the architect so yeah this was actually testified at last hearing by the operator Mr was it I couldn't remember yeah it would just be a function of the rollouts internally and they'll have to do arrange for private pickup to the extent necessary however many times a week they they need so then the plan accommodates for roll roll outs to extend out to the parking lot or the par Drive access driveway for easy yes that's that's how I understand they can facilitate at either end of the building I I think they were anticipating the southwest corner when they testified but I don't want to week for the testimony given uh by our operator last week or last month last question has to do with lighting you had mentioned you made some tweaks to the lighting plan what I'm interested in is the the scon lighting that is on the Northerly the Donahue side of the building I think previously there were building mounted scon lights proposed that's correct they're still being proposed but that I hear they're going to be in the off position the Lighting on and I'll just identify for everyone's benefit there's Lighting on this side of the north side of the building and on the west side of the building which faces towards that grassy fire lane that will normally be off there'll be motion detector so if a vehicle or someone is to come out the back door they can turn on but they're normally off that was my question so they'll be off on motion sensors so if a vehicle or somebody uses one of those manand doors they'll kick on but whatever the timer is set for they'll immediately yes or shortly thereafter be turned off yes and that's true on the Westerly side of the building as well that that is the same on the Westerly side uh so these are one two three there's I think four lights on the Westerly side which will be on that same operational basis thank you thank you thank you Mr chair thank you Bill all right the time is uh it's called 9:00 why don't we take a 10-minute break we'll adjourn we'll come back and we'll open up to members of the public to question Mr Winner's testimony all right thank you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e here yeah here here here here here thank you very much all right members of the public now is your time to ask questions only questions on Mr winter testimony and I promise when all the witnesses are done everyone here will have ample opportunity to speak for or against this case I'll give you as much time as you need but right now we're only asking questions on Mr Winter's testimony so whoever's ready come on down and you're Miss Westlake good to see you again thank you good to see you all as well and you're representing an objector correct that is correct okay thank you okay so miss W Lake just make your full appearance for the record please certainly my name is rosaland Westlake I'm an attorney I'm based in Lambertville and I represent uh Arthur's um my apologies Arthur self storage and they're not in Bridgewater correct they're located outside of Bridgewater that is correct okay thank you um okay so uh I heard that going through the list of the variances the two D variances and then the 10 C Varian that were listed um I was a little confused because I thought I found a few other discrepancies from the ordinance and uh to be perfectly honest I'm not a planner so um I was hoping that you could help me understand whether these would be variances or waivers uh the first item um was actually raised by one of the board members relating to the uh loading spaces uh as I read the ordinance um for commercial industrial and Retail uses of 50 to 75,000 square feet and that's where it stops in the measurement um it says you have to have four loading spaces and they've only provided two so I just thought that might be uh called out as a variance and that was I I believe 126-1 177b and similarly under that same section relating to the size of the loading spaces they're specifically identified as having to be uh 12 ft by 50 ft and here one of them is 12 x 50 but the other one is 10 by 32 so I would assume that that's undersized and therefore not compliant um so those two items a question for the applicant's attorney well not really because it's we need to have questions of his testimony those are great points and you know we'll take a look at them I guess I'm sorry I just thought they were questions by the time the planner gets here to testify about all the variances okay got it address it got it no worries uh okay so then my NE my next uh set of questions I guess relates to the calculations of the impervious surface uh and the total square footage because you had testified um that and it's also on your zone chart that the f is um 69% but when I look looked at the numbers and tried to do the calculations and I could be wrong believe me I'm not a math person the total land area of the property is the 149,90 square ft and then if you reduce it by this slope uh measurement it comes to 114 846 Square ft is that correct well the lot area remains unchanged but I'm I don't know if I'm follow your question well I'm just trying to confirm the land total land area versus the total land area reduced by the slopes so the total land area reduced by the slopes would be the 114 846 correct I just want to confirm you're asking this in regards to which of the bulk standards in particular well I'm trying to identify whether I even calculate the numbers correctly first your question is with regard to calculation of f ultimately that will be the question thank you I'm sorry floor area ratio so uh we we prepared the required uh calculations related to the steep slopes per the hillside Redevelopment ordinance we submitted that plan for the board professionals review and that was the basis for the reduction numbers we calculated so just to confirm as stated in our zoning table uh the Zone would require a maximum or would permit a maximum floor area ratio of 0.25 without any reduction factor with the hillside development reduction Factor applied it reduces that permitted maximum floor area ratio to92 mhm so forgive the long explanation I just want to be clear upon that okay but I'm also trying to understand it in the terms of square feet okay so if you have the 14992 square feet for total land area and if you reduce it in accordance with the steep slopes my understanding is it's 114,500 my understanding also is that the F would be the total square footage which is the 103 887 divided by the total land area as reduced by the slope which is the 114 846 and when you do that math I come up with 90.5% not 69% so I'm I'm just very confused I I don't want to drag a a tedious calculation out for for discussion because it's it's been reviewed and it's been reviewed by uh the board's professionals I believe though I don't want to speak for them um but I I believe the numbers we provided comply with the standard I think our calculation correct the floor area ratio in our plans is correct okay um I guess I'm also very confused then about the impervious surface calculation because when I looked at the impervious surface square footage that is relied upon in the storm water management in particular uh if you take a look at the recharge uh spreadsheet it adds up to 71,9 square ft so again if you take that 71,9 square ft and you divide it by 114 846 which is what I understand the total square footage of the land reduced by the slope requirements you come up with 62.2% not 48% so I guess I'm trying to figure out where's the how did you come up with 48% because I didn't see any square footage calculations well that that that description is is actually a little bit of mixing and apples and oranges scenario the impervious cover in the uh storm water calculations is different from the um Improvement coverage as defined in the ordinance uh the Improvement coverage has similar to the floor area ratio there's a hillside development reduction applicable to that zoning table we submitted notes that 40% is normally the maximum permitted Improvement coverage uh it's reduced to a permitted 30.6% by the reduction Factor uh we I testified that we've reduced our Improvement coverage which as I took a bit of time talking about does include that fire lane conservatively uh is 48% proposed so that's what we're seeking the variance from apply to the wrong integer in the formula you're applying it to the square footage whereas it should be applied to the the percentage Yeah and I I just wanted to clarify that because we we've calculated it per the standard um and it's there is a difference between the impervious and the storm water rule so it's the impervious cover isn't affected in calculation by that because it's not a bulk standard in the zone actually Improvement coverages okay so then uh the gravel that's included in the calculations for purposes of recharge and whatnot is not considered impervious surface for purposes of an impervious surface under the ordinance the recharge calculation you're referencing the storm water report that that follows a different standard under the storm water rules to account for what's imp charge does it does it differ I mean is the definition of what's impervious and not impervious cover is that different between the the recharge that that spreadsheet breaks out different categories um we we really provided that spreadsheet more for information because the site is happens to be exempt from the groundwater recharge provision even though since we're reducing impervious cover now we really aren't uh resulting and much impact on groundwater recharge that that being beside the point I apologize if confusion was introduced by that table but it's not relevant to no I I'm just trying to to to calculate numbers because I'm seeing percentages but I'm not able to understand where you a percent came up if I don't see you know f is based on square footage simp calculation I'm not I'm not understanding no no that's it's a fair question but I'll I'll clarify the simple calculation of improvement percentage is the total impervious coverage and square footage okay plus the Fire Road which we counted conser atively that square footage divided by the total square footage gives me a percent okay and the reduction factor that is in the ordinances applies to what the permitted percent is not what the actual calculation is and that's it it's just math so so the permitted percent of reduction is not based on the slope calculations it's some other number I'm sorry I didn't hear that part it's not based on what calculation the slope uh reduction because I was looking at the total land area of the 149 and then the total land area reduced by the slopes is the 114 but you're saying that the percentage used for calculating the reduction in the impervious surface is a different percentage than that which would be used to calculate the F the the it works at it's actually the same reduction the way the calculation works at it's just being applied to different factors one is being applied to the floor area ratio permitted one's being applied to the um uh Improvement coverage and we with our submission we provided in detail this calculation on the slope stability map uh excuse me slope stability exhibit uh which is part of record and that that lays out how those calculations came up as the basis for what's in our zoning table or how you came up with the 48% yes well how we came up with the permitted 30% the 48% is I explained is just area divided by I think you guys are still talking past each other miss weslake it sounds like you when you did your calculation you applied the reduction to the square footage is that correct yeah I I assumed that the square footage of the impervious surface would be important to know right but that but but the fact the the reduction based on the slopes is what you you applied it to the total area when you reduced to get to your 114 whereas Mr Winters I believe what you're saying is the formula is that you apply the reduction to the per maximum permitted so that that is what reduces us from 40% down to that 30 point something number that you said so you're you're just sounds like Miss W Wes Lake you have just applied the the factor to the wrong number I see okay right I just was very confused by the Numbers they didn't make any sense to me so I just wanted to make sure that I was understanding where you were going with that so um um okay so uh then turning to um the truck turning template uh and so on in order for the 30 foot box truck to maneuver they have to enter the first entrance correct they can't enter the second entrance that that's correct in fact we have a turn prohibition sign on that second entrance because we felt there was not adequate room for that turn Excuse me yes truck turn prob okay so a sign's going to tell trucks it's you can't turn in here yes in fact it's on our plan right here okay do do you to that drive to the east of the Westerly driveway is there is there any provision for what happens if say a 40 foot truck enters the site do you just have a sign again that says you can't enter because you're 40t I I don't want to speak for our operator but I think we gave testimony about the kind of trucks we expect in here I I think I gave some too and we don't expect to serve larger Trucks Than That M um but if one came you have a loading space accomodate we do so there is a loading space for that and although we didn't design it for it it's it's a pretty straightforward entrance um coming off of 22 I I can't speak for the success of it but it's not a highly restricted uh means of access into the site we're not anticipating those trucks mhm we didn't specifically design for them because we're not anticipating them gentlemen if I can just hop in you're doing a valiant job with One mic can we please use two microphones thank you very it doesn't work at all you able to hear me real close try it again testing all right intimate with it I'm I'm going to leave that to Mr M if you're at home on YouTube yeah we can't hear you and we to make sure that everyone can hear and is participating so thank you for trying and you're doing a great job with one thank you so if that 40 foot truck does come in and park there um when they maneuver they are going to cross both lanes to get out is that correct I I didn't analyze that I can't speak for it because it's an angled space though it's not as likely it would need to maneuver through both lanes and as I testified earlier it's a low volume driveway so it's not a main thoroughfare so there we don't have a concern about that possibility okay um I saw in the new design that that um two of the corners of the building look like they're basically touching the roadway the main Drive aisle we we are quite close at two of the corners and that's just a product of us trying our best to minimize our footprint while making it a little more efficient I don't want to get beyond that cuz I'm in architectural territory but yes we are very close we actually uh have gone forward to put a protective baller at the one corner where it projects into the parking area a little bit with that in mind but that is a correct statement into the parking area yeah okaye but what about the corners that are in the drive aisle is there a baller there or anything no those all fall behind the curb um it was just more practical to put a baller to that corner based on the placement of the building okay I see all right um it is outside of the drive aisle though regardless the building okay is there room for a person to walk between the drive AIS in the that those corners of the building or do they have to step out into the drive AIS uh there isn't room to walk walk but there's also no no doors along this side of the building until you reach the loading uh Zone side where Vehicles can park and access can be granted so there isn't a need for pedestrian access along that side it's really concentrated on the easterly side of the building where the main entrances okay I guess it would probably be a question for the operations but I would have thought maybe maintenance people might want to have some ability to walk along the side of the building but it doesn't matter um let's see uh in the originally proposed parking you had a full circulation pattern but that's been taken out now right that's correct so if you pull into the it's called Dead End parking is that you can call it that yes it's deadend if someone pulls into it that parking par area and there's no parking left they have to make a k turn to get out correct they can't they can't just do a smooth circular movement and drive onto the drive island if if the parking lot is full that would be necessary as as we've previously testified it's a low volume facility so we a lot to be full frequently um so then moving to the uh existing driver way slope um and the corner clearance at the Western curb um those are currently not compliant with or those are not compliant with current njd standards correct they're they existing situation or or circumstances I'm sorry you're at the Westerly driveway correct we are there there's an existing driveway to the state highway we're tying into and we're um trying to maintain slopes equivalent to the current in that area right but those are not currently those are not compliant with current standards which standards would you be speaking of the current NJ do Highway driveway entrance and exit design standards um I I can't say by the looks of this I don't think we're non compliant as far as I'm aware but um we're also outside of the state highway at that point by more than 10 feet would a flatter entrance or flatter exit be a bit safer that that may be possible I could I could review this but I I don't see any problem with this access is presented I I don't think it is any different from the current really and this application is subject to do dot approval we would need uh potentially a letter of no interest from the state because we're not changing the driveways but phrase that we are subject to dot jurisdiction on this jurisdiction that is correct Mr whake he was brought in not as a traffic engineer but just as an engineer so his trafficer is traffic engineer testifying I can reserve these questions for your traffic engineer we do not the due to the volume of the anticipated trips we are not bringing traffic exp okay um so if you were to redesign the driveway exit and entrance you would have to comply with current njd standards correct if they were to apply yes okay um and you would get the letter of no interest because you would not be making any changes to the existing driveway entrance and exit correct we We believe We may be eligible for a letter of no interest on this application we will uh obtain whatever dot approvals we need as a condition of any approval granted okay your maximum driveway grade for the first 25 ft of the driveway entrance is approximately 10% though is that correct I I would have to review and verify I don't have those numbers in front of me um okay uh because I was looking also at the ordinance and in the ordinance you require um a maximum driveway grade not to exceed 5% so I understand it's an existing condition but at the same time we're here with an opportunity to correct a lot of deficiencies so I just do you think the site can accommodate a better design for entrance and exit that would be more compliant or compliant with current njdot standards as opposed to those that were applied when this was first built if any revisions are required to comply with do we we would certainly make them um I'm I'm not aware of what extent of non-compliance may or may not not be there but I I believe that we are providing a design that functions for our site okay uh and I heard you testifying with respect to the water you you're um reducing the peak flow actually that is correct all right but you are slightly increasing the water no we're significantly reducing the peak flows from the site oh I'm sorry I meant to say volume my fault oh um generally we are reducing the volumes um compared compared to the existing condition okay um because when I again I looked at the the swm report and I noticed on page 14 of the existing volumes at the Westerly end um you have 22569 and then at the easterly end it's 49,0 907 correct is that describing existing or proposed condition that that that's the existing that's reported on page 14 of the existing volume calculations okay um and then two pages Along on page 16 in the proposed volume at the Westerly end I see you've reduced the volume down to 18837 and then you've increased the volume at the easterly end over by um where I guess where Don Hugh and Route 22 come in you've red you've increased that somewhat so so the the numbers you're looking at the the accumulative effect is we are keeping near or slightly reducing the volume for most storm events if you look at the West and East side of the site separately it may appear that the east side is increasing because we're redirecting a portion of the site's area from west to east but the cumulative effect as we're right between the as testified the reduction in impervious cover and the uh that that change alone is helping to mitigate against an increase in in in volume from the site right no I I understand actually I was c i I added them up and I was like wow you're actually like 17 cubic feet under yeah in the way you've calculated it we very happy with that increase on this that we're um I guess part of my question related to the fact that you're actually increasing the volume portion of it though on the easterly end correct while that while there's more volume that will be directed towards the easterly side we're providing that this additional storage for that volume which is allowing us to produce the uh significant rate reductions above and beyond the requirement so uh we we've addressed that volume redistribution by providing that additional storage and you just testified that the volume increase as a result of the redirection from other areas of the site is that correct on the east side of the site that is correct okay so then um oh did did your volume calculations include the fire lanee yes okay great and then um what happens if a downstream Culvert cannot accommodate the volume that is presently there or being created for instance the slightly increased volume for the downstream component of the East End I mean what happens then does it back up does it flood what what happens well I I I haven't studied in detail how that Downstream Corridor functions but what whatever may happen as I testified we're we're providing some improvements on our site which we believe are going to lessen the effects at least from our site development on anything Downstream okay great you have not studied i' imagine Mr bur has and I believe his conclusion was similar your your your conclusion um that he will be make made make an improvement to offsite conditions okay um at the uh with respect to the conservation easement and the 50 Foot requirement can you tell me what specific site conditions prevented you from complying with the 50 Foot conservation easement requirement the part of it is due to the geometry of the site obviously we we come to we're triangle and we come to a point and that that's a challenge for all develop on this site as as I I believe I mentioned earlier even the existing building has setback issues um non-compliances with setbacks um with that we've we've increased uh quite a bit what we've been providing um we've just been a unable to meet it one of the reasons we had a challenge meeting it in part was providing the fire lane around the rear of the building that alone takes up 22 ft of width now fire lane is health and safety and that's of of course Paramount um above having a compliant conservation buffer along the rear of the site but uh We've we've greatly improved over our initial proposal by pulling this development footprint inwards to the site reducing the footprint and impervious so we're we're very near the 50 Foot requirement I think we have here 48.6 feet is the I think I testified to 48 I rounded down 48.6 feet we have distance when we get to this northwest corner of the building um so we we've maximized what we can even on the east side we we would have to encroach into the existing detention Basin to provide the 50 ft there and that that doesn't make any sense but also is there a necessity to provide that along a basin that's a question I'm not going to answer but um where where we have had every opportunity to we've provided landscaping and we're we're providing the quantity of plants as I testify to comply with the planting requirement it's simply that the buffer uh distance was where we had a difficulty complying with this particular site so if you were to reduce the size of the building would you be more able to comply with some of those 50 foot uh conservation ement requirements well we we have reduced the side of the building and we're more closely complying with those requirements now and what if you what if you uh well actually since we don't have a traffic engineer to testify I'm going to ask a couple of these questions with respect to the um the location of the parking and the uh loading spaces if you push those back a little bit you wouldn't have to worry so much about any kind of conflict with the main Drive aisle you reduce the size of the building maybe maybe you put the parking and the loading on the side that faces the hospital where people care what's going on you could probably reduce this I mean you'd have to reduce the size of the building a little bit but you could put the drive AIS in the back where it is now you could have the fire lane in the front you would have a lot less conflict we've evaluated several options with this site and really I think we've arrived at a far more efficient layout that's that's making the most out of what we can with a site that has uh certain restrictions a number of zoning restrictions of course we're seeking those beliefs um but we're we're confident we've made a a good improvement with uh this current iteration of the plan Mr Winters the questions that are being posed to you now are with respect to the conservation easement which is a 50 foot buffer requirement but you testified earlier in the aggregate to all the variances that would be required that would leave us with basically a postage stamp on this property that would be fully compliant is that correct that's a fair statement yes so if the answer to the question is yes we could you know we can reduce the building even more more than the 20% that we have since the original application to satisfy the conservation easement the next question is well can you get the 200 foot easement can you get the 75 in the front of the par so it will just it will end up reducing to that triangle I think you've prepared on the plan is that correct uh yes and if you squint you might be able to see the little triangle here which is smaller than the 5x5 foot concrete pad outside of this door it's just a function of the geometry of the lot really that I understand but I'm I and I I totally get wanting to have some building setback variances and so on but perhaps something with like a conservation easement when you're looking at a 100,000 squ foot building perhaps you could accommodate a proper conservation easen by reducing the building to 70,000 which is I'm I'm asking if you reduce the size of the building to 70,000 ft you would obviously have plenty of other variant es bulk variances related to the setbacks and such but for something such as the conservation easement you could probably accommodate that 50-foot buffer no I disagree because the 50-foot buffer you know it gets more constricting going east to west on the site as as as we've said before you know we we're taking a site that today has no conservation buffer and it might not be a compliant one but we are providing a buffer that's at least it's more than half at its minimum and at its maximum it's approaching the 50 Foot on the west side at the front it's more than half throughout the whole and we are as I noted uh providing a compliant amount of landscaping for those buffers even if the distance isn't there um we we're confident that the the intent of the ordinances in terms of the planting and buffering is being met despite that okay all right great thank you so much for helping me out I apologize for my ignorance in terms of calculations and whatnot um I do have a number of questions relating to to the setbacks and waivers but I will Reserve those for when their planner testifies is that okay whenever you want well no I just don't want to wave my client's rights to bring up any issues because I I would Reserve those for do it with the planner they'll come up with him fantastic thank you so much thank you miss wesl all right other members of the public questions Hi how are you good just your name and address please yes my name is Ashley sheres I live at 52 Glenn Road in Bound Brook New Jersey can you spell your last name please yes I will it's c h e r e Tes and it's a mailing address Bound Brook but you're a Bridgewater resident yes I pay my taxes to Bridgewater my kids go to Bridgewater school yeah I think it was due to mail over flow or something um good evening gentlemen good evening how you doing I appreciate all the work that you've done first let me say that um I do have a question and I do apologize to the board if this was asked before but I just am curious um is there a reason why the proposed building is still at three stories instead of two as the engineer if you can answer from an engineering perspective but that's not really an engineering question I I don't think I could answer that from an engineering perspective I I can offer and and it's only the clarification which I like to repeat that it is a three-story building when you take the basement level which on I don't know if you can see okay good you can see the screen on that side on thank you on that Westerly part of the building that this grade goes down and it exposes 10 more feet of the building by the time you get down to there as the town interpreted the height with that we're we're required to count that as a full story in our counting of stories practically looking at this building from the easterly facad if you look at it it's a two-story building from from the rear of the building on the fire lane it's a two-story building um on the west side and on the South Side it starts out on the northwest corner it's a two-story and it's a three story by the time you get get down to that southwest corner in its appearance you see the third story and kind of emerge out of the ground the grade goes downward and you see this third story as you approach the loading area and a similar thing happens along the front once you get about a third of the way from east to west that grade starts coming down and that third story comes out and the only reason I explain this is I just want to try and better explain how this is going to appear um for your benefit and practically speaking and I know where your neighborhood is and I I may have mentioned it earlier in my testimony because I know the chair asked me to talk about what this might look like from other areas if I'm on excuse me on your side of 22 if I look up the the ground floor of the building which is set from the east side of the building that's not the solar floor but the ground floor is at a very similar elevation of the current floor so those two stories above they're similar to the two stories that you're looking at today yes it's a bigger building I understand that but I'm just trying to relate the stories in terms of height and how that looks that third story is actually going below that current grade um actually if you go out on the site today and you drive around the back of the building it does seem taller on the west side because the existing building does something very similar to that the west side has more exposure um we're restricted by the grade and that's how it presents itself with this building layout but ju just to give you an idea that's that's how it appears in terms of height I don't think it's going to appear really taller I'm not saying it it's the same height I'm just saying it's not going to appear taller from the existing building and uh our next witness is going to be an architect who's going to have simulations where you're going to see how it looks great thank you just another question with regard to trees so I am not by any means a botanist or some sort of environmental scientist at all but um with reference to the selections of the trees that you've made is it to for aesthetic purposes or more is it like privacy purposes I guess I want to understand the theory behind those and adding them the there's a combination of reasons for the Selections in short um we have requirements to meet that we provide certain amount of plants that are preferred for buffering purposes to to block effectively the view or or at least help to minimize the view from certain angles your citizens thank you for that yes yes so that and that's why there's such a and I wanted to bring the point of listing those number of plants we're adding to the site and a lot of them are evergreen um and then beyond that we have oh the the Evergreen which which keep there for for for the uh anyone who doesn't know evergreen trees also called coners they keep their leaves or their foliage year round so you don't see through them in the winter as easily as you would with a deciduous tree now yes the shade trees in front those are deciduous but which which is normal uh but at the at the buffer areas where we can provide evergreen trees which we provide a lot of on the site um those are going to be year round screening so we've as we noted greatly increased those numbers especially on the perimeters of the site thank you thank you board appreciate it other members of the public you good front row great all right we have 13 minutes left we don't take any testimony after 10 o'clock if you would like to use those last 12 minutes by all [Music] means seated to my right he's already been swor in remains under all right good evening so this plan that I have up here is it's part of the submittal package just not a a separate exhibit it is d1a alternate this is represents the new uh building layout for the reduced building at uh Mr Winters had testified to uh the building has been reduced to a footprint of 34,653 1887 Square ft um over three stories it comprises uh it has about 8 681 storage units the average size of the unit is about 110 square feet um as you can see the the footprint of the building we've we've segmented we've stepped it back so it steps further back from Route 22 than it did previously um basically as as Mr winter testified to it labeled additional uh Landscaping in the front and allowed for more area in the back along Donahue Road as well just taking you through the basic layout of the building the northeast corner is the main entrance that's where you would come first time to rent the space that's the main office the toilets are located there utility rooms this is the Eastern uh entrance of the building so when you would come in to bring your your uh your items for storage you'd come in the sliding door here similarly in the southwest corner Southwest end is the loading area that was discussed before that that actually enters into the cellar of the uh of the building the sheet d1b alternate is the reduced uh footprint of the building uh showing the third floor and the sorry about that and the roof plan um again there I know you saw L only about five minutes left and I think the board's really interested in seeing and I would never ever tell you guys how to do your case but I I do think members of the public and the board do want to see the renderings okay I'll leave it at that that's fine I think we kind of ran through the plan that's really not that interesting so um what you want to see is the this elevation here El the elevation submitted the rendering was not subm yeah thanks so what saying this as yes this this uh this uh rendering was uh uh retained we retained a renderer to provide this for my office this is a view from Route 22 It's A View From the southeast corner of the property uh this is the monument sign that you would that you would see as you're coming in from the uh Southeast entrance off of Route 22 um what you see here is the is the landscaping and plantings that are up higher on the burm along Route 22 and you're looking at the East end of the building here so this is the where it says snapbox Self Storage this is the main entrance to the building that I spoke to spoke about before in terms of uh the retail entrance to the left is the where the canopy is those are the sliding doors so that would be where the um customers would would bring their their uh items for storage in that main level and as you can see here as you get further to the left the building steps away from Route 22 then it goes a little further and it steps further back from Route 22 and down at this end is where that lower um lower loading area would be so as you can see we've we've done uh extensive amount of landscaping planting along Route 22 so uh aesthetically make the site nicer as well as offer some screening of the building from Route 22 the Landscaping that is shown is a wage it's about in the fiveyear range so it's as Mr Winters testified to there's a minimum height that's going in but this for rendering purposes we showed it a few years down the road um just briefly touching on the on the materials so a lot of people have kind of a preconceived notion of what Self Storage looks like it's kind of your typical metal box with insulated metal panels and it looks very warehous um so what we tried to do here is U bring in materials that give it um more of an office Park feel so there's there's brick veneers um there's windows that kind of give it more of a um more of a office scale to the building as opposed to a large Warehouse um so the extensive use of glass these are faux windows so you don't have to worry about light coming through but it just gives the impression that it's a that it's more of an office like um structure that that's a faux window so it won't show any light from the inside won't so there's different one so here the the one in this upper corner where the retail spaces that's a real that's real glass you would see into the retail office above it where you can see the you can see the four blue doors those are um storage units so those are real glass units that's looking into the building but then these these punch windows that if you will that are kind of at the lower level and upper level they're not real windows so there's no um you're not looking into the storage building there's no light coming out at nighttime um so we did that to kind of get again during the day give you the impression that's it's an office type structure at night we didn't want to have lights blaring out of the out of the building um into the surroundings so as you can see even though it is a three-story uh building per ordinance what you visual visually see at this end of the building is is very simply it's a two-story building the lower level is completely buried at this from this perspective and as Mr winter said as you move further west along the property that the grade will eventually drop off and there is a portion that a essentially a walk out um seller level this would be A7 all right so this view is is a is a Google street view of the existing landscaping that's basically if you kind of came down I believe it's crams road is the name of the the cross read on on Donahue at the North West corner of the property so as you kind of come down that street and make the turn this is the view towards the property that you would see um these are the existing trees that we've been a that we're planning on keeping and you can kind of see through the through the opening here this is our building in the center here um so at this point the building is pretty well screened you can see a little bit of newer Landscaping here that's all the extensive Landscaping that we're still providing beyond the existing tree lines to kind of fill in do you know when that picture was taken it was pretty recently I don't have the exact Google date on it I can I can it was within the last two years I believe it was pretty is it still representative of the site as far as I know as as of as of a year ago I I believe so I did not I did not compare the two [Music] today no this is actually if you if you came down this is on Donahue and it's basically at the corner of cram's Trail so if you came down crams Trail made a left onto Donahue this is kind of what you see as you're making that left so we I took it because you're kind of looking diagonally right into the right into the property the the medical facility is off screen to the to my to the right and the windows that we see in this picture are those real or those those are fake as well too again we want it's again kind of daytime impression um but we we don't want light boxes shining across the street at anybody and we put a little frosting on it's like a kind of a opaqueness to it so you don't you're not seeing like construction behind it but it kind of gives you that white frosted look that kind of gives you journe like oh maybe there's a light on is it looks lit up during the day but it's not it's not a lit structure um and again regarding the height again from this side of the building at this point it's a two story um building and it is very close to the actual Heights of the existing office building that's there now um although footprint is bigger but the actual height ground floor height and then the parit height is is within a foot of what's there now basically it in a nutshell all right this this is the view from this is what you're seeing now is from Don no I'm the the camera is the camera is is in on Donahue it's on donu road right now view I explained you come down crims Trail make a left onto Donahue that's what you see that picture is basically at the the northwest corner of our property looking crimp but I'm on I can that's what's here this is not the but the piece of Don who Road that's immediately adjacent to in behind building what about Glen ro2 with residential behind it this building is going to look like from that perspective that's why asked for a photo simulation from the surrounding area of the building you proposed to put up I'm still waiting to see that as I said that one was from Donahue this one is from Route 22 the one you're calling from rout2 I'm I'm showing you what no I am I am right at the at 22 looking up towards the property am I on am I on Glenn Road across Route 22 behind the Residential Properties no it's on Route 22 would it be possible to generate well which one I mean you want to specifically which who am I in someone's backyard am I in Route 22 looking at their house where where do you want it from I if that's what's required so there'll be hous so I'll be on Glen Road looking at houses through the backyard across Route 22 up by this building that's what you want to see in all due respect it is pretty simple he's just asking A View From Glenn Road okay I'd like to see a picture from 22 from from 22 I think we're like like this I'd like to see a picture from on 122 just square up straight on I mean you you added all these new design elements to it um and I'm not even sure I can clarify by looking at this rendering all of these cutouts in this picture right well well we also but we also the point of this was showing the Landscaping that we're doing to help yeah I get it with the overall picture it's your case I get it I I I think this is a great image this is helpful but we were hoping for more that's all so I can so again this is this is a straight on colored elevation it's not a rendering but the top elevation is what the elevation is looking from Glenn Road to the north not Glen Road Route 22 that's the route 22 elevation and it sounds like the board was looking for more from Donahue you know so maybe we can be very specific you know down to the GPS level of exactly where that rendering was and you know these things why don't we do another one from you know more easterly perspective and then you do have senior citizens do West and I am curious what they're going to see from their nursing home assisted living I should say and then you've covered four different angles all right with that it's 10:03 and Jo I'm going to put you on the spot why don't we pick a date where we're going to continue this when do we have some openings April 9th how does that work with you gentlemen April 9th okay like in past May right right it's just exhibits that but we have to call that filled y okay so April 9th or June okay take your time all right so members of the public all right so for members of the public this meeting is being adjourned right now it will continue on April 9th at 700 p.m. in this room and there'll be no further notices from the applicant all right thank you everyone for attending board members thank you and can get a motion to adjourn please a motion all right Mr Fresco and Mr gaski thank you gentlemen