on Corner more Township veton Zoning Board of adjustment regular meeting of November 21st 2023 is now in session adequate notice of this meeting as required by the open public meetings Act of 1975 has been provided by the annual notice published in the home news and Tribune on January 14th 2023 has been posted in the main lobby of the missal complex on January 3rd 2023 please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag stand Madam Secretary roll call please Mr Carly here Mr bno here Miss Shaw here Mr aat here Mr chabra here Mr Sero here Miss Hernandez Prince here Mr D here Mr sadaha here Vice chair o' Gorman here chairman Kumba here uh two announcements uh case number two on the agenda case z29 2023 Twan win at 23 Skyler Drive um it has been there was improper noticing so it's been carried to a future date new notice would be required uh to all required noticers uh case number four on the agenda cas z36 2022 tivid Lane LLC uh the applicant is adjourning this matter to December 19th 20123 um if you are here for that case that will be uh carried to December 19th 2023 uh this is your notice there will be no additional notice um with regard to that case Madam Secretary we have minutes for consideration we have October 24th 2023 minutes for approval motion to approve the minut from October 24th 2023 second motion made by Vice chairman o Gorman second by Mr sedada roll call please Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Sero yes on the motion Miss Hernandez Prince yes to the motion Mr D yes to the motion Mr sadaha yes to the motion Vice chair Gorman yes chairman Kumba yes on the motion and then uh Madam Secretary resolutions to be adopted first resolution to be adopted is z23 2023 V Han Shaw motion to approve z23 d223 second motion made by Vice chairman AG Gorman second by Mr sadada roll call please Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Sero yes on the motion Miss Hernandez Prince yes in the motion Mr D yes to the motion Vice chair o' Gorman yes and chairman Kumba yes on the motion and the final resolution to be adopted z25 2023 Jonathan and Joanne sudam motion to approve z25 d223 second motion by made by Vice chairman AG Gorman seconded by Mr sedada roll call please Mr chabo yes the motion Mr Sero yes in the motion M Hernandez Prince yes in the motion Mr D yes in the motion Vice chair or Gorman yes and chairman Kumba yes on the motion thank you very much Madam Secretary evening ladies and gentlemen this is a regular meeting of the township of Edison Zoning Board of adjustment this board is composed of Edison Township residents appointed by the municipal Council who volunteer their time and service to the board Municipal land use law requires that members successfully complete a land use training course ministered by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs this board also holds in-house training conducted by our board professionals the zoning board abides by the provisions of mville land use law in addition to our board's bylaws the zoning board is a quasi iial land use board which differs from the township planning board under the municipal land use law board members are required to be impartial and are not allowed to discuss any case prior to its hearing prior to its consideration before the board at a hearing all applicants will have the opportunity to present their case before the board with the opportunity for board members and board professionals to question the applicant and their Witnesses at the conclusion of the applicant's presentation of their case the case will be open to the public residents in within 200 ft of the subject property will be heard followed by residents from outside of 200 ft all residents will be sworn in they'll provide their name and address and they'll be given six minutes to comment on the application being considered without the opportunity for a rebuttal residents may ask questions of the applicant the applicant's professionals and board professionals the board requests that these questions are asked prior to any comments being made on the application once commentary Begins the resident timer will begin the applicant will be allowed for the opportunity for cross-examination of their Witnesses under the law the chair is allowed to stop any comment that is repetitive or is an attempt to filibuster the board further the chair is allowed to stop any commentary that is irrelevant to the case or prohibited from the board's consideration once the public portion is closed all public comment is ended unless new testimony is presented by the applicant following the closure of the public portion the applicant will have the right of summation on their application following summation the case will go to the board for a decision this procedure has been followed by the board and is similar to the procedure me followed by Boards of adjustment Statewide the mpal land use Law requires the board to engage in a balancing act is not required to strictly apply Township ordinances zoning plan or master plan as a board of adjustment variances are granted when appropriately necessary following all legal considerations as has been the case with prior boards this board will see where we are if we are still in session around 10:30 p.m. I ask all applicants professionals and residents show respect to each other and be civil throughout all proceedings I ask that you withhold a PL CL booing or interrupting of anyone while they are speaking with that being said Madam Secretary first case on the agenda please case number z21 2023 jatah House LLC 91 Livingston AV use variants sought to construct a new single family home the following standards have not been met F required is 0.25 proposed now is 28 affected property is located in the ra Zone designated as block number 54622 lot 5 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order good evening Mr one good evening Mr chair members of the board Benjamin we on behalf of the applicant jatah House LLC first off happy early holidays to everybody and I appreciate you taking the time to be here this evening if you recall we were here last month with this very application to construct a single family residence on the property located at 91 Livingston Avenue that's block 54622 lot 5 we took the opportunity that evening after hearing a little bit of feedback from the board to uh to take the time to take the month to go back take a look at uh some potential options for our project and ultimately come back here before you this evening with what we hope you will believe and agree with is uh is a good application and uh and one for a floor area ratio variance that can be granted just uh without getting too repetitive by way of brief background uh we still comply with all of the bulk requirements with respect to setbacks coverages height in fact we are now not even maxing out a single one of those uh bulk requirements we are substantially under on each one of them we do still have the floor area ratio variance which is why we're before you rather than submitting straight for building permit the requirement for this particular Zone uh as stated before is 0.25 we were previously here seeking just shy of 31 so about a .06 over and we are now here seeking. 287 I believe which is just shy of 0. 29 and there before we are 04 or thereabouts uh over the limit you'll hear this evening from our project architect as well as from our project planner what I'd like is for our architect to walk you through what those revisions have been since uh since the last meeting specifically he was able to shave off certain floor area that resulted in the reduction and then ultimately I would like for our planner as well to go over the proofs for the variants um without getting too into it as I know our planner is going to get into it um just very simply the the justification for the grant of a floor area ratio variance pursuant to the Randolph Town Center case is whether the site can accommodate the additional floor area it is our position and we hope you'll agree with us that given the fact that we can comply with all of the bulk requirements and are substantially less than all of the bulk requirements um that as I said you'll agree that the site can in fact accommodate the additional flow area I'll just put on the record that we are an undersized lot I think I brought that up last last time we're approximately 75% of the required lot the minimum required lot area where we are 15,700 ft and uh 20,000 is contemplated within your Zone that very uh fact underlies a portion of the basis for our requested relief but again you'll hear more in detail from our planner so Mr chair members of the board unless you have any questions of me I'd like to proceed with my actual experts does the board have any questions for Mr wi Mr D Mr D if you just bring the microphone do we have the another calculation sheet for the new F I don't know if there's a new calculation sheet but uh I can tell you it's uh and you'll hear from our architect based on the floor area that it should be 0.287 it was 305 before now it's. 2828 if you'd like to round I would Round Up to0 29 do we have that on the calculation sheet or no I I don't believe we submitted a new calculation sheet um simply new plans are what we submitted okay Mr D I believe it was on the plan table okay okay all right thank you they would submit that afterwards okay Council you can proceed all right perfect so with that my first witness is nihel javar our project architect Mr jav would you raise your right hand do you Solly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you guys I do and state your full name for the record yeah my first name is Nal n e h a l last name is zi j h a v v e r i v is in victor e r i Mr ja you were qualified in the last hearing your uh license are still Uh current in good standing yes sir all right we'll accept you again you make proceed thank you and uh just to confirm uh I believe he's still under oath is that correct he was just sworn yeah fair enough all right so nahal um I believe you've set up your plans over there um if you can walk the board through what changes have been made and uh where the current projects stand okay good evening um the house uh is still six bedrooms uh six uh seven bathrooms um two-story house that we had before uh we have about 200 square ft less than what we had again uh initi the last time what we have uh we were able to shave off um do you want me to walk you through the plan again or it's it's pretty much the same thing as last time so the number of bedrooms are the same the number of bathrooms are the same we shaved off uh couple of square feet Edge uh from the front and from the back so starting from the front I would say on the first floor and the second floor the the front is moved back uh shaved off about a foot same thing in the back we shaved off about a foot from the back and on the side we used to have uh roughly about 2 feet or so 2 and 1/2 ft of uh or hang area that was protruding out on the right side that we pushed it back in line with the house we also shaved off a space from the living room which was larger now it's about 13 ft only um and um also from the kitchen area which was larger and we made it smaller so all together we were able to get to keeping the same requirement from the client we were able to get to you know something reduction of 200 square ft now again most of the bedrooms are about uh 13 13x 14 12x 14 size so they are not overly um you know larger in any case so with the furniture and all that what you can see in there um is just about adequate for the size of the house uh and also for the family and Growing Kids sure and Nal just a one a couple of follow-up questions one specifically I believe there was a comment I think it was Mr dve the last time I I apologize if it was not regarding uh just to confirm that there would be no additional dwelling unit in the basement that has not changed is that correct absolutely not so there would still be no additional dwelling unit in the basement no no okay perfect and then just in terms of uh of Shaving off I think you talked about the front and the rear um you also discuss the kitchen um I believe as well on the right hand side of the property is that correct that is correct okay so just to confirm as I said in my opening I just want to have you testify to it as the as the uh the expert under oath um we are still compliant with all of the other bulk requirements with the exception of the floor area ratio is that correct absolutely right okay all right so Mr chair and members of the board that's really what I intended to elicit from Mr jav certainly if you'd like him to walk through the floor plans in more detail as he did last time he can he can definitely do that thank you does the board have any questions for Mr D Mr chair Mr D so I just want you to confirm what's the new Square fot for the first floor um well total is 4,521 square ft what's the first floor you had 2570 before 2477 sorry 2477 that's what so you had 2470 Z before uh no I think it was more in the microphone something and then your second floor 2150 you had and garage is 441 you're all together 4720 that's why I asked you guys how did you come up with the F calculations right so we added the first floor and the second floor for f calculations and that's where we came up with the 40 4521 Square ft can I can I see where you is cut back well um that's what I'm saying we shaved off from the first floor the front area we push it back so this length is shorter we push back this bedroom that we had in the back push it back and we took out the extension that was here we push it back there I get all of that just get me just the how do you come up it the first floor second floor your garage probably remains same and what's your new square foot for the total floor area I'm sorry What's the total floor area for the square foot now for the reduced home 4521 is the total square footage so first floor is 40 20 um sorry 2477 and second floor is [Music] 2045 thank you and garage remains same 441 correct garage is yes floor below and your new new F became what 287 okay and nothing else change no okay okay thank you Mr chair yeah the building exterior pretty much remain the same character thank you Mr D is anyone else have any questions from Mr D okay seeing none thank you Mr D thank you I should just uh just follow up and just quickly confirm what you showed tonight was in fact submitted more than 10 days in advance is that correct that is cor just so that we don't have to mark anything okay all right thank you Mr ja so my next and Final witness this evening would be Mr Flynn who was also here last month Mr Flynn would you raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you got I do and please State your full name for the record Sir Matthew Flynn f l YNN okay and Matt I you were qualified last month but uh Mr Mr chair would you like to hear Mr Flynn's qualifications you have to give your qualifications but your license are still current in good standing they are okay we'll accept you thank you thank you all right so Matt obviously you know you were integral in uh in going through the revisions with our project team over the course of the last few weeks so you know I understand your testimony is already on the record with respect to the prior portion of the application but if you can walk the board again through what we're dealing with in terms of variance relief and our request as well as justification therefore that would be great uh sure so as this board knows we were here last month uh for a a slightly larger F variance we have chopped off 200 square feet off the original application so we are looking at uh a pretty significant uh reduction in F in my opinion uh basically after the after the prior application or after the prior hearing the first thing I did was I just wanted to double check the case law what the statutory criteria is for a D4 F variance um and so we have to look at the Randol town Center case which is applied for these D D4 F variances um it's a site specific test that's set forth in that case law and the test is whether the site itself can accommodate the proposed F that that's um that we're proposing basically the testimony from the last hearing was that we are in compliance with setbacks Building height coverage and the like so the massing of the building itself actually does comply uh and I think that demonstrates that the site can easily accommodate the proposed F uh in that we do not anticipate any substantial negative impacts to our neighbors or to the community I spoke about compatibility at the last hearing and when I refer to compatibility I'm really talking about does is the building going to stand out uh when we look at it in comparison to the other buildings uh in the area and again in terms of setbacks that's really that measurement of of it effectively measures building to building separation so that space between buildings that's something that we can physically see we can also physically see Building height obviously again both of those requirements are in compliance um f really is just a mathematical number um basically it's an interior measurement of how how the how the interior of the building is designed in other words F could be uh cut back even even more by getting rid of a of a ceiling in the building and having higher ceilings and that would not be something that you could actually visibly see from the street uh so what again what you do see is building to building separation uh Building height and the like also lot coverag is in compliance so again light air open space all of that is is not going to be negatively impacted for all of those reasons uh as Council mentioned this is an undersized lot which I mentioned at the last hearing uh so this applicant is trying to strike a balance between what's appropriate for the client himself what's appropriate per zoning uh and what fits on the law and we think that what we have here uh cut back even further from the last hearing is is certainly appropriate uh the F mechanism does allow this board to to get a crack at at the application make sure that the the design uh Works uh and again in this case I think that the design elements are built into the zoning ordinance again setbacks height uh coverage all of that speaks to the fact that this is not going to negatively impact our neighbors here and again the massing itself uh is in compliance here again f is really an interior uh requirement so when I speak about compatibility really uh f is not something that we see from the ground in in relation to uh I mean as compared to some of these other requirements that that we're in compliance with uh so just to remind the board again we are looking at a f variance of. 287 whereas 0.25 is allowed at the last hearing we were at about 31 uh so we have reduced substantially by knocking off that 200 square fet of um of building uh building area I walked the board through and I'll just go through again quickly the positive criteria again we're providing a permitted use in the zone uh providing for uh the uh promoting the planning goal for providing a variety of housing types to meet the needs of all New Jersey residents this is not the only CL the only applicant that is going to have a family of this size uh so uh this is something that is going to again provide that variety for for uh homeowners like like the applicant uh providing a a beautiful new building I think that we can see from the from the renderings here that this is going to be attractive building that's going to add to the value and quality of the neighborhood uh again compatibility I think I spoke to that we're not going to see a building that's too close to any other buildings we're not going to see a building that's too high in relation to other buildings uh so again I think that there's compatibility in that regard um we're proposing new trees um so I think all in all this is going to be a a positive and aesthetically pleasing uh development all of that promotes purposes of the municipal land use law including purpose a promotion of the general Weare purpose G variety of uses in appropriate locations purpose I desirable visual environment and purpose M efficient use of land the flip side to that is the negative criteria again no substantial detriment to the public or to the Zone plan again the site uh the test for this uh F variant is site specific can this specific site accommodate the proposed osed F I think there's adequate testimony at this point um that it does uh I don't think that there's any real issues that have been left unaddressed in terms of negative impacts to our neighbors or to the Zone um again despite the F variance this is actually a smaller Zone seeing that this is an undersized lot this is an undersized house per zoning it was at the last hearing and we reduced it even further um and again all substantial compliance from a bulk standpoint I think I can leave it at that I know that I I'm at this point repeating what I what I went through at the last hearing unless Mr wine has anything else yeah sure Matt I I thank you for doing that and I know it's always helpful to go through it when it's been a month in between so Mr chair members of the board again I'll turn it over to you unless you have any further testimony you'd like to elicit from Mr Flynn does the board have any questions from Mr Flynn yes Mr chair I have a question Mr Flynn um last time I requested um to hear the surrounding houses and their square footages and their F values do you have anything to provide from the tax records yes so my office does have a subscription to a service that provides uh what they say is livable areas that's the term that's given in this uh service here we have found that occasionally we are able to get what's called property record cards which gives us actually building uh um each room it'll give us a calculation of the square footage of each room so we're able to calculate floor area ratio uh in this case sometimes we're able to get like I said at the last hearing sometimes this is information we can get sometimes it's not available um I was able to get some numbers for the surrounding uh properties uh albeit they are smaller in terms of a building footprint standpoint um however again the test is sight specific and again if we were to start chopping ceilings or something inside of our building the actual massing complies so I don't think it's uh it's it's it's relevant in this case to start comparing FS even if that information were available okay so the reason I'm asking it's a seven b six-bedroom house um so given that the F that you're requesting is 20% more than that zone given the understanding the fact that it's a smaller lot um I'm just curious to see if that type of house fits that neighborhood or what directly surrounding neighborhood footprint even if we could compare Footprints what where does this House's footprint of 2477 stand in comparison to those the footprint itself uh I'm looking at the numbers right now and and it would it would fit in with uh with the surrounding building Footprints okay just the nearby ones what are they in the r on this block itself I'm seeing one that's 2378 Square ft another one that's it's 2378 square fet squet or footprint it's the footprint this is footprint okay yeah uh and again this I say that with a grain of salt because this actually typically would not take into account garage space so typically these numbers would actually be even greater in reality um I'm seeing one that's 3,000 square feet uh so again substantially similar to what's going on around us for the majority of those they're sing single story uh buildings okay sounds good anyone else on the board have any questions Mr Flynn seeing none thank you Mr Flynn thank you sir Mr one sure so Mr chair I'll certainly uh reserve my right to sum up uh if there's any members of the public who' like to speak and we can address that but uh otherwise at this point I have concluded my case in Chief great uh so we will now go out to the public so anyone within 200 feet of the subject site wanting to be heard if you're within 200 feet you've received a notice via C certified mail seeing none we'll go outside of 200 ft seeing none motion to close public session motion made by Vice chairman Gorman second second by Mr sedata all in favor signify by saying I N the eyes have it public portion is now closed Mr M do you have any information sure so I again I want to take the opportunity I'm not going to belabor the point but to thank the board for hearing us um between the October and then this meeting here this evening um I think having the few weeks in between did give us the opportunity to uh to take another crack at the application obviously we're here representing our client and and what he's looking for in his house for the size of his family and his needs but at the end of the day um working with our architect we did have the ability to shave off just a couple hundred more square feet and to reduce that uh floor area ratio variance from about 3 point I believe it was 33065 exactly down to 0 287 so we were able to shave that off and reduce it as you've heard from our testimony the test is really um whether or not the site can accommodate the additional floor area I do believe and I I hope I'm correct that we were able to satisfy the questions from the board with respect to that test and uh with that chairman members of the board I would respectfully request that the app that the board Grant the application as presented thank you very much and um okay so we will go to the board Mr chairman I'll make a motion to approve this application the applicant has met all the negative and positive criteria the site is particularly suited for the use intended the use is not a detriment to the public good or Public Safety as appropriate um there are no objetives for this application um this motion will incorporate all of the testimony of the applicant attorney engineers and members of the board as well as incorporation of all the conditions and what is to be done and not to be done at the site as was testified to the applicant will will submit the detailed F calculation as discussed I like to add that it would be a beneficial use to the neighborhood and the f is 0. 29 I second a motion motion made by Mr dve seconded by Vice chairman o' Gorman roll call please roll call please it was granted at Point 28 right 287 29 okay just clarifying thank you uh Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Sero yes on the motion Miss Hernandez Prince yes on the motion Mr D yes on the motion Mr sadaha yes to the motion Vice chair o' Gorman yes and chairman kambo uh yes on the motion great uh unanimous approval congratulations thank you so much for working with the board and have a Happy Thanksgiving thank you very much you too good luck guys all right next case on the agenda please next case next case on the agenda please case z35 2023 Phoenix realy and Management LLC 651 King George Post Road preliminary and final site plan approval is being sought along with use and bulk variances to permit a school bus depot on the existing property existing commercial building is to remain standards have not been met in accordance with the master plan maximum lot area required is 880,000 sare Ft proposed is 60,1 19992 squ ft sidey yard setbacks one/ both required is 40 ft80 ft proposed is 11.3 Ft 33.1 ft affected property is located in the LI Zone designated as block number 752 SL Lot number 24.01 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order good evening Mr Smith Mr chairman Bob Smith I'm a licensed attorney in the state of New Jersey and I'm here tonight representing Phoenix realy and Management LLC um I'd like to point out that what we're doing tonight is seeking from you a use variance a preliminary and final site plan even though we're not doing anything to the site except adding uh a lot more Landscaping um we appeared before the um board TRC committee and at that meeting uh a number of waivers were approved uh and this property just but again by way of background the total uh property is 1.37 acres and on it there is an exist existing structure of 5,373 square ft that is broken down into two uh components 3,975 ft as a maintenance garage and 1,398 square F feet is a roofing contractor uh what we're seeking to do tonight is to uh allow a use variance to continue what had been a bus storage and maintenance operation for Board of Education buses and as a matter of fact uh what you'll hear tonight is that the the um facility the new tenant uh and we'll get into more detail is actually the uh service provider for the Edison Board of Education so as well as some other uh Board of educations so we um we want to mention that this has some Community involvement uh but back to the waivers when we appeared before the technical Review Committee five waivers were granted and I just want to point them out for the record uh section 25- 9.1 sub a subb tree replacement the applicant is Seeking a waiver from this requirement as no trees are being removed from the existing site as I said this is an Asis we're not doing a thing to the site other than more trees number two section 37-4 point21 B uh interference with pipelines the applicant is Seeking a waiver from the this requirement as there's no proposed disturb ments or construction taking place on the site so that particular checklist item is irrelevant in this case number three uh section 37- 44.1 Landscaping the applicant has provided Landscaping on the site plan to the satisfaction of the Review Committee Additionally the applicant will continue to work with the board's professional staff to determine the number of trees that can be planted on the north side of the property to to provide screening to the residential dwellings we're seeking waiver from all other Landscaping requirements on an existing absolutely existing not to change site except for more trees uh number four section 37- 61 lighting the applicant accepts the suggestion of the Review Committee and is Seeking a waiver from the lighting regulations then finally number five in the big Nell report plan review comment C the applicant is Seeking a waiver for from the requirement to provide information per the NJ doot access easement as no additional changes are proposed to the Ingress or or erress to the site so it's my intention tonight Mr chairman to call two witnesses the first is the owner of the property Mr asach bajani who's also the managing member of uh Phoenix realy LLC uh and then secondly Mr John Dupont who will serve as our licensed professional engineer in and professional planner and I believe who's been before your board on many many occasions with that uh said Mr chairman if it's okay I'll proceed with the case does board have any questions Mr Smith Council May proceed okay the um first I'd call the owner of the property the managing member of the LLC Mr asach bajani who's seated to my left I'd ask that they be sworn so that he can give testimony Mr Pani would you please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear orer to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth so help you God and if you could use the microphone just State your full name for the record and spell it please spell it too as bani and spell the whole a h o k b h OJ W and I okay so uh Mr bajani I did a little bit of an introduction but I'd like you to confirm it you are the owner of the property yes sir and you're the managing member of Phoenix realy LLC yes sir okay and um the site that and what we're proposing tonight the use variants is to uh replace what had been a bus maintenance fac bus maintenance and storage facility with a new bus maintenance and storage facility is that correct yes sir okay and can you tell the board the name of the new tenant uh nelby Transit Incorporated all right and do they serve various School systems in around this County yes they do including Edison Township yes sir all right uh melvv m n lvi Transit Inc okay so um in terms of that uh new tenant you've asked them uh what kind of utilization they're going to have for the property uh can you tell the board when the bus drivers would arrive to the the site uh bus drivers do arrive at 7:30 in the morning and they do the first uh pickup of the students from their homes 7:30 to 9 so I'm going to beat you up my notes say 6:30 a.m. and we want to make sure we have it right yeah sorry 60 6:30 6:30 a.m. so the bus drivers arrive at 6:30 a.m. and then the way the bus the the buses work they go do whatever they're going to do and they return at 10:00 a.m. yes okay and then likewise there's an afternoon where the kids are also picked up my understanding is that they come at 300 p.m. is that true oh 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. okay so they come at 1 I'm wrong on that one and then they return at 5:00 p.m. um on your uh on this the Mr or n's transits uh operation it's my understanding they're going to have two mechanics is that true yes sir and total employees one to three uh there's two mechanics one Helper and two office people okay so there's a total of five employees maybe and that's from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. correct correct okay so um do you remember how long the prior bus maintenance operation was on that on that land uh this this lot has been used for over 30 years uh I scker on bus service okay over 30 years now good and Mr chairman if it's appropriate I think we want to use your it system what's that get oh we can't get it working sorry we wanted to use your it system to put the site plan on the uh on your boards uh but we are going to you have the package and we're going to provide a handout as well so scratch that idea um we've done the hours of operation number of employees is there anything else you want to add Mr bani no sir okay Mr Mr bajani is available to the board for questions does the board have any questions for Mr bajani Mr chairman Vice chairman so the arrows are operation will be 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. no the the bus hours are from 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 they' leave the bus again they come back again at 1: p.m. for the another route and return back to the base for 5:00 p.m. so it's 5:00 p.m. for them and for the two mechanics and the two office employees is at 9: to5 yes sir thank you any other questions okay see none thank you all right then I'd like to call my second witness Mr John Dupont our professional engineer Mr chairman before you do move this is a couple concerns I have Maybe the owner can explain if they're going to work on buses they're going to do it all interior to the building right there's not going to be any outside work on buses no sir say that is correct so you have yeah that's correct you have no problem with that being a condition of approval right yes sir okay and then um Mr chairman I have no problem with the waivers that they're requesting because it is an existing facility and buses are an inherently beneficial school buses are considered an inherently beneficial use on a property and in a community so that helps them with their burden appr proof but my only concern is is the neighbors and as long as the site's maintained and they kind of go along with the comments in our report um I'll be satisfied but no work outside the on the property got to pull the buses into the building and do it inside so there's no U no noise and and things like that and that's absolutely acceptable to the applicant thank you thanks Mr P all right so let me move you out and let me ask Mr dupon to come forward we also have all right so these are 10 by 17 11 by 17 exactly what was submitted in the package uh let us pass them out to the board so they're right in front of their faces okay we appreciate that and just for the record mad this is identical to what's already been submitted it's just in a smaller form right so we're not going to mark it so there's no need to mark them corre they're already in the record Mr Dupont would you raise your right hand you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you God I do and just State your full name for the record John P Dupont du capital p o n t Mr Dupont you're here so often I know your resume better than you do but you just G give me the elevator version absolutely so I am a licensed special engineer as well as planner in EST state of New Jersey um I served for the last 28 years in the bur caret as both the board engineer uh um and their board planner I've been front this board numerous times as well as boards throughout the state and you're licensed for both uh engineering or planning and are current in good standing they are all right we'll accept you thank you thank you thank you Mr chairman uh Mr Deon if you would using the uh miniaturized version of the package would you describe for the board what is the site plan that's in front of them certainly will so this is 651 King George King George Road uh it's in the LI Zone it's a 1.37 Acre Site that is fully developed as you heard it currently has a 5373 ft on story garage building on site it also has a monopole an existing monopole in the rear of the site it's about 111 feet tall the property is are regular shaped it's approximately 100 ft wide and 615 ft in length uh the property is almost completely covered with impervious coverage it's fully developed the north property is bordered by The mid6 Greenway formerly the Conrail uh Lehigh Valley Railroad and the property does have Fran King George Post Road and in addition there is a driveway through NJ dot property to Liberty Street the proposed conditions um as you heard also there is an existing roofing company which is in the portion of the building 1,398 Square F feet towards King George Road that roofing company is going to stay in place the remaining portion of the building the 3,975 Ft will become this new bus maintenance company again I know we know that this currently or previously was a bus maintenance company but this is just our applicant we'll take that portion um in addition to that portion of the building our applicant is proposing to stripe 12 standard School Bus spaces uh those are 12 x 40 feet they're also going to stripe 21 mini buus spaces 12 x 20 ft in addition there's going to be 10 employee parking stalls for our bus company striped so the total buses on site will be 33 in total we are proposing some minor other site improvements and you can see on sheet if you look at the handout we gave you uh sheet 304 is probably the best sheet to look at for a couple of the improvements we are proposing some lighting uh there's several existing poles on site to the south of property we're going to add more lighting fixtures there there are a couple building mounted lights uh towards the rear that we're just going to update and there's several lighting poles we're going to post along the node inside of the property um as you heard we're asking for a waiver of the lighting requirement we are because we don't meet the complete site requirements of the ordinance however everywhere where there's a parking space and or access to the building we do have proper Lighting in addition to that there are some land Landscaping proposed there's some Landscaping along uh again being a site fully developed we took advantage where we could little Landscaping along King George Post Road we pl did some plant things out front thought it make front of property better along Liberty Street we planted a couple trees again trying to enhance that and if we could we'd add a couple trees along the northern side adjacent to the building now it's a green strip there now where that Greenway is um so it's a little tight but if we could put another tree or two there we certainly will and we will agree to work with the township professional staff to do any landscape improvements they they think is best um the site is currently fenced in not completely but there is fencing we're going to repair what fencing needs to be we're going to complete the fencing around the property and we're going to screen it we're going to put green mesh screening on it just to screen the entire property so I think that's a big Improvement and we do have a a trash enclosure proposed that wasn't there now so as far as relief for the project there's two things there's three bulk variances that are existing today there's a minimum lot area uh the requirement is 80,000 square feet the existing lot is 6,199 square F feet not changing the minimum yard minimum side yard setback requirement is 40 feet in this Zone the existing is 11.3 Feet Again not changing that and the combined sidey setback requirement is 80 feet the existing is 33.1 feet and we're not changing that the only new variance we're requesting tonight is for the use a school bus maintenance and parking facility is not specifically listed in your ordinance as a permitted use thereby we need the use variance um there was a question about parking calculations so I want to clear that up too there's two ways you calculate parking in this area the most most restrictive for our case is one space required for every three 300 ft of space there is 5373 square feet which results in 17.9 we say 18 parking spaces required there are 10 existing for the roofing company on King George Post Road that will remain we are proposing 10 additional behind the building by our trans enclosure so now we have proposed 20 spaces we exceed the requirement um we've heard we've talked about the waivers already and if you board wishes I could like could go through the two professional staff reports so for the record you've you've had a chance to review the big nail report dated November 16th 20123 I have okay and uh we agree uh with the report generally speaking I would point out to the board on page two there's no changes to the existing bulk conditions on the site uh we've indicated what waivers uh are appropriate and um we basically I think need to respond to the plan review comments that Mr bignell has on page four of the report that's correct okay so number one uh we will be providing to the professional staff the various approvals required middlex County planning board Freehold soil and any outside agencies with Juris is that correct that is correct okay so number two the applicant should explain the roofing contractor tenant is it a permitted use it is all right so it's that's not even in the in under question uh the applicant needs to address and submit documentation to clarify the details of the new J New Jersey access way and is it doesn't an easement exist and we're going to provide that information that is correct but as the as Mr begell pointed out there's no change to the access in any way at this point number four will the bus storage portion of the site be paved or repaved we are not proposing any additional pavement a portion of the lot is currently paved today in good condition and the rear portion of lot is stoned in good condition and that will stay as such okay item e the applicant should provide testimony to address the adequacy of this layout for the proposed tenant how many buses are in the operator's Fleet can the buses be stored in a parking stall is storage the same during the school year A as in the summer yes so we uh we do have a total number of buses of 33 we have put together a turny radius map I think we get that your professional staff asked for um an exhibit showing the Turning radiuses for both the small and larger buses on site that is the exhibit being shown now you see the smaller buses are towards the bottom of the page the Southside and they can make the turn of movement without conflict as well as the larger buses to the top of the page they as well can we've angled those spaces they can make those movements in and out without conflict Mr chairman Mr BR the uh the the plan that we're looking at is the 33 including both sizes of the buses so the total number of vehicles will be 33 that is correct and there is a space for every one of them on the plan there is and it works without any any issues like you're not that is correct not impeding the um the the truck tra the tra the traffic flow with the parked vehicles that is correct okay so Mr chairman I would suggest that we approve that a maximum number of 33 Vehicles be a condition of approval and for the just to clarify the breakdown for the 33 is 12 regular sized and 21 smaller correct that is correct okay item F the applicant should address parking for maintenance and bus driver employee vehicles on site so we have obviously we have our bus parking spaces shown we have 10 employee parking spaces striped we have heard testimony that we have five employees so we have five Extra Spaces so as a bus driver comes to the site and their personal vehicle they will have a spot to park in temporarily they will move the bus out of their space put their passenger car into that space and leave the site so we always have excess parking to make that operation work well great and item G the um applicant should seek relief from the lighting ordinance no additional lighting is requested that's right again we've provided Lighting in the areas where the spaces are but we do not meet your requirements because there are gaps on the site and we're going to ask for that waiver item H relief should be requested from the loading ordinance testimony should be provided in this type of business there's no need for any kind of loading space so we ask for that waiver item I if buses will back into the angled spaces this turning movement should be shown on the plan and they they want to pull and head first and that's our exhibit we've shown so it's on exhibit a it is thank you item J this application does not include a landscaping plan but does provide additional Landscaping on the site plan this office recommends the applicant provide the trees on the proposed plan plus an additional 12 wide growing evergreen trees on the north side of the property line to screen the site from the abing residential dwellings and then seek a waiver from all other Landscaping requirements and that's what we're doing correct that's what we're doing all right I I I think 12 Trees may be much but we certainly work with the township professionals on and basic whatever the professionals want professionals will get absolutely all right item K the applicant should indicate if any safety or informational signs are proposed there's no additional signs proposed okay and item L the applicant should address the pipeline buffering ordinance or seek a waiver from same if no ground disturbance is proposed and the answer is we're going to get a waiver for that because no ground disturbance is proposed right so there's no reason to request a a letter or a certification there's no Mr chairman I would ask that you make that a condition of approval so that it's easier when we're doing compliance that that you don't have to provide those uh those letters from the pipeline buffering okay thank you sir thank you Mr P item M as a condition of approval no work should be done on any vehicle outside of the building and as you heard earlier Mr Dupont the owner of the site indicate that indicated that he's willing to live with that as a condition on any approval if the board would be kind enough to Grant it correct that is correct and Mr chairman that's my most important comment that there'd be no work outside they just park the vehicles and work on them inside and they don't disturb the neighborhood so that's my biggest concern and and if they agree to that that's wonderful thank you item n school bus depot is an inherently beneficial use John Dupont to demonstrate the satisfaction of the negative criteria so we have the case law uh Scholastic bus Inc versus the Zoning Board of the burough of Fair Lawn in which the uh School Bus facilities were considered inherently beneficial uh but in turn that helps us on our proof so let me take your hat off as the engineer and put on your hat as the plan can we just can we just do get questionings before we go to the plan okay thank you appreciate that Mr absolutely okay uh Mr Bell are you satisfied with Mr chairman I'm completely satisfied thank you that's excellent excellent all right and before we do the planner hat let's keep the engineers have's report we have the DNR report all right Mr Carly's report first are you familiar with the report dated November 6 2023 I am okay is there uh anything within the report where you want to provide clarification or discussion yes there are a couple items for the most part we can comply with everything I just want to bring four items to the board's attention so 3.1 on Mr cary's report talks about EV charging stations because we're not proposing any significant changes on site and ground penetrations we're looking for a waiver of the EV requirement we don't think we looking for w we think e is not required here because we're not building a new parking lot um that's one 4.1 talks to lighting and again we are proposing some lighting but we going to ask for that waiver of the lighting requirement uh 5.1 talks about storm War management we're asking for a waiver of the storm water management the site is almost completely impervious we're not increasing the impervious coverage by anything by any amount at all so we haven't changed the volume of flow or the direction of flow so we're asking for a waiver and the last thing uh we proposed 8.3 talks about buffering we have proposed some buffering again asking for a waer we've done best we can on this site and we work with the professional staff everything else in Mr Carly's letter we can comply with Mr Carly uh thank you Mr chair uh Mr uh Dupont uh do you anticipate that you're going to have to go to uh Freehold Soil Conservation District for a certification I would probably say we get an exemption okay well if you get the exemption then that will cover the storm water management but please do provide that if the board uh looks uh favorable favorably upon this application as part of resolution compliance it certainly will thank you thank you Mr Carley does the board have any questions for Mr D Dupont with regard to the engineering testimony you left them speechless you can change hats now all right let's see if we can do it again on planning everybody all right hats off hats on as planner uh we we pointed out to the board that uh School Bus maintenance facilities are an inherently beneficial use but how about the other part of the criteria why is there no negative impact on the community uh as a result of this application okay so as we heard um and your board planner has has stated in a report that school bus maintenance and parking has been found to be inherently beneficial by the courts as long as the site is deemed to be particularly well suited and that is in that case Scholastic School Bus versus zoning board um if it's particularly well suited it becomes inherently beneficial positive criteria is automatically met so we have a fully developed existing site Almost 100% impervious in a light industrial Zone um that is bordered by The Greenway to the north industrial sites to the South we've demonstrated how buses can park and move around the site effectively there is sufficient access to the site the site is currently being used as an industrial site and we're making some improvements increasing the lighting and add and fencing and screening and it was noted and should be noted again the site was previously used as bus maintenance and storage company so when the site is uh used for a Township school system and the storage and maintenance of buses is in fact essential as as an accessory to the schools is then deemed inherently beneficial so positive criteria met with respect to negative criteria I don't see any negative impacts is my impact that the site is particularly well suited for proposed use it's an industrial area we're increasing the buffering increasing the Landscaping um again other uh some very minor but some definitely sight improvements being done making the site aesthetically more pleasing we feel the granting of the variants can be done without substantial detriment to the public good the benefits of the project will substantially outweigh any detriment and the granting of variations variances will not substantially impact the intent or purpose of the Zone plan or Zone your ordinance so you have a site that really is conducive has existed like this before making some nice quality improvements the buses work it's for the township of Edison's school buses itself and beneficial and we think it's a good application and he summed it up for me I don't think I have to summarize anything after that okay we'll go to the board for questions board members have any questions for Mr dup plant with regard to the planning testimony you're two for two that's okay so we will now go out to the public uh anyone within 200 feet of the subject site wanting to be heard if you are within 200 feet you received a notice via certified mail seeing none any anyone outside of 200 feet of the property seeing none motion to close public session second motion made by Vice chairman o Gorman seconded by Mr sedado all in favor of signify by saying I I I oose nay the eyes have it public portion is now closed and we'll go to the board Mr chair I have a question for the applicant okay we did we we we closed the all right Mr chair I make a motion to approve this application the applicant has met all the negative and positive criteria the site is particularly suited for the intended use the use is not a detriment to the public good or Public Safety uh with the conditions that maximum 33 buses would be parked at any given time uh hours of operation are 7 to5 9 6 6:30 a.m. 6:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. correct um and no work will be uh uh performed outside the building um this motion will incorporate all of the testimony of the applicant attorney planners engineers and members of the board um and as well as incorporation of all the conditions we discuss here Mr chair Vice chairman i' like to add that the applicant um since they're not disturbing the uh ground they get waiver for the um buffer ordinance on the ground and that's based on also getting the approval the exemption from free old soil Mr chairman wa just give me one second Mr are you seconding the motion by yes okay all right Mr Beno I'd like you also make a condition of approval that the number the maximum number of vehicles that they that they testify to be the maximum number of vehicles believe Mr dve put that into oh I'm sorry I apologize better be sure chairman should the waivers be memorialized as well in the resolution right M or or the granting by the TRC is enough I I don't know your procedures uh they they probably should be memorialized in the resolution so just so I understand the motion clearly the waivers that were requested um and there were five of them yes uh and one was for the okay one of the waivers was for the tree replacement waiver correct um as no trees are being removed the other was a waiver from pipelines as there is no construction correct Landscaping um as you're going to work with Township professionals and there is Landscaping that is being proposed with buffering which is what the waiver was that Mr Gorman put on the record uh waiver from lighting requirements um and I think the other is a waiver as to uh no no need for the New Jersey do access is minut as there is no changes to the egress or Ingress that's correct and the pipeline do we get pipeline buffer I think you said that right yes okay I'm sorry I'm having a hard time or something tough to get old tell me about it all right everybody good I I second the motion okay second motion being by Mr dve seconded by Vice chairman o' Gorman roll call please Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Sero yes on the motion M Hernandez Prince yes on the motion Mr de yes on the motion Mr sadaha yes to the motion Vice chair o' Gorman yes on a motion and chairman Kumba yes on the motion thank you Mr CH members have a great Thanksgiving congratulations have a Happy Thanksgiving thank you good luck okay uh is there any more business to come before the board this evening that is all all right um just before we ask for a motion to adjourn I just want to take this opportunity just to thank our board members thank you for your time thank you for your talent um thank you for being here I want to thank our amazing uh Municipal staff uh for all that they do I want to thank our board Professionals for sharing your time and your talent and being with us um we cannot do what we do for the public if it weren't for all of you and and personally sitting here uh thank you for getting me through this past year so far um with that motion to adjourn motion to adj Second motion made by Mr sedada second by Vice chairman o' Gorman all in favor signified by saying I I I oos nay the eyes have it Happy Thanksgiving board stands adjourned Happy Thanksgiving but the alternative is very Grim I like that vest V are making a big comeback