e e e e e e e e Town vettis Zing Board of adjustment special meeting of June 25th 2024 is now in session adequate notice of this meeting as required by open public meetings Act of 1975 has been provided by the annual notice published in the home news and Tribune on December 18th 2023 has been posted in the main lobby the mpal complex on December 18th 2023 please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag Unice Madam Secretary roll call please Mr Carly Mr Bell here Miss Shaw here Mr a here Mr chabra here Mr Patel here Mr Brown here Mr D here Mr sadaha here Vice chair ogorman here and chairman Kumba here Madam Secretary M for consideration June 18th 2024 for approval what's the board's pleasure motion to approve second motion made by Vice chairman o Gorman second by Mr sedada roll call please Mr Brown yes on the motion Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Patel yes on the motion Mr D yes on the motion Mr Saha yes on the motion Vice chair Gorman yes on a motion and chairman kba yes on the motion you mam secretary resolutions to be adopted uh the Z28 2022 the Quick Check Corporation board's pleasure motion to approve second motion made by Mr chabra seconded by Mr sedada roll call please Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr de yes on the motion Mr sedaha yes on the motion and chairman Kumba yes on the motion thank you next is Z5 2023 Juan Grana what's a board's pleasure motion yes was yes the one second motion made by Mr s second by Vice chairman o Gorman roll call please Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr do yes on the motion Mr sadaha yes on the motion Vice chair Gorman yes on a motion and chairman cumba yes on the motion the final resolution Madam Secretary z27 2023 ly Sports what's the board's pleasure motion to approve second motion made by Mr chabra second by Mr sedada roll call please Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr chabra yes the mo yes the motion Mr Patel yes on the motion Mr de yes on the motion Mr sedaha yes to the mo and chairman Kumba yes on the motion thank you all right good evening ladies and gentlemen this is a special meeting of the township Edison Zoning Board of adjustment this board is composed of Edison Township residents appointed by Municipal Council who volunteer their time and service to the board the municipal land use Law requires that members successfully complete a land use training course administered by the New Jersey Department Community Affairs this board also holds in-house training conducted by our board professionals the zoning board abides by the provisions of Municipal land use law in addition to our board's bylaws the zoning board is a quasi judicial 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 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 within 200 fet of subject property will be heard followed by residents from outside of 200 fet all residents will be sworn in they'll provide their name and address and then will be given six minutes to comment on the application being considered without the opportunity for rebuttal residents may ask questions of the applicant the applicants professionals and board professionals the board requests that these questions are asked prior to any commentary being made on the application once com AR Begins the resident's timer will begin the applicant would be allowed for the opportunity for cross-examination of their Witnesses under the law the chair is allowed to stop any commentary which 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 abortion 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 case will go to the board for a decision this procedure has been followed by this board and similar to the procedures followed by Boards of adjustment Statewide Municipal land use Law requires the board to engage in a balancing act and 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 at if we are still in session around 10:30 p.m. I ask that all applicants professionals and residents show respect to each other be civil throughout all proceedings I ask that you withhold Applause booing or interrupting of anyone while they are speaking the chair will not tolerate any outbursts by applicants professionals or the public further since most cases are being recorded by a court reporter I ask that speakers do not speak over one another Madam Secretary first case on the agenda please case number z31 2023 kashuk do waly 47 nolwood Road is seeking bulk and use variances to construct a second story addition to the existing single family dwelling the following standards have not been met maximum lot coverage required is 23% proposed is 25.9% maximum F required is 44% proposed is 49% affected property is located in the RB Zone designated as block number 1102 Lot number 17 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order good evening Mr sh good evening Mr chairman members of the board my name is Bernard Shire I represent Mr and Mrs dalwadi the owner applicants of the property at 47 Westwood Road Block 1102 lot 17 uh as you recall there was a prior hearing on this matter uh and the board uh wanted to see a change in the floor area ratio uh proposed which was 54.5% and to bring it down to 49% uh that was accomplished on the amend plans as a result of that the lot coverage by building variance has also been reduced uh from 28.0% to 25.9% uh if you will recall uh the uh deles have lived in the neighborhood for 16 years across the street from this property uh and with their three children and Mr DW's parents uh they really want to stay in the neighborhood and as you heard from uh neighbors who testified they want them to stay in the neighborhood uh there are no setback violations uh we' brought down the F and lot coverage variances um uh I have Mr Dupont to Simply testify for the record as to what's been done to the plan at the board's request uh and then of course any comments you may have I also have the architect here uh if you desire any comments from the architect thank you raise your right hand do youly swear or to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth bring it closer thank you state your full name John P Dupont and I am professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey Mr dupon if you could just give a brief summary of your qualifications yeah yes I am a licensed professional engineer in state of New Jersey I am also a professional planner in the state I served as the planning zoning board engineer and planner for of carrett for the past 25 years I've been before this board numerous times as well as other boards throughout the state and your license are current in good standing they are okay we'll accept you thank you thank you uh Mr Dupont uh you've already testified as to the uh basics of uh this project correct that is correct and also given your planning testimony uh as to why the board should Grant the variances in question I did uh and the board requested uh that we change the F to reduce the violation is that correct that is correct and that has been accomplished that has uh could you please uh indicate to the board the changes that have been made uh at their request okay so as per the board's direction we did reduce the size of the proposed dwelling to from 375 squ ft to 3,364 Square fet so that reduced the F from 0.54 to 0.49 as directed that also resulted in the maximum lot coverage for building being reduced to from 2.08% to 25.9 so um and I think that was the last change right yeah that was the last change so we we heard the board loud and clear we made those revisions it wasn't easy but the applicant put a lot of effort in his architect and made those changes and I think we did exactly what the board requested right Mr Dupont I assume in light of the fact that we've reduced uh the variances in question uh that your opinion uh that these uh variances can be granted without any substantial impairment of the Zone plan or zoning ordinance and no substantial detriment to the public goods still stand that's correct I have other questions to Mr Dupont does the board have any questions for Mr DuPont pry good all right uh I do have our architect president if the board has any questions of the architect um but uh essentially uh we're before the board to indicate that we've complied with the board's desires regarding the floor area ratio uh and I assume any uh there can be public comment as to the changes that have been made does a board of any questions with regard to the architectural seeing none okay that's the applicant's case thank you Mr Char so we will now go out to the public anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard please approach seeing none anyone outside 200 ft wanting to be heard seeing none can I get a motion to close the public portion motion to close the public portion second motion made by Vice chairman o Gorman second by Mr sedada all in favor signify by saying I I I oose nay the guys have it public portion is now closed U Mr Char do you have any information prior to going uh just very briefly these are uh two nice people that have lived across the street from this property for 16 years uh their house is now too small for the family they have three children and the uh parents of Mr dalwadi live there uh they want all want to live in the neighborhood the neighbors all want them to live in the neighborhood and I think we''ve uh uh brought the uh project down to something that should be very palatable to the board and the public okay so we'll now go to the board for a motion Mr chairman like make a motion like to make a motion that the applicant has satisfied all the positive and negative criteria subject to the following I'm sorry wrong line applicant uh provided sufficient proofs to Grant the requested bulk variance relief without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the master plan and ordinance and improves the neighborhood and also there was no opposition from the neighbor Neighbors second motion made by Vice chairman o' Gorman second by Mr sedata roll call please Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Patel yes on the motion Mr D yes on the motion Mr sadaha yes on a motion Vice CH Gorman yes on a motion and chairman Kumba yes on the motion unanimous approval congratulations thank you very much Madam Secretary next case on the agenda case z13 2024 Krishna Murthy Ral at 22 Reed Street applicant is proposing both variances to construct a a second story Edition the following standard have not been met maximum perious coverage required is 40% proposed is 50.98 lot building coverage required is 23% proposed is 29.62 minimum rear yard required is 30 ft proposed is 2633 ft affected property is located in the RB Zone designated as block number 9801 Lot number 21 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order is the applicant here if you gentlemen consider the other table please thank you good evening hello I see there are two people there so I'm going to I'm assuming one of them is Mr chrishna Mory Ralph yes I am would you raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth so help you God I do and state your full name for the record I do your full name please for the record Krishna morti okay and sir I'm assuming you're going to testify yes my name is Kurt lwig uh Mr Rous architect okay raise your right hand do you solemly swear orm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth so help you God I do and state your full name again for the record sh CT Ludwick lud wi and Mr Ludwick if you could just give the board a summary of your qualifications sure um I'm a registered architect my office is located at 77 North Main Street in miltown New Jersey I testified in front of numerous boards including this board numerous times and your license are current in good standing yes it is all right we'll accept it you may proceed thank you uh would you like me to describe okay so hope that's okay that it's over here oh please do that's perfect thank you like the pric is right so um do I need to Mark these are they part of the initial submissions they're the same then you don't need to mark them just reference them okay so uh my office prepared the uh design and drawings for the proposed two-story rear Edition uh this board um labeled A1 indicates General zoning information there's a picture of the existing two-story house it's a stucco home with a hip style roof this is a site key plan where we have the front of the house facing Reed Street uh this is the existing house and what we're proposing is in blue rear two-story Edition if I may I'll go to the next board and I can come back to this one as needed uh this is a floor plan page labeled 82 we have our first floor plan here we're proposing to enlarge the existing kitchen create a new open Flow floor plan for a family room and then added a new bathroom on the first floor which does not include a bathroom now uh on the second floor we're proposing a new master bedroom with closets and its own private bathroom and on the last board we have our uh proposed exterior elevations um the addition is hatched the the exterior will match the colors and materials and textures of the existing stucco and the roof the roof design will match the existing hip roof and that uh that's the basic uh proposal that we have thank you does board have any questions for Mr there's a basement I'm sorry there's a basement yes that's a good question the proposed twostory Edition is proposed to have an unfinished basement is there a floor plan with that uh no not in this set that basement that unfinished basement we're proposing a exterior stair down to the basement level and we also included an egress pit in case the client ever wanted to put a bedroom in the basement they could do so but that is not proposed now what's the square footage of the basement the proposed the exterior square footage of the proposed basement is 343 Square ft all right thank you you're welcome I have a question the uh increase in your impervious can you give the basis for that well uh currently we have our house here we have a large driveway with an existing rear detached garage um we're we're proposing um 56.8% in perious coverage and 40% is uh the ordinance and that's one of the reasons we're here tonight your current what's your current lot coverage prior to the addition percentage wise r at uh 48.0 4 okay your lot building coverage that's for the lot coverage the building coverage aage um the current is 22.7 required is 23 and we're proposing 29.62 and if I may the other variants that were here for the rear of the proposed addition complies with the rear setback however the exterior platform in stair that is located at the proposed sliding glass store that is over the required 30 ft setback which is requiring a [Music] 26.440 over what's required uh you would like me I'm sorry to do I'd like you to give give us some more detail as to the need for the increase in the impervious because you're nearly 14% over what is required well um unfortunately the existing conditions include a very large driveway that goes back to this existing garage which obviously takes up a lot of land area uh we minimize the size of the addition the house is is small small um we minimize the size of it but we want it obviously to be realistic for use um they're in need of a bathroom on the first floor um so we kind we did our best to keep the project small but due to the lot size which is undersized um we have this imperious issue okay thank you you're welcome the board have any question other questions for Mr lewick all right seeing none thank you thank you do you have anything to add sir paron do you have anything you want to add to the case before we go to the public yeah uh actually I bought this house 18 years ago when the kids were in middle and elementary school so now the kids are grown they all married and we are no extended families and friends so we are very good with the neighborhood so we don't have to move out of that area so we have been putting up with 900 square ft so far so now we just want another 350 square fet living space to make up for the accommodation for the extended families okay thank you thank you board have any questions with the applicant all right seeing none so we will now go out to the public if there's anyone within 200 ft of the subject property wanting to be heard if you're within 200 ft you received a notice via certified mail seeing none will to go outside at 200 ft seeing none can I get a motion to close the public portion motion to close the public portion second motion made by Vice chairman o Gorman second by Mr sedada all in favor signify by saying I I oose nay the eyes have it public portion is now closed we'll go to the board Mr chairman Mr D I make a motion to approve the application applicant will comply with the engine's report um it is a very dious request it is not detrimental to the neighborhood um and there are no objectives second motion made by Mr dve second by Mr sedada roll call please uh Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Patel yes on the motion Mr D yes on the motion Mr sadaha yes on the motion Vice chair o Gorman yes on a motion and chairman Kumba yes on the motion unan approval congratulations thank you you thank you thank mam secretary next case on the agenda please next case is z14 20124 PA Mand at 71 rad Street applicant is proposing both variances to construct a deck on the side of the single family dwelling the following standards have not been met lot area required is 7,500 ft proposed is 6,900 697 Square ft lot width required is 85 ft proposed is 69.6 7 ft front yard setback required is 24 ft proposed is 10.4 ft affected property is located in the RB Zone designated as block number 130.0 one Lot number 16 on the Edison Township tax map all notice and paperwork is in order good evening good evening our attorney will s would you raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth's help you got I do please State your full name for the record Paul mangeris okay and Sir you're going to testify as well so let's have you raise your right hand you sol me swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth so help you God I do and state your full name for the record Kurt Ludwick l w AG registered architect Mr lewig you were previously accepted your nothing's changed the past five minutes I'm tired no nothing's changed thank you stick around for our agenda okay we'll accept you thank you thank you do you want to say anything about me go ahead and present what we're doing um no go ahead okay I I'll present the project so as mentioned we're proposing uh a a deck on the side of the house unfortunately or fortunately the house is located on a corner lot um meaning that this has two front yards so our proposed deck extends into the required front yard area um the rear yard was not a good location for the proposed deck because the back of the existing house includes bedrooms and bathroom and part of the house and also the um existing Side Porch is access off the existing kitchen at that location so flow wise this is the best location um if I can go to the next board up before I move on you could see here pictures of the existing house this is our side door our side porch the deck would be located in this area here uh next board has our floor plan our existing kitchen here our access to the side yard which is technically a front yard Our Deck located here the front rail of the deck will also match the uh fence that will be located here so from The Front Street it will all be a continuous material there'll be a stair from the driveway area and the stair add into the backyard and that concludes our presentation okay the board have any questions for Mr BL right seeing none thank you thank you before we go to the public um I wish my wife were here uh she's actually running a vacation bible school at our at our church um one of the reasons why we are looking at this deck is because she has um problems um climbing stairs and um the addition of the stairs that would lead up onto the deck and right into the house are going to be a great help for her um we're both 57 we plan we've been in this house since 2009 and we plan on um retiring in this house and um our daughter is 12 we're going to be in the Edison school system until at least until she turns 18 so we we committed to this house and and we want to have a place where that we can go and relax in the in the Sun so okay all right and this the first time we've heard on this day as I wish my wife were here does the board have any questions for the applicant Mr chairman Vice chairman yes the proposed setback is 10 feet 10.4 feet and required is 24 feet what's the justification for that well um as Paul mentioned uh it's it's better Access wise for them off of the kitchen unfortunately the kitchen is in the front of the house the backyard is not accessible from the interior of the house because of the layout of the bedrooms and bathroom in the house now um so for their needs and because of the existing conditions This was um the best location thank you thank you any other questions you can instead of having 15t wide can you just shrink it 10t and make it more longer so Square ft still remain same so you get more setback you can have the same square fet of your deck just so right now we're proposing um can't see 16 ft a 15 wide make it 10 wide and then make it more longer go all the way to the face of the that corner there my only concern with that is a deck furniture is is bulky and 10 ft would make it um almost like it would be difficult to put a table um I I don't know if 14 ft I could see a 14t deck being realistic but I don't know about a 10-ft deck for your needs Paul I I I would think the 10 foot might be a little too narrow um especially since I believe we're planning on putting the the stairs in the center of the entrance the at the driveway side so and I believe that's 3 foot so it would end up being kind of bisecting it um and not having a lot of room once you actually get up into the deck itself so if you put a deck on the back in the back rear yard you don't have to ask for any variance right give me one moment please we would be able to go out the back 13 feet however we would have to go through a bedroom to get to the deck the required satb is 24 ft you are only living 10t I'm sorry required is 24t you are living only 10t you're 14t going into toward the fence well um again I I think a 10- foot deck would be very tight Mr chair Mr me um how high is the deck off the ground there's a a picture here it's about 18 in to 2 4 in off the ground okay so if it's more than 24 in off the ground which it appears it is not then it would follow the principal structure setbacks which are 24 ft they're actually 25 ft because it's lower than 24 in it follows the accessory setbacks which are 3 fet so Deck with the railing doesn't count it's regardless he he doesn't need a railing till he gets above 30 in yeah actually it's above 24 now you don't need a rail uh above 24 in above grade is now requires a right three three risers or 24 in okay okay that's fine that's in building anyway so that's okay but for zoning you're still unless you go above 24 in this is considered an accessory structure okay so that would follow setbacks for 3 ft for accessory structures in yourb zone what's the what's the current floor height from the ground the kitchen floor that's a good question there's a landing from the kitchen uh one two three so from the kitchen Landing to the ground is about 24 in so you're going to match that that floor going in we're going to have a slate Step at the door for snow correct 4 in but you're not above 24 in so you you you can follow the accessory setbacks accessory structure setbacks in the RB zone are 3 feet for the principal structure you're at 25 ft so if you go to if you go to 25 Ines or more then you have to follow to 25 which is what you have on the plans as long as you keep it under 20 24 in or under it's considered an accessory structure setback okay that does the deck need to be um not attached to the home I can design it so that it's not if it's you can attach it to the home at 24 in okay you can lag it right in no problem at all okay so you didn't need to make a need to make a step and then this deck height should not be more than 24 in it cannot be more well it shows on a plan to two steps on the S three steps so two three sorry I'm looking at this one here D I was looking but he's saying 24 in that's three steps that's what I'm saying as long as the deck stays before below 24 in you might have to put a step when you come out of the kitchen make a step and don't increase the don't raise the deck more than 24 in then you can get the size right that's okay yep yep okay I know that um when you when you normally step into that side door there is two steps that gets you to the door and then once you get inside the house there's one more step that brings you up to the kitchen so the kitchen is slightly higher than the the entry doorway but the entry doorway is I believe 24 in and then it's so we we decided to make it that height um so that when we walk in we walk directly into that same level okay Paul we might lower that a little bit so we don't go over the 2 no if we need two that that's fine okay thank you Mr so the maximum height will of the deck will be 24 in maximum height yes thank you all right great okay do you have anything to add sir thank you good all right Mr blood we you have anything to add no I don't thanks thank you so we now go out to the public anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard if you're within 200 feet you received a notice via certified mail seeing none will now go outside 200 ft seeing none can I get a motion to close the public portion motion to close for public portion second motion made and seconded all in favor signify by saying I oose nay the eyes have it public portion is now closed Mr chairman Mr D I make a motion to approve this application the applicant will comply with the engine's report applicant also agreed to uh build a deck no more than 24 in height he might have to add the steps when coming out of the kitchen to the deck uh this is a very dious request not detrimental to the neighborhood um it's not out of the character with the neighborhood and there are no objectives second motion made by Mr dve second by Mr sedada roll call please Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr chabra yes the motion Mr Patel yes on the motion Mr de yes on the motion Mr Saha yes on the motion Vice chair Gorman yes on a motion and chairman combo yes on the motion unanimous approval congratulations thank you thank you we'll tell your wife that you did a good job she'd appreciate it all right Madame secretary next case on the agenda please case number z7 2024 rashim arvind at 178 Fleet AV applicant is seeking bul can use variances to construct a 10x 25 sunm addition to the existing single family dwelling the following standards have not been met lot coverage permitted is 23% proposed is 25% Max F permitted is 44% proposed is 47% affected properties located in the RB Zone designated as block number 59016 Lot number 3.01 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order good evening than you Mr chairman MERS of the board Timothy Casey appearing on behalf of the applicant this is an application to construct a sun room on the side of the existing single family house I have with me tonight Paul fetcher professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey will testify as to the planning issues the applicant and the contractor or present in case the board has any questions with that I ask that Mr fetcher be sworn raise your right hand you solemnly swear orir to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth so helping God yes I do and state your full name for the record Paul Jeter Mr fleder you've appeared before us prior if you could just please give us a brief summary of your background and qualifications yes U I'm a uh licensed professional engineer and professional planner in the state of New Jersey principal of Fletcher engineering and have been for 32 years I've appeared under or in uh in front of uh numerous boards including this board and the Edison planning board uh on many occasions also other uh municipalities uh within middle County mammouth and Union County and your license are current in good standing yes they are all right you may proceed thank you Mr Fletcher you reviewed this application we please address the the variances the applicant is seeking tonight and specially opinion with with respect to same certainly uh subject property uh known as 178 uh Fleet Avenue that is a lot 3.01 uh in Block 590 D Point used to be P which is when we did were uh originally working on this project uh this is a was a new home back in uh 2015 uh we had done the site plan in the pot and Grading plant that time uh the uh current owners uh would like to uh construct a sun room on the left side of the of the building this be one story be 10 ft wide 25 ft deep 250 square ft uh it will comply with the side yard setbacks front yard rear yard setbacks however it does exceed uh two of the bulk standards uh firstly uh maximum uh percent of building cover uh 23% is allowed in the ra sorry the RB Zone uh 22% is existing uh 25% is proposed uh secondly maximum floor area ratio uh in the RB Zone 44 is allowed uh with this addition it will bring it up to 047 so in my mind these two variances are are di Minimus in nature uh I think the court the courts have found that the required D variances for the floor area ratio uh the proofs are not as stringent as would be required for a true use variance uh this is a permit use in the zone residential uh the courts have found that you have to show that the uh uh the increase in floor area can be handled uh and not overburden the lot and I can point to the fact that first of all the the uh uh 3% increases is in my mind di Minimus uh the uh required uh setbacks uh are uh being complied with therefore we are providing the required uh light air and open space uh that is one of the uh purposes of the M Municipal land use law uh and I don't see any negative impact for from this dominous increase in lot area uh or uh lot cover um with that said I I see no uh uh negative impact to the uh the Zone plan the master plan uh or to the neighborhood I think this will be aesthetically pleasing uh it'll be uh an asset to the house uh and I think it will be uh an improvement in the neighborhood uh and for those reasons I think the board uh has the ability and I would uh urge the board to Grant these uh requested variances The Proposal is consistent with the development in and the character of the neighborhood in your opinion in my opinion yes it is and the correct Lot number is 3.01 correct that is correct no further questions from Mr Fletcher board have any questions for Mr Fletcher all rightless the the board has any questions of the applicant or the contractor I would submit does the board have any questions of the applicant or the contractor seeing none iate the case okay all right so we'll now go out to the public anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard if you were within 200 feet you received a notice VI a certified mail seeing none uh anyone outside Fe is subject property want to be heard seeing none can I get a motion to close a public portion motion to close appliation second motion made by Mr sedada second by Mr Patel all in favor signify by saying I iose nay the eyes have it public portion is now closed Mr Casey do you have summation before we go to the board I I have done I submit okay all right so we now go to the board for a decision Mr chairman Mr dve I make a motion to approve this application the applicant has met all the negative and positive criteria the use of use is not detriment to the public good or Public Safety it will enhance the neighborhood um this motion will also incorporate all of the testimony of the applicant attorney planner engineers and um and the board second motion made by Mr dve second by Mr sedado roll call please Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Patel yes in the motion Mr D yes on the motion Mr sadaha Vice chair o Gorman it's on a motion and chairman Kumba yes on the motion unan approval congratulations thank you for your time thank you very much good even okay all right Madam Secretary next case on the agenda case number z34 2023 Mohammad zuar at 106 Jam Street applicant is proposing preliminary and final site plan approval and seeking bulk and use variances to construct a three-story medical office building standards have not been met in accordance with the master plan parking required is 45 proposed is 20 maximum height required is 30 feet SL2 story proposed is 32833 story maximum floor area required is 0.25 proposed is 344 front yard setback required is 35 ft proposed is 32.2 ft affected property is located in the OS Zone designated as block number 631 Lot number 12.11 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order good evening good evening for the record my name is Lisa John basa with the law firm Kaa shahinian and Jan tamasi as the board will recall the applicant was before you last in February since it's been approximately 4 months since we were here I just if you could bear with me I'd like to recap the testimony that was provided so far on the record so we're before you uh for a medical office building at 106 shame Street Medical Office use is a permitted use within the zoning District the testimony that was provided at the February hearing was testimony from Dr zuar Dr zuar is a pulmonologist he's the owner and would be operator of this facility Dr Zuber would be the sole doctor operating at the facility on the first and second floors there would be five exam rooms each and on the third floor there would be three sleep study rooms testimony was provided that the first and second floor would never operate at the same time as the third floor the proposed hours of operation for floors one and two are Monday Tuesday Thursday and Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and Wednesdays 12:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. the proposed hours for operation on the third floor are Monday Wednesday Friday 8:30 p.m. to approximately 6 a.m. Dr Zuber is a specialist in pulmonology and Sleep Disorders disease which are often interconnected pulmonologists specialize in lung conditions such as Co influenza RSV and lung cancer Dr zuar provided testimony that one during and following the pandemic there was a shortage of Physicians practicing in the field of pulmonology and infectious diseases particularly in the immediate AA of JFK Hospital which was the reason why he was attracted to the site to begin with secondarily that the practice of pulmonology care has changed since the pandemic mainly in operations of the doctor's office due to to the contagious nature of the lung disease when patients arrive they do not wait in a communal waiting room they are immediately placed into exam rooms patients visits are also strategically scheduled to provide an opportunity to properly clean and ventilate the room after the patients leaves appointments are scheduled 2 to three hours slot two to three hour time slots to ensure that there is a minimum of 30 to 45 minutes to clean and ventilate an exam room prior to the next patient entering it similarly Dr Dr zuar testified that a separate sleep study space is required to uh comply with the new procedures for sleep studies to allow for a 24-hour ventilation of the sleep study room prior to a new patient entering it which is why they're only scheduled every other day moreover to that point Mr do Dr Zar said in previous practices preco previously exam rooms doubled as sleep study rooms during the overnight hours which is no longer good practice due to the contagious nature of the patients the new standards and good practice in pulmonology field is the need for the additional floor area within the building and the reason why the application is before this board for floor area variance and for the height variant it's for the safety of the patients we also had our architect testify to the design of the building he explained that he tried to retrofit the existing building which is currently used for pulmonology uh by two pulmonologists before the pandemic but it could not meet meet the current needs in this post uh Co world the Paramount concern was the way to remediate Rooms after they were used in order for the facility to operate properly and it could not be done in the existing space additional rooms and additional floor area within the building was needed to properly air out and ventilate the space in between patients he also explained that the need for the height which is an increase of 2.8 ft over what is permitted was needed for proper ventilation to have dropped ceilings with ducks under underneath it to accommodate the HVAC and ventilation systems in practice our our next witness was John Dupont who testified in the capacity as a civil engineer he described the existing location and setting of the property describing that James Street from Mundy Avenue to JFK hospital that the primary uses were exclusively medical office uses and that the proposed use was permitted in the district the proposed building also met and exceeded the bulk requirements in the zoning code lot area minimum is2 sare ft the subject lot is 21792 Ft maximum building coverage permit is 25 uh perc and we were uh about half of that at 11.47% also compliant with the yard requirements he further testified that there would be Landscaping provided with over 177 evergreen trees that would be planted in double rows around the parking lot and board onboard 8ft fence um along the rear property line there would be 20 parking spaces which meets the needs of the facility whereas the code requires 60 um at the end of the conclusion of the hearing last time we we concluded so that the police and fire reports could be issued for this application because there was a parking variance we have since received a letter from the fire chief dated March 7 2024 which indicates that we were in compliance with the New Jersey uniform fire code and a letter from the police department dated February 12 2024 was also Alo issued saying that the proposed plan does not directly affect traffic flow in the area and that the department had no concerns regarding the number of proposed parking spaces uh we also submitted a traffic impact uh study to the board in advance of tonight's meeting that was prepared by Dynamic engineering and lastly we received a letter of support from JFK Hospital dated May 24 2024 that the proposed use and and further indicating that the presence of additional physician offices in the immediate area Hospital enhances access to care and that the hospital was supportive of the application so that that concludes where we left off tonight I would intend to call two witnesses our traffic engineer to talk a little bit more about the parking needs for the facility and then we would conclude with John Dupont in the capacity as the professional planner um Miss John Bas I'm just going to correct you on um you had said February 12th for the police letter um it was actually was March 12th yes thank you very much make absolutely want make sure reflects um and this so this was a revised letter there was an initial letter that was uh submitted to the board by Sergeant wners on March 7th then there was a Revis on March 12th correct okay you may proceed okay um so our first witness is PR Craig peror he is with Dynamic traffic your right hand s orer to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you God yes I do and please State your full name for the record sure it's Craig Parago p r e g y and if you just give a summary of your uh qualifications and background please sure uh I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from Virginia Tech um a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey I testify pretty much on a nightly basis uh including here in Edison a number of times uh been a traffic engineer for 24 years now and your licens are current and good standing all right we'll accept you may proceed thank you Craig you were the preparer of the April 17 2024 traffic impact uh and parking assessment that was submitt to the board yes okay if you can discuss for the to the board uh what you did in preparation re report and your conclusions sure uh I'll start uh quickly with the the traffic impact side of things I think that's probably a lesser concern for the board than the parking but uh in terms of traffic impact for building this size we project how much volume would generate based on the It or The Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation manual and the data that we site there is based on generic Medical Office Buildings not specific to this type of user which you've heard a lot of testimony on that is probably less intensive but even so using that it data uh the maximum peak hour trip generation the number of cars generated into or out of the site in an hour is 27 generally what's considered a significant increase in traffic is 100 in a in in a hour so we're at about a quarter of that significance threshold and you also have to keep in mind that this was occupied by a medical office previously that's going away so not even taking that into account assuming this is over vacant land we're talking about a very minimal traffic impact I think parking is probably more um the reason that we were brought in your ordinance uh requires five parking spaces per Professional Plus One parking space per 150 square fet so there's two professionals on the site that alone gets you to 10 parking spaces and then at that one per 150 square ft it's another 50 spaces so your ordinance requires 60 parking spaces for this building which is quite High um you heard uh from the testimony back in February the specifics of this operation I think clearly we can all agree that 60 spaces isn't isn't really uh going to be necessary based on what's going to go on here um there are four employees that would be on the site and 10 exam rooms on those lower floors so if you assume all four employees were there and drove their own car and even though it doesn't really happen based on the practice he's got all 10 exam rooms were full that's 14 parking spaces and then at night time you'd have three sleep study uh patients and one employee so that's four overnight so even if there was an overlap at the end of the day that's 18 parking spaces we have 19 physical parking spaces proposed 20 if you consider the the EV credit um so just of a practical matter based on the actual operations that are going to go on in here and based on the way um this building is going to operate I certainly think there's more than enough parking but I also took a look at of a more generic look at it what if this is a generic medical office building so I go back and I reference that it data they also have parking generation data and uh the latest manual that they have is uh research at 41 other medical or dental facilities so these are going to include pediatrician offices which have probably the highest parking demand as far as doctors go dental offices where you have a lot of people in the waiting room and so on and so forth um so even that even even these numbers are a little bit high and I suspect that's why your ordinance number is high because uh it's going to encapsulate all types of medical professions and also probably predates tele medicine which is becoming a more uh more common thing which obviates the need to drive to a medical office but that being said if I look at the it data the average Peak parking demand of those 41 various medical and dental facilities is 2.63 spaces per th000 square feet so if you do the math here that's 19.7 so 20 parking spaces so even if this was a pediatrician's office or was a dentist office I could still sit here and say that I think the number of parking spaces that we have are adequate whereas in reality based on the actual operations that you just heard resummed and you heard at the initial testimony in February it's it's more than enough uh parking on the site um so if you look at it from a realistic practical perspective of what we're proposing here or if you look at it generically as a generic medical office based on traffic engineering data I think we we clearly have enough parking in this location that was really the summary that's really the summary of that report thank you Craig no further questions does the board have any questions any question Mr D so your testimony is that 18 spaces are more than enough for this facility absolutely es especially given the operation that's going to be in there but if I was looking at it generically I would still be able to say that was enough and the standard requires 50 so you're saying the standard is uh is erroneous why they ask for 50 yeah the standard I well I I I think the reason why is because a couple things one it's it's blanket for medical offices so you have you know pediatricians and and there are certain types of medical facilities that generate a higher parking demand and the second thing is I assume that that ordinance requirement predates tele medicine which is now reducing the need for parking demand as people are able to you know go on their Amazon app and talk to the doctor as opposed to drive there you have 10 exam rooms right 10 exam rooms two medical profession and four staff members correct 10 medical usage 10 all the 10 uh rooms are occupied you have other 10 waiting in in the waiting area right no one come and one goes not for this practice Yeah the the rooms have to be uh ventilated and cleaned out so there's a long Gap in between so you have Gap in between for patient to yeah and I believe the doctor said he does two to three it's appointment only this isn't just walk in and say I'm sick it's appointment and only he tries to schedule two to three patients appointments an hour at most because of that need you can't overlap and you can't have them in a common waiting room because could be an infectious James Street is a very busy street there is no parking on the street there in case there's an Overflow what happens I I don't believe there will be that's that's what I'm saying for this particular practice I certainly don't think there will be and even if this was an unknown user I I would think it would be very infrequent so there will be absolutely zero parking and a James Street there no there will not be you will manage your appointment in such a way that there will not be any overflow on the James Street correct all on site thank you Mr CH thank you Mr D so going based upon Mr D's questions so let's say you know one day that the current use is not the current use and and Dr zuar retires and another practice comes in there let's say there's more of intensive use and it doesn't need the the minimal parking that you say that it does then you know building is going to last a 100 years and that's a good question and that that's why I gave you that it data too I mean it's easy to sit here and say this this particular practice isn't going to need anywhere close to the number of parking spaces but if you look at a generic office building and research that's been done again 41 other locations it points you to around 20 spaces so that's that's one reason I looked at that the second thing is um if this does get leased out to another doctor it's obviously has to be a doctor whose practice can work within that parking if if I'm a doctor and I normally have 50 people that are going to be on site I'm not going to lease a building that only has 19 parking spaces so it's sort of self- policing in that way but realistically the gamut of different types of medical office are covered based on uh National Standard published data and I can say for to address uh more of the board concerns that if the board were inclined to Grant this application the applicant would be um would accept a condition of approval that the third floor be only used for sleep studies um and if that were the case additionally your zoning code or your code itself has a provision that can help Safeguard this which requires that um there be a review if there's a change of tendency so if it's no longer Dr Zuber or a pulmonologist there's a review before A continuing certificate occupancy can be issued and you they could be required to come back to the planning board to address that parking variance at that point in time which is section 36 uh- 8.1 B1 small C of your code even better sport have any other questions for Mr per Mr car would like to jump [Music] in I'm going to refer to our second review of April 29 2024 now the parking uh space requirement is something the board's going to to wrestle with in terms of adequacy of uh parking based on Mr perlo's testimony but in section two of my report on pages one and two uh there's a uh a dozen of comments relative to site layout uh Mr Parago have you had a chance to review those and uh can you make those revisions to the uh plan um I don't recall seeing anything that was critical but I will leave that response to the engineer or the architect to to verify there plans but yeah I I I didn't see anything very disagreeable okay and the same uh line of uh commentary follows in uh section three of our report on pages two just on page two uh parking and loading uh we'll look for uh the site engineer to address those comments when he gives testimony and that's it for Mr Paraguay Mr chair thank Mr Carly Mr P thank you Mr chair um the only thing that I just wanted to point out just to confirmed that your testimony was that uh per the standards of the general medical uses you said it was well it one space per 2,000 square feet somewhere around there uh 2.63 per 1,000 square feet 2.63 per 1,000 okay so whereas the general standard is one space per 150 square feet not including the five spaces per Medical Professional so times that by three you're at 450 so just uh it seems like the information you provided combined to the standards that are currently in like that are currently set are just a still drastically far apart but that's just something for the board to consider that's all I have Mr mcnell so we had some I remember from earlier um consideration of this case there were some varying numbers um so Mr Carly's report is 45 spaces required the application is 45 spaces required yeah so uh from the meeting last time we had point out there was a slight typo in our letter where it says five spaces per doctor or or professional and there's one equals five spaces but then in the total requirement it was just calculated wrong and then they had testified that there'll be two doctors so that's the 10 spaces plus the 50 required for the one space per 150 so the total requirement would be 60 spaces and they're proposing 20 two years Mr peroy would you agree with that I'm sorry could you say that again we were oh yeah no worries um and this was clarified at the uh last meeting and he testified today that it would be 60 would be the number it would be yeah since there's a slight typo in the calculation in our letter but essentially it's there'll be two professionals five spaces per doctor that's 10 spaces plus the 50 spaces for one space per 150 square feet of medical so a total of 60 would be required and 20 are proposed yeah and it's it seems like it is the summation of the two a lot of times an ordinance will say the X number per professional or this many square foot depending Which is higher but it seems like yours as the summation okay I just want to make sure we all landed on the same number here yeah so the the total number is 60 okay yeah great thank you very much does the board have M um the the plan shows that you have 20 spaces but you're short if I'm reading this correctly you're short 40 spaces yes okay that's the variant ask is 40 yeah okay so you're short 40 spaces as per Mr Big Nell's report and I have the police report which shows it's short 31 spaces is that correct yes because they took the number off of the the site plans that had it as 45 but we're in agreement that if the way that it's calculated based on number professionals so Mr Bell's office or it might have been Mr Carly's office they took the doctor Plus One tech as two professionals and then the square footage of the building itself okay okay um Craig I just have a follow-up question so looking at the Town zoning code it looks like the parking regulations were last updated in 1999 um could that be a reason for the Divergence between what the code requires as to what it uh proposes or recommends how often is it it looked at the parking generation manual comes out rough every two years and and each addition since in my career which started a year after 1999 it's got the medical uh parking requirement has gone down so was retail and other things because uh you know parking Trends have changed in the last uh I don't know 20 plus years it's the magic of the internet I assume yeah thank you not over by JFK hospital I can tell you that much board have any other questions Mr per peroy Mr CH you just offered that the second floor the third floor uh you will just keep it only for the sleep study patients only that's correct how many rooms you have on the third floor three for sleep studies so basically after of 10 rooms seven would be usable and three would just strictly for the sleep studies at the night no so on the first the first floor there's five exam rooms on the second floor there's five exam rooms so there would be 10 exam room rooms which I'll say you're like your normal practice on the third floor there's three rooms for the sleep studies so those three rooms on the third floor the third floor would only be used for the sleep study practice it would not be opened at the same time as floors one and two at any given time daytime how many rooms would be in operation how many rooms maximum there there would be 10 however the testimony of Mr zuar that was here uh last time Dr zuar he tested ify that the scheduling of appointments is scheduled out 2 to 3 hours uh time slots and that that so that it leaves adequate room for 30 minutes to 45 minutes for each of those exam rooms to ventilate so it's not like you're having one exam room uh um unoccupied then there's somebody immediately going into it they're scheduled out so that they're stagger to properly ventilate given the contagious nature of most of the patients at the practice but at most 10 which will never happen but there's 10 exam rooms and at any given time two doctors would attend 10 patients one doctor and one Tech but there given the nature of this particular practice there will never be 10 patients at any given time within the building right because there's always got to be a room of ventilating but but even if that that's why I said the worst case even if there were 10 plus the four you you still have enough parking so no matter which way you you look at it all right Mr chair thank you Mr D Mr chairman chairman on the third floor you have three sleep study rooms what's the other space being used for I can pull out the architectural plans but it is um I believe there's an office up there for or I can recall the architect but let's let's pull out the plans I'd rather sir I'd rather recall you than have you whisper in the attorney's year um all right so does anybody have any other questions for Mr Parago all right so then we'll recall the architect okay thank you so we're going to swear you in again raise your right hand you s them to swear or for to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you guys I do and state your full name for the record my name's Dave Dugas last name du asz and I am a partner at Dugas Ander Architects and Mr Dugas you were previously sworn and do you understand your under oath still I do okay uh there was just a question from one of the board members what is located on the third floor where the sleep studies rooms are can you please statewood I'm going to hold you up before you answer so you're you were previously uh accepted your license are still current in good good standing okay we'll accept you thank you so there are are three sleep study rooms outside the sleep study room there's a control room where they're monitoring the people that are sleeping there is a PFT room which uh Dr zir can testify what that use is for there's a kitchen and an office um there's also additional bathroom space that's going to be used by the people that are possibly staying for the sleep study so um the first two floors have a generic uh handicap bathroom and these are more suited to uh showering and more of a personal touch so it takes a little more room and that's why um you go from five exam rooms down to three thank you any other questions for Mr dudash he here okay thank you very much thank you our next witness is John Dupont your right hand do you solemly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth hope you got I do and state your full name please name is John P Dupont Mr Dupont you were accepted uh earlier this evening nothing's changed in the that's correct thank you you may proceed and Mr dupon uh in connection with this application you were previously sworn um do you understand your cylinder oath I do okay and um I know that you did conclude your civil engineering testimony at the last hearing but there was a question by Mr Carly related to his latest report is the applicant willing to comply with comments within that report yes we uh we briefly touched on it in the last when we provided our original engineering testimony but yes we have no condition no concerns around the conditions we can meet all the conditions okay unless there's any questions from civil engineering I would like to move on to John Deon uh in the capacity as a professional planner Mr Carly thank you Mr chair now Mr Dupont said the uh the magic words he's reviewed our uh April 29 report and he'll revise the plans to address uh the comments that are offered thereup yes that's correct thank you Mr chair thank you Mr Carly okay then uh John uh speaking Your Capacity as a professional plan planner um I believe they qualified I believe you were qualified by by the board as a professional planner at the last hearing did at the beginning of when he came great thank you okay so um can you just describe to the board what you did in advance to your testimony this evening yeah sure will so as always we reviewed well we prepared the plans and then uh reviewed the master plan we visited the site we visited a neighborhood um we reviewed all the zoning information um and as I start the planing testimony I think we just want to reemphasize in the beginning that the medical use is a permitted use in his Zone I think you're all familiar with it and I have an exhibit that you were handed to that will we'll go to in a little bit but if you want me to at least I could start with the variances required please so this case has one D variance and three C variances so let's start with the D variance uh D variance is because we exceed the FL a ratio that's a D4 so the D4 we must demonstrate that the site will accommodate the problems associated with the larger floor area that hased in his Zone and you've heard a testimony by Dr zuar he stated that the increase in flor aor is is segregate and isolated is is segregate and isolate patients in his practice uh there's very highly contagious diseases in his practice so that's a critical part of his business uh while the increase in Flor area ratio in this instance uh does not equate to intensity of use or of traffic again you've heard a testimony that the third floor is for sleep study floor one and two although there's 10 rooms it'll be circulated and scheduled there has to be uh decontamination of the rooms the ventilation of the rooms so the first two floors won't be 10 people in in rooms and 10 people in Waiting rooms that's not the way this profession works so it will be isolated the third floor will never be used when the first and second floors are in use and vice versa and so it won't cause additional traffic to the site you heard our traffic engineer talk about the relatively limited impacts of traffic um to and from the site it's just going to be limited that 20 spaces is more than enough Park spaces on site too so that's the FL ratio the three VAR C variances one is height we are proposing three stories when two stories are permitted we're proposing 32.8 3 feet in height and 30 feet is permitted um we believe that's a minimum deviation and the permitted height and we could identify several buildings right on James Street in my exhibit that are three three stories and over 30 ft tall and I will do that in a second um this the second C variant front yard setback the existing is 32.2 ft required is 35 in a proposed condition we followed the the um existing Street pattern where at 32.3 made it a little better it's pretty close a little better than the existing and then the proposed parking we're propos proposing 20 spaces on site you've heard from Dr zuar that this number will far exceed his needs we've had the traffic information you've had a police report um so I think we've covered that pretty well as far as the positive criteria and for a C2 in our project we must show that we advance the municipal Landings law the purposes of and we do we advance purpose a uh that's to encourage Municipal action to guide the appropriate use and development of all lands in the state in a manner that will promote the public health safety morals and general welfare following covid now more than ever is important to provide medical facilities of this nature you've heard from Dr zuar that 70 to 75% of his clients are from Edison and that the property was previously used as a medical office and it's just up the street from JFK Hospital purpose G to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of commercial uses according to their respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens The Proposal is permitted in use in the zoning District where we're located will provide addition pulmonary care within the Edison Township and the surrounding areas and a close proximity to the hospital it makes a lot of sense where we're located for this project purpose ey to promote the desirable visual environmental uh through desire visual environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design the building and materials and design will blend with the existing buildings in the area along James Street purpose J to promote the conservation of valuable natural resources in the state to prevent the urban sprawl and degradation of the environment through improper use of land we're taking a building that is outdated and constructing a new facility to serve the community while providing a significant aesthetic Improvement to the area and purpose M to encourage coordination of various public and private procedures and activities shaping Land Development with a view of lessening the cost of such development and to move to efficient use of land repurposing the existing development site with a permitted use that meets the needs of the residents in a postco era is a very efficient use of land now before I go to N crer I may I'll go through the exibit I'm gonna take this microphone so I'm sure it one's familiar with the area and we've submitted an exhibit to the board in a previous meeting yes this was previously marched as exhibit A2 okay so just basically it's this is James Street with our property 106 James Street top of the page towards the middle it's a Google Earth shot and we just looked up and down the block I know you're all familiar but we have JFK hospital to the bottom of the page clearly over three stories clearly over 30 feet JFK Hospital owns numerous buildings across the street some medical buildings a church that is converted to a medical building couple bu office building build in the back all three plus stories over 35 ft in height there's at least four buildings to the top of the page from JFK hospital now as we go towards uh Monday Avenue so we get away from the specific Hospital location we come to our site which is a currently a medical facility older home then we have one two three four five properties on our side of the street of which three of them are medical uses already so three out of five are already medical uses on the lower part of the property along the same uh Jam Street portion of the property um of the street there's four sorry there's three medical uses there now again add the three two are over three sto or three stories or more over 35 ft what we're proposing with the height alone certainly not out of character the neighborhood it's going to fit right in matter of fact the the impressive thing is that we're taking an older building that really could use to be updated and we're building a brand new facility that is going to mesh perfectly with the area and it's going to serve it's a you know serve a perfect location to the hospital and support so I just wanted to make sure we go through that now if I can go to the negative criteria so in preparation of the testimony tonight in the application we did look at your last reexamination which was 2011 I know the Township's in the midst right now R doing it again but it is old M than 10 years old and some of the regulations may not be applicable and you've heard testimony from traffic that the traffic Tendencies have surely changed over the last 20 years especially since covid and then we have a pulmonologist which very specifically his business has changed so I think the township requirements um haven't been amended since 99 they're certainly outdated and for this specific project they're outdated and you've heard a specific testimony on that um since this since the 2011 re-exam The Zone um there's specific recommendations for the zone that are fronting James Street between the hospital and Monday Avenue should be changed from rbb to O to OS which was implemented by the town now the OS Zone your Township recommended the board approved it made Medical in this area and we're complying with that so we're doing exactly what the township is is asking for addition with respect to the proposed height it's worth noting that the three-story building directly adjacent to our property to the rear The Zo district is rbb that Z District allows three stories or two and a half stories and 35 ft directly behind our property so we're going to three stories 32 plus feet the zone immediately adjacent to us is is higher than that so I don't think there's going to be any negative impact at all there should be no impact at all to light air open space not to mention we're meeting the bulk requirements again medical officers permitted use in his Zone it's similar and compatible to older uses in the corridor their proposed height is simply 2.2 feet higher than permitted but we know surrounding properties are all exceeding that height parking you heard the testimony provided based on it standards we have and the experience of the pulmonologist and the specific use we will the parking does meet the requirements and the needs of this building public good the approval of this application will not cause a detriment to the public good the proposed use is rather a benefit to the public good both in terms of providing a much needed pulmonologist practice in Edison in close proximity to the hospital as well as to request variances for height and FL uh FL area ratio variances are directly necessitated by the need by been needed to ensure that the rooms and the facilities are properly ventilated as patients arise and again you've heard that the applicant has agreed to even restrict that third floor so that is completes my planning testimony if if anybody has any questions does board have any questions Mr Dupont Mr dup I'd like to go through your your visual so where the subject site is located is with for photo 9 so to the right of it is you have the temple Emanuel property that entire property is all uh owned by JFK and it goes back the JFK correct correct okay so then the the properties that are um adjacent between uh the subject site and Mundy um there are medical uses the medical uses that are there what are the height of those those on that side of the street are 30 feet or lower they don't exceed 30 feet okay so would you agree with me that this if we if so approved that we this would kind of change the character of that side of the street well I don't think the corridor perhaps that side of the street but that but the corridor clearly everything on the other side of the street is exceeding that he sorry I'm sorry be no Outburst the public will have a por have an opportunity to speak later but there will be no outbursts Mr tupan you may continue that was that was cuz say the three to the other side of the street are exceeding that height I wasn't talking about that side of the street understood I think you're you're accurate on what you say all right and where where did you state that the rbb zone is directly behind our property which is I believe the property is faced on Adam Street okay all right thank you does board have any other questions Mr D all right seeing none thank you thank you uh Mr chair that would conclude our affirmative presentation okay um so I would like before PRI going into the public I would like to uh discuss with the board the possibility there have been a number of parking demand numbers um that have been circulated um we've received the applicants traffic review report from Dynamic traffic um we have received two different uh police review letters what I would like to do is the board we do have within our budget for municipal Council I would like to um have an independent review of uh this site by traffic engineer um if the board would so agree we would need a motion on that Mr chairman Vice chairman yes I'd like to make a motion that the zoning board hire a traffic study engineer for this particular case [Music] second motion made by uh Vice chairman o' Gorman second by Mr sedada uh roll call please uh Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Patel yes on the motion Mr de yes on the motion Mr sedaha yes to the motion Vice chair Gorman yes on the motion and chairman Kum yes on the motion okay so I'm going to turn to my expert on this one Mr Carly Mr Bell what would your guesstimation be uh just in terms of of carrying this matter would guesstimation be on how long it would take an engineer to get us a traffic study for this site okay Madam Secretary how are we looking on dates uh three months out I had two months out uh hold on one second Mr chair what be possible to schedule it two months out and if your professional is not prepared then we can carry an additional month I would have no problem with that I just need to ask permission of my secretaries okay okay yeah we can offer September 17th we want to go that direction okay would that work for you Council and your team is that okay for you I'm sure yes okay all right great we're good okay all right so for anyone here present and anyone listening at home this case will be carried until September 17 2024 uh the meeting will be begin at 700 p.m. be held here in council chambers um if you have received a notice on this case you will not receive any further notice this will serve as your notice this case will be carried until Tuesday September 17 2024 begin at 7 pm at the in the council chambers um thank you so much thank you all right have a good evening so the board's going to take a five minute recess just to stretch our legs before the next case for e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e the board will return to session uh prior going to the next case we just have one announcement case uh seven on the agenda z45 2023 Wana Lopez at 237 Woodridge Avenue it has been carried to August 27th 20 24 if you are here for this case uh z45 2023 Wanda Lopez at 23237 Woodbridge Avenue it will not be heard this evening it will be heard on August 27th 2024 begin 7M here in council chambers uh all right Madame clerk next case on the agenda please case number z40 2023 Verizon Wireless at 2387 Woodbridge AV applicant is seeking bulk and use variances to propose uh to add antennas and triplexers to the existing transmission tower and add four cabinets and a 10 x 26 fenced area standards have not been met in accordance with the master plan this is not a permitted use in this Zone re yard setback required is 25 ft proposed is 21.2 feet height required is 30t proposed is 102.5 ft affected property is located in the GB Zone designated as block number 26 5.32 Lot number 17701 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order good evening Mr Ferrar good evening Mr chairman members of the board uh Frank Ferraro with the firm of Ferraro and Stamos here on behalf of the applicant Verizon Wireless um Mr chairman um as was indicated um M rero that this is an application for a use variance height variance uh we have a parking deviation we also asking for a waiver from the pipeline buffering ordinance and a rear yard setback variants Verizon Wireless um has um has unreliable service in this area uh of Edison around the subject site at 2387 Woodbridge Avenue uh we do have three Witnesses uh tonight our radio frequency engineer will review the need for this particular site at this location and at this particular uh height on the pole um the need here is twofold uh the engineer will review the the existing coverage in in the area and and the Gap that exists uh in addition he'll also address the capacity deficiency in the network um driven by the just the amount of uh data usage in this particular area uh the existing onair sites can can no longer keep up with it um so this additional site will help remedy that uh situation and provide reliable coverage to the neighborhood um we will have our professional engineer review the site plan and the site design and then finally our last witness is Timothy Kon who was our professional planner planner he will review the um the statutory criteria for the granting of the use variants the height variance and the underlying bulk um so um just in a nutshell um was explained this is an application to attach nine panel antennas to an existing Public Service Electric um and gas company electric transmission tower the existing Tower at the site is 178 ft tall um our antennas would be going below the wires on the tower so our antennas will reach a height of 102.5 ft so we do have a height variance but it's technical in nature since we won't be increasing the uh the height of the existing structure and then um uh we do have some ground equipment that the engineer can review so Mr chairman unless there's any initial comments or questions from the board members we would call our first witness board have anything to add any questions prior sing n you may proceed thank you thank you our first witness is Mr Paul Dugan who is our RF radio frequency engineer sir 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 did and state your full name for the record you could bring the microphone sure yes good evening uh Paul Dugan d g an and Mr Dugan if you just provide the board with a summary of your background and qualifications sure I have a Bachelor of Science in electrical engineering from Wier University also a MERS of electrical engineering from wner University a registered professional engineer in the state of New Jersey as well as a total of 10 jurisdictions and I have 40 years of experience in the design performance operation and maintenance of wireless telec communication systems and your license are current in good standing yes you may proceed thank you thank you uh Mr Dugan you have um you have undertaken a radio fre excuse me undertaken a radio frequency review of the subject area is that correct yes I have and the existing Verizon network is that correct yes okay Verizon Wireless is an FCC license provider of telecommunication Services yes they are okay um could you please just uh give an overview of what the need is for this particular site at this location sure um the objectives of the proposed uh Cod location on the existing PSC and G pole are to provide new and improved reliable coverage and broadband service to a southern section of the township of Edison the proposed collocation will provide new coverage to an area approximately one mile in all directions from the existing poll location which equates to over three over three square miles of much improved coverage this area includes sections of I95 New Jersey Turnpike Route 1 route 514 Woodbridge Avenue mville Road old Post Road and the enjoining roads in the community the facility will better serve the neighborhoods and businesses in the area the facility will also provide capacity offloading to adjacent facilities in ad joining municipalities and substantially improve INB building coverage capacity and data throughput speeds which are now necessary more than ever for law enforcement First Responders Public Safety working from home virtual learning tella Health Online worship service Services zoom and virtual meetings and many other escalated demands on the need for prudent Wireless facilities were necessary and feasible to serve the community utiliz it in this case an existing structure okay and have you performed um have you prepared I should say radio frequency exhibits demonstrating the need for this additional site yes I exib performed under my supervision from Verizon Wireless okay and uh would you like to introduce those exhibits to the board in public sure grab this um can he take the microphone with him okay yes please it's like a library just return it back at the end of the night September so Mr Dugan as you as you go through the um exhibit packet I'm just going to ask that you describe each sheet and then Mark it as A1 A2 okay I don't have a pen I will L your mine similar rules microphone Mr Ferraro were any of these a part of the submission there [Music] are RF exhibits that were submitted as part of the ex exhib uh as part of the application that the board has in their packet so they're identical to what's there are additional exhibits in this so if there are those that have already been provided he can just them and then any additional but our board secretary will need 8 and half by I guess 11 14 okay um yeah need to submit those I do have copies of the additional ones that would be perfect if you want to if you just want to Mark the whole packet we can do that too okay easier unless you want to do a page by Page might be e to go Page by Page all right um so just so the board knows what we did you have the um the RF information in your packet we thought it might be best to also bring the same information in a in a different form so instead of having the existing coverage and the proposed coverage on one sheet where you can't see the parameters of the uh new coverage what Mr Dugan's done in these exhibits is you'll see the existing coverage as it exists today and then you'll see the proposed coverage and you can see better how much coverage we're getting because we thought it was a little confusing using in the initial exhibit so that's the reasoning behind it so Mr Dugan the first um exhibit you're about to show is not in the board's packet it's just a a road map is that correct yes this is dorm street atlet map that I prepared which shows the uh location it identifies the location of the existing psse and G pole and it has two concentric circles a half a mile and one mile in radius simply placed on the map as a distance reference and let's mark this as A1 since it's not in the board's packet so the the rest of the exhibits that Mr Dugan's going to show are in this handout so councelor would you have any objections to me marking this packet as A2 and giving it to the board members packet is going to be marked as A2 okay this way so okay okay thank you so Mr Dugan starting with the first exhibit can you please identify the uh title of this sheet sure should I should I mark it A2 um all the exhibits you're about to um introduce are in the packet that has been marked as A2 so let's just identify this will be A2 and if you can give the name of the uh of the M sure uh this first just so you also know you also have a page number on the bottom you can say to it's page three do you have a well we'll mark this as A2 page three A2 page three correct okay the first propagation modeling exhibit shows existing coverage from the existing facilities that are serving the area um this Verizon operates in several different frequency bands the lower the frequency band which 700 megahertz is the lowest the signals travel the farthest as you go up in frequency um signals just simply fall off and don't travel as far so it at 700 existing coverage is not all that bad you can see it's uh the the yellow is meets their design uh threshold but there are some Gap areas to the North or Northeast of the proposed site location the next exhibit shows the additional coverage afforded by the proposed site subject to this application with the addition of this particular site which is known as Edison 8 so this shows how this will fill in some of those Gap areas that existed to the north and Northeast of the site and also provide sufficient overlap with adjacent sites and as we'll show you a little further how this will also offload traffic from from the adjacent sites okay and that is A2 page four the next next prop exhibit is uh existing coverage at what's known as 2100 megahertz also known as AWS band um from the existing sites without the addition of Edison 8 but again the next next uh exibit will show you how the uh in introduction of this site will provide that fill in to fill in that Tire area that's not in green and this is A2 page five this uh site shows the additional coverage afforded by the Edison 8 at 2100 megahertz as you can see the propagation doesn't uh propagate as far as it did in the lower band it still fills in enough to to fill that gap for that we're going to mark this one's going to be marked as A3 because this is an additional uh exhibit to the packet A3 yeah so we don't have this in this packet just so you know I'm sorry so this particular exhibit is not in this correct so I'm going to mark this as A3 hey um and Mr du before you go to the next exhibit can you just identify the uh signal strength that's shown on this particular exhibit a A3 uh 85 is the design criteria to provide a uh good good inbu building uh INB building uh coverage and data throughput speeds okay and the um the exhibit that the board has um as A2 page seven that shows the same coverage but but at a neg 100 level I believe so yeah um so it's showing more coverage than the ne 85 correct yes okay okay this exhibit shows existing coverage afforded at 1900 megahertz uh which is a little lower than the last set but as you can see there there are Gap areas uh in proximity of the site that introducing the Edison 8 collocation on existing structure will'll fill those areas fill those Gap areas okay and that is A2 page8 A2 page8 this exhibit shows the additional coverage afforded by the proposed site subject to this application on the existing structure at 1900 megahertz again this will fill in most of those Gap areas uh close to the site okay and this is going to be marked as A4 because this is not in the board's packet this is the coverage shown at a level of neg5 correct yes which is an INB building level of coverage yes um the propagation map shown in the board's packet which is A2 page 10 shows the 1900 proposed coverage at a neg 100 level correct I believe that's the case yes okay could you describe the difference between neg 85 and neg 100 NE neg 85 is a stronger signal um higher threshold um it provides if you're at an 85 you could provide much better INB building coverage much better data throughput speeds to serve your customers and is neg 100 more of an street level of service more or less yeah okay so we're showing both levels of coverage the ultimate objective for Verizon here is to provide INB building coverage is that correct yes yes also I wanted to point out that when I do my site visit I canvas the area looking for any other existing tall structures that could could be considered for collocation there are no existing uh Towers in the area other than other utility poles like this one uh also I do data throughput speed checks throughout the neighborhoods to validate the the need for uh for better coverage and it's clearly um clearly the data throughput speeds are poor throughout these neighborhoods which which really a need demonstrates a need for a new facility at this location um and have you prepared um capacity charts to demonstrate uh the capacity deficiency in the area yes I have two capacity charts which are for sectors that are pointing towards the proposed facility location to demonstrate how the actual uh usage is exceeding capacity here is one of the one of the other sites that's pointing in the direction of Edis and 8 and as you can see over a year's time this the this is constantly ceeding capacity the red line is the uh the capacity level that the site can handle and the green is the actual usage throughout a a year's time what happens is when you when you exceed the capacity you either denied service or performance of the site just degrades data throughput speeds just drops substantially so this demonstrates the need to offload uh traffic from these other adjacent sectors and what will happen when the new sector when the new site is introduced it'll absorb usage from traffic in the area and the these blue the actual usage will actually drop so it'll be within capacity limits um and much better serve the area okay and Mr Dugan that's A2 page page 12 in the board's packet and then the final exhibit I believe okay similarly this is another sector that's pointing in the direction of Edison 8 and as you can see the the usage the capacity line is up here this is over a year's time and the usage just actual usage just climbed to the point of exceeding capacity earlier this first quarter of this year and that's uh A2 page 13 so so that um demonstrates the need for the site in terms of providing sufficient signal to the users that are in the Edison Township and also providing a capacity offload to existing uh sites that are currently serving Edison Township um could you just flip back to either the 1900 uh megahertz uh existing coverage map that's this one okay perfect so the capacity charts that we just showed maybe we can put some context to it um which two sites existing sites that's shown on this map are exhausted or Beyond capacity your exhibits uh Your Capacity exhibits show Edison 7 and Edison 4 Edison gamma Mr Dugan I'm sorry if you can just bring the microphone back up it looks like uh we're showing Edison 4 gamma which is this site to the South and second one Edison 7 is the other capacity chart seven what sector that's beta yeah so Edison 7 beta is directed to the southeast and is is overloaded it's at capacity this site Edison 8 will absorb uh quite a bit of that traffic so that Edison 7 will not will not be overloaded once this site is introduced question so as noted in my opening is it possible that the exhibits can show coverage but in fact there is unreliable service in that area because of the capacity demands yeah you need to have sufficient signal and you have to have enough channels to be able to serve your V subscriber base so you could show coverage but if you don't have enough capacity you're not going to be able to serve all your customers in those areas effectively okay and is that because of the numerous ways that people utilize their phones these days instead of just making phone calls oh yeah the um the propagation exhibits that you prepared uh were they prepared at the proposed height of 10 uh 102 feet 102 and a half fet um I know it was around 100 I don't know the exact number okay is that uh is that the minimum height necessary in your opinion to uh to provide service into this area yes it is uh to it would provide enough capacity relief and new coverage to effectively provide the services it's needed in this area at this time okay and just with respect to the site selection um correct me if I'm wrong but you indicated that you look in the area to identify collocation or other existing structures yes I did I canvas the area uh looking for other collocation opportunities and as I said there are no no other uh telec towers that I've I've identified but there are other utility poles in the area okay and this particular site is it centrally located in the uh the area of need it is is that important from a radio frequency perspective oh very and could you just expand on that sure you don't want to be too close to existing structure existing Verizon sites and provide too much overlap you want to be in the heart of the area you're trying to serve effectively um lastly is there anything that could be done at the existing onair sites to fill this uh this area of unreliable service no those surrounding sites have been optimized they they've been optimized the performance teams optimize all facilities to best serve the community so in your professional opinion and of your years of experience you believe this additional site is necessary to address this uh area of deficient service it is yes um Mr Dugan have you also um done a FCC RF emissions analysis of the proposed site yes I did and in fact you prepared the report that was submitted to the board dated November 3rd 2023 entitled RF safety FCC compliance a proposed Communications facility is that correct that's correct um councilor do I have to mark this it was in the board's packet it's I'll mark it it's easy enough A5 will be the uh RF missions report uh Mr Dugan could you please review the analysis and conclusion contained in this report sure I performed an evaluation of the proposed facility subject to this application to provide a determination and certification if this site complies with the FCC exposure limits and guidelines for the health safety and Welfare of the public the FCC say sets a national standard for compliance with electromagnetic field safety and with all upper limit parameters this site at any any ground level location in proximity to this facility will be at or below 1% of the federal safety standard and will this facility if approved uh cause any interference with existing Public Safety Communications or other electronic equipment it will not okay thank you uh Mr chairman I have no further direct questions Mr Dugan I would open it to the board does board have any questions for Mr Dugan Mr chairman Vice chairman so the the existing Height's going to remain the same that is correct thank you any other questions see none thank you very much thank you um Mr chairman that would bring us to our next witness Miss Connelly who's our professional engineer raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth so help you God yes and please State your full name for the record Colleen Connelly Co n n o l l y and Miss Connelly if you could just give the board a summary of your background and qualifications yes I have a bachelor's of engineering and civil engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology and I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey I've testified um among numerous boards throughout the state um and I have testified before this board before and your license are current in good standing yes it is great we'll accept you may proceed thank you thank you Miss Connelly the uh plans that you're about to present either prepared by you or under your supervision is that correct yes that's correct um could you please just go over the existing conditions and then uh review with the board uh the proposed improvements certainly and uh we can maybe start by just giving the last revision date on the plans yes um I'm referring to plans that were produced by my office the last revision date was 111 1323 okay and uh we'll mark the plans collectively as A6 if you can just refer to the sheet number that you're reviewing that would be helpful okay first I'm just going to look at sheet Z3 so this property is um the Public Service Electric and Gas Company property this is referred to as pole 3 over 10-2 it's an electric transmission pole for part of the psng matachin Trenton RightWay transmission line um on this property there is an existing monopole style transmission tower which is 178 feet tall and there's also an existing lattice style uh transmission tower on the same property the property is encompassed in the 100t uh psng RightWay um and it is located at the intersection of gurly Road and Woodbridge Avenue uh this is in the g-b uh General business Zone and I'll go into um what we're proposing now I'm going to refer to an elevation VI so I'm looking at sheet Z5 which is the elevation detail you can see that this shows the existing Tower it is 178 ft tall there will be no increase in the height of the tower itself we're proposing nine panel antennas with six triplexers and one ovp on a triangular placed platform which will be attached to this existing tower that will be at a maximum height of to the antenna of 102.5 ft there will be 13 cables that will be routed from this antenna the 102 ft down to a compound that will be placed at grade just going to switch one sheet to uh go over what's on the ground so now I'm referring to sheet Z4 which is the equipment layout you can see that we are proposing a compound a fenced compound that compound compound is 10 ft by 26 ft it's a fenced compound we have an 8T High chain link fence which will have green privacy slots for screening within that compound there will be two proposed cabinets and room for f two future cabinets as well as an electric panel an automatic transfer switch with a generator plug a 200 amp uh disconnect and meter a telephone enclosure as well as some additional equipment of six triplexers one ovp and six rr's those will be placed on the equipment frame uh that is shown next to the cabinets there will be an ice Bridge that'll be 10 ft high that will go from the compound over to the monopole or over to the the mono tower for transmission tower uh to have the cables go up to the an antennas also proposing to GPS units um the facility will require electric and Fiber service that will come from an existing utility poll that's on the site and be routed underground to the compound itself access to the site uh let me go back to the overall site plan hold on one second now referring back to sheet Z3 the overall site plan so access to the site will be via an existing depressed curb um which is off of Woodbridge Avenue I can't possibly be that there will be no additional parking or driveways proposed as part of this uh application um in addition there will not be a permanent uh backup emergency power generator proposed that's because pscg will not allow us to put that within the right of way they will however allow us to put in a generator plug that will allow in the case of an emergency for Verizon to bring a rollup generator and plug it in to service the site and um just so far as uh some of the comments there is um this facility will be remotely monitored on a 247 basis is that correct yes regarding security um or actually do you want me to just run through the comments or some of the key comment things however you prefer so I if we could go through report by report so which one are you which one are you questioning from uh the DNR report we we were starting at section two point all right Mr Carly step up to the plate through our uh February 28 2024 first review report uh section two starts the uh the commentary about the site plan from us so I think it's the intent to go through that report uh for the board am I correct correct okay thank you thank you yes there was a question regarding um security so the site will not have any cameras associated with it it will however be remotely monitored um that's monitored 247 uh and the fence will be locked for security purposes um there was a question question regarding screening um the compound will have an 8ft tall fence with security slots that will cover the or be taller than any of the cabinets that are proposed it will also be higher than any of the equipment that will be on the rack uh what will extend above that fencing will be the cable Bridge which is what takes the cables from the compound over and also the GPS units will extend above uh that would be more like fence post sticking up um within the compound and that's where the GPS units are attached to uh the plans have been sent to the fire fire department and also to the police uh they did not have any comments um regarding lighting there will be no lighting within the compound uh no security lighting there will also be no Lighting on the tower itself that's not required for by FIA um Landscaping is not allowed by psng with in their transmission RightWay uh that's as per the Board of Public Utilities so we are asking for a waiver regarding Landscaping um and tree replacement ordinance uh there will there is no really no landscaping or trees on this site and as such none will be cut down for this installation a passing structural analysis for the tower will be supplied to the building department um as this goes to building permit and just to discuss a little bit about access and monitoring uh the site will be accessed by technicians approximately once per month um in the event that there is anything that has to be maintained um or taken care of at the site again it's monitored 24/7 so they will know that there's an issue and then dispatch a a technician to the site uh that technician will access via um Woodbridge Avenue there is a depressed curb and they would be parking within the site itself uh we are not calling for an additional parking space uh this is a pass use unmanned um and really has no traditional sight plan um issues um there will be limited traffic just one technician a month we do not require any water or Sewer Service uh no odor smoke glare or dust associated with it uh noise levels will be be within uh ordinance requirements um no need for municipal services will comply with the building codes and the eiaa standards as well as the nesc standards which are required for electrical transmission lines uh no garbage or refu will be generated there are no Wetlands on the site and no flood planes and no signage is required with the exception of the f CC required uh warning signs um no easements or covenants are in place that will restrict the usage and there are no real drainage impacts uh storm water management will be complied with uh the overall disturbance will be less than 5,000 ft so we will get an exemption from soil erosion the soil erosion District um and I believe that that that covers believe that covers the the letter Mr Carley I think uh Miss Connell we uh touch on those points uh from my review that uh request the testimony uh there are some uh uh administrative items in uh section nine of my report that the we look for the applicant to address if the board looks upon the application favorably thank you yes and Verizon will comply with those the items that you had on the administrative side there all right Mr Bell uh yeah thank you Mr chair I believe uh testimony was provided pretty much for everything that we had asked for as well already um I just wanted to confirm that uh a technician when they would pull up on site there would be no designated parking space they would just pull up and park on the site through the existing access driveway exactly within the grass area Okay and then again just to confirm um for our item 11g uh our office recommended uh Wireless telecommunication fa to be equipped with emergency generators you testified that a permanent one is not allowed by PSG but I believe you said a rollup would be provided yes um they would let us put in a generator plug which would allow them to bring a generator a temporary generator on site thank you very much that's all I have thank you chairman thank you Mr does the board have any um there's one uh one item that I just want to make sure that we discuss is regarding a waiver of the gra gas transmission lines um there is there are two transmission lines that are on the site um what we will have is an operator from that transmission line on site when any uh any excavation any ground disturbance is happening that will be hand dug just to make sure we're in compliance with uh the gas company requirements thank you thank you does the board have any questions for Miss Conley see none Thank you very much thank you uh Mr chairman that brings us to our Final witness uh Tim K who is our professional planner I don't know raise your right hand do you saw me swear or affm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you guys I do and please State your full name for the record Timothy M Kon k r o n k and Mr cron if you could just give the board a summary of your background and qualifications yes I have a Bachelor of Science from the University of Massachusetts I have 33 years of land use experience predominantly in New Jersey I am a New Jersey licensed professional planner and an aicp certified planner and my license is intact and I have been accepted by this board on numerous occasion great so we'll accept you again thank you Mr chair uh Mr Croc um you have per performed a planning analysis of the subject application is that correct yes I have could you please start by reviewing some of the materials that you looked at in preparation for your testimonies tonight uh yes I uh I reviewed the application I reviewed the plans I reviewed the professional reports um reviewed the municipal ordinance uh Municipal master plan uh visited the site on several occasions and including including March 17th uh when I took photographs for the purpose of preparing a visual analysis package that was submitted to the board okay and is is this visual analysis for Edison 8 dated April 11th 2024 yes is this a copy of that visual analysis report yes it is the date the April 11th was the date it was submitted the photos were completed on March 17th okay and this is in the board's packet I'll just mark it as as correct okay yes okay um based upon your due diligence could you please uh share your opinion as to whether the applicant has meant the statutary requirements for a D1 use variance as well as the ancillary ancillary variances in the applic certainly I will as you mentioned uh the subject application does require a D1 use variance as the subject property is located in the GB Zone General business district and uh Wireless out Communications are not permitted in that zone we also do require relief under a D6 deviation a maximum height permitted in this zone is 30 ft um the proposed antennas will be 102.5 ft to the top of the antennas um but the the existing Tower itself is 178 ft so will be nowhere nowhere near the top of it uh we also do require a bulk variance deviation for rear yard setback uh the uh Zone does require a 25t rear yard setback it's actually proposing 21.2 but that's not on the ground that is actually to the antennas at the 2.5 foot elevation um subject property uh is uh about a third of an acre 14,132 square feet um the lot is undeveloped other than the two existing trans pscg transmission towers on site uh as the engineer mentioned one's the newer monopole type structure and the other is the older lattice uh Tower uh this uh these two towers are in a 100 foot wide psng RightWay that encompasses the entire lot uh the proposal by Verizon Wireless is for um the nine antennas to be located at that uh 99.5 Foot Center Line with a 102.5 foot maximum height uh equipment compound at the base 10 ft by 26 ft uh enclosed with the 8T High uh chain link fence uh in evaluating the uh Wireless telec telecommunications use in a d variant um the New Jersey Supreme Court has in um instructed us to use the four-step seek analysis in evaluating this type of application um as the board is aware first you identify the public interest at stake second determine what detrimental effects could ensue from the grant of the variant third impos reasonable conditions to help amarate the negative impacts and fourth for perform the actual balancing test between the positive and negative aspects of its application uh Verizon Wireless is a licensed FCC provider of Wireless telecommunications services in this portion of uh middle sex County and the New Jersey Supreme Court also appin that the fact that the carrier does possess the requisite SEC license provide services in this area that the uh the carrier does promote the general welfare through enhanced telecommunication services but what we need to do in the evaluation of each application is determine the particular suitability of the application or or the location uh in this case a large portion of the suitability comes down to the radio frequency testimony that you heard from Mr Dugan uh the proposed site is centrally located in the coverage deficiency area that Verizon Wireless is experiencing both in coverage and capacity by uh Lo being centrally located they are able to make um their handoff to the surrounding sites without being too close to any of the existing sites in the area um we are also proposing an installation that's nowhere near the top of the tower we have a maximum height of 102.5 ft and that's the maximum the it's the maximum height that Verizon needs so we're not going any higher than than is required to provide the coverage uh to this area uh the site is particularly suited from the fact that we are locating these antennas on an existing structure although we are not in a zone that permits this use uh certainly uh the second best planning alternative to being in a permitted location would to be use any type of existing existing structure and of course uh PSG Towers uh as board is aware you know are high and uh we can get the height that's required for the radio frequency Engineers to meet their coverage objectives uh the subject lot is uh certainly a utility use as I mentioned the the lot has nothing no development on site other than to existing utility uses uh we are in a utility uh Corridor uh and we are located in 100 foot wide pscg right away so the utility use that we are proposing has clearly been established in this location and that has also been confirmed by your Municipal master plan that recognized the utility use of this area uh ALS also we are located in the GB General business Zone which is a non-residential Zone certainly there are residents in the area but it's um especially long Wood Bridge avue predominantly a a commercial zone so for those reasons I do believe that this site is particularly suited and combined with the special reasons of the promotion of general welfare of to enhanced telecommunication Services I do believe that this application meets the statutory criteria required for the grant of the uh D1 uh use variants uh with regard to the second step of the seek analysis um where we identify the uh detrimental effects that could ensue from this application um this is a benign commercial use this is use that has none of the traditional negative impacts associated with Land Development there is no noise no glare no no odor no vibration no noxious characteristics this is an unman facility and it'll be visited approximately once a month by a technician who will spend a couple hours on the site and leave uh certainly the existing PSC curb cut in driveway area uh is sufficient for a small uh SUV or van type vehicle to pull off Wood Bridge Avenue and park there uh to perform their Diagnostics this application will no use uh no impact on Utilities in the area the only things that Verizon will require is electric uh service and Fiber service and those will be brought in um by Verizon Wireless there is no impact on any Municipal Utilities or Services as Mr Dugan testified too the site will be in complete compliance with all FCC uh requirements for the emissions of radio energy um in terms of negative impact associated with these types of applications a large portion of that comes down to the visibility of these installations uh and that is the reason that we did submit the visual analysis package which is now marked it as A7 um Mr chairman I have I have those same exhibits on boards if you would like to run if you'd like me to run through the exhibits or oh one Mr chairman um perhaps you can do an overview of them Mr CR first because the board has them in front of them yes that's why I was asking you wanted me to let's do that just uh if you can give your opinion uh based upon the photo simulations that you took in uh A7 the report A7 I think we don't need the boards for now okay um w't we uh if you can give your opinion on what the aesthetic impact if any is well certainly is uh as the board can see as they Le through that visual analys package that was submitted um there was a series of photographs that were taken in the surrounding environs of uh view sheds represent uh represented in all directions and certainly as you can see we have a a large transmission tower uh and a monopole structure another lattice one right next to it we have we have a utility Corridor with a lot of tall structures and uh in those photographs a lot of times it's even hard to find those uh you know small antennas at the 102 foot elevation so I certainly do not believe that the uh the visibility um of this application uh would have any detrimental effect on the uh on the surrounding areas um under the third step of the SEC balancing test is for the board to impose any reasonable conditions to help amarate the negative impacts of the application and then we move on to the fourth step of the analysis and in that one we are balancing the promotion of the general welfare uh through enhanced telecommunication services against the negative impacts primarily of visual nature and determine on balance whether the board can grant the variance uh without a substantial detriment to the public good and I certainly do believe that the visibility um in the negative impact here does not rise to the level of a substantial detriment and the board certainly can um approve this application I do believe the board can grant the variance without a substantial impairment to the Zone plan or zoning ordinance uh we are in a utility Corridor the lot is entirely uh utility with two other structures I do not believe there'll be any other future development on this lot since it's uh all in the psng right away and don't believe there could be any other development believe it's a very appropriate location and as I mentioned the master plan actually uh identifies this as a public utility use so I do believe that uh there would not be any impairment to the Zone plan or zoning ordinance thank you Mr kro U thank you Mr chairman uh questions Mr kro regarding his testimony or exhibits does the board have any questions Mr CR mrman Mr D M bring microphone planning report and the dnr's report as well correct correct and you'll comply with uh everything that's included in there correct yes correct thank you thank you any other questions right see none thank you very much thank you Mr chairman that concludes our direct case okay all right so we'll now go out to the public anyone within 200 feet of subject site wanting to be heard if you within 200 feet you've received a notice via certified mail seeing none we'll go outside 200 feet seeing none can I get a motion to close the public portion motion to close public portion second motion made by Vice chairman ogorman seconded by Mr sedada signifi by saying I oose nay the eyes have it public portion is now closed uh Mr far if you have any summation uh Mr chairman uh I'm going to reserve and just uh rely on the expert testimony of my Witnesses thank you thank you very much so we'll now go to the board for decision Mr chairman Mr D I'll make a motion to I'll make a motion to approve the application the app applicant has met all the negative and positive criteria the the application is basically the uh erecting the nine panel antenna and existing telecommunication Tower the visibility will have very minimal impact aesthetic impact on the neighborhood um this motion will also incover all of the testimony of the applicant attorney planners engineers and the board and AppLink will uh um satisfy the Mr bignells and dnr's Report dated February 20th 2024 second motion made by Mr dve second by Vice chairman Gman roll call please Mr Baron yes on the motion Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Patel yes on the motion Mr de yes on the motion Mr sadaha yes on the motion M CH Gorman yes on a motion and chairman Kumba yes on the motion unanimous approval congratulations thank you thank you very much uh very much for your time appreciate it thank you so much to I think professional it's August 27 move to August 27 number seven is August 27 over to August 27th Madam Secretary next case on the agenda please case number z19 2021 rout 27 Edison chicken llc at 20006 US Route 27 applicant is seeking preliminary and final site plan approval along with use and bulk variances for the existing building to include a drive-thru along with parking and various sign variances standards have not been met in accordance with the master plan lot coverage required is 75% proposed is 8079 per. parking spaces required are 35 proposed are 31 with two EV spots affected property is located in the GB Zone designated as block number 1,131 Lot number 2 3.13 on the Edison Township tax map all noticing paperwork is in order good evening Mr lsky good evening Mr chairman how are you I'm well I'm well just to note so you know we usually go till about 10:30 but at least this way we get the train moving down the track and see where we're at we're going to go as fast as we can to get through our application thank you Mr chairman members of the board uh very briefly U this is an application to renovate the former Pizza Hut location which is located right on 27 nearly across the street from the municipal complex um with me this evening to discuss this application um is u a representative of the applicant I also have the engineer the architect traffic and planner so there's a total of five uh five people that we'll be presenting um I would also mention that we have met with the technical Advisory Board several times and we've revised the plans to accommodate what we believe is all of those uh suggestions and recommendations uh in fact we believe and will'll provide the testimony that we no longer require that parking variance that was originally intended as a result of the reduction in the seating capacity and square footage of the restaurant seating area by expanding the area of the kitchen to accommodate some of the concerns of the planner um but uh that aside the first witness I'm going to U call is uh Mr Don sir raise your right hand you Sol me swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you got yes I do you got to pull the microphone in close and can you please State your full name bahadar derani thank you and Mr danani can you um describe your affiliation with the applicant Route 27 Edison chicken LLC I'm the owner operator of that proposed restaurant yes and is the there a franchise that you intend to operate at that location yes that's correct and what's the name of the franchise popey's Louisiana Kitchen and um do you have familiarity with operating and uh experience with other Popeyes yes certainly I've been doing this for about 16 years uh in several States and I currently own U about a dozen restaurants popey's restaurants so um your testimony this evening and the reason that I called you first was to address a few of the use and operational questions that were raised by some of the board professionals so I'm just going to um go through a couple of those areas with you um can you uh describe the hours of operation U they will be typical to our other restaurant uh 10:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. and that's seven days a week uh correct we usually try to close early on Sundays and uh there was a question about uh how Del delivery services such as Uber Eats door Dash or or other delivery services um will use the facility provide services is that correct can you describe based on our experience with our other restaurants in New Jersey uh most of these drivers prefer to just come into the parking lot park and go in and pick up the food uh because on those apps there is something where the driver has to say I'm here is when the food starts getting prepared so they prefer to park and go inside but there's a small percentage that also sometimes joins the drive-thru to do that but usually they prefer to park and go inside thank you and then with respect to food deliveries and and product deliveries uh paper products that type of thing can you describe what types of vehicles are used how often in the hours so these are large scale delivery operators and they have flexible Vehicles as for needs because they deliver in New York other urban areas and Suburban areas so as per my conversation with the representative of the vendor uh they were very flexible they're local and uh they said they could do off peak hours they could do at times where the time the town would permit us and uh if needed they could send smaller trucks forward to and more frequency could be added as well but that's all dependent on the volume and how the town per and then with respect with respect to Refuge garbage and recycling collections how often when where that type of uh operation it's a private uh refuge collector and uh after having a conversation with him that too uh the frequency can be increased to as much as four times a week uh recycling to twice a week Thrice a week and uh the timings can be determined by us we can request uh for uh non- peak hours so you know before business hours if needed or however the town directs us and uh last question operationally there was some questions raised because of course Fried Chicken is being cooked here uh what is the process for waste oil and um for cooking oil deliveries and and the process there to make sure it doesn't find its way into the sewer right so Al as restaurant operators we're very careful about not letting it enter the drainage system uh and we have tanks uh that are filled automatically we dispose of used grease cooking oil into that tank which is then emptied out uh by a vendor who comes on site and they the oil basically never sees the day of light it goes straight from our fryer into that containers and from that container it gets pulled out by the vendor uh so there's no uh you know ejecting any of that oil into the drainage or any of that I have nothing further for this this Mr chairman thank you very much um so with regard how many uh employees do you envision on site per shift that's a good question about 12 okay eight uh on off peak hours and 12 so eight to 12 okay all right thank you um and then with regards to delivery you said off peak hours given that there is um a residential neighborhood to the south of the site I don't want to disrupt that um at all cost so would you agree to um deliveries between say 7:00 a.m. and 10: a.m. yes we okay um and then if so approved with regard to Refuge pickup would you agree to the same condition between 7: a.m. okay so it be between 7:00 a.m. and 10. am okay um and then the number of seats inside the yeah the architect will test the number's the number is 80 okay answer your question okay all right all right and then do you have it from your previous experience um they have a percentage of how many um customers are eating in versus how many are going through the drive-thru uh during Co the numbers were different after co uh it's a little different but we're uh more of a dinin business now uh we're at 55 45 55 dining in 45 in the Drive-Thru okay very heavily drive-thru Reliant a couple years ago but not so much okay now okay all right thank you um does the board have any more qu any any other questions for the applicant seeing none thank you very much uh next WI engineer front raise your right hand you solemly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing both truth to help you God I do and please State your full name for the record Brent papy thanks Mr papy if you could just please give the board a brief summary of your qualifications and background yes I have a Bachelor of Science and civil engineering from Ruckers College of Engineering I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey I'm also a certified Municipal engineer uh in the state of New Jersey I've been practicing for over 25 years I've I've appeared before this board as well as Woodbridge matachin New Brunswick uh many other boards and I also served as the uh planning board engineer in Spring heits for five years and your license are current in good standing yes all right so we'll accept you thank you thank you Mr chairman um Mr papy uh were you engaged to prepare the site plan for the applicant yes I was and I'm gonna let you describe the okay current conditions and sure and I believe you we may may need to Mark the drawing that you've provided yes the handouts um I have a color rendering of the site it's color rendering of the site plan um that um was submitted to the to the uh board with the application so that'll be marked A1 and I also have a um before you mark it the site plan was already submitted previously right and this is just a coloriz is colored color so we're going to mark that as A1 okay I also have an um an aerial map of the site showing the site um existing conditions surrounding so that might be A2 okay the subject property as mentioned is located at the address 202 State Highway Route 27 it includes Lots 23- A2 24b 24c and 25 within block 1131 the total area of the site is 3,810 square ft 707 Acres the property's rectangular shape aped uh midblock lot um with a with 237 linear feet of Frontage along Route 27 which is also state New Jersey State Highway the site is presently developed as a Pizza Hut restaurant uh with a vestibule facing the highway and a pickup window at the rear uh of the building there's one point of vehicle access along Route 27 and there's an existing concrete dumpster pad at the rear left corner of the lot majority site is covered by pavement there's currently 50 parking spaces on site and there's also an existing pylon sign at the property Frontage which faces toward Route 27 the aerial map that I had handed out depicts the approximate property boundary in yellow uh as well as the current site conditions and the surrounding uh buildings the site's located in the g-b general business zoning District along Route 27 which has four vehicle Lanes two in each Direction North and South there's a PNC Bank bordering the lot to the Northeast which also has a driveway entrance along Route 27 that's just beyond the subject property there's also a one-story apartment building bordering the property to the Southwest with residences backing to the South uh across the street there are professional offices as well as the Edison fire department from the image you could see um the extent of pavement you could also see the roof areas on the site and you can see the concrete pad where the dumpsters are currently located at the back of the site it's also important to note on the U aerial image the location of the existing parking spaces facing the rear of the lot which where there's an existing retaining wall and with a board onboard fence at top that wall the wall and fence are on the subject property and they're set back approximately 1.5 ft from the rear property line uh the color rendering that was submitted also as a handout uh shows the um what the applicant's proposing which is a renovation of the existing restaurant uh with a footprint area of 3538 Square ft to a pye's restaurant with a drive-thru window at the rear the proposed 10-ft wide drive-thru Lane at the rear is at the rear of the building just ahead of where the existing pickup window once was there's also a pre menu board at the drive-thru entrance with within the curved Island and a full menu board at the rear of the restaurant which provides enough space for eight cued uh Vehicles before the pickup window uh there's additional part uh three more vehicle spaces between the menu board and the pickup window so there's a total of 11 cute spaces there's also a separate 10-ft wide Escape Lane which runs um directly alongside the drive-thru Lane um and it's for exiting whenever needed in case of a uh and not wanting to wait to the drive-thru the applicant has already obtained an NJ do letter of no interest which identifies the exit Drive will be a right out only uh they have recently obtained a separate NJ do permit uh for the replacement of the concrete driveway apron and sidewalks along the highway Frontage which was a request of the uh board Professionals in our Tech meetings a copy of those dot permits uh and documents have been submitted to the to the board in the with the application following our technical review meetings with the town it was recommended the applicant create a landscape buffer uh that's between the residences at the rear of the property this area is shown in light blue on the color rendering it's 15t wide and consist of riverstones with a mix of shade trees and shrubs right up against that existing retaining wall um the tradeoff for providing this landscape buffer was the um loss of 19 existing parts parking spaces the site plan depicts uh 31 proposed parking spaces throughout the site two of which are Ada accessible and there are two electric vehicle um kiosks one is directly near the Ada and there's another one near the curbed Island it might be a little hard to see on the color rendering but it's in that curbed Island based upon the township ordinance section 37- 60.3 the minimum number of parking spaces required for a restaurant is one space for each three seats or one for each 50 square feet of retail space excluding kitchen and utility rooms whichever is greater therefore the total of 80 seats within the restaurant divided by three equals 27 spaces and 1,270 square ft of retail divided by 50 equals 25 spaces so the parking requirement that we calculated was the uh taking the greater of those two numbers 27 minus the two electric vehicle parking uh calculated to be 25 required parking spaces for the project there's a dedicated Refuge enclosure at the same location as the existing enclosure towards the rear left corner of the property that's accessible for The Refuge trucks and the the restaurant's main Refuge doorway just off the easterly side of the building which is the kitchen the enclosure will be constructed of concrete block with veneer to match the building's exterior and will have two solid Gates that are self-closing the enclosure size is 24 ft by 11.3 ft and based on similar restaurant uses it'll house two seven yard containers one for refu one for recycling and as testified just now uh by the applicant the refu will be by private hauler two times per week between the hours of 7 and I believe 10: a.m. uh prior to business opening all loading will be during off business hours again between the hours of 7 a. and 10 a.m. as just testified by the applicant at the west side of the building where there's a proposed stripe loading zone similar to the current loading operation at the Pizza Hut the tractor trailer would pull up to the front of the building K turn back into the loading zone and then unload and then pull straight out to the road since the employees will be parking at the rear along those uh parallel parking spaces the entire middle area will be clear of any vehicles and clear for the operation with regard to storm water the proposed development will not disturb more than an acre of land nor will it increase in prvious surfaces by one qu acre or more and as a result the site is not classified as a major development in accordance with the state storm water rules njac C7 colon 8 and is not subject to water quality reductions sorry quantity reductions water quality or groundwater recharge requirements by the request of the board professionals and the tech Review Committee we Pro provided a storm water report rep uh which demonstrated that there's a net decrease in the amount of impervious services for the site of 2,697 square ft that's when we added that landscape buffer at the rear which it resulted in a net decrease in the peak storm water runoff rates from the existing condition to ensure the site drained properly the applicant uh and to make it safer for pedestrians the applicant proposing an on-site storm water collection system to catch some of the roof runoff and pavement runoff uh rather than just allowing it to sheet flow uh into the p over the pavement as it currently does today the new system will connect directly to the back of the existing storm Inlet which is located on site near the front of the property By Request of the board engineer we've added a note to the drainage plan requiring the contractor to inspect clean and repair the existing Inlet and pipe as part of the project to ensure it functions properly the applicant's architect who is here to testify as the evaluated the existing utilities serving the existing building existing restaurant building that is and they will continue serving the new restaurant no new utilities are proposed and the applicant agrees to perform the video inspection of The Source service as a condition of approval the applicant's architect has also confirmed that the fire suppression system is not required for the building based on its size and therefore a separate fire service lateral will not be required that was one of the uh comments in the engineers report the architect will further explain how the building will be protected in his testimony in addition the Edison Township fire station is located across the street from the subject property and there's a fire hydrant also located across the street the applicat proposing to replace the concrete curbing throughout the parking lot and sidewalks around the building pavement will be milled and overlaid toward the front of the site and completely replaced at the rear from the saw cut line to the back there'll be minimal if no filling activity since the site's mostly paved and the applicant agrees to submit proof to the township for any soil imported when when required the proposed site lighting will consist of pole mounted LED light fixtures throughout the parking areas all lights will be dark sky compliant and warm color temperature we have spoken with the board engineer we agree to comply with the lighning requirements in his report including having no spillage onto adjacent residences and having security lighting activated by motion sensor or other means during the overnight hours to extend required by the Edison ordinance 37- 61.5 with regard to the pylon sign um it's proposed within a landscape planter bed near the front of the property facing the direction of Route 27 similar to the existing location as a um the sign will be 20 ft in height back lit have approximately 69.3 Square ft it will have a uh it will require a variance for sign area since the length of the frontage is 237 feet divided by five permits 47.4 squ ft it also required a variance for sign setback since the sign will be less than 15 ft from the front line the existing setback at 6.5 there's also an assortment of building mounted signs and menu boards that are included with the submission quickly speeding through this the engineering and planning review comments just to address a few more the applicant agrees to consolidate all the Lots into one single lot the there will be no they will not be proposing a generator nor a ground mounted Transformer the applicant will provide a refug and recycling report as a condition of approval the applicant will ensure all Landscaping complies with the standards for selection of trees shrubs and Vines for planting and they agree to obtain all the necessary agency approvals uh and permits including pipeline letters and letters from the Township Police and Fire you want me to go through a couple of variances want as well okay the app the application requires a use variance uh where the GB Zone does not permit fast food restaurants with a drive-through window the application requires a maximum impervious lock coverage variance where there's a reduction from 8935 to 8.79 which is 2697 square feet and 75% is permitted and there's a parking set back with less than 5 foot to the front line is in existing condition which will continue the applicat planner will provide more details for those variances okay we're going to go through um Mr B's report to start Mr B uh as long as they agree they can address everything our letter they pretty much addressed all the testimony uh points um and then I know you were talking about the lighting uh just confirm as a condition of approval the light should be lowered after closing at night at night I know you had suggested that there would be the uh security lighting on timers I mean motion sensor right I think the applicant has no issue with agreeing to the requirements in the your review report and I the security lighting comment I think came from one maybe from the engineers report okay want to testify about the request for a waiver of pipeline I'm just gonna provide it provide you good Mr budo yes thank you thank you very much Mr Carly thank you Mr chair uh as Mr ansky uh stated at the outset this application has been uh pending for the uh the last three years and so uh Mr papy and East Point engineering have had the opportunity to uh receive a fair amount of commentary from Mr Big Nell's office and my office and uh we have a third review dated April 24th 2024 and you can see by the strikeouts and the bolds there that Mr papy has addressed most of the comments uh in that report those comments that elicited uh testimony he's touched upon uh and so I have no further comments other than um looking for the applicants assurance that uh those administrative items and those uh minor plan revision items that the report calls for are addressed if the board looks upon the application favorably which we fully intend to do thank you absolutely thank you thank you very much all right we'll now go to the board the board has any questions for Mr papy I actually I have one question so on the um on your detail for the drive-thru um there is a vehicle so the Ed the entrance to the drive-thru you have a vehicle image um and then you have an out Arrow oh there was there might be some arrows there from the existing condition okay so the darker arrows that are that are shade that are U fully solid the black arrows those are the ones that are proposed the lighter colored ones were from the base map there was an existing condition there okay all right that's clear I just want to make sure we're not we're not rolling traffic out of the out of the drive through okay that is all I have thank you very much thank you thank you um our next witness is our architect thank you everyone Jeremy raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth help you got I do and just State your full name please uh my name is Jeremy Danley I'm a senior project manager at Albert tal Architects I'm a licensed architect in uh Pennsylvania I have presented in front of boards in New Jersey previously and they've accepted my testimony I've got my bachelor of architecture from New Jersey Institute of Technology and I've been uh in the field of architecture for the past 18 years so your licensed in Pennsylvania I'm licensed in Pennsylvania I'm under direct supervision of appert C who is licensed in New Jersey uh and he's the architect of record for this project okay all right so we'll accept Youk and both of our licens are in good standing and condition great thank you very much you may proceed and um you're familiar with the uh Popeyes franchises I've been working on Popeyes for the past 16 years yes and um going to let you just go through your plans some your plans um so as was previous testified um the way the just to addressing the the grease used from the friers will go into a storage tank at the rear of the building and to be picked up by a a vendor truck the employees never have to mess with the grease manually transport it from the fryer to the tank um as Le said it never sees a light of air so it doesn't have a chance to get into the drain and stays out of the municipal system um we have had to update our kitchen based on providing additional stacking from where we previously had the drive-thru menu a drive-thru pickup at the middle portion of the rear we had to slide it down so this kitchen that we made for this location is not a uh not a standard popey's layout we had to update it specifically for this location to meet the stacking requirements uh as we've been going through the years so it's a it's a unique um condition which changed our dining room layout and our kitchen layout to reduce some Square footages to which reduced our parking uh needs um why don't you go through that a little bit of detail maybe you can reference your plans and sure stretch your legs so you you did mention about the seating so uh the by code we have 80 seats uh shown however um most of that's due to us using bankett and booths which goes by the linear foot of the the bench and not necessarily the actual usable you how many people are going to practically sit there so we have a long banket seating which would have more seats per code but then be practical you wouldn't have you know more than you know one person sitting across from that table so 80 seats might sound High especially in this postco world um but our actual seat count is much lower it's more like 60 so um so touching on the grease our grease tank is back here so it pump from the fryer area to the grease tank and then the truck would come to a port that's on the outside hook up a hose take the grease and um take it off we did talk about the the building itself does not need a fire sprinkler per the code however the type one exhaust uh Hood the for the grease cooking will have its own anso suppression system and there will be K and ABC fire extinguishers in the back of house uh and located per with the fire department requirements um in addition to the exterior trash enclosure one of the requirements was to have a refrigerated storage chest for uh interior trash so we are locating that in the back um area away from any food prep uh and uh serving area so we do have a refrigerated chest to have inside trash before it gets taken out to uh the dumpster area and uh just note previously the drive-through window was here and our front counter was here so when the drive-thru got pushed towards more towards the rear the whole kitchen layout moves so we kind of have a deeper queuing area with all of our seating on one side with all the where the existing storefront is um we're not changing how the building's footprint really looks the front door is still in that middle section the storefront and the setback the bump out here all maintains the previous Pizza Hut um footprint we have a second means of e have the dining room here coming out into uh the parking area um the main change is removing the Pizza Hut hat roof and creating a popey's uh typical building with the a squared off building one of the comments was HVAC to be hidden we are going to have our parapet High Enough from our roof level that the HVAC units and the exhaust fans will be screened by the parit um and L and located in the middle of the the building it's okay uh there were some comments by the professionals that the I don't know if you've addressed them all just going through my notes here um but perhaps we um if you want to address them if there anything else you want to add no I think I okay does the board have any questions for Mr Daniels seeing none thank you very much all right our next um uh witness is our traffic expert Lee you Solly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth to help you go I do and state your full name please Lee middle initial D is and Daniel kleene kle i n I'm a professional engineer in the state of New Jersey my license is current and a good standing I'm also a nationally certified professional traffic operations engineer uh I've been accepted in uh several boards uh name a few in Middle sex County uh Monroe Piscataway sometimes I do the planning board applications if there's a conflict with their traffic engineer Woodbridge North Brunswick South planfield New Brunswick so you've been to the rest so welcome to the best we'll accept sounds good so I think okay no I was just going to um briefly so um in in this application because it's on a state highway there have been uh state permits issued after a review of the traffic studies is that correct that's correct yes and so they they've addressed the um traffic counts and other data that's already been provided um and have issued permits of or letters of no no interest that's correct October 8th 2020 is a letter of no interest we received from njd and subsequent to that uh the plans were submitted to modify and allow for the um curban sidewalks that were in disrepair along the highway to be replaced and those have also been approved that's correct and that permit I believe has an extension now through August of next year 2025 and um there were several comments related to Traffic that were made by the professionals yes and I just want to give you an opportunity to address uh those comments and we can do that you know Point by point or however you want yeah yeah I'll go Point by point so in the um in the April 24th 2024 DNR comment letter uh comment 2.1a talks about the number of trips that are permitted under the do letter of no interest he uh the comment is this appears to be s liim margins however if we were to be one trip over that additional 100 trips per peak hour then we wouldn't be able to get the letter of no interest so whether we're one under or 50 under we're still allowed to have the letter of no interest we also uh there's some comments about the movements of traffic and it says that the applicants agreed to make it a right in right out only driveway and then adequate site distance should be shown on the plans and I was out there this afternoon looking from the uh current driveway looking West toward uh langstaff you're able to see at least 500 ft to the West the site uh stopping site distance is 360 feet required and the intersection site distance is 430 fet required and we're able to see over 500 feet to the West I think you heard Mr papy go through the parking numbers uh 27 required and we've got 31 physical spaces and we get a reduction or a credit but we don't need to really use that credit so there's really no parking variants being asked for right now uh as as uh our attorney said we're looking at replacing the sidewalk and the driveway aprons that's 2.5 and we've got that permit and we've extended that highway occupany permit to be able to make those changes and I think that's it oh oh there's a comment to 2.3 about uh the the physical layout of the parking there's uh the parking that faces Route 27 the drive aisle behind it is a little over 21 fet wide but when a person were to back out of those parking spaces there's a sidewalk and a curb that separates uh to that has a about four feet of distance to the building so if somebody were to back up out of that parking spot their Tire would hit the curb and they'd have enough distance to be able to make that turn and it's an existing condition that I believe has been uh that operated adequately when the pizza was there I think that's it check my notes I think that's all I had from that report I so I have nothing further okay Mr Carly as uh the testimony addressed your report just want to see if you uh had anything to add yes the the 21 foot wide Drive outs a few inches over 21 feet when a car would back out or pull into that spot they'd be able to make that turn when they back out they'd just possibly have to bump into the the curb that's on the north side of the building to finish their turn but it's an existing condition that must have operated when the pizza Hub was there correct instead of 24 it's 21 and change so yeah it's a little over two feet sure so the current operation when Pizza Hut was an operation but the it had been a full service Drive aisle where it was uh right turn out left turn out correct driveway Drive I believe yeah I believe there are no restrictions currently on the drive okay all right so this this would be an improvement because then You' Be Right Turn Only uh patrons would head down 27 Northbound to Vineyard Road and then make the uh turnaround if they wanted to go southbound make the turnaround that intersection correct okay correct all right does the board have any questions for Mr Klein all right seeing none thank you very much thank you and next is our planner how am I doing I don't compliment until cases are over okay V you're up would you raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or fir to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth so help you God yes I do please State your full name for the record you can pull the microphone in closer Vina sain s a w n and if you could just please provide the board with a summary of your background qualifications please sure um I'm a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey I'm certified nationally by the American Institute of certified planners uh I hold a bachelor's degree in architecture from Mumbai University India and a dual Master's in urban planning and policym from NYU uh I have been uh working in the field of planning for almost 20 years I currently serve as the planning director for Oldbridge Township and your life and I have testified before numerous boards in Middle sex SX mam susex um burington County great most importantly is your license current yes excellent we'll accept you thank you so much you may proceed thank you and you've had an opportunity to um review this application yes I have and I'm going to let you just present your testimony I know you're thorough so the subject property contains uh four tax slots and is located at 2002 US Route 27 the property is roughly 77 Acres um the property is fully located in the GB General business Zone the subject property is developed with a single story non-residential building that previously housed a Pizza Hut and a paved parking lot that contained 49 parking spaces the existing use was a use that was permitted in the JB Zone uh the applicant proposes to rehabilitate the existing building and to reuse it as a fast food Resturant with drive-through facility um the uh project requires a Ed variance as drive-throughs are not permitted in the JB Zone um and so a use variance is required the JB Zone GB Zone allows restaurants and other eating and drinking establishments wherein food and drinks are consumed within the principal building uh and Drive-In restaurants however a drive-thru restaurant is not permitted so uh D1 use Varian is required there are a couple of bulk variances which are existing the first one being maximum impervious coverage The Zone requires 75% % the existing is 89.3 5% whereas the proposed is 8.79% so we are reducing the uh the variance that is sought parking setback a 5T setback is required from the front property line a 5 ft setback is proposed is it is an existing condition and will be unaltered um the free standing sign setback a 15t setback is required we are approximately at 10 ft it is an existing condition we're not changing that condition these are the existing bulk variances U the new ones proposed are actually all affiliated with the drive through facility um The Sign of the the size of the sign 60 um it allows 47.2 Square ft based on the Frontage whereas 69.3 4 Square ft is proposed so a sign area variance is required um the wall signs on the North elevation 154.32 5 Square ft is required whereas the total uh there are four signs on that wall and all of them together measure 17.45 square ft so assign area variance is required um the west elevation has one wall sign where none are permitted because it's not a street Frontage so variance is required and uh the menu board sign and the pre menu board sign are not permitted because drive throughs are not permitted and um a variance is required most of the C variances are assumed by uh the D Varian so first I will provide proofs for the use variants the JP Zone allows sit down restaurants and other eating and drinking establishments wherein food and drink are consumed within the principal building as a principal permitted use and Drive-In restaurants as a permitted conditional use however a drive-through restaurant is not permitted in the zone the applicant proposes to rehabilitate the existing vacant building to contain a fast food restaurant with drive-through facility hence a use variance is required a study of existing land use patter s shows that there is an existing drive-through facility right next door for the PNC Bank uh which abuts this property to the easterly side additionally within 800 ft of the subject property on the Westerly side there is a McDonald's a fast food restaurant with drive-thru facility both of these properties are fully located within the GB General business Zone the entire Corridor along NJ Route 27 mostly contains retail and Commercial stores offices and food establishments this Corridor is traversed by both commuters traveling between counties as well as municipalities as is in the case of with all commercial highways this Corridor generates a lot lot of passing by traffic where quick bite fast food restaurants are quintessential and often flourish um this Corridor has uh serves as an employment base too with Amazon and the municipal comp complex and many other uh office commercial uses so uh such eating places that that do not need D in or sit down places flourish well drive-thru ordering has surged post uh pandemic which shuttered indoor dining and has made consumers vary of entering restaurants people now prefer to eat outdoors or use drive-through facilities drive-throughs are not typically allow not allowed in the JB Zone this is a very common policy because often drive-through facilities uh tend to have traffic backing up on highly highly Traverse roads and you don't want traffic to slow down on these corridors however our site engineer has worked on the side design such that there is a queuing space for 11 typically like when I review drive-thru applications in Oldbridge like I would use a rule of thumb that eight stacking spaces are adequate however we have provided 11 uh spaces for queuing so IT addresses that concern based on Edison Township's future land use plan contained within the master plan the subject property is anticipated to be a commercial use the proposal in front of you is for a rehabilitation of the existing building for a fast food restaurant it furthers the goals and objectives some of the goals and objectives Ives of the master plant to code few discourage deviation from established land use pattern that would permit incompatible and or conflicting land uses being developed adjacent to one another where appropriate amend zoning to prohibit inous land uses conduct a study of abandoned underutilized properties along Route n route one and Route 27 corridors where appropriate designate additional areas or Parcels in need of fre development in accordance with the New Jersey local Redevelopment and Housing law particularly along Route 1 and Route 27 The Proposal therefore furthers many of the goals and objectives of the master plan the site has been underutilized the building has been wakened for quite some time um the applicant is proposing to repurpose um this building and also enhance uh and improve a lot of things on the site including Landscaping the building facade adding and construction of new sidewalks the The Proposal also advances uh following purposes of the municipal land use law purpose a to encourage Municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote public health safety morals and general welfare purpose at n to promote utilization of renewable energy resources we are promoting the state's policy for electric vehicle purpose G to provide sufficient space and appropriate location for a variety of agricultural residential recreational commercial and Industrial uses and open space both public and private according to their respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens in summary the requested use variants can be granted without causing substantial detriment to the public go and won't substantially impair the intent in the purpose of the municipal zoning ordinance and Municipal master plan the proposed use is ideal for the location and is particularly well suited the proposed application advances numerous purposes of Municipal land use law Edison Township's future land use element of the master plan recommends commercial use for this property which is consistent with what is being proposed on the subject property The Proposal also advances the goals and objectives of the master plan the existing building is vacant and is being rehabilitated this itself advances one of the main goals of the state's Redevelopment plan the applicant has agreed to install an electric vehicle charging station to advance the state's policy to encourage EV charging the proposed ride through a facility allows for 11 vehicle parking spaces the site was specifically designed to add as many vehicles or stacking space as possible possible to provide adequate amount of space for on-site maneuvering and circulation of vehicles in the queue for service that do not impede traffic on Route 27 based in the discussions with the township professionals the site plan was amended to add a 15t landscape buffer to provide additional screening from the drive-through facility Additionally the applicant proposes to paint the existing retaining wall and maintain the fence that is located to the rare property line the applicant also proposes to replace the dread dead Shrubbery along the front of the building with the new Plantation to improve the visual appearance of the site the screening and the protection from the noise or this will also protect um noise from infil string into the residential neighborhoods the applicant also proposes to install a new F free standing sign along the front property line which will be more attractive than the existing uh sign the proposal does not cause any detriment to the public good and in fact it only furthers the intent of the Zone plan and the master plan the right turn only on Route 27 makes it a safe safer egress from the side since it's a used variance and um the um C variances as assumed by the D if you would like I will go into details with the c but if you want to want me to skip it it's up to the board I think you you covered his Bo agree you you don't have to cover this C you're fine does the board have any questions for Miss SW s none thank you very much thank you that's our case okay all right so we'll now go out to the public anyone within 200 ft of the subject property wanting to be heard if you're within 200 feet you received a notice of you certified mail anyone outside 200 feet want to be heard seeing none can you get a motion to close the public portion motion to close public second motion made by Vice chairman o' Gorman seconded by Mr sedada all in favor signify by saying I I oose nay the eyes have it public portion is now closed Mr lsky any summation um just very briefly I'm not going to review the any of the testimony but I just want to thank the the board the technical advisory committee because we did work um on a lot of improvements to our plan to accommodate some of the concerns all which improved I think our application so I just want to thank them for their time and commitment to our application okay all right so we'll go to the board for a motion Mr a chairman Mr D I make a motion to approve this application the applicant has met all of the negative and positive criteria the site is particularly suited for the use in intended use used as being an existing pizza restaurant the use is not detriment to the public good and Public Safety um the architect also agreed the applicant also agreed to satisfy Mr bignell and dnr's Engineering report um this motion incorporates all of the testimony of the applicant attorney planners engineers and members of the board a second and there are no obors motion made by Mr dve second by Mr sedada roll call please Mr Brown yes on the motion Mr chabra yes to the motion Mr Patel yes to the motion Mr D yes to the motion Mr sadaha yes to the motion Vice chair Gman yes and chairman yes on the motion un approval congratulations thank you Madame secretary do we have any more business to come before the board this evening that'll be all this evening okay can I get a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn second motion made by Mr sedat second by Mr Patel all in favor signify by saying I I POS nay the eyes have it board stands adjourned wake you up