[Music] Eileen it looks like we're ready to start okay sounds good thank you how old Township Zoning Board of adjustment Monday January 22nd 2024 I hereby declare this meeting of the how Township zoning board to be open adequate notice having been given pursuant to the New Jersey open public meeting act in the following manner first on December 11th 2023 a copy of said notice was mailed to the Asbury Park Press and the store Ledger second on December 11th 2023 a copy of said notice was hand delivered to the clerk of the township of Howell third on December 11th 2023 said notice was posted in the office of the zoning board and on the bulletin board in the Howell Township Municipal Building 4567 Route 9 how Township New Jersey in accordance with the fire prevention and for your safety please be advised that this facility is designed with two emergency exits at the front and the rear of the meeting room furthermore smoking is not permitted in the municipal building please take note that this meeting is being videotaped for possible future broadcast on Howell Township TV 77 this meeting a is a Judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to the issues of what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and a decorum appropriate to judicial in must be maintained at all times thank you thank you eileene can we have a roll call please sure Mr burillo here Mr caner here Mr Hughes here Mr merens here Mr Rosco here Mr Stanton is excused Mr Ryan here miss scotson here and chairman SE here you have a quorum thank you everyone please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance to flag of the United States of America and to the for it stands one nation God indivisible with liy and justice for all okay thank you Andy can we have a swearing in of the professionals please yes Mr chairman you swear the testimony you give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you God I do we state your name for the record J Jennifer beam your professionals are sworn thank you okay item five on the agenda approval of minutes reorganization and regular meeting 8 January 2024 eligible vote is burillo canther use Mertens Orosco scotson Stanton Ryan and seya may I have a motion please I'll make a motion to approve we got a motion second we got a second Eileen roll call please Mr burillo yes Mr caner yes Mr Hughes yes Mr merens yes Mr Rosco yes Mr Ryan yes and Mr seya yes minutes approved thank you Eileen item six vouchers do we have any vouchers no vouchers tonight okay item seven correspondence do we have any correspondence um I have three things for correspondance one at a time please okay case number ba 2315 Stanley krya will be carried to later date with notice so those folks that are here for case number ba 23-15 Stanley kryler this application is being carried to a further later date with with notice with notice yes yes and um current expiration is April 2nd 2024 okay I next one piece number ba 2306 Gateway industrial 175 LLC will be carried to March 11th 2024 with notice Chief DAV okay for anyone that's here for case number ba 23-6 Gateway industrial 175 LLC this application is being carried to March 11 2024 with notice yes all right what's the third one notice yeah um Charlie has a letter about a resolution that he'd like to talk about I'm not sure now or later well we'll doow it now go ahead Charlie yeah so if you recall we had the uh Fernando Campfield application uh Fernando Camp I apologize uh come to us uh within the last two meetings they were approved uh one of the requirements of my letter was that they obtain an Loi for some Matt Wetlands all on the rear of the site subsequent to that and prior to uh tonight um they provided an environmental a report to us from the boys engineering who's been uh before this board numerous times um it was in their professional opinion that uh based on a site visit that there was no Wetlands present on the site nor any Wetlands buffers had they presented to that to us at the time of the hearing we probably would have struck the requirement of n as a condition the approval um being that we're memorializing the me resolution today you know if the board should um act favorably on it I would carry that recommend recomendation that they don't need to get the LOI I think the professional recommendation uh should satisfy that requirement thank you Charlie Andy You're tracking I am all right good if the board approves the resolution if if on the motion with that Amendment and then I'll make the change and send it on to I okay which Oneil that was a Celeste fendo Campfield correct yes all right thank you Eileen resolutions before the board zoning board attorney resolution appointing Andy Bear of pashman and Stein eligible voters burillo caner use merens Stanton Ryan and seya can I have a motion please make a motion to approve got a motion I'll second that we have a second roll call please eile Mr Barillo yes Mr caner yes Mr Hughes yes Mr Mertens yes Mr Rosco yes Mr Ryan yes and chairman seya yes resolution approved zoning board attorney resolution approving Charles Kliff tnm eligible voters burillo caner use Merton Stanton Ryan and seya may I have a motion please yeah that's right engineer engineer you saidy I'm sorry and can share our duty that I'll make a motion a raise on that one we have a motion can I have a second please I'll second all right IA roll call please Mr Billa yes Mr caner yes Mr Hughes yes Mr merens yes Mr Rosco yes Mr Ryan yes and chairman SE yes resolution approved thank you zoning board planner Jennifer beam of Leon and avakian eligible voters burillo caner Hughes mertin Orosco Stanton and seya may I have a motion please motion to approve got a motion second we got a second I roll call please Mr Baro yes Mr caner yes Mr Hughes yes Mr Mertens yes Mr Rosco yes Mr Ryan yes and chairman seya yes resolution approved zoning board licensed tree expert resolution appointing Sher speo CME Associates eligible voters burillo caner use Mertens Orosco Stanton and seya may I have a roll call uh motion please I'll make a proceed Martins Mars second Matt second H roll call please Mr burillo yes Mr caner yes Mr Hughes yes Mr yes Mr Rosco yes Mr Ryan yes and chairman say yes resolution approved Mr chairman can I just take a second to interrupt we didn't say it last week I just want to say how fortunate we are to have this group of professionals uh helping us teaching us um continue to learn a lot from them and I just wanted to let it be known that we really appreciate the professionals that we have I second that for sure amen thank you thank you okay case number ba 23-20 Janine and Joseph Maron bulk variants approval to construct the two story additions to a single family dwelling eligible voters burillo caner Martens Ryan and seya may I have a motion please I'll make a motion caner second that motion Ryan roll call please Eileen Mr burillo yes Mr caner yes Mr merens yes Mr Ryan yes and chairman seya yes resolution approved okay case number ba2 3-17 celest fendo Campfield this is a resolution granting bulk variants approval to construct a twostory single family dwelling eligible voters Martin Stanton Ryan and seya this motion should include the inclusion of the LOI that it's already been satisfied may I have a motion please I'll make a motion based on the amendment that we made uh recommendations of our engineer you're not but you're not an eligible person Mertens Ryan seya period Martens made the motion oh I'm sorry I I apologize I was confus I thought it was Mr caner I I apologize 100 no worries I will second that motion Mr Ryan makes the second roll call please eile Mr Martens yes Mr Ryan yes and chairman say yes resolution approved thank you okay applications before the board case number ba 23-18 Cranberry Road Holdings the type this is a conditional use variant bulk variants and preliminary and final major site plan approval application of Cranberry Road Holdings as applicant and owner seeking conditional use variants bulk variants and preliminary and final major site plan approval for the construction of a 200 130 ft office building for a contractor's use with Associated parking equipment trailer storage and outdoor material storage in the S1 Zone on premises known as block 184 Lot 24 383 Cranberry Road Andy yes Mr sorta how are you good even you want to swear yeah let's do that we want to introduce and then we uh good evening uh board members uh my name is John sardo I'm the applicant attorney uh from the law firm gardano holler and cisla uh I have with me tonight the professional expert witnesses that I plan to call um and I guess if You' like we could swear them in together now that would be fine Mr Soo thank you okay okay professionals raise your right hand do you swear the testimony you give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you God I do I do please state your name and spell your last starting down the end and come in this come to mic I mean are the mics yeah yeah qualifications as well no or no you want to qualify now too or no no let's just let's just get the squaring in one at a time okay just yeah go ahead sorry ma Desmond uh that's de s m o n d from Insight engineering I'm a professional planner Adam anselin a nzz o l i n I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey with anel on architectural Patrick Ward Ward with Insight engineering professional engineer the Witnesses are sworn Mr chairman thank you so Mr sardo who's going to be your first witness uh Patrick Ward our civil engineer Mr can you please put your credentials on the record sure um with the firm Insight engineering I've been with Insight this is my 15th year been a license engineer in the state of New Jersey for 10 years uh license is current invalid I've been before this zoning board at least one time and I've been in front of the township planning board um numerous times and then throughout Maman Ocean County and elsewhere where'd you go to school uh Drexel University Bachelor of Science civil engineering all right thank you we accept your credentials thank you Mr chair take it away okay um I'll sit down if you uh so Patrick this this site as uh we've had a history with this site let me let me I guess just the rest of the board the the applicant and the application got uh prior approvals from the planning board 2015 and 2021 um and a just a general outline of what we're doing is amending that site plan uh which now due to a change in zoning in 20121 comes before this board we're now in the S1 Zone instead of the S and we're conditional use um I just wanted to preview that so we're amend essentially amending the site plan layout that we got approved in 2021 uh which Patrick's going to walk through now um Patrick with the if you could could you just give the background and um describe the plans you prepared and submitted sure if um you would be so kind to uh pull up the existing aerial uh rendering that we prepared just to give the board a sense of where we are in town and then I'll get into um what the current proposal is and and compare and contrast to what was approved by the planning board of the Township in uh 2021 hey John I'm interrupt was this submitted with the application or do we want to Mark or we're going to mark this this uh yeah we we'll mark these These are exhibits based off the site plan that was submitted [Applause] correct I can okay so subject property is 383 Cranberry Road Block 184 Lot 24 property is about 3 acres and as Mr sardo stated we're in the S1 A6 so the applicant which this is this is a16 for 16 aial I should have 10 copies of it for you have one no no no I have these are plent you can the board okay yep oh okay we yeah we could do that as A7 and out yep and John maybe just or Patrick tell what yeah I will yep I just want to make sure I have a and then this can be A8 Sorry Charlie you got a laser pointer not John hey was it 18 I do am I handing this one out too sir yes yes so I'll start with what what's on the screen now why you wait for the board [Music] member we see if there's probably going to be ex I we extras she's this walk a lot I'll thank you thank [Applause] you oh yeah we got another one for you oh oh you're passing [Applause] we're taking one and one go ahead move [Applause] them Mr chair I'll proceed when when you feel everyone's ready 184 so that's 182 this is 184 right here 184 24 right here okay so you have circled on the drawing the location that we're talking about right now is that correct okay okay so what I'll do is I'll just describe the three exhibits that were just distributed a16 is an existing conditions aerial the image is from September 6 2023 so relatively recent um it's from the near map Imaging service that our office utilizes and the subject property is Central to this image um there is some off of the screen here there's some areas to the North and South that aren't shown which is okay at the moment um but it really wants to the reason for this is to show the board what the property looks like from the sky today and then also what just a taste of what surrounds us today um and we we'll describe that in further detail a17 is a proposed color rendering of the site in its proposed form with the current application um again superimposed on the same aerial image just again to give the board some context as to what we're proposing and and how it kind of works with or you know marries with adjacent uses and properties and then a18 is is a serves two purposes one is to provide the board um just an updated zoning table uh and also a list of the conditional use requirements it was something noted in the tnm review letter and it's a checklist item to provide a conditional use statement um it's a applicant's position that A8 will serve as that conditional use statement and also provide the board some clarity as to where we comply with the conditional use requirements and where we do not and also to provide some clarity on the parking calculation which upon the initial submission we did not have it in um ref referencing the trade contractor use that's the conditional use we're seeking approval for tonight that handout does reference the trade contractor use which has different parking when you say the initial was that the initial to the planning board or the initial coming here coming here with the submitted plans that you have before you okay got it they have not been revised we just revised the table Mr chair they wouldn't be here if they complied with the conditional use standards right they' be at the planning board so they don't comply with those standards right right and we'll provide testimony in support of that conditional use variance that we're seeking so just a little background on the applicant this is this property is owned by so Brothers paving or operated by so Brothers paving um all of their construction operations emanate from this property and they have off-site today off-site offices elsewhere they're seeking site plan approval tonight to improve the property with a new Administrative Building for their business operation and make this property continue to make this property their long-term home here in Howell so the site is located on Cranberry Road it's about A4 Mile East of the cranberry yellow Road intersection as you can see on this image in front of you we're generally surrounded by similar uses to the east is a mammoth County highway department yard to the South is a multiple tenant Contractor Yard it goes Way Beyond off page to the South to the West is a private commercial SLC Contractor Yard and then across the street and I'll point it with my laser point on the big screen up here here this is the George harmes I call it the George harmes yard side entrance their main entrance is around the corner but that's what's directly across from you yep and I'm glad you brought that up and directly across from us so there there's the Harm's entrance and then what you see here directly to the north is the the rear end of the the second phase of equestra um and its rear entrance is up to the Northeast off page here um to that second phase so what you can you see the very tip there is a is a wooded area on that south side of the equestra development and they as part of their approval they have a 100 foot wide perimeter buffer that was that was established as part of that whole application and and approval process so in terms of zoning where the S1 we have equestra is in the PRC the planned retirement community Zone and that was established as part of that development to the east of us is actually a Zone boundary the mammoth County yard is in the agricultural rural estate six Zone which is technically a residential Zone um as you could see the property today is almost entirely Disturbed and um if you were to move the equipment and vehicles and some of the the Mounds of dirt you will the property is nearly 100% impervious and it's a combination of pavement and compacted gravel um crushed gravel and the like that's been there for um you know numerous years but it's Zone residential right uh what's that m par site the county property is residential zone so you have the residential Zone immediately to the East and the residential Zone across the road to the north correct that's correct okay and then west and south is non-residential we have two curb cuts at the property today as you can see coming from Cranberry Road right now today the the dark line which is the Shadow from the fence there's a chaming fence that comes right across the front there and it really separates the a front you know U rough parking area as you can see and then the rear yard the actual enclosed yard of the of the the use the area in the front is used for employee parking and it's not striped to delineate as you can see that's really mostly there's there's pavement patches below but a lot of it's just crushed gravel behind the fence we have some structures we have an existing garage down in the southwest corner it's a quantit Hut as referenced to uh Mr kliff's review letter where the denotes block 184 there's another garage type structure with a gable roof and then to the west of that is a is in effect a temporary construction trailer it's been there for you know a semi-permanent basis um proposed conditions and and as I go through these if you can pull up a17 if you don't mind the the color rendering um I'll explain how what we're proposing tonight is is what we feel similar to what was approved in 2021 so the applicant intend to upgrade the site and the building so that it meets the needs of the business today and improve its functionality and Aesthetics of the site at the same time so to go back further the applicant was actually before the planning board in 2015 for something that looks completely different than what you'll see tonight they were approved for new buildings and other site improvements um at the time the applicant felt it met their needs but in short order they never perfected that approval because it really didn't meet their needs in terms of space function and the like as a result in we were Insight was not a part of the 2015 application neither was Mr sardo or Mr anselin but in 20121 all three of us were retained by the applicant to in effect fix that approval and come back to something that would work for them and it's very similar to what you see in front of you um the applicant sought approval from the planning board for a different building design and layoff from 2015 and it was ultimately approved and with that approval variances were granted for setbacks the buffer to the North and the buffer to the east to both residential districts and I we will address those um in testimony as we go forward so Mr Ward yes ma'am that never got perfected correct 2021 correct was never fully perfected correct so therefore you're coming back you're looking to to demolish the majority of the structures on the site I think that the buffer situation needs to be reevaluated and we agree with that and we are prepared to address that yes okay we agree that's a it is a call fresh fresh start on that right that type of relief absolutely we just wanted to mention it because at the time it was granted and that led to the site layout similar to what you see here so tonight we're seeking to in effect amend that 2021 approval by changing the buildings only so the goal here is to keep both garages on site that I mentioned and construct a permanent office building for administrator staff and that's located you know Central north of the property there behind in the yard area the operations of the site from a construction standpoint and the operations of the business the paving operation will not change as a result of this application we're just proposing an administrative building to bring that staff from offsite onsite so in effect the only change here is bringing in the administrative Personnel so just if I can interrupt you for a second um but when we look at the the landscaping that's along the RightWay um and and the Landscaping front of the building that that's all oriented similar to how it was in 2021 correct correct so yes and then the the um the you know what I'll call the office building which is highlighted in the center there you want to hit it with the laser pointer that that's slightly shifted back from where the the building was in the 2021 approval is that correct that's correct yes okay so it was a larger building the front garage was was to be removed and there was a larger building across the front that was about eight or nine fet closer to Cranberry Road than what we're proposing now so we're proposing the administrative offices in this 2,130 ft building here single story prefabricated structure we're proposing it on the bottom if you could pan down there's material storage bins on the south side for to support the operations of the business those were approved in 2021 they are to remain to be proposed and the the company today has um storage containers enclosed storage containers here they're actually on the east side of the property today over here they're going to be relocated to the South Side you know not unlike what was proposed in 2021 they were proposed to remain and be relocated on site but the zoning has changed correct correct so now you're condition use and there are definitely conditions regarding outdoor storage buffer compliance as well as other items that were not in in effect in 2021 so I just want the the board to be aware that they don't comply with the buffer requirements they don't comply with the outdoor storage materials requirements and that's problematic on honestly like I get it that it was what it was in 2021 but here we are in 2024 and it's a new day here in Howell so you are required now to comply with the buffer requirements and the outdoor storage requirements and you didn't perfect the approval from 2021 so you can't keep relying on it if you didn't perfect it so the outdoor storage is in the buffer the the the requirements are 50 ft you're not there you're not there in the front either so there's relief that's required associated with this application associated with the conditional use right that's why you're here D3 requirement but I would say to the board these are things that we have consistently required of applicants have coming in this site I get it it has an old approval but they didn't perfect it and here they are back so they're still subject to these these requirements and they need to adjust their site plan to comply with what we're asking for so I I mean it's up to you guys to decide how you want to proceed but like I don't support the relief associated with the buffer requirements on what is that the the norle and the norle property line and the easterly property line they don't comply with either and you guys have not been aboard that grants that buffer relief ever uh if I may the the buffering requirements adjacent to residential zones it's residential use or Zone not just Zone correct it's part of the conditional use standard but it was also part of it's also elsewhere in the ordinance correct that and was a variance that we required at the planning board and we were granted but this is new this is a new application I guess I'm just saying the 50 Foot buffer to you don't just get to rely upon the fact that you got relief based upon a different use this is a different use in the buffer you need relief from it handedly that the use hasn't changed but we're prepared to put on the testimony and proofs for the I I don't I don't support the relief you guys can listen to what they have to say and decide how you want to proceed but we don't Grant relief from the 50 Foot buffer period up to you guys so Jen for clarity to the east is a six three six six are six Zone across the street is equestra what what's the buffer requirement between Austra and this property 50 ft on their prop 100 okay it's 50t okay it doesn't it doesn't take into consideration the width of the road either it's 50 ft on their property and then the easterly property line is a 50 foot buffer as well because immediately to the east is an a six [Applause] Zone what's the alternative if they do nothing with the property what is the use now Charlie I mean I think that would be up for the applicant to give more information on the use but um I mean you've heard them make representations they were before the planning board in 2015 never perfected the approval you know under a different professional team uh they were before the board again sometime after 2021 you know got an approval never perfected it and now we're here for you know a different board but for the third time to the town I think that's the concern is uh you know this is the third shot at the Apple and we're still trying to get a perfected site plan for a use that's been operating there and I think has been allowed to operate there with the understanding that you know we're going to get a perfected site plan at some point you know and now it's eight years removed from the first time they were before one of the boards at the township I can I know John is there any violations at this site as Charlie iterated they are uh they are they're basically uh operating with a temporary Co that was issued uh predicated on the fact that they were going to perfect the site plan since that has not been perfected uh the CCO uh has come due so to speak uh we would recommend that if there's any approval uh that there be some kind of sunset Clause because this has been dragged out for such a long time say that all building approvals um and permits uh have to be applied for and the site perfected within the year uh so that a a permanent CCO can be issued well if I may just add to this I mean this is not news to us um the applicant that is and we worked with uh Mr Howard in the community development office I I'm aware of the issue um when we decided after the 2021 approval to come back and modify the building those were discussions I had had understanding that we were eager to go forward with um most of the development on this project but we couldn't until we perfected the site plan but we were ready willing and able to put in landscaping Paving getting the sewer put in um and it was all predicated on us coming before the board on another application with the understanding that you know this is it we're going to perfect the site plan and essentially the changes that we're proposing are the last ones and we got to go forward with the development if the board were to approve it I mean I would just say to the board that like they're relying upon relief that they requested based upon prior approvals that they never perfected so you don't get to you don't get the benefit of those variances when you don't perfect the site plan you need to come back and now they're new because you never perfected the approvals that you came for historically you don't get to say oh I asked for this you approved it it but then I didn't I didn't move forward on it so I get to keep carrying it forward that's not how it works you never perfected the site plan that you got these variances for you don't get the benefit of the buffer variances moving forward when you never perfected the site plan historically and I'm not putting that on you because I know this is a new team right so I know that I'm just saying to the board they don't get to carry those those variances when they never perfected the approvals that they got historically Jen looking at this site yeah what they're trying to accomplish can they get there with modifications I mean if they if they comply with the buffer they would probably comply with the the coverage which is also a variance that they're seeking but I don't think I mean the buffer in the front is never going to happen right they're because they need a buffer here right so they're going to still require relief regardless but the buffer to the east which is against the A6 Zone has not been complied with the buffer against equestra has not been complied with they need a a variance for lot coverage which if they complied with some of these buffer requirements probably could be complied with but we just don't know I mean I'm going to leave it to the applicant to decide how they want to proceed but I'm just saying like you can't comply you can't rely upon relief given to an approval that you did not perfect and then come back and say well we got that approval before you didn't perfect the approval and this is a we do not Grant buffer relief H like easily period Charlie did you look at the calculations so uh yeah so they do need a variance for impervious coverage I think you'll find on the applicant plan they indicated they it's actually a net reduction in impervious coverage from what's existing there on the site uh so it still does need a technical variance because it exceeds exceeds the 70% that's permitted in the zone but it's a net reduction from what's existing this all goes back to how much of this cover has historically been there how much of it was you know previously approved for prior site plans which have also never been perfected um you know to Jen's point with the buffers right along the frontage in the easterly side yard um you know the parking area the angle parking along the property Frontage would certainly for full compliance of the 50ft buffer would have to be relocated elsewhere you know along the easterly property line where I think there's some uh larger vehicle parking space uh along the east prer line that's almost entirely within the 50 Foot buffer um you would be looking at significant changes to the S plan if they were to comply with those buffer requirements in the entirety um having said that you know um I believe Eileen provided us with like what the last site plan they submitted for residu compliance to the planning board what's being shown is relatively in Conformity to what was approved at the planning but I think you've heard Jen speak uh elaborately on you know not relying on prior approvals uh you know this is a new application this is a different board there's different standards as far as the conditional use requirements in place right now and they didn't perfect those approvals I mean I think that if they perfected those approvals we'd be having a different conversation but they didn't so now we're here as is like as it as if it was Square One so we're leap frogging from existing condition to where we are right now so here's the question why were the per approval is not perfected when when you say perfected you mean to the point where we had signed plans yeah and pulling permits because we knew I mean we're significantly towards compliance but knowing that there was a desire to change the building it seemed not to make sense to continue those efforts knowing you were going to change the building now we are where we are today of course and had I had the knowledge that um the buffers would be considered in the way I'm now understanding they'd be considered I may have taken a different tact many many many months ago um but and I guess begs the question you know if if we were to just rely on the prior approval and now perfect it I don't know if that's an open question or if you've made a consideration but in my mind it was well we can go ahead and perfect the prior approval and go go go ahead or we need to make the minor modifications that we hope to make and that's why we're here tonight um we've sat now for about a year in in line between you know we we initially pled the planning board several Ms went by we found out that the uh about the zone change we transferred the application in the summer or the fall um and now we're finally here at the hearing so um you know I guess we have a choice proceed and try to make modifications in light of the the more recent comments that we're just finding out about or uh going forward with the prior approval in 2021 well if you go forward with the prior approval of 2021 John would that satisfy the violations they would so there there's your answer there was of course the concern of the applicant was related to the modifications to the primary building um which was why we were coming in for the modification and we were always happy by the way to like I like I had stated early we're always happy to perfect do the landscaping and try to phase that in as soon as we were able to we weren't able to uh nor were we asked frankly to perfect it and to do that right away um so so you know now it's hindsight at this current moment but I would just say that if you were to perfect your prior approvals which have whatever Leaf associated with it is included in that per in that resolution that may help you moving forward because right now I would say they should to comply with the puffer requirements yes right so because you never perfected the prior approvals therefore this is like a new crack edit and you are you are adjoining a residential lot to the East and to the north so those are variances that this board does not take lightly and so you know I mean it's up to you guys to how you want to proce ceed but this board does not Grant relief from that buffer requirement lightly just so you know Mr Soo would you like to take 10 and speak to your client yes very good Eileen we're going to take 10 minutes the board will now take a 10-minute break and reconvene at 7:55 p.m. thank you the meeting will now reconvene Mr sardo thank you Mr chairman um discuss the matter with my client professionals we'd like to ask for an adjournment to be carried to the the next meeting without notice so we can evaluate how we can react to the comments we've received this evening that's fine Mr sardo I just uh you know it's it's it's significant from what we are understanding just so you know no no I've I've heard the message loud and clear okay um and I don't know that John just wait one sec on the scheduling hold on um we do have three applications for the next meeting the meeting on the February 26th we have three applications March 11th we have four applications and March 25th we have two applications and April 8th we have nothing yet I'm out that if you would if you cover if you carry one meeting if that's amendable of the board there's a lot of other would you want to go to April 8 and we'll give you an extension that probably doesn't and April 8th there's that's the open meeting yes um yeah I I guess that's agreeable to us we'll give you an extension time act April 30th extension or Andy a little further out what do you think I think April 30th okay that does that work for you Mr sardo it does and I guess if the opportunity presents itself that we can come back earlier uh I'll I'll speak with the board secretary and see if we can arrange that if rote it yeah no I mean I understand we uh we have full agendas going forward understood okay all right so application ba 23-18 cranberry row Holdings this application is being carried to April 8th 2024 with extension of time to 30 April 2024 and and you said without notice I just I don't know that I heard without further notice yes thank you Eileen we're good yes we're all [Applause] good thank you Mr s thank you okay Eileen is there any other further business of the board no there is not all right may I have a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn take on we got a motion in a second all in favor all right Eileen this meeting is adjourned