e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e we're going to call this meeting to order please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance i al to flag of the United States of America and to the rep it stands one na God indivisible andice for all good evening ladies and gentlemen pursuing to uh njsa 10 col 4 the open public meetings act notice of the this duly and regularly scheduled meeting of the Jackson Township zoning Board of adjustment has been published and posted in all appropriate locations roll call please Mr Stafford Smith Miss FR is absent Mr book here Mr Hudak here M Parnes here Mr Heyman here Dr Holstein Miss Bradley yes May 15th motion to approve roll call please Mr Stafford Smith yes Mr book yes Mr Hudak yes Mr Parnes Mr Hyman yes Miss Bradley yes okay I also have a voucher that we need to um approve for payment from Jackson Township for the recording secretary for this evening's meeting in the amount of $175 I need a motion and a second please move to approve second roll call please Mr Stafford Smith yes Mr book yes Mr Hudak yes Miss Parnes Mr hman yes Miss Bradley yes do we have any announcements this evening Mr Murphy none that I'm aware of okay all right we need to swear in the Prof EXC me um number three on the agenda is not being heard tonight it's going to be carried indefinitely and they will have to re notice okay so I'll make that announcement then please yes all right so number three on this evening's agenda a a Avenue Partners LLC number two it's two weard okay we'll we'll we'll restart then um number two applicant uh Frederick weart III home occupation variance 3503 uh this is block 11403 lot 39 uh this application is going to be carried um the application will be require uh required to Ren notice the application as it's not being carried to a date certain um so the application is currently on hold other than that we have no other announcements this evening all right we need to swear on our professionals gentlemen thank you for raising your right hand do you solemnly swear affirm that the testimony information questions or comments that you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes yes if you would each please state your name and positions with the board Evan Hill Board engineer Ernie Peters board planner Jeffrey Pororo zoning officer thank you very much okay Mr Murphy on the executive session this evening no matters for discussion nope and we do have an administrative approval however that's correct for Earl Investments LC so if I may first uh for for the for those board members who are newer and you're not familiar with what an administrative approval request is it's the app the applicant has brought to my attention during resolution compliance that there are proposed changes to what the board had approved on the site plan and if those if those changes are significant in your opinion then you would ask the um applicant to come back with amended site plans and re and go through the whole hearing process again however I'm kind of like a I once I understand what those changes are I will then make a determination that I think it's appropriate where the board should administratively hear those changes first right because I don't believe that they necessarily rise to compromising the Integrity or altering the intent of the approval and the plans so in most cases they're very minor in nature um if you hear the testimony by the applicant regarding how they propose to change or modify your approval and you agree that it doesn't rise to the level of amended plans then the applicant would just work with our office to to finalize resolution compliance and those changes are essentially delegated to me to review administratively as part of the resolution compliance process so that that's what a uh that that's what this type of administrative approval request is for good evening for the record B Gala the law from of varc Shane is Associates in Tom's River I know the agenda says Robert Cay but I'm taking his place tonight um as your um engineer uh indicated we seeking administrative approval um this is a result of a um discussion with Pinel lands uh that they want us to come back before this board to have the board kind of get an approval to what the change we're making to our plan which is rather insignificant but I will rely upon the testimony of Brian Murphy our professional engineer uh in this matter I believe Mr Murphy has appeared before this board in the past Mr Murphy I would ask we have two Murphy's here huh I would ask that Mr Murphy Mr Brian Murphy's qualifications be accepted by the board uh I will swear Mr Murphy in um and I will ask him to profer his credentials and that will be left to the discretion of the chair but yes Mr Murphy has appeared here before and he's got a great last name um Mr Murphy do you uh if you would please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony information questions or comments they about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth if you'd please state your name provide your affiliation uh and your credentials please you have definitely been here plenty of times when this board accept your credentials thank you Mr Murphy can you give the board an overview as to why we're here tonight seeking administrative approval there we go all right uh so there's no change to the site plan whatsoever same parking same building same everything the only change is in the ratio of Warehouse to office and it's a slight change in each unit uh so just so we're clear on the record uh for lot 21.05 the Ware the old warehouse number was 23,600 it will now be 23,100 square ft the old office square footage was 2400 Square ft it will now be be 2,882 square ft what that does it it increases the parking need by two stalls so we need 46 stalls instead of 44 previously but we have 64 so we're still well overp parked we so we don't have to do anything to the site plan no change to the site plan at all uh it's just a minor adjustment uh for lot 2.07 uh the Ware the old Warehouse square footage was 24,6 75 sare ft it will now be 24,1949 square ft again it increases the parking requirement by two stalls uh we'll have 49 uh required parking stalls where we have 66 so again we're still well overp parked no change to the S plan parking or anything else it's it's all internal of the building building footprint isn't changing at all we're just basically changing the configuration of the office in the warehouse just to clarify 64 you have or 66 we have 64 on lot 21.05 okay and we have 66 on Lot 21 or 20.07% [Music] yes um did you say it was something to do with Pinelands yeah uh Pinelands wants the board to approve the change in the square footage uh because the the okay the septic requirements are are tied to the the change was not Pinelands related it's just the approval exactly okay and um does it impact the like traffic study anything like that having no it's it's a it's such a minor increase we're only talking couple 100 square feet of office versus Warehouse change one of them sounded like from 2500 to over 3,000 yeah it's 2500 square feet to to 3,35 square feet so it's it's 500 sare feet over the entire building so it's it's not that much of a change it works out to two parking stalls essentially got it thanks and the increase is being decreased out of the warehouse space so it's we're not changing the square footage of the building at all thank you if I may Madam chair uh so there was a question that was raised uh in relation to this application regarding notice um there again this is an administrative approval it's a rather di Minimus change that's being requested um as a result of pin lands there are no changes to the site plan this is solely as to the square footage inside of the building um and what is being uh requested is just a shift in the in the square footing uh square footing square footing footage of the uh usage inside the building so this is again rather di Minimus change it wouldn't require uh notice under the statute um and and it's you know again this is as a result of uh Pine land's request so if anybody has any other questions I'm happy to address them any other questions for the applicant yes uh Duty chair um are you changing the size of the units internally no no so so what's happening is that the office space is increasing slightly in each unit but that increase comes out of the warehouse out of each the unit itself isn't changing it's just that ratio is changing Mr Peters I mean Mr Hill that's all right so I just want to clarify that this has no this has no effect on the site plans as they were reviewed and approved by us and approved by I'm sorry reviewed by us but approved by the board they there are no site plan modifications required as a result result of this change is what in any way whatsoever and the property is still adequately designed for parking they're overdesigned for parking U and I would agree with Mr Murphy that there are no material impacts to any kind of any types of traffic imp impact analyses that were performed as part of the application as well any other qu excuse me any other questions for the applicant it's up to us to decide if we want to go ahead and move forward we approve it the the administrative approval no Mr Murphy second roll call please Mr Stafford Smith yes Mr book yes Mr Hudak yes Miss Parnes Mr Hyman yes Miss Bradley yes thank you very much appr have a good evening yes okay we're going to move forward to applicant number one lindsy Penna variance 3509 block 2701 Lot 29 [Music] it's up to you [Music] sorry I see I see that there's a stenographer in the room hi I just want to which application are you here for uh the Avenue Partners okay all right so I will just make a note on the record uh when that application is heard right um okay so we are here for um Miss Peña correct Adam chair members Robert and mchu on behalf of the applicants Robert and mchan on behalf of the applicants uh the pennis um the property is located at 880 Hallmark Dr Court um by way of preface it's uh a property that was it's a small subdivision there that was previously an R1 Zone and the zoning changed or three years ago and so uh my clients are proposing they want to put an addition on the home they purchased the home in November 2020 there young family they have one child now they just found out they have another child on the way the property has three bedrooms currently they want to add an addition with two more bedrooms and a bathroom on the second floor and it has a covered porch in the first floor and then a crawl space under that so um because the zoning requirements change with the R3 Zone it's an it's an undersized lot based on the R3 requirements um they don't meet the R1 lot area requirements which kicks into the R3 uh bulk requirements and it requires them to get a uh lot area variance they are 0.93 acres currently and 3 acres is required they also need uh a variance for the front yard setback and the side yard set back with regard to the addition that they're putting on um front yard setb back is 75.7 ft uh proposed and 80 is required and then 50 ft on the side yard setback is required and 22 feet is proposed there's a pool and a shed that were existing on the property when they purchased it in November 2020 and those are pre-existing conditions that require variance as a result of the application tonight I have um Eric dun who is the uh president of Heritage Builders here to testify as to the addition that they to put on and I also have Mr Mrs Penny here if the board has any questions I don't plan to have them testify though are you ready Mr D yeah I'll swear Mr dunan if you would Mr Dunn please raise your right hand do you Solly swear affirm that the testimony information questions or comments that you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you very much if you would please state your name spell your last name uh provide your affiliation to this application um and I know you're being presented as a fact witness but I'll ask you to um swear that you are a licensed builder in the state of New Jersey yes okay uh Eric Dunn last name spelled du NN um president and owner of Heritage Builders and a licensed home builder and Home Improvement contractor in the state of New Jersey and you're responsible for this project yes okay thank you Mr done you were retained by that is correct correct uh essentially as soon as we get approvals it we're planning for Sometime Late July did you give AEF descrition to the yes so essentially it is an extension to the left side of the existing home overall it's going to add about 700 square feet and the biggest piece is the additional two bedrooms um young family kid on the way with plans to grow the size of that family very quickly so um looking definitely looking to get relief to get the additional living space and um the additional two bedrooms and is the the uh house the addition that you putting on is still perers with houses neighor correct about the same size correct it yes yeah it's very large it's about about 100 ft long and roughly 15 to 20t wide excuse me he's going to turn that one off and you're aware of the current zoning requirements and the fact that they require variances for front yard sidey yard setb and lot area correct correct and that's due to the fact that it's an undersized lot in the R3 Zone correct okay Mr chairman I Madam chair I have no more questions unless you have any specific questions and as I said the pennes are here to answer any questions about the addition itself chair through the chair pick it up Mr D you you kind of glossed over it pretty quickly in terms of the additional these two bedrooms uh with the addition of a few bedrooms it's still going to conform with the other houses in the neighborhood did you take a look did you measure do you know how many how many other houses there are in the neighborhood how many bedrooms are in those houses and whether or not any of those houses are encroaching upon the sidelines and whether or not those houses would be as close to the sidelines as you're proposing in this in this application can you can you provide any of those details I can't say I can provide hard details on their exact distances from the setbacks I would say that given the way the zoning was changed over to R3 a a lot of lots were given the relief to be considered in R1 and it's about 007 Acres from that consideration so that's the only reason that the front and side yard setbacks require a variance so it is highly likely that there's several Lots because the others in the row of the CAC are for the most part smaller I believe it's the second largest they have a very similar setback scenario I just I I can't speak to the exact specifics of what those are I haven't evaluated a lot by lot okay Dy chair uh homes were built in the area were they originally all considered R1 zones I'm sorry sir at the beginning when when the homes were built on say on this C the ACT were they all considered one acre lots that was my understanding yes the I think there's a about 11 homes there or maybe eight 11 homes that were built on that sub in that subdivision I think there were R1 and they were built so after the homes were built they would change to three to R3 that's correct and because they don't comply with the lot area that puts them into the they have to comply with the R3 all standards so by changing changing the Zone the town has created a hardship for any owner who wants add that's correct something that that falls short of the requirements for our three that's correct thank you uh through the chair through the chair I just want to note that um there are protections for the undiz Lots in the R3 Zone the protections are that it once had to have been an R1 Zone which this was the other protections are that it has to be in the would have had to have been once in the R1 Zone it has to be at least one acre he's just under an acre and if it were an acre or more they wouldn't be here so citing the R3 setbacks well it's good to put it on the record primarily they can't meet the R1 standards because again it's not a one acre property it's a 0.93 AC of an acre it's a builder's acre it's what 40 40,000 square feet instead of 43 right that's what they call it I ran those numbers kept coming out the same so yeah through the chair um could you confirm that it would if it if it could use the R1 bulk standards it would it does comply with those setback requirements it's just isn't an acre so it doesn't have that protection did I understand that correctly the side yard setbacks for an R1 zone is 20 ft for for the structure so they meet the setbacks they just don't just don't need the lot area they just are under an acre so the relief is I guess for the being undersized under even the one acre correct thank you any other questions for this Witness do you want to go move forward and call the penis we're we're completed that's the only testimony I have unless you have any questions for the pennis okay does anyone on the board have a question quick question since you are adding two bedrooms uh have you will you be contacting the Ocean County Board of Health about the septic system yet we'll comply with any of the conditions of approval okay thank so Dr hofstein you beat me to it but I I appreciate that thank you U yes with with the bedroom expansion they're going to be required to get approval from the Board of Health for a septic for an expansion to their septic system um and I just want to make a note that the uh even with even with the undersized nature of the lot being less than one acre they still comply with the requirements for building coverage and total impervious coverage they're not re re ired to they're not re they're not asking for any relief from those standards through the chair yes are there any rsis parking standards because of the additional bedrooms and do they comply with those so you are correct so when you go it's it's going to be what a four-bedroom home now or five five five-bedroom home so uh for a five-bedroom home you're going to have to demonstrate that you have at least three and a half parking spaces located on your property off the the street uh based on the plan that they submitted uh you have what a one car garage is it a onear garage currently twocc car garage twocc car garage so you have two parking spaces within the garage and then just based on the survey that the driveway is of ample length for another two vehicles do any members of the board have any other additional questions for this Witness and does anyone wish to question the homeowner regarding anything okay I'm going to go ahead and move forward and open this the public session anyone wishing to come forward and comment on this application please do so seeing no one come forward I'm going to close public session board it's up to us for discussion and or motion through the chair for the purpose of discussion I'll move to approve it and I would agree with the motion and the second I have no problem approving it giving the change from R3 to R1 and as Jeff explained if you had exactly an acre or more it would fit so I would have no problem approving it either okay we have a motion and a second on the floor roll call please Mr Stafford Smith yes Mr book Mr Hudak yes M parnaz yes Mr Hyman yes Dr Holstein Miss Bradley yes thank you it's been approved thank you thank you thank you um so there is going to be a quick announcement um here uh the application number four which is James J deau uh variance number 3499 is going to be shifted to number two given and the fact that it's just undersized lot variance and the other application is a preliminary final sight plan with use variance so the chair is elected to take this first thank you [Music] [Music] Noe problem good evening every good evening everybody Adam Feer ATT on behalf of the applicant um Mr Alpert just going to hand out some some give you some handouts um I'll take the the moment just to go over real quickly what the application is um this is a a as as straightforward of an undersized isolated lot case um as you'll see um the property question is in the R3 Zone um there are three lots that comprise it um that total uh together about 1.13 Acres um obviously as a condition should the board approve it we would obviously agree to consolidate them into one lot um should also be noted um my client Mr theau the the property has been in the theau family for over a 100 years this is not something that someone who just came in recently and now wants to change the area um they're looking to build the house for themselves on this one acre site um I also just want I know some board members are new I know the board does see these T these cases frequently but if we'll just take a quick moment um just wanted to read to you from the uh the dalm case which is the leading case uh from Ocean County where judge serpentelli um did list the five requirements that the applicant must meet for the board to Grant the case uh to Grant the approval uh one is that it's we are required to carry the burden of the proof to as to the positive and the negative criteria two is to demonstrate that the efforts made uh were made to bring the property into Conformity three to submit detailed plans of the proposed house four to attempt where applicable to demonstrate compliance with the use to side yard the setback requirements uh and five attempt to demonstrate the proposed use does not violate any traditional zoning um light air open space um the application in question um we do have three variances obviously the largest one being lot area as I indicated again we're one point uh I'm sorry one point uh 13 acres where 3 acres is required uh the second variance would be for minimum lot depth um the property is a little bit odd-shaped and and it's up on the map and we'll get to it but uh we are 234. one feet uh where 400t is required uh and finally the minimum front yard setback of 80 ft where we only are providing 60 feet uh you will hear testimony um regarding other houses in the area uh that we are not out of line with with uh those types of uh setbacks uh I have provided already to the to the board uh the buy sell letters there are two contiguous properties one of them being a very large track you can see right behind it is great adventure um they have not responded the other one being the property owners right to the call to the right of the property I did have a conversation with them my believe they are here yes I had a conversation with them and indicated uh if there was if we were to sell they wanted to buy it it would be at a value as if the lot was a fully approved conforming lot which is what is is required and again I'm not I don't want to speak for them but the indication on the phone was that that they would not be interested at that price point um with that being said if we can swear in Mr Halpert um and then yes uh just for the purposes of the record we'll mark the by sell letters as exhibit A1 is that fair yes thank you all right very good again they were pracy provided um I concur with the representations made by Mr feffer as to the law regarding uh the purchase Andor sale of uh the lot uh it would be at the fair market value as if the lot were fully conforming with all approvals um so that would be the appropriate um calculation uh for any one wishing to purchase um that particular lot um and with that I will sarl Mr hbert Mr hbert nice to see you thank you for raising right hand do you somly swear or affirm that the testimony information questions or comments that you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth I do thank you if you would please state your name spell your last provide your affiliation and your credentials Eric Halbert h a l p r t I am a licensed professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey I prepared these plans and I'm familiar with the uh zoning ordinance and I visited the site I'm I'm familiar with the site I'm the applicant's engineer and planner this board accept your credentials thank you Mr Al if you can just may walk us through you add some exhibits and then you can confirm all the stuff that I've indicated I'll uh first go through the actual um Plan before we get to the suram ing areas Anthony could you pull up the um the plan just to show the board the um improvements being proposed so just for the purposes of the record the plan will be not to confuse everybody though it's not the first sheet the plan will be marked exhibit A2 that that's the floor plan there's uh different the uh site plan the plot plan designed re parville thank you in front of the board um is uh the plan the site plan um prepared showing the applicant um proposing to improve the currently wooded lot um vacant lot with a one and a half story uh dwelling the first floor comprises 1550 square feet and contains two bedrooms the second floor is 800 square ft approximately and contains uh two bedrooms um the site plan calls for the construction of the modular home and we'll go through the modular floor plan um this is a modular home with a porch a driveway there are no public utilities and a septic field is proposed and a well and uh the plan shows that the property is able to uh um contain the uh septic field that could meet the uh setbacks from adjacent septic and Wells and I will discuss uh the surrounding areas as well if you could bring up that first exhibit the aerial the property is located in the Northwestern uh section of the town of Jackson Township it is near um the Great Adventure uh amusement park the property is located on the corner of Reed and parville Road um it is presently wooded as the aerial as as is demonstrated on the on the aerial um there are single family homes in the area the property is uh a combined lot area of one .13 Acres it is irregularly shaped the um on the aerial there is um within the yellow area there is a triangle showing the available setback um if the applicant would be required would be attempting to construct the house only within the setbacks at its deepest within the setbacks there is approximately 36 F feet a little less than 36 ft which uh quickly reduces um as um as one goes away from the center and there is no ability to build um a house larger than approximately 900 square feet if it would be squared or rectangular and not irregularly shaped um the applicant is again seeking to construct a house with the following bulk variances the lot area is 1.13 in this R3 Zone and because of the um setback requirements what um The Proposal is attempting to do is minimize the relief required so no relief is being sought on the side and rear um setbacks and relief is being sought from the front setback where the requirement is 80 feet and the house is being placed at 60 ft um a 60ft setback and therefore variance relief is required I'd like to just go through on this aerial some of the surrounding um houses um some of the the setbacks the front setbacks of the surrounding houses are shown and um there is I have more information for the board regarding the general lot areas and the um the houses so the um the board is looking at the aerial um this is at an intersection most of the what the board is uh looking at is the R3 Zone in the North in the South um easterly portion that is an R1 Zone um and therefore the houses um are only need to meet the R1 Zone requirement ments so the neighbor immediately adjacent to our property over to the right and to the east has a front setback of 32 ft where 80 ft is required um there are other houses over to the west where the two houses adjacent uh do meet the front setback on Reed the house immediately across the street has uh an accessory structure in the front yard along penville as the aerial shows there's a setback only of 41 ft where 80 ft is required a little farther down Reed Road it is a it is it is it is a garage an accessory structure um they're um farther down Anthony I the um could you zoom out a little bit or scroll over so that the left just to bring up more of the houses in the aerial and over more to the left facing the screen to the West um there um a house has a setback of 72 66.5 and 96.8 in general these houses comprise a variety of 1 and a half story um upon a site visit um one and a half story twostory um by level um they all are generally the footprint alone generally is larger than the proposed um house the proposed dwelling of this applicant which is a 1550 square foot uh footprint the other houses generally are larger and are again generally one and a half by level or two store wories there is um there are ranches also one or two ranches but the um proposed dwelling um that is in front of the board is generally in conformance with the adjacent uh dwellings in terms of the size and um intensity just for the record this is going to be this area will be marked A3 sorry I didn't do it beforehand [Music] Anthony could you go back to the um to the site plan to the plot plan showing thank you um as depicted on the plan the appli the applicant is proposing a driveway um which is able to um Park two cars side by side it is deep and therefore um it could fit um stacked 10 spaces the applicant is only um proposing four bedrooms and the driveway is the parking is sufficient um for the proposed bedrooms there are two bedrooms on the first floor and two bedrooms on the the uh second floor before I before we go through the review letter could you bring up Anthony the floor plans you don't want to mark them we don't mark it yet I was going to mark it A4 uh collectively I know there's more than one sheet but collectively the floor plan will be marked A4 thank you the proposed dwelling is um going to uh modular so a letter um a waiver was requested from providing signed and sealed architect plans however um the modular company has provided floor plans um and these are the floor plans that the applicant will use generally um the first floor contains two bedrooms a living room dining room kitchen it's measuring 50 by 31 there is a full bath on the first floor and there is uh room for washing machines for you to for there is room for washing machines um on the first floor there um I'm sorry there are two there are there are there is a full bath and then there is um in addition a half bath on the first floor on the second floor is um contains only two bedrooms closets and a full bath with a hallway in total the applicant is Seeking a dwelling that will have four bedrooms additionally this will be constructed on an unfinished basement soil testing was done and there um was no seasonal high water indicated greater than 10 ft regarding um the roadway as depicted on the um on the site plan the driveway is near the intersection of Reed and pinville and as mentioned earlier and um this can be seen on the on the plot plan there exists across the street um an existing driveway servicing um a garage farther down farther into the roadway the applicants driveway is proposed near the intersection upon a site visit the roadway is in poor condition there is considerable runting um and this is um classified as a semi-improved road um beyond the property uh there is a sign pavement ends at this point there still is pavement it is in poor condition um however the applicant is this is a single family home and the applicant would be requesting a waiver from uh providing um improvements but will agree to comply with what the board will require regarding roadway improvements as this is only a single family home and the driveway is closer to the intersection than an existing driveway already and the intensity of use will be di Minimus versus what is existing regarding sidewalk the applicant will again comply with what the board um will require there is no sidewalk along this um side of the road and any sidewalk that would be installed will terminate and will not lead uh to any other sidewalk and I believe it is Justified to Grant a waiver from installing sidewalk and the applicant would be um contributing to the Jackson Township pedestrian funds and that would apply to both re and parentville there are no sidewalk continuing along read or continuing along parentville so any sidewalk installed would end at both ends of the of the property uh as far as the the report and the uh variances these are all C variances is that correct these are all C variances if you can just give the justification the three VAR before before you do that I just had one question um you did address the uh the the unfinished basement um any attic Space Storage purposes only yes correct thank you and again it's a it's a um prefab modular home so yes okay so again um the applicant is seeking um Varian relief from providing the required lot area where this is an R3 zone three acres are required and a little bit over one acre is being provided the minimum lot depth of 400 is required and 234. one ft is provided both of those are existing the property is presently undeveloped and the proposal is to in construct a dwelling that will not conform with the 80 foot front yard setback and will be placed at 60 ft this um this um these would fall under C variances these could be justified under both um C1 and C2 uh the lot area and the lot depth are existing it is irregularly shaped additionally as shown on the aerial exhibit with the Set uh setback lines shown and the minimal area to construct a home that would also constitute I believe a hardship and the construction of the home with the uh requested variants of 60 uh of 60 fet where 80s required would constitute a hardship additionally uh before we get to the negative criteria it would also constitute the requested relief would comply with the C2 um in that it is it is advancing the um Municipal land use law it is advancing the first um the first uh purpose it is encouraging Municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote the public health safety morals and general welfare in order to for uh an applicant to demonstrate that variance relief is Justified under C2 in addition to advancing the purpose of the mlul it has to be demonstrated that the benefits of of the deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment the detriment is again there are um there are vary there are lot area lot depth and and front setback um relief being requested and as shown in the aerial there are other um homes in the area which also do not comply with um the um the setbacks the detriment would be um Dem Minimus and the benefit of being able to develop the lot with a single family home which is not an intense devel velopment would um outweigh any detriment in order to satisfy the negative criteria it has to be established that the relief could be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and it will not substantially impair the intent of the purpose of the zoning plan and that can be satisfied by demonstrating that any detriment to the public good resulting from the variance will be outweighed by the benefits and as Dem as previously mentioned the um benefits for the public good in providing a lot which could be developed will outweigh any detriment which is Dem Minimus um as previously explained and I therefore believe the board would be justified in granting the um the C1 and C2 variance relief for the requested uh variances as per the plan that is our application if the board obviously has any questions or the professionals have any comments we're happy to address them for the chair couple questions and clarifications for you Eric uh you are proposing a basement correct correct okay so the I thought I heard we thought we heard crawl space but I think you were referring to storage in the Attic correct correct correct based on the floor plans this is a Cape Cod style home is that correct yes okay uh we we there's there's some additional details we'd like to see on a revise plan uh most of those details typical for single family home type applications we're okay with reviewing during resolution compliance uh limits of tree clearing we'd like to see on the plan uh some some additional grading proposed grading yes uh the soil boring you have you have notes indicating that you you did a soil I guess a test pick or a boring I don't see I don't have that in my paperwork I will include that on the revised plans it was done in the area of the septic of the proposed septic field typically you would also have to do one in the footprint of the dwelling itself too right so just be prepared that you'll have to do that and we like to flush out a lot of these details during resolution compliance phase that way the plot plan is pretty much the similar is exactly basically it's plot plan level quality so there's no issues between here here uh because we have to um any approval for resolution compliance is also the preliminary engineering approval so you skip that step with the town engineer so um a driveway apron detail I we see on the plan that you have a concrete driveway apron so thank you for that but just need a detail for that um the recharge calculations I think you need to revisit they appear to be cut and paste from a prior job um are you're not proposing osing to only recharge the rear half of the structure are you we will propose for the entire structure okay and there's no pool housee proposed correct no okay so it's a it's a cut and paste note that's what I assumed now the the other item for the that I want to bring to the board's attention is for septic systems so this is an undersized lot in the R3 zone right it's just just under an acre or just about an acre just over I'm sorry just over an acre uh historically the board has has um required the use of an alternative treatment unit or an ATU system for septic for for applicants who are proposing to develop on undersized lots for the Zone okay so what that means is the septic systems there's you know we we like to see a septic system um that incorporates alternative treatment consistent with those approved by the pine lands right and the reason why we would like to see those is those systems are based on a different model than than the conventional system whereas they're heavily favored and skewed and modeled for um for nitrate delusion at property lines and that's important when you have higher density being proposed in an area where it's it's than the Z than the Zone allows so um you know while it's not an ordinance requirement it is it has been the board's practice to request that an ATU system be installed so you can make certainly make that request to the applicant and I would just point out to the applicant that most other applicants in the past have been favorable to that so and on that point uh we've had we we did anticipate that might be a comment from the board we've had discussions with the client and we if the board does uh the board would like to see that uh we would agree as a condition of approval uh to install that septic that system I mean but beyond that that's those are my comments if the board has any questions for me I can answer them I'll try to answer the other is that that area I went out took the it's also very and what I would to see clearcut no it we're not going to be clear cutting we're going to clear as much as we need for the house but it's not going to be clear cutting we're going to work uh with the Township's uh uh tree within the ordinance because we'll have to probably replant some additional trees but we're not looking to I understand what you I drove it also I've not been there in many years in that area I did recently just drive uh drive there today um and yes we're not clear cutting if that's the concern I don't have a suggestion the other the other is flooding you may have mentioned something about flooding but I know the road is just a strange demography out there does this create any type of a flooding scenario that would be an issue for the based upon what intend build so um I can tell you you know I don't have very highly detailed grading plans in front of me um but Bas based on what I can see here there the grading is not going to adversely affect any any of the adjacent Property Owners nor will it create a flooding condition within the road and I say that because the applicant has agreed uh to manage and infiltrate the storm water runoff from the roof so really the only the only additional runoff would be that associated with the clearing of vegetation and converting it to lawn and and the asphalt driveway U th those tend to be di Minimus in nature you know the condition of the existing road is is is semi-improved yes it could use some additional Improvement but it is a Township Road um U I can tell you historically the board has not required applicants to do any roadway improvements along the road because it is a Township Road especially for a single family home if it was developer blowing in 15 20 30 homes and obviously that's that's a trigger for roadway improvements in this case since there not there are no Curbing and sidewalks I do suggest though that the board um consider a a contribution to The Pedestrian safety Fund in lie of building in lie of constructing Curbing and sidewalks along the frontage um there are no Curbing and sidewalks on this side of the road there is Curbing and sidewalk walk along Reed Road um and I think did I answer your all your questions okay thank you any other questions for the applicant any other Witnesses Mr Feer I have the applicant here but only to answer any questions that the board may have but if not that's our that's our uh that's our case Okay anyone have any questions for the applicant do you feel the need to have him bring him up okay I'm going to open this for a public session anyone wishing to come forward and make comments about this application please come forward just have a question really uh you need to be sworn in sir thank you for raising your hand do you solemly swear from the testimony information questions or comments they about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes if you would please state your name spell your last and provide your address um yeah Carlos Martins M TS can I just say Jackson resident I have to give you my street address I prefer your full address please I prefer to just say Jackson resident is that okay I've seen others do that so I prefer to do that where in relation to this property you reside it's in my Township right so again as a resident um so here's my question um kind of heard an explanation of the benefit that this was going to have building a single family home on a one acre um to the township and to the neighbors and all that kind of stuff that wasn't clear to me what that benefit was I think the board has said that the bet you're an R3 you need three acres to build a house that'll be beneficial I don't understand what the benefit is of building a house on a one acre right I think that was one of the criteria so what's the benefit applicant wants to address said that's fine it's not my a housing it's a Housing Opportunity for who how does that benefit the township though wasn't that the rule that you read that it benefit everybody how does it benefit anybody the town you guys have decided that the benefit is to build it on three acres that's why you zoned it an R3 now you're telling us well no it's also beneficial if you do an R1 okay that's not let me finish my question go ahead that's not clear to me why it's a benefit and I would like an explanation on I will let Mr feffer in just one second address the benefit but let me just clarify something and put on the record the zoning board does not make the ordinances or the master plan so we didn't require R3 the purpose of the zoning board is to decide any Resident yourself included has the ability to come before us to get a variance so there's a rule in place you have the ability to come before us to get a variance do not have to adhere to each and every rule as you can see there's different situations every lot doesn't look like that we have rules for they they have rules for very different things so as a resident you have the ability to come before us if your property does not meet every strict requirement I I I understand so just to be clear then who said who said that the right acreage for this area was three acres if it wasn't you guys somebody did because that's the rule right and when that rule was set sir that's an ordinance that's passed by councel sorry who's Council to Township Council sir the Govern body understand right you guys another thing is respectfully you're talking about rules but you wouldn't give me your address which is a rule of testifying so it can't be a rule because I've seen it many times on YouTube that you guys just say Jackson correct I can't I can't speak for the board sir but I can tell you this board okay hold on one minute I I would think I can't remember one time in the three years I've been on this board that we've allowed that okay all right okay you may have seen other boards I cannot speak to them okay but this where we require okay that's fair so let me give you my address and then I will go to YouTube find that exact spot and I'll send it to you okay uh so I live on 406 Cobain Road I think I've been there about 10 years and um I think others could probably testify that many people come up here and just say Jackson but anyway um so I still have that question whatever board this one is because it's a little confusing it says adjustment board and then the zone board who's who okay on the agenda it says something different there no it doesn't it says the Zoning Board of adjustment of Jackson Township which is exactly what this board is so there are two land use boards in the township I I didn't know we were doing a cfic lesson but there are two but you guys brought it up there are there are two land use boards in the township of Jackson there's one is the planning board the board of adjustments that's the zoning Board of adjustments zoning on here anywhere sure it doesn't need to this is the Jackson Township Zoning Board of adjustment the ml the ml clearly defines this as a zoning Board of adjustment all right so now I turn out to look like the bad guy and the out of control because you can't and you keep attacking me so please stop so that I can look like a normal person here okay can you say that to him ex agreed agreed agreed okay okay agreed I would just ask that Mr attorney Murphy there listen to your advice can he listen to your advice you know what you're done I'm cutting it off is he allowed to do that absolutely okay please keep your comments to your don't address sir Mr feffer I apologize you like to respond yeah just real quickly to recap again uh Mr aler has already provided the justification but again it is a uh I remind the board we are in a R3 residential Zone uh these are residential lots uh as I started from the onset actually there are actually three lots so by making this application one of the first things that I indicated to the board was is that as a condition of approval should you approve it we would agree to consolidate these three lots into one 1.13 acre plus or minus whatever it is uh which you now have a lot one lot that is closer um to to the 3 Acre minimum um additionally uh just for everyone's knowledge should the board not agree and they would and you would deny it there's actually it's actually known as a reverse condemnation where the township would then be at a be put into a position where they actually have to go ahead and come out of pocket as opposed to having a Housing Opportunity that someone's going to be paying taxes on they then have to actually it's a process but they would be actually writing a check as if it was a buildable lot so again there are many positives that that we are proposing but this is like I said from the beginning a simple straightforward isolated 1. one uh 1.15 1.13 size lot um with a single family house we can resume public session anyone else wishing to come forward to make comment please do so sir my glasses I'm sorry forgive me I don't mean to be rude and interrupt you I'm sorry could you just remember to speak in it's hard to hear up here it may seem like we hear it all but we don't okay they're directional the all right if you would please scalino s c a l a b r i have to sir I have to swear you R okay do you solemnly swear for that the testimony information questions or comments you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do if you would please state your name and spell your last and provide your address my name is s last name is scalabrino s c a l a r i n o I live at 17 uh 715 read Road directly across from their proposed property okay uh I don't think I have any uh things that um violate any of your rules uh he pointed out a building that was on my property that's a garage just for the record okay uh why I'm here tonight um the rules are you need 130,000 square feet to build a home he only has 4950 okay this is an extreme application an application like this is what's pissing people off in your town okay if if if he was off by and what I'm going to say say wait a minute uh the lot debt is supposed to be 400 he's only at 234 the setback is supposed to be 80 he's only at 60 I mean we heard a lot about bathrooms and uh washers and dryers but we didn't get down to the actual numbers for the board to hear okay and that's why I'm here tonight I'm opposing this I think that the board should show its integrity and and knock this plan right down and it the house does not conform with the neighborhood we all have ranches and a lot of our houses have been there before 1980 so uh you know I think it was a nice presentation but I'm opposing it can I ask one question what's what's that what is the size of your lot I have an acre in a quarter and you're in the same R3 Zone correct I'm directly across the street from you thank you okay your your your application is in my eyes I'm not Builder I'm not an engineer but these are the numbers you're uh you're an attorney you sent me you're way way out of bound okay and not only that uh if you were close I wouldn't even be here I would say build your house you're way off and I and I think you're ruining the Integrity of Jackson by even coming here to present this please please direct your comments to the board oh I'm I'm sorry but uh approximately he did ask me he did ask me a question approximately what is uh the size of your home I have a 2100t house and you have an accessory garage just one I have a garage that's been there since the 80s it's a fourcc car garage four car garage and it's a separate build it's a separate building is all matter it's a separate building thank you yeah well it doesn't need a septic in a well you know that right it's a separate building from your house a separate building it's been here since the 1980s is 2024 sorry go ahead sir good evening sir if you would please raise your right hand thank you do you somly swear affirm the testimony information questions or comments you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do thank you very much sir if you would please state your name spell your last and provide your address John Mains m i NES just like to stay to me with an s and I've lived next to these lots for 45 your address please sir excuse me I'm sorry your if M NES your address 718 Reed Road thank you this whole thing about these build buildable Lots has got me so confused like all my neighbors how are you can have a 3 Acre minimum and have something so long and skinny that the two corners from the back of that house can you assure me that that's going to be more than 35 ft to the property line it's almost everybody's worried about the frontage I'm worried about the rear because I'm the neighbor uh just just for the record the um applicant did indicate that they're not seeking any side yard or rear yard setback variances so they would comply with those setback requirements honestly if they would leave all the trees around and made very little lawn we wouldn't have to see the house that's what we feel about but everybody else has a ranch and this is basically a two-story house if you were out there if you Liv there I'm sure you would see the Dilemma thank you Mr M if I could just ask one question do you know the approximate size of your lot approximate size of my lot is about S8 maybe 3/4 to seven8 of an acre it was bought by the debau or the Catherine deau I was never even contacted in 45 years about buying those lots no obligation I would have bought them years ago I there's no obligation but your your Lots about you said three4 of an acre plus or minus yeah and approximately what's the size of your house square footage uh 950 thank you that's what I'm saying your house is way over anyone else wishing to come forward good evening sir if you would please raise your right hand raise your right hand sorry I have to do a better job talking in the microphone thank you um do you Solly swear or affirm that the testimony information questions or comments you're about to present before the board will rep present the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do if you would please state your name spell your last name and provide your address uh my name is Ernest Manchester just like the man Township it's m an c h s t e r I'm at 738 Reed Road which is directly facing my pole bar is facing their uh their house I have a few questions about the setback on the the back of the house I mean everybody has a lot but they're all conforming to to their neighbors as far as privacy you're talking less than 50 ft to for John's house I mean once you clear it you're obviously going to clear all that those trees down and that lot is completely treed so they're going to take down all those trees and his lot is empty right over there so basically he's going to be looking at these people and most of the houses that are small are on these small lots and there are ranches the bigger houses that they have on the street are all big Big Lots my lot is uh under just under two acres I'm on the corner there I have a pole barn on the side facing the Pineville Road and I my house faces Reed Road I have aund something foot uh setback of my house and what you said about John's house they saying his setback his house got to be 60 feet or better I they said it was whatever it was the setback 30 something if you cting the setback from the township the first 10 ft is that what we're talking about the setback for John's house were they said he only had 30 something feet from the the road to his house I I've been past this house plenty of times it's got to be close to 60 feet yeah I don't know what they're saying about him only having 30 feet plus his house there's nobody in the backyard he has PL privacy this house is is is uh ruin the privacy of his whole backyard I mean plus it's a two story this is an awful small a big house for a small lot like that my house is only 30 uh what 30 by 60 it's a ranch and they're doing a two-story house it's is almost as wide as my house and they're going up to with four bedrooms that's a lot of uh acreage for a small lot like that wouldn't you say and I just think that it's the the the way the lot is signed they're talking about 200 and something feet is that to that point way in the back from the road to all the way to the back because I know it's not even 100t uh on the road in the front it's less than 100 feet so there must be talking about from that very point to the the road would you like to live in a house where somebody's got 50 ft from your property line I don't think anybody in this whole courtroom would want to have that having somebody have their backyard facing you like that it's not fair to the neighborhood to have something like that I don't mind it being a lot but that lot is just a weird shape it's not really uh friendly to the neighborhood and besides that they they're going to have to clear most of 90% of that lot is as far as those trees I mean to have any kind of between the driveway the house and the backyard and the septic and the well they're going to have to clear most of that lot so it's definitely going to change the whole environment in that thing and it is kind of a pine land area I mean I have the house there and I've lived in milstone before this and it just acrossing that 195 area the soil changes drastically you know there nothing but sand so I think it's not fair that uh you know that the house is positioned the way it is that's all I really have to say thank thank you for coming forward sir all right thank you if I could just ask approximately what's the size of your lot my lot is uh a little shy of two acres yeah and I do have at least 100 setback on my front of my house and deci side and the worst part about it is too is we have uh being a corner lot you have to give up a lot of your lot to build on you know you py bille Road in there because when I put the pole barn on I was all lucky enough that when I I first submitted it they uh told me I had to have the 80 foot setback but for some reason when I drew it on the map it came out to 60 feet which they're telling me you only have 40 it's kind of the road sort of angles a little bit but 90% of it is 60 feet from the road to the my P bar but they told me if I could produce a letter saying they approved it and they did approve it for the 60 ft he said uh he would approve the me put the this board approved it sir pardon this board approved it you had to get a variance for that no the zoning uh the guy that uh approves the zoning the zoning board he when I proposed the put the barn pole barn on my property you know it was at the 60 ft he approved it but when I came for the final he told me that you know I can't put the pole bar there and I said well you already approved it that he said but if you can produce a letter saying that I approved it you could have it and I produced the letter and he's he approved it for the 60 ft but otherwise they would told me I had to bring it back 80 ft all right thank you for coming forward Mr feffer do you want to address his comment about the distance of Mr Main's house from the RO yeah a couple uh a couple comments that uh that I heard one last time I checked there there is no bulk Sanders for conforming to privacy uh again we've indicated as as Mr book had asked to make sure that one we're not going to be a clear cutting we've agreed to that um I know that there there's got to be some word Smith in terms of a resolution uh in speaking with uh with Mr Alpert he recommended that in the rear of the property even though we're complying in the rear of a 50ft setback to doing at a minimum a 10t uh strip you know of not taking down at 10 feet of of those trees um so I think that again we have no variance in the rear anyway U but we're going to at a minimum give another 10 feet um in the rear of of uh of trees would you agree to a condition of say a 10t strip of existing that's what I'm saying we won't be taking it down I don't think it's necessary anyway it gives our client the Privacy that's already existing without having to plant uh trees or what or put you know putting up the fence and whatnot so um yeah we we could agree upon that language but yeah I'm just saying it's an additional it's not a requirement additionally I heard that you know this is similar to a Pinelands rather in the Pinelands or we're not in the Pinelands and this is not in the Pinelands but we've already agreed should the board request it we have no objection to putting in the Pinelands required septic system um so again all those concerns that that I'm hearing you know we're trying to tell everybody we're we're complying um I'll keep my other comments to the closing St do you know anybody has backyard anticipation like that though I mean facing somebody's backyard would you would like to have somebody put a house like that so under the law what what I'm looking at is is what I would consider an exceptional shaped a lot yeah it's weird yeah I mean I I mean I I feel for the people that own the property don't get me wrong I mean they should be able to build something but it's just a weird lot I mean and it's not for the neighborhood it's it's just weird and you're going to have to clear all those trees uh there was and the house is PR big for a little lot like that you got to admit right I mean John's house is a small ranch theot over one acre right lotlot .13 acres and I just want to so we're complying with the we're complying with the 50ft setback and additionally from the property line the neighbors property is another 30 feet um and we've agreed to keep the 10 feet of of existing vegetation these are mature trees I mean I just drove there today I mean it's well densed I mean the it's going to be pretty hard seeing through those trees or over them because it's one backyard the way it is it's going to be clear you could see we just we just indicated that we're not we would agree to leave 10 ft of the existing vegetation on the rear line of the neighbor's property so that there is none of that issue yeah because it' be in a two-story building because most of the big houses they were on lot Big Lots Big Lots all the small ranches are on uh you know the the smaller Lots all right um sorry um unless I misunderstood one of the prior Neighbors St that they had a 2100t home on one acre so you're not talking a huge difference I understand your concerns yeah but his his lot when you look at it he has complete privacy his house faces re Road and the side where he has his garage is on primeville road but there's nobody behind him how many feet do you have behind your house yeah yeah he's got quite a you know you're talking 50 feet to somebody else's backyard and I don't care if you take out those 10 feet of trees there's not that many trees that are going to block anything it's it's it's is a privacy issue there this is not condos and stuff like this is residential area understand sir I have a question for the applicant and you're talking at 250 it's got to be that point it can't be the whole lot okay thank you for coming forward Mr Feer there seems to be some concern over privacy with regard to I I presume it facing that the house will be facing that lot that appears to have no I I guess that's the garage that you're facing so you're you're not facing a home you're facing you're facing a okay two two different two different properties two different properties okay all right I'm just one we're going to be facing a p bar and one we're going to be facing a a garage a fourcc car garage and then the other side is the rear is the backyard which we again from the rear of our property to their house is 80 ft if you come combine the two properties along with we're keeping and I I'm I don't want to estimate the height of these trees they are well matured trees um that have been up there and we're agreeing to leave a strip of 10 feet at a minimum all right look at the we'll pull up the area we could zoom in there there are a lot of trees it's all green you propose somebody go down there a number of us have already looked at the property sir but you've already had a chance to make comments Mr uh anyone else wishing to come forward please do so yes you only have one opportunity to speak sir on this on this application correct good evening ma'am if you would please raise your right hand thank you very much do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony information questions or comments that you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you very much if you would please state your name spell your last and provide your address could you put the mic down there you go like that thank you yes my name is Jean MS m a i NES I'm John's wife and we live at 718 Reed Road in Jackson thank you and we are adjacent to the the lots that they are asking a variance on okay I do disagree that there's so many other homes in the area that have two floors in our immediate area everybody is a single floor dwelling if you go all the way down Reed Road there's maybe three houses down there huge houses on huge pieces of property that have two floors and if you go into the development that they put on Reed Road those floors have those houses have two floors but in our immediate area they are single family one floor homes okay and um my husband misstated that um we were never offered the opportunity to buy the property we were offered that opportunity soon after we moved into our house we bought it from Jimmy deau deau realy in 1979 we've been there for 45 years and those lots were offered to us by Jimmy deau our realtor for $10,000 at the time and we didn't have the money because we just bought the house from there and our bank account was pretty much cleared out so much to my surprise I learned from Mr feffer that now the fair market price of those lots is $400,000 so that was out a question for us I said I didn't I did not say it was 400,000 I said it would be a fair market value and I said I'm not an appraiser but it would be based upon a buildable lot in the area I didn't say I didn't I never said 400,000 $400,000 it would be whatever the fair market value is based upon a licensed appraisal in the area for a buildable lot I did not put a price on I specific that's true he did not say that that's true okay but anyway we were surprised to find that out and my other question was was how far from our property line would the back of this proposed home be and he said it would be around 50 feet and I don't know if that's within your ordinances or not that something can be built that close to you I'm not sure but even if we put up a fence the fence can only be like what six feet high and we're still going to see two floors so you know it's it's very close to us and the other question that I had too was and this is like kind of on a different sort of matter but it applies to Any House in the area what's to stop any owner of any house in our area from changing it from a single family home to a business or you know some other function other than a single family home and Mr Feer said that you'd have to go for a change of use and I guess that's another variance they would have to ask for but is there any way that the people in our area can protect themselves and the value of our homes from letting that happen as I indicated again it's a it's a single family Zone uh any other use would have to come before the board for use variant and I made it clear this is a application solely for the purpose of a single family house so I I can't provide you with legal advice um I'm here to provide the board with legal advice um however what I can tell you is that uh there's a case um that was decided uh called uh dalm versus I think it was Lacy Township and the do the courton dalm was very sensitive um to undersiz lot cases um because what happens is is if these variances are not granted um we're essentially saying that if you look at that I'm not a good shapes guy if you look at that triangle in the middle of the lot uh you know that's the buildable area if you were to comply with every single set back in the zone that's why the Zoning Board of adjustment exists because that's inherently unfair right uh everybody's entitled to use their property and if if if they need to seek variances that's why we exist right I'm not saying that the board is necessarily going to Grant this application but I would caution the board because again the dalme case was very clear if you're not going to permit him to build uh you know a a a a home on this particular type of lot uh which is zoned uh residential for a single family dwelling you're essentially Inver inversely condemning the lot which means that the township is going to have to pay for the lot nobody wanted to buy it so offered like I said the that that may very well be the case but that would be at the fair market value as if the variances that were requested here in have been approved and was a buildable lot so keep that in mind and we did Mark the first exhibit is my Buy sell letters uh which we did provide and were sent and they've a they received and I will note that the applicant has complied with do Meer and has done the buy sell letters and that's what the court is required and not that I'm any kind of expert on Frontage and what's required and all that but I can tell you that several times a year there's a front loader is that what they call it that goes up and down Pineville Road and every time it goes up and down Pineville Road gets a little bit wider so they might think they're getting so much Frontage but maybe eventually they won't have that much thank you for coming forward ma'am thank you anyone else wishing to come forward and comment seeing no one else come forward I'm going to close public session Mr feffer closing comment yeah just just real quick just a few quick comments um I I think it's very clear that the applicant has done um a very good job in terms of Designing a house that's complying as much as he can um again the rear setback is 50 ft we are over 50 ft from the rear of the property uh if we had the 3 acres we if we went call it we moved left and we owned more of that land the house would be at the same location and would be right in the same spot in terms of the backyard um we've agreed as a condition should the board approve uh for an extra um to leave 10 feet of the existing uh mature trees um in the rear of the property we've agreed uh Evan had some some comments and we we we've agreed we would comply with all of those comments um additionally uh I believe the I heard that the board would like to see the enhanced septic as if it was in the pin lands uh the applicant would have no objection to same um just as far as the the front yard setback I think uh as Mr Halpert had had testified to there are other houses in the area that this 60 feet would not be uncommon it would not look out of place or out of line um I also want to point out that again we are doing the variant if we wanted to shift the house up more and give even though we don't have a variant in the back we'd be increasing the variant in the front yard and I point out the only thing that's across the street are is on one side of pull bar and the other side of fourcc car garage that's a standalone bu building um we believe this is the best design and the best location uh for the home um again we will comply with the board if they want the sidewalks installed again I I drove through it I don't think it's it's it would be sidewalk to nowhere and I don't think it's ever going to go anywhere we would uh ask if we just pay into the fund as required by the uh by the ordinance uh and with that I I do agree uh I believe we've met the criteria of the dalm case and we would ask the board to vote uh in favor of this application thank you thank you board it's up to us for a possible motion or for discussion chair car you could just use your microphone I'm sorry is it on Hello hello hello he thought I pressed the right buttons um observations are uh I think the C1 hardship variance is appropriate when you look at the description of the property in that small red triangle it creates a a sliver of an area for this applicant to build his house and he's he's fit it in there his best he can so I think he's making best efforts to put uh to put the Lots together to create the one put a house in a in a spot that he possibly build a house in or can build a house in if we approve his application that is not something he created if he created it I'd say we have a different issue but he did not create it if um if if we thought that there's some substantial harm to the public good or some substantial hard harm to our our ordinance or to our zoning plan uh that would be a negative criteria issue I don't see any substantial harm to the public good I don't see any substantial detriment to our to our zoning plan or to our ordinance so from the point of view of C1 uh I my observation is that it's applicable I think they've satisfied the requirements of dmire in terms of sidewalk waiver um it seems the sidewalk waiver under these circumstances is appropriate I've been out there I took a look there are no sidewalks anywhere but contribution to the fund would be uh would be appropriate uh also based upon the the the uh testimony of the and also the information that Evan placed upon upon the record about the road that being a Township Road I don't see that there's a necessity of requiring the applicant to make any road Improvement to barango Road um we did agree the applicant did agree to the ATU system so I make that a condition and I think that's it and with that I would move to approve the application that was perfectly said nothing to say on my part any other comments no I just wanted to make one comment um I just heard a bunch of the neighbors you know making this comment about the fact that it's a two-story home um that's uncharacteristic of the neighborhood I think that it's even still it's would make sense um because if they needed that square footage then they would be going and asking for further variances to expand the home making it into Ranch encroaching further on the neighbors and I don't think that would make it any better but I think Mr book uh laid it out very nicely and I agree with his assessment I have a few comments as well um we heard the neighbors comments I don't want any of the neighbors to think that they were not heard um definitely seems I commiserate with the plight of having someone's entire backyard be you know sort of becoming uh someone else's house as as it seems to feel like to them um but I don't think that any of us heard any arguments that rise to um the level of a legal argument that creates a hardship so I think you know the reverse condemnation of this you know we can't deny the applicant the use of his property um all the concerns about the height they're not violating a height restriction um one of the neighbors uh actually seemed to reinforce the case about how unique the shape of this lot is um that actually makes it a hardship for the applicant and and um really makes their case to sort of give us something that we we have to we have to give them use of their property they have a hardship they have a very unique property shape um and and in the undersized lot um and uh building coverage as well you know the size it's not relevant if it doesn't exceed the building coverage uh percentages um and and I did some math as far as the they're not building unreasonably uh the the depth of the property is not of the structure is not unre unreasonably large and if you look at the um what they have left from that little triangle if you would comply with the 80 foot front yard setback that means taking 20 feet off of the property line unless we would be encroaching into the rear yard setback that would leave them with 11 feet um which is not a useful amount of space so and if and if they would move it further back I think uh the the applicants attorney um laid out how that would interfere with more with the neighbors that that have the adjoining rear yard property line um and uh so those are just my comments I don't I don't want the neighbors to think that they were not heard um but we just the the application um it they have a hardship they from the shape of the property and the size they did not create those hardships they've done a very good job on working within what they have to put something that's very reasonable and when you weigh the positive and negatives of this application to me it seems like it's uh it's I I would agree with the motion and the second then the other board members comments Dr H yes just to agree with the last few speak is the the house and use it a lot is not a substantial detriment to the zoning laws or ordinances or to the neighborhood this lot has been in the family for for many many years and uh they entitled to use it and I I think they've gone out of their way to try to conform as much as possible uh on on a lot that doesn't conform to most of the uh that most of the people would like it to and uh I I cannot see denying this at all okay we have a motion in a second roll call please Mr Stafford Smith yes Mr book yes Mr Hudak yes M parz yes Mr Hyman yes Dr Holstein yes Miss Bradley yes Mr thank thank you Mr Pape you will be up next we're going to take a 10-minute break we'll return at 9 o'cl thank you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e leing back to order Mr peep good evening Madam chair board members board professionals and members of the public my name is Kenneth Pape of the firm hurn pape I have the privilege and the responsibility of representing your applicant A Partners this evening this is the first this is the first time that application has been presented to the board and if I may ask that you confirm receipt of our notices and establish jurisdiction of the board to hear the application so confirmed thank you counselor this is an application requesting use variance relief preliminary and final site plan and limited bulk variance relief there are two proposed uses on the property that we present to you there is a 9,000 square foot building in the written application materials it was identified as office retail the applicant is amending that to office only no retail element it is an office building and there's a second building 4,000 square feet that is located to the rear of the property and that is a maintenance garage building for our clients um business I've before the meeting I before the this hearing began I asked your counselor if I could profer some State statements on behalf of our client with me this evening is es seino who is one of the applicants her family her mother her father her brother and she are your applicant they are PM construction she's the controller of the the company and has been for some time and we have she has been the our contact person that we have worked with to prepare this application and she has assisted me in putting together an operation statement with permission I will profer that operation statement to the board and then asked that she confirm the accuracy and completeness I offered that and to be efficient I think it would be the most efficient way of putting that testimony before the board Mr Murphy is that an acceptable procedure uh Mr Fae I will represent to the board that you and I had that discussion uh during the break um I take no issue so long as your um your witness confirms the accuracy of the um of the uh the statement of operations very fine and members of the the board members ESI saino will stay with us us through the entire application and if there are additional questions um now or later she is available to respond so if I may I'll offer to you the following operation statement first what there are two buildings on the property our client's business is PM construction and they are in the site construction industry they're looking for a place to have their corporate headquarters that would be the second floor of the front office building they would take the second floor 4500 ft that's their corporate headquarters the building behind is a maintenance building you'll hear that they have a a large storage yard in Union New Jersey and that will continue this is intended to be an ancillary site there'll be a maintenance building and there'll be limited opportunity to do storage uh on on the rear of the site so the statement that I have been authorized to present to you is as follows this is PM constructions operations it is a family-owned business run by husband and wife and their two children all four family members moved in recent years so that they're in central New Jersey they're actually all very close to the Border Millstone and Jackson and that is the motivation to have their corporate headquarters here traveling to the office up north became an inconvenience for them this property became available and it it suited their needs their business is 24 years old the business provides site development including site clearing excavations soil erosion measures concrete work asphalt milling and Paving utility installation and storm water installation they are a union shop all of their workers not their administrative Personnel but all of their skilled workers are all union members that is the way they operate this is intended to be their corporate headquarters the maintenance building is intended to be an ancillary use to the corporate headquarters they they would like to have the ability to do limited maintenance on their equipment the storage is also an ancillary use to the their corporate headquarters as I indicate they continue to own a large storage yard where they have had for years in Union New Jersey where they store most of their equipment as a practical matter storing their equipment isn't something that they do very regularly because equipment stays out it stays on the jobsite it rarely comes in some of the paving equipment Milling machines and Paving machines are not used during the winter months and those are in fact stored regularly none of the other equipment has a regular storage schedule and as New Jersey goes to be a 12month of the Year construction state they're out 12 months of the year they have 35 employees during the peak season and the peak Seasons become a 12 month season they currently have six office employees and and anticipate that that is a stable number in the maintenance building they anticipate that there will be two or three employees currently they have two maintenance Personnel they have a substantial list of equipment and Machinery um just about all of it stays out at sites the ma vast majority when it is stored would be in Union this would not be a primary storage facility equipment would be here for limited storage or for maintenance they do not have fuel Fu trucks they do not have fuel trucks they have a third-party company that Services their equipment and brings fuel to the site they do not have fuel trucks they do wish to have a onsite fuel tank it would be over the road diesel as opposed to Blue diesel which is off-road diesel it would be an above ground fuel tank and it would be fully conforming with all applicable fire and construction code requirements their yard operation is 6:00 a.m. to 6: PM they have activity begins as early as 6 and ends at 600 pm. their office is normal business hours 8 to 5 that's not to say that asme or other members of a family don't sit at their desk into the late hours but their scheduled office hours are 8 to 5 almost all of their employees do not come to any of their sites their employees go to the work sites they conduct uh they have available for their employees a a van pooling systems to make it convenient for their employees the employees who would come to the site would be the ones who work in the office the maintenance personnel and if there's someone who was picking up a truck he would leave his car and take the truck um off off site that is is the description of the business that was put together by our clients and with your permission I'll ask that as me join us I ask if she would just join us I'll swear her in I'll have her establish her relationship with the company and ask that she confirm the accuracy of the statements that I've just made on her behalf wonderful and I presume if the board has any questions about that statement we would be open to answering them anytime uh at this time anytime this time I think you'd have a more complete picture a little bit later after Mr until he testifies but at any time I have some questions of my own but I'm pretty sure the board would ask them anyway so let's uh let's let's get um let's get you swor it if you would please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony information questions or comments that you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth yes I do if you would please state your name spell your last name and pro uh provide your uh well we've established that you're the controller of the of the uh entity seeking the U approvals tonight um so if you would uh just please um State and State your name and spell your last as me seino s v r i n o and Miss Severino so the protocol is intact your home address nine havland Drive milstone New Jersey 08535 thank you you're welcome by may I just made statements on the record with your permission I would ask if you could confirm that the statements that I made on behalf of your company PM construction are accurate and complete yes they are Mr P do you intend to submit a written copy of this to the board I have a written copy of it if if you could you can just give it to um Mr Boro and we'll mark that A1 through the chair I don't want track going know yes I'll Prov questions it's entirely up to you if you have plan for that in your presentation I'll just sit back and wait but would like more detail on the main so we described that there's 4000 building on property we described that there's a 4,000 foot building on the property and it's intended for maintenance you had shared with us that most maintenance on your equipment and vehicles occurs at the job site what type of Maintenance would occur in the building that's proposed on the property basic oil changes filter changes any uh Tire changes to any of the pickup trucks or larger fleet vehicles and there was also a question that was raised before tonight as to does any of this maintenance occur in the yard or does it occur inside the maintenance building it's inside the maintenance building and you shared with us and there reasons for that it involves that's where their materials are that's where the lights are that's where their tools are that's where the lifts are we wouldn't be installing lifts for the vehicles as well Mr book any further that you wish to hear that's okay okay thank you I have while on site where would the vehicles be stored sorry while on site where would the vehicles be stored but Mr until can go through the physical site wonderful there is a yard of in the back of the property and that's the storage Peters Madam chair um Miss srino will any of the maintenance yard area that's not associated with the office building UPF front be leased to another person or entity no for our use only thank you we would stipulate and had that was coming a little bit later that the ancillary use of the maintenance building and storage yard would always be ancillary to a primary use meaning the office on the first in the building is Corporate Headquarters and the maintenance and storage is ancillary to that no separation no separate Tendencies for for the chair uh what what are the types of equipment to be stored in in approximate quantities that you would expect to be on site uh on on any given day we had gone through that there there is a large yard in Union and that is the reservoir where most of their equipment is kept most when it's kept most of the equipment is out at job sites so this is equipment that's come in for some form of Maintenance one to oine is the number of vehicles that could be on this site at most um maybe two or three dump trucks um possibly some light duty pickup trucks but not very much cuz that won't be the primary parking location for those and you're not proposing to store any types of materials construction materials in the yard at all the only type of construction material we would store is basically our inventory so water M pipe fittings valves fire hydrants PVC piping no stone um we don't store any stone cuz that all gets delivered to the job sites nothing comes back to the yard we don't bring back any millings we don't bring back any top soil any dirt that is not something that customary to our primary work business so as far as the types of materials um the maximum height that those materials would reach at any given time we know that it cannot exceed the proposed fence around the perimeter and we would stipulate to that which is six feet it's six feet so maximum storage height of any bulk material would be 6 ft uh but it's not bulk material such as sand and gravel it's not it's not it's not agregates correct it would just be um fittings material for sewer M installation water main installation possibly some pre-cast manhole structures which do not exceed the six foot and do you have uh do you have a what equipment would be moving that equipment moving that that material or loading that material is it a large front end loader is it uh forklift forklifts okay anything further Miss seino she'll not leave us any questions from Miss saino from the board uh yeah that's correct so I I I I guess we have an obor's attorney here um and if you would just come and place your appearance on the record please um and then of course you may uh ask some cross-examination questions my name is Paul Rivier um I represent an adjacent property owner who's also name is Paul Rivier Senor uh which happens to be my father um I just have some cross uh 7 in that statement that was um handwritten then read by your attorney you said that equipment um sort of es and flows um to the job sites with uh very minimal uh storage being taken place at your main site which is in North Jersey I don't remember the exact town and then this would be an ancillary site are you aware that there's three pieces of equipment that have been sitting at that site for quite some time already yes I am okay does that fit uh the course of your testimony that the equipment es and flows from job sites and is very rarely at the site um it does but there is a purpose for that equipment being stored there at the Curr moment I'm not sure if you're aware of the illegal dumping that was going on in the rear of the property um so we are trying to prevent that as we're not the ones doing the illegal dumping activities on there so that's kind of serving as a blockage of entrance to the side to the rear of the property okay and those are those are large pieces of equ correct yes it's a excavator and a wheel loader okay which would which is clearly blocking the rear entrance to the property and is eliminating the illegal dumping that was occurring on the property and approximately how many pieces are stored at your site in North Jersey how many pieces are stored at the site in North Jersey yes in Union uh pieces of equipment they're as you mentioned very large pieces of equipment so when they do come back it's possibly maxed three pieces of equipment at a time do you anticipate that large pieces of equipment would be coming to this ancillary site uh I would yes okay I have nothing further excuse me sir to the chair m r could you come back please I knew the name sounded familiar are you do you have anything to do with the property on lot eight I don't have anything to do with the property on lot eight other than representing my father who owns that lot I'm sorry didn't you I don't have anything to do with the property I don't have any ownership interest I just represent my father who owns that property but I don't have any ownership interest or vested interest in that property okay and does that property have anything to do with with the property you're discussing now well it's it it's I mean there's there's a lot of issues and we'll get through them as each expert as each expert comes and presents their their testimony in their case but um yes it's it's it's an adjoining lot it's very close the the largest issue that you're going to see tonight is that the in the the egress Ingress coming from this large industrial site which is proposed to go in there is going to basically destroy the in egress and Ingress to a a smaller lot that's which my father's is next door you're substantially looking at a at a takings case with the destroyed you represented access and if I recall you represented your father when when that that site was approved for the home when that when the say it was approved for yes yes yes just checking the name thank you yep no problem M chair yes I ask a quick question I'm just trying to make sure I understand what's going on in the office um um I believe the statement of operations said six employees yes that's correct I'm not usually one to argue about size of a building but it's it's a 9,000 foot office building correct overall yes is there anything else going on in there or is there an intention to expand the employee base it seemed like there wasn't is my the opening remarks and the ones that were confirmed upstairs is going to be corporate headquarters and downstairs is a is up to three office bill up to three office sites and they would be rented to third parties oh okay I missed that thanks or offered for rent to third parties we hope they're rent and the other questions chair EV Miss par has opened the door with her question so I'm going to ask another one what type of office uses would you anticipate renting leasing to and more specifically which ones would you are are you not proposing to lease to um so we're not looking for it to become a medical office building we're looking more for corporate office um an insurance agent a real estate agency um something with kind of to give the overall professional look of the building so professional office space correct okay but not Medical not correct not MediCal and we don't want to exclude corporate ownership as theirs which I don't think was called professional professional general office not other contractors office space that could utilize the the outside in any way no the outside would be the outside rear would be for our intent in purposes only I have a followup question actually for our professionals does our ordinance make a distinction to like I don't I don't know if this would be a retail kind of site but like a realtor office has a lot of walk up traffic I would imagine is there a distinction to a type of office that has a lot more foot traffic well generally speaking in each of our zones we list specific uses so they're either in there or they're not but like is office considered meaning it specifies more narrowly than just office and in each individual Zone it'll indicate whether it's General Office Professional office medical office those categories I'm sorry and then obviously in the parking standards there are different standards for medical as opposed to General or professional office but in each of our zones we list what the permitted uses are it's the applicant's responsibility to show us what it is that they're providing okay thank you no the retail was in the in our original application my opening remarks we withdraw any request for retail no retail no retail General Office Professional office any additional questions Mr P continue and I'll ask that Mr inly join us Michael inly is the professional engineer here who prepared the plans the site the variance plan and site plan that is before you I know that he has testified before but I'd like to have him sworn we'll share his credentials with you and a ask that you accept him before proceeding with his substantive testimony than you Mr P who would please raise your right hand you saw me swear affirm that the testimony information questions or comments that you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do if you would please state your name uh spell your last uh provide your affiliation to this application and your credentials Michael b inly i NTI l e I'm a New Jersey Professional engineer and professional planner my affiliation is that the design of the project is under my supervision Mr anly is your license to in good standing on this date yes Madam chair May Mr anelli testify as a professional engineer this evening this board accept your credentials thank you Mr anly I'm going to ask if you could begin by identifying the property and if you could let the it officer know what exhibit you would like to have shown as you begin could we please show the aerial Exhibit while we're waiting for that I want just a little preview that Witnesses this evening are mikee and Tilly and John Ray traffic expert Steve rasi the architect who designed both buildings and the signage and the last witness if we're fortunate to get that far is Allison coffin our planet and in that order Mike John Steve Allison okay thank you this is the aerial of our site uh you can see the property uh boundary in yellow there uh we're 28.9 Acres overall located in the highway commercial Zone um the site is basically wooded and vacant there is one small um structure on Lot Number Nine which is vacant not utilized currently uh the site also is subject to a conservation easement filed in 2012 of 26.2 Acres uh and that is a result of an FHA application uh repairing and buffers and an Loi issued in 2016 for the wetlands and wetlands buffer so in all combined uh ended up with a conservation easement of that 26.2 acres and you could see that area uh that is the Upland remaining area in the brown so that's that brown area is the site uh of our development and our our development stays completely within that area your professionals asked before the meeting days before the meeting that we provide copies of the recorded documents the LOI and the the conservation easement that is recorded at the county and and that has been done if you could identify by the adjacent roadway and and who has jurisdiction of the adjacent roadway we are on uh Frontage on West commodor Boulevard which is a county road we also have Frontage on uh Interstate 195 to the South um to the to the West you can see the mall Jackson Outlet Mall farther to the north we have Residential Properties and then uh some commercial development as well the entrance to the mall I should mention is uh on Commodore Boulevard just to the west of our property and by the way North is uh that way up is West the township ordinances required that you identify the environmentally constrained properties and not take any credit for them when you're calculating setbacks and impervious coverage before we go into more detailed substantive testimony if you could confirm that is the way you approach the development of this property yes the uh the general notes um as was pointed out by the planner in his review indicated that uh the notes indicated that we took the total lot area in calculation of our lot coverage and our bulk standards as well the the building coverage we we have provided supplemental information to both the board engineer and the planner indicates that we now utilize just the net area uh minus the whole lot minus all of that Wetland all of that conservation easement and we we do conform to the requirements of the bulk standard in terms of lot area coverage and building coverage so you're not saying I've got a 29 acre parcel and I'm allowed to have 50% of 29 Acres you're saying i' this small piece is all that I have to work with and that's where I imposed all of the restrictions correct we have it in your in your plan set there is an existing condition survey I don't think it's necessary to present it unless there's a request that' be presented the aerial was intended to orient everybody here to the existing conditions but if we could go to the rendered site plan that you yes um it should say display pedal block very F thank you so is this the rendered site plan prepared by your office and the other than the coloration is it the site plan that was submitted in your plan set yes it is would you take a few moments to do an executive an Engineers executive overview of the application we're presenting to the board this evening so we're seeking approval for as mentioned earlier 9,000 squ ft twostory uh office building uh that is in the center of the of the rendering and then the maintenance building is a 4,000 foot building towards the back of the site um and to that we're providing of course the parking lots a 50 car parking lot includes three handicap spots and one EV dedicated spot providing Drive entrances and normal alignment and layout of parking areas we have an access to to Commodore Boulevard a 35- ft Drive aisle there you see the only access on this plan uh which leads back to the uh the maintenance building and the yard area um of course we're providing lighting and Landscaping um and I can get into those in terms of specifics I think we're about to do that okay so site plan elements I'm going to speak to each one of the statutory site plan elements and I'm going to ask if you could begin with grading and discuss the whether this is cut and filled to accomplish this design that is shown the site existing has a gentle gentle slope from Commodore Boulevard to the Wetland areas and as a result of the the maintenance yard the development of the site any development of the site would likely require retaining wall um if you can notice along the perimeter uh starting on the west side of our property that's the side where the mall is there is a dark line in there that's a retaining wall that runs basically from the front of the property around the maintenance yard to the back and then blends with uh the retaining wall in the storm waterer Management Facility and this grading do you continue to direct the surface storm water in the same directions that it currently travels yes we do if we could talk about storm water design and I'm not going to ask that you go into any great detail the Great great detail is exchanged between you Mr Peters and Mr Hill but if you could just briefly describe the type of storm water system that you've designed and then we'll go through compliance of that system with d and Township requirements yes the system comprises an infiltration sand bottom Basin which is the Blue Area you see there uh that is a The Collection point for uh the distribution system in the parking lot which collects storm water and distribut distributes it to the Basin and the for Bay there which is just before the Basin uh we also have underground system which is on the west side of the property adjacent to that retaining wall and that collects all the roof uh surface areas directly into the underground system we also have perious pavement which is a best management practices njd element as is the sand bottom detention Basin uh meeting the water quality and water quantity cutbacks and Peak flow requirements as stated by njd all of that is part of the plan set that was submitted to the board and their Professionals for review corre that's correct you could confirm oh if you could confirm as the designer of that system that all applicable New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection regulations for storm waterer management and all applicable Jackson Township requirements for storm waterer management will be met by this design I can confirm that yes the town the state has in recent years imposed the recording of an onm or an operations in maintenance manual for the record and operations and maintenance manual drawn by Mr enly is submitted to your engineers for review and when it is approved it is then recorded as a restrictive covenant against the property it runs in perpetuity and creates the operations and maintenance manual obligations on the prop property owner whoever that property owner is and it also requires a biannual reporting to the state of New Jersey as to the maintenance that is conducted you could confirm that your office has prepared an onm manual and will comply with the requirements of the board's professionals we will be preparing one I'm not sure one was submitted but we will in conformance with the regulatory requirements um as stated yes one last comment on storm water one I think is very important you've designed this as a privately owned and maintained system it does not create any burden on the township although the township has oversight at their election the correct that's correct we could move on to the portable water supply that would be provided to the site how is that provided which is a portable well located on the Eastern backside of the property and sanitary facilities how will those be handled individual septic uh individual subsurface Disposal system a septic system located in back of the building your office I believe has completed the soil investigations in depth to water table investigations and has been able to confirm that this site is suitable for on-site septic system design is that correct Yes you heard me describe that we're asking for permission to have an above ground diesel fuel tank if you could identify where that fuel tank is to be located on the site and confirm that all building and fire code requirements for same would be met fuel tank is located in this area back of the uh 9,000 foot building um the fuel tank will of course meet all of the regulatory standards for spill prevention containment uh and so forth uh distances from uh buildings or property lines yes and I'd like to discuss circulation I think at this point it's it should be pointed out to the board that working with your staff including receiving their reports and participating in a technical review committee meeting your staff had identified that separating the traffic from the office building from the traffic to the rear building was a suggestion we have Mr en Tilly took the suggestion to heart and has created an alternative driveway system that your applicant is offering to the board we like it we offer it if it is acceptable to the board it'll be implemented going to ask if we could ask the it officer to bring that um up and once that is up we'll go through your circulation and parking elements and it should say in the title block second ESS second ESS in the title block not finding uh since it's going if for any reason it cannot be retrieved Mr inly does have a colored paper version of it with us yeah don't mind Steve's going to help me out here so this is uh the concept plan mentioned second erress display in the uh in the filing we made and it is a result of a TRC meeting we had with your Township professionals uh as Ken mentioned uh it was encouraged to have a second entrance separate entrance for the different uses so essentially what we did is uh modified the parking lot in that area to the East and provided a second 24 foot Drive aisle two-way which provides Ingress and egress to uh the 9,000 foot building we haven't touched the entrance to the storage room and full disclosure on the record this was prepared with suggestions from your staff but your staff only saw it for the first time today um if you could confirm and Mr Ray will have a greater responsibility L but could you confirm that the anticipated Vehicles the um trash removal emergency vehicles firefighting vehicles and the vehicles that our client would bring to the site can maneuver the site as designed we do have a circulation plan and we have run a 55 foot uh WD 50 tractor trailer to the back of the site into the maintenance yard only we have run a 45 foot fire truck in both areas uh it is part of the submission uh within your set of plans and the second entrance really doesn't affect any of that um the second entrance only adds flexibility to the parking lot the parking areas and it's that the intention of keeping the truck traffic that was associated with the maintenance building out of the parking lot is accomplished with the second plan that's correct we could ask you to come back to your seat we'll talk about parking Mr couldn't find it we get it if you could confirm that the parking facilities as designed are intended to provide adequate parking and we'll do a office building first what is the number of parking STS for the office we have um com 47 parking spaces are located in the uh office building area including three handicap and one evate we have three spaces located in front of the maintenance building in the back for the 4,000 ft uh maintenance building and those ratios were using office at 1 for 200 requiring the 45 for the 9,000 ft building and for the warehouse we used um Warehouse excuse me for the maintenance we used Warehouse ratios at 1 for 1500 requiring then a fraction equaling three and one for the business so four there so four plus the 45 would be 49 required the site has 50 uh parking spaces and you chose that standard for parking I think there was no Maintenance building standard in the ordinance so you looked for one that was consistent with what your client told you would be the use of the building that is correct and you did hear testimony uh about the number of employees for the maintenance being three so that two to three reports with the three if you could describe the lighting plan the elements of the lighting plan um and we could just go go through that they're all LED lighting we have 13 fixtures on the site overall four wall packs for the buildings uh three on the 9,000 foot building and one on the 4,000 square foot building uh the remaining nine are whole mounted lights about 18 to 20 feet in height um and houseside shields were necessary adj adjoining the residential um particularly Lot 8 on the west side and on the east side residential zoning as well there comments in the staff's the professionals reports about compliance with the ordinance can you confirm that you can and will I'm going to call it tweak your your lighting intensity so that you're can so that the design is consistent with the town's ordinance yes it will be consistent the uh planner letter did bring out a couple points where SP places where we did not achieve the 0.5 uh required candle foot candles so we'll we'll make those slight adjustments we're we're not too bright a couple places we're too di correct and we're amenable to lights off after hours and we're amenable to dimming if the board feels that dimming of the lighting is appropriate Landscaping I there was comments in the staff report if we could begin by indicating that we intend to comply fully with the comments and direction of Mr Peters as set forth in his report if you could just describe briefly the Landscaping plan that's proposed yes we will comply with the Landscaping comments within the report um just generally speaking mix of deciduous and shrubs uh trees and shrubs excuse me in the parking lot areas with some annuals mulch beds and such and then uh Street trees would be red Maples along West Boulevard quite common there's also a mix of deciduous trees um on the west side of the property on the other side of the retaining wall you'll notice on the landscape plan and um other than that we we'll you know work with the the town professionals with regard to the planner's comment about buffering for lot eight which is a residential home um so we do have uh the retaining wall Which is higher than that property of course we then do have Landscaping we're providing on top of that five to six feet and um that Landscaping just to address that particular comment we'll get to those I suppose uh is is buffering the parking lot area not necessarily the building area um on top of the retaining wall so um that's the purpose of that buffer there's some comments in the report some species comments and some size comments if you could confirm that you'll make the amendments to be consistent consistent with the guidance of Mr Peters yes we will trash collection and removal if you could identify where the trash collection storage area is the type of storage facility proposed and confirm that the trash location is accessible to the vehicle that will remove the trash on a scheduled basis yes it typical refuse containers uh masonry containers in this uh masonry housing uh with board on board fencing in this area they're located right here for easy access for the frontload truck to pick up and uh and remove if we could go to the there's a monument sign that's proposed and before Mr anly addresses that Monument sign there is a setback variant identified in the application Mr iny can we confirm that the setback for the monument is not required and you redesign to conform with the ordinance we will conform to the 30 ft required it's currently 26 there is a height of the sign that is shown on the plan at 10 feet I have reviewed with our architect he will present the details but we're going to ask that the sign be 8 feet your ordinance says six we'd like to have a two foot foot footing so that we can landscape at its foot so the 10 foot request is reduced to eight and the sign face that is shown on the plan is large it's some 90 plus square feet and we have reviewed with no retail the sign size is not as important we're going to amend that to a request for 45 square feet it is still variance relief but it's approximately half of what was originally shown with regard to there were a bulk variance that was shown of a parking lot setback of 19 ft where 20 is required can you confirm that that 20 foot setback can be cor you'll make it 20 feet on pl we will adjust that to 20 feet Yes are there any other of the variances I think that we went through them but if there are there any other the variances that you have reviewed that would can be eliminated through a redesign no I think we discussed them can you would you confirm that you have in fact received the staff reports and gone through the staff reports in detail I have yes and M Madam chair I would look to you if there's an appropriate time to ask if your professionals have any further questions of Mr enly before he leaves uh the stand um if you could confirm that the plan as you've designed it does not have sidewalks along West Commodore Boulevard but does have have room to install sidewalks if requested I'll advise the board we were here with this very same property 15 years ago with a larger shopping center and a 5,000 foot Maintenance building and at that time the planning board heard the application and advised the applicant that they preferred contribution and not sidewalk we defer to you in its entirety it's not on the plan but please confirm that is space to put it if they ask there is room for a sidewalk yes there was one question I'm going to call it a dangling question I just want to make sure it's on the record what is the surface material in the storage area around the maintenance building what surface material is part of your design two minutes Pavel so no stone or no an asphalt P correct and that's bituminous asphalt pavement there not in that area there is porest pavement on the site though okay Madam chair members of the board I have nothing further on Direct of Mr enly he is available to you and your professionals at this time chair that's it so this is that uh plan we were looking for it's the the added uh Ingress erress right here U the original plan just showed the Central and singular uh entrance it was 35 ft wide it had a break through here to allow vehicles that weren't going into the storage yard to make a left into the parking area for the office so we eliminated that keeping all the construction traffic um the larger vehicles and such into the back area um and provided only that entrance for the professional office and it's and 4pm construction through the chair is there any on-site uh water storage for fire suppression is there any sprinkler systems any hydrants there there's none no hydrants on the site there's a pable well there's no storage that I'm aware of uh such is a storage tank for fire supression for sprinkler systems no sprinkler system in the buildings I'm not sure of that the architect could address it's not suppressed it's not suppressed is it at least sprinkled with an outside fire department connection or is a building sprinkled with with fire to be water to be supplied from a a fire department connection on the building or is it a dry system Mr rasi designed the building and we'll present that to you I now the applicant's pretty much uh gone during his course of testimony addressed the major issues that we pointed out in our letter dated June 16th excuse me um yeah there are some minor revisions that have to be completed this stormw management system U but I do want to thank the applicant they were very uh during the TRC meeting uh they were very uh respective and responsive to to our comments and concerns uh specifically with regards to a shared driveway entrance for all proposed tenants and uses so they they did segregate that um you know I I think from our standpoint uh we'd be looking for direction from the board if you prefer this concept versus the originally submitted one so that's the kind of feedback we'd like to at least get from you tonight so we know how to proceed to continue working with the applicant um assuming you're not voting assume that's going to assume you're not voting on the application yet tonight but I don't if you do that's fine but I we would like that kind of Direction um the septic system I believe that would be still under the 2,000 gallons per day threshold it would not require a tww application um so that would stick stay with the county uh you know the soils in this area are fairly are fairly decent for septic U and and the test the soils information that they've collected indicates that a a conventional system without without necessarily use of pumps or mounting should be should be accommodated on site you know with and I I'll ultimately you can hear the testimony from the uh the applicants um architect but regarding fire suppression U have you have you received comments from the A Fire official yet on your application I I don't have you haven't received I I don't have a report the reports that we received to date are from you gentlemen okay we we did how a submit to them we hav't heard anything back okay so in MO in a lot of cases we defer to the local Fire official but um obviously there's codes there's building codes that that dictate what kind of suppression system if any they're required to have hookups and so on uh but I would like to hear testimony from the architect regarding what the intention there is um now with respect to the the conservation easement and the wet lands in the past so this property was actually part of an a development application in the I guess it was the mid 2000s 20 2012 somewhere around there n right N9 2009 resolution yeah um and as part of that develop it was it was at the planning board it was approved uh but as part of that application that that applicant U delineated the wetlands they received an Loi from the state of New Jersey and and they went ahead and memorialized that approval by creating the conservation easement protecting the wetlands and the buffers and then recording that instrument so it's memorialized there's no more there's there's they don't have to get a new one it's recorded those access are off those those areas are off limits and they're conserved so that prior applicant um completed that process so there there's there's no there's no additional D requirement there um unless there's a modification to the flood Hazard area permit for any reason but that's specific to this development uh I don't suspect that there is because they're working within the Upland areas um but obviously if there are modifications to any FHA permit they're going to it's an outside agency approval and they're going to be required to obtain that approval [Music] that yes right well I mean the truck traffic is actually the the the truck traffic which has been kind of characterized by the by the petitioner is going to be in that West E uh Ingress egress which is the egress Ingress close to our lot not the not the other one that they've created for the more light traffic I guess they would have characterized it um so you know lot lot 8 is still going to be subjected to truck traffic is if that was your concern so I can tell you that was something that was discussed at the TRC meeting uh with the applicant and there was some thought put into that and whether or not you agree with it that's fine you can object or you can State your opinion the thought there was that the a a full fully utilized office building would generate more trips per day of traffic coming in and out of that that that driveway entrance than half a dozen Vehicles possibly over a week coming into the service to get serviced and maintained so even though it's a truck a dedicated truck driveway it based on what the applicant had indicated to us in the TRC it would it's a much less intense and less used driveway as a result I'll let them put that on the record but that was the conversations that we had at the TRC can I do I cross now or did did the board still have more questions that they want to get through before I go excuse me I'm sorry any other questions for the uh applicant before the obor attorney speaks please proceed Mr we okay mrly could you tell me how many feet that that Western access point is from the access point for lot I don't know exactly where the driveway on Lot 8 is but I can tell you that the center of our construction access point to the center of Lot 8 itself is 12 120 ft 120t okay and you had testified about uh trucks of 50 5 ft um going in and out of either of those erass access access points correct it was a 55- fot tractor trailer potentially um for just the one entrance for the construction entrance and that would just be for the construction entrance that's correct okay now how what is the largest truck when you designed the site plan what was the largest truck that was in mind to come in and out of that access point the construction access point as it's been as it's been characterized the layout and the radi for the parking lot is designed generally based on fire truck a 42t fire truck nonarticulating meaning it doesn't turn as a pivot point um and then a 55 fot uh tractor trailer for The operational uh part of the business so we look at both the fire and then we look at the operational those are the two extreme vehicles that would what is the operational aspect of the business what is the operational sorry that would need an articulated truck what is the operational aspect of the business that would require an articulated truck that was made part of the record by Miss seino and my profer it is a a maintenance building they are in the site constru I'm just going to object to the attorney I profer these statements they're on the testifying for the for the expert I profer these statements I proper these statements with permission hold on one at a time I'm asking ask for a question I want to hear what's hold on stop what's the objection what's the objection yeah what's the objection my objection yeah didn't you my objection that I asked the question the expert and the the attorney is is profer the the testimony with the expert if I may this this was an operational question from what I understood us correct it's not something that if I could articulate what I was was I was I was asking I'm asking from an operational standpoint in while you're considering a site plan what type of operational Artic what kind of trucks were considered in site plan to be articulated going I think that was established on the record as a 42 foot non-articulating fire truck and a 55 fot uh tractor trailer correct that's that's not what the testimony was that's what I that is the testimony that Mr I'm not trying to mischaracterize that's that's not that's not what I heard I'm I'm just trying to figure out when they were designing the site plan okay and this this was the the question that went to the expert what was the anticipated articulated size of an articulated truck that would go in and out of that access point if shantell would you would you kindly site design Engineers take their inputs from their clients so one of the ways to get that answer is to sit down with your client and ask them what the anticipated traffic would be into the site that they want to develop and and that terms of frequency of those vehicles in terms of uh other inputs um we that's not part of that design only the radi the Turning radi for the parking lot curving and the width of the aisles and I and I can confirm that the design of the site took those inputs and the design of the site meets The Turning rate ad and the movements required for those vehicles and those are the extreme vehicles for this site and so you're the input that you're testifying to was a was a 55 foot articulated truck correct okay that's all that's what I was trying to get at now there's a variance for an 8 foot sign uh a sign that's 8 ft in height and 45 ft uh in total uh Square square feet how could you tell me how far that sign is from the access point to lot eight again from the center of Lot 8 not the access point um because I don't have it it the sign is 90 feet okay now when you're saying to the center of lot eight that wouldn't necessarily reflect exactly how many feet it is from the access point for what's been characterized as the construction access point for this site plan to what the access point is to lot eight is that correct I don't have the exact driveway location for lot eight I'm correct was there any consideration put into the site plan in um how that would dis how the design distance from Lot 8 as well as the what's been characterized as the construction access point would disrupt lots lots 8 flow of its access point the highway commercial nature of the property allows for the construction of the driveway um in this case our construction driveway at the the distances the separation from those driveways multiple driveways for example or property lines um that design is set forth by Township Code and we follow that okay now as far as on the west side of the site plan um which adjoins Lot 8 I think you testified that there's a retaining wall running along the per running along the perimeter over there has there been any consideration uh with regard to the site plan as far as um storm swell when there I'm not sure if you're aware but there's a there's a small Creek that runs along the perimeter of Lot 8 now if that if lot8 were to have some type of storm swell and the swell would run into a retaining wall on that West Side how would that affect Lot 8 your property actually drains the other way so um that small stream you referred to as part of the FHA application that was done I think 2006 or eight um it was approved by njd the uh any any surface water should flow from the retaining wall over and down towards that Stream area lower than your property has there been any specific study or anything that would confirm that there there would be a it would be looked at like everything uh joining the property and on the property when an engineer prepares a stor Water Management report but you can't testify to any specific study or consideration that was taken into the site plan with regard to that concern well the uh we met the standards for the submission of the stor War management report to the township it's reviewed by the township professionals and their comments uh come back to us and then we modify or change the report as necessary um for minor comment changes now admittedly the the variances that are need for that are needed for the the uh sign and I think you you rectified the variances for the for the parking spaces but any variance that is needed for the sign um could the site plan be modified that so that you wouldn't need a [Music] variance if I may just the variance testimony hasn't been made part of the record description of the variances was variance testimony is Allison confin purview and we'll come later yeah I'm going to sustain that one this is not within the purview of this witness that's all I have thank you any excuse me any additional questions Mr P would you like to call your next witness um I would like to just State we normally take testimony till 10:30 so you may want to take that into consideration thank you I think that the next witness is I'm looking at the 20 minutes or so that's left and I did would not want Mr rasi's testimony which I believe is going to be a little bit interesting to all the board and in the public I would like don't want him to be caught in the middle I think that Mr Ray's testimony on this one is is succinct so I'll call John Ray our traffic engineer to U come forward to testify thank you evening Mr Ray thank you for raising your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm that testimony information questions or comments you're about to present before the board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you if you would please state your name uh provide your affiliation and credentials John Ray Rea a professional engineer with MCD and Ray Associates traffic and transportation Engineers 1431 Lakewood Road Manis Squan New Jersey Mr Ray if you could take a few moments to share excuse me one second this board Mr Ray you've been before us plenty of times we accept your credentials thank you courtesy Mr Ray will testify as an expert in his field of traffic engineering Mr Ray I think we have two parts I one I'm going to ask for some Rea affirmation from you on statements that were made by Mr antiy with regard to the design and the separation of car and truck traffic but if you could begin by indicating the nature of the study that your firm conducted and take us through the conclusions that you reached after you did in fact study this the roadway and this proposed development plan sure we we have a traffic impact study dated October 3rd 2023 it is what I believe uh I would classify it as a full traffic impact study for the proposal uh we went out to the site on numerous occasions to just review existing traffic conditions in the area we conducted peak hour traffic counts during the morning and afternoon peak hours at the intersection where the Jackson Premium Outlets intersects route 571 and from that data we were were able to get the peak hour traffic volumes that are passing the site driveway of the property that's in question we prepared estimates of how much traffic the office and maintenance building would generate based on Institute of Transportation Engineers data and uh I can tell you that after listening to the statement of operations that if anything we've probably overestimated the traffic a little bit uh we are projecting 15 total driveway movements during the morning peak hour and 18 total driveway movements during the afternoon peak hour and given the fact that there will be I think six uh that sounds about right in terms of uh what's going to be generated maybe a little bit on the high end based on the fact that uh the major tenant here the construction company is going to have two to three maintenance employees and six office employees but of course we also have to account for the other floor of the office building which would account for the difference in peak hour trips so I think those numbers are pretty accurate perhaps a little bit on the high side we uh projected traffic volumes 10 years into the future utilizing the NJ Do's background traffic growth rate data uh the Ocean County planning board requires all applications to look at a 10-year Horizon in terms of traffic impact studies so we had to add 10 years worth of background traffic growth from the NJ Do's historical growth rate data we projected those volumes to a design year of 2032 uh because we had been involved with this project for the last couple of years and we did a level of service capacity uh analysis for the site driveway and also for the driveway from the Jackson Premium Outlets to Route 571 both of those driveway connections our driveway and the driveway from the outlets will operate at a sea level of service for both the morning and afternoon peak hours for the for the design year 10 years into the future so the conclusion reached at that juncture was that both site Drive our site driveway and the driveway from the outlets would operate within acceptable traffic engineering parameters um as a side note we have applied to the Ocean County planning board for an approval uh they are in the process of reviewing the application but with respect to the location ation of the driveway and this is the single driveway plan we we have proferred a two driveway plan this evening but the driveway that seems to be in question with respect to the adjoining property uh the county has made no comments with respect to the location of that driveway it appears to be acceptable to them uh route 571 is under the jurisdiction of Ocean County uh the second thing I did do is review the parking Supply with respect to the Jackson Township ordinance requir requirements Mr antiy has gone through that we do meet your ordinance requirements with respect to the number of parking spaces that are provided for the maintenance building and for the office building and the circulation I also looked at that I believe Mr antii has correctly indicated that uh the site has been properly designed for the designed vehicles that are anticipated to enter and exit the facility I can confirm that uh that testimony in my opinion is accurate and and uh so that basically covers it you could the the second design you would comment on benefits if there are any of separating the car and truck traffic as shown on this plan uh I think it would be a benefit I I understand I was not at the TRC meeting but I understand why Mr Hill and perhaps Mr Peters had asked for that I I think it would be a benefit to separate the car traffic from the truck traffic uh I think it can can be done of course again it is subject to the uh County's approval but I think it would be um you know a proper way of Designing the site to separate the car traffic heading just for the office parking lot from the activity going to the rear to the maintenance building I think it makes sense going to ask you you heard the testimony of Mr anelli he testified as the design engineer and he indicated the vehicles that he designed for as the traffic TR engineer and in your area of expertise would you provide your opinion is there adequate on-site circulation for the anticipated articulated Vehicles described by Mr antii for the fire fighting vehicle described by Mr anelli for the trash removal vehicle that route that was described by Mr eni and for the general traffic that we anticipate would enter and exit the site I I can confirm that the only correction I would make to the testimony and and if Mike's listening maybe he can um if I'm wrong I'm wrong I think we were looking at a WB 50 designed vehicle not a 55t vehicle a WB 50 would be the designed vehicle that we designed the project for and the project has been designed for those for the vehicles and are you able to share your opinion that it's adequate and safe yes one last question is the intersection of the driveways that are proposed the original driveway and the second driveway that's proposed are can you confirm that the horizontal and vertical conditions at those driveways will create adequate and safe intersections for the anticipated traffic to uh assuming that site triangles are provided which the county requires the answer to that is yes uh the site distance will be acceptable with the proper sight triangles established for either the single driveway or the Dual driveway uh prop no horizontal vertical conditions that prohibit those driveways no and again the county has made an initial review of the application and uh they've expressed no concern about the location of the of of the driveway uh the one that's at the Western end of the property and uh basically they've just asked for more technical information from Mr anelli which I'm sure he can provide Madam chair members of the board I have nothing further of Mr Ray on Direct any questions for Mr Ray Dr Hof okay Mr Ray let just go back to the two driveways of one from lot8 and the one from the site you said that the county didn't have any comments on that and therefore you assume there is no problem uh with the driveway uh do you as an expert anticipate any problem with the location of the two driveways ba based on the number of uh Vehicles entering the uh that driveway the The Limited number yes there will be truck traffic but based on the limited amount of traffic and I think Mr Hill alluded to this earlier we're looking at perhaps several truck movements over the course of a week I don't do not anticipate a problem I do agree with Mr Hill that the the driveway if we go to the Dual driveway Arrangement the traffic entering and exiting the parking lot for the office building will certainly be at a higher level than the maintenance Vehicles entering the back of the property for the chair I'm sorry and and Mr right I guess if if the board were if the were to prefer this two driveway setup um it's it's it would be your recommendation to the client to pursue that further with the county as part of the approval process yes okay and I think just one one thing to clarify too is I do believe you were on the TRC meeting with us uh I I do believe you are um just I can't remember what I yesterday so look I know your business is Cutthroat but just in case case you submitted an invoice to your client I want to put on the record you were on that call how how all right it it was a zoom call the controller yes okay okay sorry about that okay I'm sorry it was Mr Mr Mr Ray yes sir Mr Ray Mr Ray you um had testified that Ocean County has not yet given any approval uh as far as any applications to them is that correct they they've asked for some additional technical information from the engineer correct right but there's no there's no implicit understanding that it's been approved already correct no but based on my experience with Ocean County and based on the comments that they've given us it will be approved now you had testified that your your study had anticipated a I think you said a w50 truck versus a 55 wb50f study do you take into consideration a site plan yes okay so when you were taking in consideration the site plan was it to your understanding that the site plan was considering a WB 50 or a 55 there is no wb5 it was a WB 50 it was a WB 50 but you had you had heard previous testimony that the consideration was for 55 is that correct I I I believe Mr inly meant to say wb-50 okay he can correct me if I'm wrong um you had testified in regard to site triangles that would need to be approved by the Ocean County board um in your opinion what would be a proper sight triangle for the West access point for the site plan to lot eight uh the county typically requires what we call ashto site triangles which is the American Association of State Highway and transportation officials it's based on the speed limit along West commodor so it would probably the site triangle is measured from a point 15 ft back from the edge of the traveled way and it would be about 500 feet in each Direction and if I'm not mistaken I don't know if Mr antiy has put them on the plan but we can accommodate the County's side triangle request okay would the side triangle fall onto Lot 8 I do not believe so no okay how far do you know how far the access point is the what's been what's been um characterized as the truck access point which is on the west side of that site plan do you know how far that is from the access point the lot I I don't see it on Mr these plan so I I cannot give you that answer okay so how how how would you be able to tell me that you could meet those standards if you don't know what this if you don't know what the distance what standards are you talking about you just told me that you would be able to meet the the side side triangle stand we can okay but that's a different question about how far the other driveway is it's well doesn't the doesn't the site triangle have something to do with distance from one point A to point B yeah but if there are structures in the way that block your sight distance a driveway wouldn't fall into that cat okay John is there any other can I just clarify something you're talking about two different things oh you're talking sight triangles you're talking line of sight right yes two different things so you might want to explain to him the difference between the two okay thanks EV the side triangle is required to make sure that there is nothing over I think it's 36 in in height no plantings no signs no structures that would block site distance for someone coming out of our driveway looking to the left and to the right on West commodor so that's what the purpose of the side triangle is to make sure that there's nothing blocking the line of sight for a vehicle exiting the site so that really has nothing to do with the location of the driveway for your client's property two totally different things what's the what's the What's the total height of the psychot tri triangle excuse me what's the height I just saw Mr 40 42 in nothing 42 in how tall is the typical SUV on the road much bigger than 42 in sure so a a SUV could be parked in the access point to Lot 8 That Could Fall with an that sight triangle correct it would still be outside the side triangle my unless the gentleman was foolish enough to park it that close to the road so you don't you don't know the answer to that question I just answered it okay unless they your answer is unless somebody were to park where they wanted to on on their driveway the site triang perfect I couldn't I couldn't understand why somebody would want to park an SUV what if you had what if somebody had a party or something like that they had cars parked Mr R can I interject one more time please um all the hypotheticals you're you're you're talking about this this is a county roadway the County planning board has full jurisdiction over making sure that these driveways meet their standards this board does not so a lot of your hypothetical questions really aren't appropriate for this board and this application yeah well I I'm really trying to point out some inconsistencies and testimony he's testifying to things that you're bring you're bringing up hypothetical that he's trying to answer what I'm seeing is he's trying to answer but probably aren't applicable and if you don't accept those responses that's you but I think your questions are better geared towards what the county standards are and again the county has full jurisdiction over this I understand that okay so thank you I just want just keep them more I would say keep your questions more focused to the purpose of why he's here tonight somebody's testifying credibility is is something that's considered all right thank you I have nothing further I'm going to now open this to the public anybody wishing to come forward and make comments but please keep in mind you can only make comments based on what was testified to tonight thank you I have a yeah sure and I have handouts can I provide the handouts please I spent a lot of time working on so you just heard from an attorney if I may you have to be I have a little bit of a hearing problem I apologize in advance yeah so I'm gonna I'm going to stop you right there you're represented by Council correct we're working as a team okay and we both agreed that he would ask his questions and I'm GNA ask my questions and these questions are really important that's how this works I I oh let me let me first of all Mr Murphy although he is represented by Council he has the right to speak as a a public comment don't disagree with you however the fact of the matter is is that he's represented by Council meaning that you as objector have the opportunity to present your case in Chief excuse me I don't understand what's going on go ahead I'm sorry he's hard of hearing so you have you as the objector have the right to present a case in chief after the applicant this is not the appropriate time for a represented party to address the board okay we'll we'll we'll hold off thank you can I these out speak to your attorney the record Council I think that that's the correct ruling there's nothing that prohibits Mr Rivier the citizen from being a witness of Mr River the attorney when they're putting their case in Chief but ask the applicant to answer questions from the attorney and then have his client speak directly it would be in my opinion duplicative and also procedurally incorrect that's my that's my legal opinion now do we need to determine a date for them to return yes we do and I already have a couple in mind um so our reorganization meeting is on the 17th of July um um we have three bulk variances scheduled before you um I don't know how long you're going to anticipate taking the other option I can give you is August 21st there's only one application thus far listed if I may would it be appropriate this isn't voting on the application but would be appropriate to PLL the board as to which of the driveway configurations is considered to be the superior one if it is the one not yet fully designed we would take the opportunity to do that design but only if there was some indication from the board that it was preferred is that an appropriate request um so I won't take a formal vote on that but I I suppose we can go down the line if the chair would permit that to perhaps see which which of the driveway um configurations that have been presented tonight the board prefers and I'll make this statement any reference is not on what ground on what ground okay but this has nothing to do with that I'll note your your objection is of course noted for the record I for the record um Mr we if you remember when Mr Hill talked about this I did state that I thought the two driveways were better and that's when I asked you to point out where you were located and that was why so I I don't see the harm in not a poll but us stating what we prefer there's there's is no harm in stating what you prefer it's not prohibited in any stretch by any stretch of the imagination and I think it's a valid question because it's going to determine how the applicant is going to proceed with the application um and so I think it's a it's relevant uh B it's going to save the board time L at a later at a later date and and c I I don't find it objectionable in the least I the objection is noted for the record but but it's overruled can I can I ask a quick question about the two driveway options to Mr Hill um is it your opinion that the driveway the truck driveway be there specifically out of consideration to the neighbor so because that's like are there other considerations of the two driveways if I if I were trying to be more sympathetic to an adjacent property owner if I was designing it I would put the least the lesser of the two intense driveways based on the testimony the least intense driveway is for the proposed truck traffic entering and exiting the The Contractor Yard okay even though it's bigger vehicles it's only a handful of trips per week is what we heard rather than the potential for 18 trips in the afternoon for the office driveway right so or 16 and 18 so yes if if if my if my client I was working for was sympathetic I'd put the the lesser of the two intensity driveways there I'm just curious like if the neighbor were to disagree would that be like a and I don't know what they would think between where which driveway is more intense to them like the size of the vehicle versus the I'm purely talking about from a traffic standpoint like how many trips as far as what you see out your wind out your window you hear or feel when trucks are rumbling like I know because I have trucks sometimes driving down my road and like you could feel it sometimes so I'm just curious like if that's a consideration and if I like I don't know if it's appropriate to like hear input from the neighbor on it but to me that like if our cons if our thoughts are we're trying to be sympathetic to the neighbor is it appropriate to say well what does the neighbor think well I think that's I mean I I don't think right now the applicant's asking you to lock down which driveway is necessarily or the location but just splitting it but like if we were to split it because I also I I like that idea but if we were to split it but then change swap which one is where hypothetically could that could be engineered if the right so like I just I guess I out of like consideration to their Professionals of them designing something and then potentially it being redesigned I'm like they want us to weigh in on what our feeling is so that they could do more work and I'm like ah I wouldn't want to you know engineer something that then ends up I mean it is part of the process to some but okay Mr B do you you you've heard Miss peres's concern as to the driveway would you have an objection to the objector attorney representing what option of the two that they might prefer Mr a do you have an opinion on that which of the two driveways would be preferable to your client if given the option if this were to be approved and we were given the option um certainly you know a residence is going to be preferable to car traffic coming passing you know what we I think we determined was somewhere in a range of less than 100 feet no no one had the exact answer and again this is all solely hypothetical yeah totally hypothetical I think of course the preference would be the non construction or truck has it been characterize traffic moving to the east side and the and the car traffic moving to the west side you're welcome okay uh with that said I guess uh I think I par I think you I think you open the door so I think that's on you yeah I mean just thinking about if I was the neighbor I as much as many trips are a concern I like the idea of separating the the access and the driveways um but you know considering which one I guess is to be used in your consideration of what you guys develop Mr Safford you mind if iol Mr Safford Smith I am in favor of the two driveways I think at a consideration for the neighbor I'd be more inclined to have the truck traffic away from his residents I'd even offer that as a motion if the board would so desire there's no no no no there is no motion to take at this point this is simply a poll uh based on the requests of the of the um applicants Council um and it's it's an appropriate poll but we're not making motions at this time because uh first of all the applicant's case isn't finished and the objector has the right to their case and chief as well you can consider that my opinion thank you Mr s um I do prefer the two driveways uh my and although I understand and I can I I sympathize with the neighbor my concern is the purpose was to separate the truck traffic from the office traffic well if we do that how are they going to reroute it based on the location of the buildings are we asking them to relocate buildings now for the chair I would say look let let the let the applicant hear your feedback and let the engineers do their thing um I want to worry about extra engineering costs because it sounds like they don't charge their client for their time anyway so I would have G if you had asked me I would have given you the same advice I just did um but he said it way funnier Mr Hyman so as far as the two driveways I think it's a great idea originally before I heard Evans position on it I thought that it would be mental or I wouldn't want to have trucks going next to my property um but when he gave that idea of that they're only few and far in between during the week that they'll be coming in and out I'm sort of like stuck in between I don't know if we should flip it or not but I do agree that the two driveway option is best again okay two driveways and could we be provide with a map with any the changes for the next meeting thank you I have no preference right I think there's other factors that have to be considered so I can't call the shop I think you have a a consensus of some sword Mr Pee thank you very much Mr P okay with that with that said I still have two dates pending out there yeah happy birthday all right so with respect to application number three the applicant A Partners LLC it's preliminary and final site plan 918 with use variance 3497 block 2901 lot 7 n and 10 uh the location uh 17 West Com Boulevard this application will be carried to the August 21st meeting of the Jackson Township Zoning Board of adjustment that's August 21st 2024 no further notice will be required as this is being carried on the record and if applicable which I I'm not sure that it is but if applicable applicant waste time I presume P I always appreciate your courtesies thank you for that um so with that said this is uh this is carried to uh August 21st of 2024 thank you thank you motion to adjourn all in favor I