we're going to call this meeting to order please stand for the pledge of allegiance to flag of the United States of America and to the for stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all good evening ladies and gentlemen uh pursuant to njsa 10 colon4 the open public meetings act notice of 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 Buck here M FR is absent Mr Hurley is absent Mr ricardi here Mr Hudak Mr Stafford Smith here miss Parnes Mr laak was absent and Miss Bradley here do we have any resolutions this evening yes we do we have two resolutions this evening the first being resolution number Jackson County of ocean state of New Jersey accepting the withdrawal of application for use variants for Michael and Thomas damore for property located at 440 baso street block 2 23108 lot 29.02 uh eligible to vote are Mr book Mr ricardi Mr Stafford Smith and Miss Bradley move to approve second roll call please Mr book yes Mr ricardi yes Mr Stafford Smith yes and Miss Bradley yes the second resolution resolution number 223-4674 lot 43 eligible to vote are Mr book Mr ricardi Mr Stafford Smith and Miss Bradley move to approve second roll call please Mr book yes Mr ricardi yes Mr Stafford Smith yes Miss Bradley yes that concludes the resolutions do we have any minutes this evening no we do not have any minutes this evening all right I have three vouchers uh one is for the township of Jackson for our recording secretary for this evening for $150 and I have two from King reporting one for the appearance fee for the court reporting and one for the recording secretary and they total 400 one is 150 and one is 250 I need a motion and a second please to pay the bill move to approve and pay all res all vouchers second roll call please Mr book yes Mr ricardi yes Mr Hudak Mr Stafford Smith yes m pares m Bradley yes do we have any announcements Mr Murphy yes we do we have two announcements this evening um the first announcement is application number four the keyer Family Trust variance 33951 um that application is being carried to to the December 20th 2023 meeting of the Jackson Township zoning Board of adjustment um due to a personal uh conflict with the professional team of the applicant um no further notice will be required and the applicant has waved time through December 31st of 2023 um the SE the the uh second um announcement this evening is related to application number five um Mr fer is the uh applicant's attorney and he's present that's application number five Dan R Excavating LLC that's a use variance 3458 um Mr feffer I don't believe if you want to enter your appearance just quickly yeah Adam feffer turn the attorney on behalf of the applicant again it's a use variance on that application we would like to have seven members um I did I did have an opportunity to review the calendar which was sent to me uh for the meetings um because it's it still need the use variant and we still need seven members so the reorg mean I'm afraid I'm not sure if there be new members not new members who's rein uh so so for the membership we do reorg in July so members will not be changing at the reor that's for the professionals so I was going to say end the January 17 meeting I'm away I was going to ask for the February 7 if that I think the calendar looked pretty light on that on that one that's February 7th February 7th or if it you prefer February I'm on both the meetings I'm available in February we'll carry to February 7th and go from there no additional uh notice and we'll agree to a waiver of time perfect thank you thank you so much with that application number five danra Excavating LLC use variance 3458 will be carried to the February 7th 2024 meeting of the Jackson Township Zoning Board of adjustment no further notice will be required by the applicant and the applicant has waved time through that date that completes the announcements for this evening we can swear in the professionals gentlemen if you would please ra raise your right hand oh I got a they're missing their microphones thank you for raising your right hands do you solemnly swear or affirm 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 yes yes if you would please each state your name and your positions with the board board Evan Hill Board engineer Ernie Peters board planner Jeffrey paoro zoning officer thank you Mr Murphy I believe you have an announcement about executive session um I do uh Madam chair I'd like to make a motion uh or strike that I'd like to make a resolution um that we go into executive session so if I may articulate that uh whereas the Zoning Board of the township of Jackson is subject to certain requirements of the open public meetings Act njsa 10 4 and whereas the open public meetings Act njsa 10 col 4-12 provides that an executive session not open to the public may be held for certain specified purposes when authorized by resolution and whereas it is necessary for the zoning board excuse me whereas it is necessary for the zoning Board of the township of Jackson to discuss in uh session not open to the public matter relating to the item or items authorized by njsa 104-b uh 12b the matter in question this evening being specifically enumerated as Personnel now therefore be it resolved that the uh by the the Zoning Board of the township of Jackson to enter executive session for discussion of personnel issues is anticipated that Del deliberations conducted in close session may be disclosed to the public upon the determination that the public interest will no longer be served by such confidentiality Madam chair I just ask that somebody make a motion to approve that resolution please move to approve the resolution second roll call please Mr book yes Mr ricardi yes Mr Hudak Mr Stafford Smith yes M pares Miss Bradley yes ladies and gentlemen I don't anticipate this taking longer than 10 to 15es minutes I say that every time we go in I mean it this time though all right so uh we'll be back in 10 to 15 minutes in a second please so moved second Mr B yes Mr ricardi Mr Hudak Mr Stafford Smith miss pares and miss Bradley yes we are going to proceed to our first application applicant is forgive me if I butcher your name I apologize Arya Miller That's variant 3484 one Prince way thank you better yeah there you go thank you salvator alfy of fle giobi alfy and Jacobs on behalf of the applicant uh if you don't mind him thank you just you know the Acoustics in here aren't great just speak into that absolutely thank you so we're here tonight uh because we have a application to construct a pool uh install Associated fencing as well as a auxiliary structure u a cabana type structure uh we're here because it's a corner lot and uh we do need variance relief to proceed with that uh plan I do have one um I have one uh witness with me here tonight and uh shomo uh Med and if you'd like I would just have him sworn in we could proceed right to his testimony unless the board has any questions absolutely if you would please raise your yeah give him the mic oh perfect if you please raise your right hand you Solly 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 yes I do if you please state your name uh your affiliation to this application and if uh applicable your credentials please uh my name is schlomo mamad I'm G to be rep sorry s h l o m o last name is mamad m l a m DK you and what's your affiliation to the application uh so I'm the contractor and I am a friend of the homeowner so trying to help him out he wasn't able to be here today at a go out of out of the country so he asked me to come here and kind of help him out okay not an engineer or or a planner licens in the state Jersey licensed contractor yes okay all right that's fine this board excuse me this board accepts your credentials thank you madam chair Mr mamed if you could just uh describe for the board um the nature of the project uh get into some of the dimensions of what's being proposed as well as uh any other uh Rel information you believe that the the board can use in their consideration so Mr Miller is looking to construct a in ground swimming pool on his property um he prefers to put it on the left side of the lot so that it's not directly in front of his house so that it doesn't uh obstruct a play area right in front of his deck or his backyard so he's looking to put it a little bit to the left we are within the setbacks which is uh 40t from each side I believe one of that is is 48 ft um and he wants to do the Cabana as well which is also abiding by the setbacks and the idea of that location is again just to not obstruct the entire uh property and kind of set it aside and Mr malamed as far as the location that's being proposed um if you if you look at the plans there directly behind the house just below where it says lot one block uh 15302 uh could you please just address to the board as to why the applicant is proposing the pool in to the left of that rather than directly behind the house yeah so he has this huge lot and if he put it in the middle it would kind of uh consume most of it and it would be that's where you know mainly his kids are playing and uh that's where he wants the you know he wants to kind of keep that dry land and have the pool as an accessory especially because the pool is not open year round it's only uh you know a couple of months a year so he does he really wants to be able to have access to his backyard all of the other times and it's also mainly a a safety reason he doesn't want anyone walking out of the house directly into the pool uh he would have to you know fence that put fences right up against his his house and so this is how this is this is the location he kind of you know prefers and would like to get approved and in your your opinion it would be the most practical location yeah most people aren't putting pools right in front of their home most most like right in their backyard most people are trying to set it to one side or the other and in addition to the pool and the Cabana is there any other improvements uh there's a six foot fence I believe he wants to construct around his property once he has the variant going okay thank you uh we would uh turn it over to the board or the professionals to answer any uh questions that they may have Mr Hill um this uh as the board is aware this is a corner lot uh the the appli is proposing we're going to break it down into its components here uh the applicant is proposing a 6ot high solid fence in the front yard and it's considered the front yard area because it's forward of the home uh along Prince way um this is this is actually a double corner lot they're surrounded by Road butterfly Road and princeway on two sides so they there's three roadway frontages the six fo High solid fence is proposed proposed to be in the front yard setback it is it it will abide by uh it will conform to and stay out of the six foot wide shade tree and utility easement located along princeway and Butterfly Road uh and also if you look at the intersection of princeway and Butterfly Road you'll see a sight triangle easement that's been recorded that's been identified on the plan uh there are no encroachments proposed within the site triangle easement the existing 4ft High chain l fence will be removed from the perimeter of the property and replaced with the six foot high fence uh the only portion of the six foot high fence that requires variance approval is that along princeway and also butterfly road to the rear which is the the rear of the lot the applicant is also proposing an inground swimming pool within the front yard area along with a cabana building which is 15 by 30 ft I don't know anything about the height so you have any testimony on the height of the Cabana yeah it's going to keep to I believe 8 ft or Max 10 I'm sorry it is on the plan 10 foot 10 foot maximum height yes uh from a grading and drainage standpoint the left side of the property where they're putting the pool is the higher side of the property uh storm water flows from left to right uh so there would be no no adverse impact on storm water runoff as a result of this pool uh within the roadways or or within the the lot area itself I'm assuming the septic systems in the front yard yes okay and they're on public water or are they on uh wh I don't have that information of hand okay um so the septic system being in the front yard there there's no adverse impact of the septic system as well how far off the sidewalk will the six foot fence be um when you looking at the diagram more specifically to the left side princeway how far off the sidewalk is there a sidewalk there I don't remember there is I'm yeah there is U if you're based on the survey uh the property line is approximately 4 feet from inside the sidewalk so uh and the applicants proposing six feet further in in from there so it's going to be a total of about 10 feet from the sidewalk itself Mr Peters do you have anything okay any other Mr book yeah through the chair thank you uh specific to the Cabana what is going to be inside the Cabana describe what you propos to uh to to have inside that Cabana what will it be how will it be built is it going to be multiple rooms is it going to be served by Electric Etc it's going to be an open concept cabana it's going to be mostly for shade um we probably are going to have some electrical for lighting and kind of fans and possibly a grill area but no rooms or anything like that it's just fully open structure no water is going to be supplied to the gabana there's not going to be a kitchen or a B bathroom in the Cabana uh I not as the current plans not as the current plans if if there is that raises a different issue uh so Council I don't know does he do you have the authority to State here definitively whether or not there will be a kitchen or a bathroom inside the cavana we'd be willing to stipulate that um as I look at the plans and the ones you have up on the board it's it's clearly depicting that the intended six- foot vinyl fence is going to be inside uh the the current chain link fence is is that an accurate representation yes okay um all right I'm I'm good thank you any additional Smith yes i' just like to know from the applicant this this is a private use is just for the immediate family I apologize we're just discussing the uh the issue as to the water and um the electricity and things with regard to the Cabana um it was my understanding that we would be able to stipulate to that but in speaking with my professional we're not in a position here tonight to agree to stipulate um to whether or not that would be um that the that my client is going to say you know we won't we won't allow uh water to be run over there or anything like that so as far as um that issue is concerned Mr book uh we would U essentially have to get back to the board with additional information on that piece he he would like to leave that option open that's why I can't say definitively yes or no it was discussed in the initial plans he wants to have that option so I would say yes for now um if it's something that would hold up the project then it's possible he would just agree to not do it if that's an issue but I think he wanted to keep that option open I just want to I'd just like to take a moment Madam chair yes I appreciate the witness's cander but the Board needs to vote on something and Mr Murphy needs to be able to put it in a resolution maybe he's not an answer absolutely so to the extent that if they want to carry the application come back with a definitive answer if they want to say well we'll do this and we agree if we want to do more we'll have to come back but the the in between really doesn't there needs to be some specificity when application comes before the board yeah in speaking and I apologize for that in speaking with my professional as far as tonight goes we would be willing to stipulate that as as far as the uh the plans go we wouldn't be moving forward with the running water or anything at this stage and that if ultimately the applicant decides that's something you want to do we'd have to we would agree to come back to the board and seek additional relief in that regard yeah so yes if I may I think Mr Hudak just hit my point um there were there were a couple of um questions posed by Mr book uh the first one being did you intend to have um electricity and running uh and I guess it might have been a two-part question but and running water um to the Cabana the second question was did you plan to have any kitchen or bathroom in the Cabana area so I I I don't know necessarily that the running water is the issue that we're most concerned about um what M I think what Mr book is alluding to is the fact that if you're putting a kitchen and a bathroom in the Cabana it becomes a habitable space so if you will stipulate that there will be no bathroom or Kitchen in the Cabana I think that will be sufficient um you know again I don't it's up to the board but I think the issue of running water is a separate issue absolutely understood perhaps is any condition of an approval the board may give is they provide a plan for the Cabana we're being asked to guess here [Music] and I I believe um the testimony earlier was is that the intention is this would be an open AED Cabana space uh so there would be a great Grill that's associated with this but it would be open air so you know that I I and you can correct me if I'm wrong there wouldn't be no enclosed walls or anything like that as far as creating this habitable space that the board might be concerned about any additional questions or comments yes I just this is for private use this just a family's use in this pool area Absol absolutely yes any other qu I was gonna say and if it pleases the board we would uh we would agree as a condition of approval to provide some sort of plan as to the ultimate uh final product of the the Cabana space as far as the open space area and addressing the concerns raised by the board and that would be um administratively reviewed as part of uh resolution compliance I presume professionals not a not a site plan correct but just a a plan for administrative review during resolution compliance can you repeat can you repeat that um Mr alfery just stipulated that they would provide a plan for the Cabana uh my question to the professionals would that that would be a an administratively reviewed plan as part of resolution compliance uh it can be I mean we can work with Jeff Jeff we we've done this before we're if if they uh submit supporting additional supporting documentation uh after the resolution is adopted uh we will Comm communicate it or review it and communicate um I don't see it being more than a maybe a floor plan of how you anticipate using in that with also some notation of what utilities you plan on running and and what utilities you are not installing you're not installing sanitary sewer you're not you know those kind of things absolutely in short my question was they're not going to be required to come back for site plan is that correct no it's this doesn't rise to a level site plan application it's just it's a uh it's it's again it's a um it's a schematic plan that Norm that normally homeowners would prepare and submit to the building department for building permit purposes so it's it's no different just wanted to clear up the record thank you thank you Council any additional questions or comments Mr you have a closing statement summary of anything no Madam chair I I I think we're uh we're we're happy with the testimony and given what's been discussed and the stipulations we're we're we're happy to receive okay given that council is finished I'm going to open this to public session anyone wishing to comment on this application please come forward seeing no one come forward I'm going to close public session board it's up to us for discussion just a just we have a motion on the floor in a second Mr hak will there be any conditions related to that motion okay no you don't have to list them I just want to make sure that we were uh making that motion subject to the conditions placed upon the record thank you all right we have a motion on a second roll call please Mr book yes Mr ricardi yes Mr Hudak yes Mr staffer Smith yes Miss pares Miss Bradley yes your application's been approved thank you so much for your time thank you you happy holidays you too we're going to move on to application number two applicant are Ryan and Danielle Bur variant 3488 9 Abby Road please come forward good evening 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 but the truth I do if you would please state your name spell your last provide your address and your affiliation to this application Ryan Burell b r TC h e l l nine Abbey Road and I'm the owner of the property thank you Mr Burell why don't you tell us what you're looking to do here I'm looking to replace a wood shed that was uh already on my property um it was damaged in the tornado I'm looking to build a 12x 20 uh wood shed for storage and uh garden shed where a 15t setback as required I'm looking for 8 ft can you tell the board a little bit about the reason why you're looking for a variance for the 8 foot setback um to the right of where the shed is obviously is the pool um there's Wetlands on the other side of my rear fence and there's a lot of mature trees to the rear there so I'd have to cut down a lot of mature trees and it would be back in the woods if I put it back there so really that's the only location in your backyard that you can put that shed yeah there's a swing set on the other side of the pool in that open space thank you i' be um sorry so the fence there um I would have to take down that rear fence in that corner and slide it back about uh 5 feet and I'd be replacing it with the same chain link fence that was there just putting it back up Mr Hill so um you had indicated that you had a you you currently have a shed there there that's damaged I did I took it down and that shed was that closer to the property line than what you're proposing no it was uh same exact um it was actually a little bit closer to the property line yes I I looking at some aerial photography and it looks like it's right up against the fence and the fence is 5 ft off the property line so you're going to give yourself a little bit more buffers so you're making it you're going to install it further away from the property line than your existing fence put in the same area okay uh you submitted a sketch exterior sketch of the shed uh you're going to is it going to be stick built in place I'm going to build it myself yeah right uh it says you're going to put a concrete pad down uh the the shed itself is 12 by 20 so because it's over 200 square ft you're going to have to get building permits for the foundation and the structure itself uh they may require more than a concrete pad so you know the board's not approving the foundation type here but you know just be aware you're going to have to probably put in more substantial Foundation system and then your your sketch shows it's approximately 12 foot high um you think that's you think that's uh accurate or would you like a little wiggle room there a little wiggle room on there so like 15 feet 15 yeah okay so I would say a maximum of 15 ft uh Foundation to be determined at time of uh building permit any util being run to the shed uh possibly electric lighting and and uh an outlet I'll let the board I'll let a board member ask what the purpose of the shed is thank you because I was going to ask what what's I'm assuming storage but please tell us it's a basic garden shed storage no vehicles will be stored in there or anything um lighting and maybe an outlet or two for um tools and charging you know uh batteries and stuff no Mr Peters applicants provided testimony as to the hardship he's indicated that he's actually going to make the non-conformity less tends to lessen the degree of non-conformity and those are all positives that would lead the board to acting affirmative on the application any other questions or comments from the board I'm going to open this to the public if anyone would like to make comments on this application please come forward seeing no one come forward I'm going to close public session board it's up to us for discussion the the old shed that you had that got damaged what did you do in that shed I took it down no no what what was the it was same uh Garden storage yep same thing it was just uh 10 by 12 10 by 12 so you're just giving yourself yeah it was very small thank you yes we have a motion and a second roll call please Mr book yes Mr rard yes Mr Hudak Mr Stafford Smith yes m paret m Bradley yes your application approve sir thank you for your time thank you all right we are going to move on to applicant number three green apple Holdings LLC thank you thank [Laughter] you now why would he talk about you like that sir just one minute um I see some members of the public here um and I just want to make sure uh I I believe that they had missed the announcements um application number four which is the kebler Family Trust that was carried to December 20th um and application number five Dan rack Excavating was previously carried on the record to February 7th 2024 so if you're here for either of those applications those have both been carried uh this application green apple Holdings is the last application we'll be hearing this evening just wanted to make that announcement as a courtesy Mr feffer yes good evening Madam chairperson board members of the board um we've been before this board several times on this this application um couple housekeeping things I like to just address um since I know uh I'm not sure who is here not here and we've had some different versions of this application um we are going to run through um all the testimony um from the beginning however we will do it at a quicker Pace uh than normal um we came when we came before the board uh almost two years ago um the same site everyone I'm sure is familiar with the site it's the Jr land escaping site uh as a tortured history and and we're trying to make it as best uh make it a lot better than it is and and and what it was um so when we initially came before the board uh back in 2021 the site was all retail was approximately a little more than 41,000 square feet uh spread over a couple buildings um at that time before the board the board indicated uh it was too intense and obviously we're here for a use variant as it's not a permit it's not a enumerated permitted use uh in the in the zone um we listened to the board we understood that we went back we did some some re revising of the plans um and this some more research and we came back uh with a smaller uh site of approximately 37,500 square feet uh again all just retail again when we came back um the board said listen we still think is a little bit too intense um you guys had some questions you had some concerns look at my notes uh you know some of the concerns of being the use in the site and there were some residential uh neighborhoods surrounding the properties uh and you felt that maybe this should really be something else maybe it should be mixed use maybe it should be residential apartments and there were a lot of good good thoughts and questions and and admittedly we had not explored those options um so at that time we carried it again um we've and the board also at the same time asked as for um some economics you guys wanted to hear you know the retail vers the residential versus the permitted uses um and we said yes we understand that and that's that's been the delay in us coming back to this time but I just hand it around it's been submitted to the board it's it's an exhibit that we submitted uh is a full economic uh report on the site for all the different uses uh and we do have have uh you know a representative here to give testimony on that report as well but what what what's very important I believe is that now in doing all of that and before we came back to the board we decided we're going to make this a much smaller application um at this point what we are seeking tonight again it's a bifurcated use variance application right so the bifurcation means that we're going to definitely have to come back here for additional site plans and anything else that we may want to do at this point we are seeking a total of 13,200 square feet which is spread up of two buildings and we have exhibits and we'll talk about those in in two SE separate retail buildings in the front of the site um we have left the rear of the site uh vacant at this time um to do further exploration as to possibly the retail possibly more uh possibly residential multif family um or more retail but no matter what it is it would have to come back before this board for you to to to analyze and to give your blessing um I'm sure some people are sitting saying you know what's the catch why are we doing this and you know it we started at 40 some thousand square feet we're down to 13,000 square feet um at a previous hearing uh Brian flanner who who who's our expert who will be testifying again uh indicated this property is not within the sewer service area as we stand here today which means we cannot build the retail without being in the SE server we we're not doing it on on on a septic and we'd have to be within the sewer service area uh the testimony and it'll again be reaffirmed uh tonight is that we we have had informal uh initial conversations with the DP to have this property added into the sewer service area they are which is they have been receptive and they haven't they have not told us that it'll definitely happen which obviously if you approve it it doesn't happen it's not getting built anyway um but they have said we're not even going to explore it further with a formal application until you have an approval on this site and a use variance would be that first step so this is the first step in a lengthy process um and we understand the hesitation from the board at looking at a 40 some thousand square foot you know whole retail Center this is now 13,000 spread over two buildings a smaller pad site and a small retail building all in the front um and the board likes it great we would ask you know that vote being in the affirmative if you don't like it so be it um you know as I indicated also last time we've tried all the different you know um all different variations of this project and we're going to show you a few other sketches that we're exploring um the problem being at a certain point it just the economics don't work um what is permitted on the site is a school it does not need to be in the sewer service area it's a permitted use and the reality is is that obviously if it's not going to be retail or some kind of a mixed use with the multi family you know it's just going to end up going for an application for for a school which I personally think this is a much better application and site um for this type of of use for the property than having the school um but those are just the reality so and all this has been said before and I I ask I'm really not seeing this as as a threat like if you don't vote for this that's what we're gonna it's just the reality of of economics and the property and the permitted uses um so I mean that's really the the overview uh so this evening I do have three Witnesses I Brian flanner our our engineer and planner um I do have a John Ray here to give traffic testimony I will tell you I'm going to make it very easy on everybody John Ray last time said it worked at the 47,000 square foot he's going to say it's going to work at the at the 13,000 square foot so I'm not going to look to believe to believe everybody in terms of listening to John Ray as as much as everybody enjoys listening to him uh I'll call him up and I'm just going to ask him at the end does this work and don't forget if you do approve it we're coming back for a site plan you're going to have a whole other review of it and as well as the camp because it's on the county road uh and then we have our economic uh expert and I'm definitely not going to butcher his last name um his first name is Conor and he'll be up here and he will give some testimony and answer any of the questions so that's just the the overlay um of of of the application uh as I indicate it is a use variant so we will to have this approved we do need five affirmative votes um and at the end of the testimony I'll ask that that that be the vote but so be it at this time if we can we'll call him Brian Flannery and we'll have him morning Mr faner thank you for raising 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 but the truth uh I do uh Brian flry Jackson New Jersey licensed professional engineer uh professional Lancer surveyor uh um professional planner and registered architect in the state of New Jersey so uh as Adam indicated we'll we'll run through this quickly uh so as not to um you know drag it drag it out any further than necessary we had submitted uh 13 exhibits on this that I'll go through the ones that are applicable uh uh that three of them are like background information then we did three concepts based on what the the board asked us to look at at the last meeting and then I handed out exhibit a13 which is what we're asking for which is the uh 13,200 square foot of retail we're asking just for the use on that we understand we would have to come back we'd have to satisfy the board on every other uh criteria in the ordinance at time of site plan also by the time we get back uh we will have more information on what the future uh Development Area in the back is whether it be uh the the multifam and and and if that's the case we would need to come and ask for another use for that or or a permitted use such as a daycare um uh which we wouldn't need but we would still need site plan approval so this is a process that's going to take a while so the board understands I started on this in 2018 the first step was going to the governing body and see if they would look at a rezoning of the property and basically the answer I got there was well if we res own the property you have stuff by right and you can come in and and the neighbors don't have as much uh chance and the board doesn't have as much chance to tell you we we want you to do it the right way that you guys have the authority if there's anything you don't like uh it doesn't happen so then I went to the D and the D said that's great I went to the MUA in the county everybody said great but not as an R3 project that's just got a landscaping business on it so this would be the first step that lets us do that it'll probably be two years before we're back again if the board acts favorably so uh if Anthony could just put up uh A1 so a A1 is a tax map exhibit it shows in red the subject property it shows next to it the speedway in the Wawa it shows the Hope Cathedral School uh the Jackson United Methodist Church uh and then it shows off to the West the approved uh commercial multif family development uh and and the schools and the municipal building where we are this evening A2 uh is an aerial um showing the same marot uh and again it shows all all of the development where we are it it shows the subject site uh A3 we don't need to look at because that showed the original uh item on it but if we could go to A4 uh A4 shows the existing Jr Landscaping site and and what I'd like to point out as as a landscaping site you know it's good and I've actually used it in the past that you know they have good Stone they have good top soil but as as a neighbor not not so much you see there's no buffers it's a little messy it it it could certainly uh be better and and and that's why we feel what we're proposing would be better um uh a uh 5 through nine have been reduced so if we could go to 810 yeah they're not they're not in order on the website I I and it's kind of the the application has gone on a while so uh we don't really need to look at the A10 then that that was a scaled down version of detail something a little smaller if you have a11 I I would like to show the board that that was the multifam uh and it was units similar to what were approved down the street it it should beb labeled as exhibit A1 oh yes there it is that's right that one's up there first so so that that showed if we did all um uh multifam what it would be like uh you know my feeling in looking at it is with the frontage with the other uses uh some retail at just like was done down the road by the mud mudra would make more sense if you're doing the multif family so we did a sketch a12 which which had just that it has the 13,200 foot of retail up front and and some apartments in the back and and and that works we're not asking for that tonight uh again we're not going to be getting to a point where we're going to be designing something for a couple years what we're asking for tonight is on shown on a13 which is just the 13,200 Ft of retail up front uh leaving an area in the back uh uh that we will in a couple years when we come back uh have more details on we'll we'll have full engineered plans full reports uh if the board acts favorably um I I'd like to point out that we did um the notes on our plan that we we've indicated uh since the original one uh we we've noted that all signage will comply with the Jackson ordinance any approval of this will be condition upon public sewer and water being extended from the MUA we would comply in in full with the landscaping and buffer areas of the township we'd comply with the lighting we would provide a letter from the D indicating there's no uh environmentally sensitive parts of the property uh at site plan curb and sidewalk would be planted would be provided uh up to the uh as required by the ordinance with no relief requested and then we listed the uh the specific uses uh that we would be limited to and again if the board acts favorably we're we're expecting and what we're committing to is that um this would be the maximum that we would ask for with respect to retail and we would comply with all the representations with respect to the buffer and and the public sewer and the retail uses that we've listed uh and and I live a couple miles from here and uh I know I originally told you I wanted a Starbucks there so I didn't have to drive my grandkids so far and now we can get one by Jackson Crossings but this would still be closer for them and and I think a lot of people but a bookstore drive-through Cafe Bakery Candy Store gift shop ice cream parar stationary periodical store Variety Store Pharmacy shoe repair photo studio and hair hair salon it would be limited to those uses so having given that background now uh the to get into the detail TS it's a 6 and2 Acres site uh what we've uh agreed to is we would comply with all of the uh coverage requirements of the uh R3 Zone uh which is 50% 15% building coverage uh and obviously we proposed 13,200 foot that's 15% on roughly two acres of the 6 and a half acres uh we would also comply with this 60% impervious coverage so when we come back with the site plan we will be complying with them in full we will not be asking for any bulk relief um the uh we had reports that were done on the on the bigger development uh we had one from the engineer and and and uh he asked for a lot of information which John Ray has provided in a report and and and he will confirm as Adam said and if the board acts favorably at time of site plant we will will also have a traffic report uh to provide that that the traffic will be acceptable uh Evan held did a report uh and he had requested uh that the survey be updated which we would do as part of any site plan application if the board acts favorably uh uh he asked if we had any discussions and and and yes I've had discussions with the county with the state with with the governing body uh he questioned the number of parking spaces here we're we're showing 68 parking spaces which uh is complying with the ordinance requirement and again we will not request any parking relief uh and the board would have the opportunity if if somebody else came back and asked for parking relief to deny the application um uh he asked for the presence of absence of wetlands and we do have an Loi indicating there's no Wetlands on site uh the the uh John Ray will address the traffic and again that would be ATT addressed again at time of sight plan um he had the comment on Curbing and sidewalk which is why we put that as a note on the plan um and and additionally we added buffers to the plant along all sides of the buffer and along the front all sides the rear and the front of the property to comply with the ordinance in full uh Ernie's report um listed the the compliance uh with all the ordinance requirements and and my testimony is that we will comply in full with all of them uh the original submission had a couple that we didn't comply with any site plan that we came back will comply with the ordinance requirements in full and then the second part of Ernie's report is with respect to uh satisfying the um the municipal land use law with respect to the uh D variants that we're requesting uh one of the things that we look at there we we look at positive criteria the negative criteria and the special reasons when we look at the negative criteria it it's two steps the first step uh is usually the um how it impacts the neighborhood and the adjoining properties uh and and when you look on A1 if Anthony could put that back up again we're very limited on what properties join us uh when we look on Bennett Mills road to the east uh the Hope Chapel Church adjoins our property uh and obviously they're next to a landscape uh company right now with no buffer we're going to be providing a buffer uh so uh we do have one small uh home which is 36 benit Mills Road which right now is next to a landscape company with no buffer we're going to be providing them a buffer we go to the West we have Speedway then we go along Cedar Swamp Road we have a couple properties uh that from the first time I came I drove by and and made a note that they had a sign up for sale medical or or office property for sale signs still up so uh th those houses are there they have uh they're next to a landscaping company with no buffer we're going to be giving a buffer so my planning uh opinion on that is we've uh increased it uh We've improved it and then we have the properties in the back that probably if we go to A2 uh would demonstrate where uh additionally I feel that um you see the back of the property the the residents that are Beyond Cedar Swamp all have Woods near us with no buffer the woods is going to stay we're going to add a 35 foot buffer uh they're looking at a landscaping yard now and and they'll be looking at a buffer and and a much nicer property afterwards and that's part of the financial uh analysis they did a a stigma check to um indicate if there's going to be any Financial impact on on their property values and I'll let our expert on on that handle that one um so then we then we get to the 20123 master plan Amendment uh on page two it has land use plan element and they have a goal to achieve a pattern of mixed land uses that achieves various Community planning objectives including provision of quality neighbor neighborhoods the protection of Natural Resources the economic development of the community and the creation of a livable desirable community so my testimony is that this makes the community better because it cleans up the site and it does provide for economic development uh the next objective is to direct growth into areas suited for Land Development and away from appropriate resource protection so again we have the D Loi that says we have no environment sensitive areas and the fact that we would bring sewer here it would be a benefit to the neighbors we got Wawa we got Speedway that are on septics uh if you look further down you see we we got mostly one acre lots all smaller lot sizes than you want for the for the groundwater if we bring public sewer that that helps that situation out uh next objective is encourage the use of planning techniques that will effectively integrate desirable residential commun communities viable commercial and service uses and rep Source protection in open space areas and and we would do that with our site plan when we came in the following objective is to provide Economic Development opportunities in areas that are well suited and my testimony is this fits that category uh uh the last one on the page is to provide for c commercial development to serve both local and Regional needs this one would mostly serve local needs with the uses we've picked uh but I think it it meets that as as well um and the utility service plan the goal is to provide the utility services needed to serve the existing and future population of Jackson Township in a safe and effective Manner and again we we have uh existing uses on septic systems that I know they're old I've been doing this a long time I know they're not the best and this applicant would help to bring sewer to that whole area it would be a benefit to the existing uh uses in the area it would be a benefit to this property and it would be in benefit to the environment in general um the the master plan uh land use section in 17 uh goes on to talk about um uh the R3 planning district and it's to serve that are outside the sewer service area and it talks about the minimum lot sizes of 3 acres and you can see the the other Lots around here aren't on three acres anything we can do to not put another septic system in there especially a septic system for a school which is a permitted use uh would be a benefit uh to the town and the general public in in my U estimation um the um the same uh master plan uh goes on to talk about the percentage of the township that's already built and and and we all know with respect to uh residential development um the areas that are remaining uh to be developed um they had it as a 29% increase would would be projected um uh non-residential uh development opportunities um they're looking for an increase of 65% so this would be a uh increased uh and I think having the retail there as as a um a nice rable certainly adds to that um uh the population projections from page nine uh indicate that there was a 45% increase from 2000 to 2017 um it it's I I I don't see it slowing down and and I think that uh if we come back at a future time and provide some uh select multif family as was mentioned that we should look at from the board I I I think that would be helpful in that regard uh and and again it'll be two years down the road maybe we have a new master plan by that point and um and we could Target something to exactly what we're looking the they have a figure on page 10 of the land use uh Acres uh and the the vacant land is 11.35% the residential is 25% the commercial is 2.59% and which me especially as a Jackson taxpayer I think 2.59% uh commercial we need to get as many ratables as possible um so the master plan recommendations on page 14 were encourage commercial development it says in commercial zoning districts um this piece is uh adjacent to commercial properties and and I think the same thing would uh would be appropriate um then we go to the municipal land use law and as 40 call 55d 2 Under the purpose of the ACT a is to encourage Municipal action to guide the appropriate use of development of allil lands and estate in a manner which will promote public health safety morals and general welfare and I think this does that I I think it it provides a rateable it helps the groundwater and it provides public sewer to other users uh the G is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural residential recreational commercial and Industrial uses and and and this would be uses that uh I would find useful as as a neighbor that lives a couple miles from the site so we are asking for a d variance um uh to allow a principal use that's uh not allowed in in the uh in this zoning District uh and we need to show that the variants can be granted uh without substantial detriment to public good and will not substantially impair the intent purpose of Zone plan and zoning ordinance and that's like the two steps of the negative criteria um the first one we're looking at is the effect on the surrounding properties and I think I've gone through that and we have the financial expert uh that's going to go uh indicate uh his findings after studying it in detail um and and and the the second um is the um it will not substantially impair the intent purpose of the Zone plan and zoning ordinance and I think we're looking at a unique piece of property uh located in between other non-residential uses and and I think based on that uh there there would be no substantial impact on either Zone planner zoning ordinance it's a uh very unique lot with non-residential uses on both sides the positive criteria is the goals of the master plan that I read providing the buffer I I think is a huge um positive uh the rable is a positive but I think the biggest one is the public sewer uh to this property and to the other uses that I've testified to um obviously uh as Adam mentioned the alternative is a school on a septic which is a byright application which the planning board has to approve uh and and my opinion is uh that what we're asking for uh is certainly a benefit over that when we ask for the dev variances there's typically three types of Dev variant that you ask for an inherently beneficial use uh which we're not uh a a hardship which we don't have because we have a site that's being used we have a site that can be used as a school or or one that uh promotes the general welfare and I think my testimony uh uh has established that it promotes The General welfare and the property is particularly well suited uh the the tax increase as a taxpayer uh of of approving this would be substantial and and as a taxpayer I would be happier getting uh more taxes for that piece of property with buffers and with public sewer uh so I think for all those reasons uh we certainly qualify for the variants that we're requesting Mr fer you mentioned public sewer a number of times any idea of the time frame we've heard a number of applications as you know where public sewer is not available any idea how long it would take um I started working on it in 2018 I I got answers uh that everybody thinks it's a good idea but not for an R3 property so my my gut feeling is that in two years we would be back here with a site plan uh probably take a year getting the site plan approved because I know the board reviews it thoroughly we get impact from the uh the public we'd adjust it just like we did this time and we'd come in with a good project and then it's going to take another two years to to get the sewer done so hopefully in four years Wawa can stop getting their septic pumped out every it won't be W anymore have they open in the new one off of the 195 all right well who whoever buys the Wawa because it it is a very busy site I I go byy there all the time and uh it's a heavily used property which it'll continue to be used because there's a use for it uh any idea on when that other WWA is going to be done year year and a half year and a half yeah because I'm looking forward to that too it's Brian the the four years that's assuming that this property gets gets put in that put into the SE service area is that correct that is correct and that so just maybe we could speak on that process assuming that a use variant is obtained here and you start working on on with the D to have this amend have it amended the the first thing I'll do is uh reach out again to the county and to the governing body uh and and and get there uh okay and then I'll go to the uh the Jackson mua which I have spoken to before and at the Jackson mua I'd like to roll it into bigger than than just this and and if and that that was what they expressed to me originally that you know maybe we get to the fire station down the street maybe we pick an area that makes sense all that's going to take a minimum of six months then we go to the D they're going to take a year so in a year and a half hopefully we we have something from the D that draws a new sewer service area line that makes sense for Jackson chair Mr flry first I I would love to see the sewer service area expanded I'd love to see it go all the way to leeville Road personally is the main you're proposing to put in a force man from your property going east or is it a Gravity Man the there's a uh Force man in front of this subject property on Bennett Mills Road the the uh plan that was spoken about with the MUA would be in a put in a pump station at a low Point uh and and also pump uh to whatever location made the most sense and and the project that was approved down the street they're in in the same situation where they need to get that figured out and with a few applicants together it makes the process easier I couldn't agree with you more uh the I guess my concern is how much capacity is left in north central of oca's collection the the central is dead it's gone so it's some point NPS 5 and six are nearing capacity do you feel that there's enough room that this actually has some viability I I I certainly feel it has viability and and I know that ocua uh has to look at uh figuring out how to make it work as well because the county is not going to stop ocean count is not sto now they're currently doing a study on the central agency to try and pick up more from say right right and and and and somehow they're going to work it out certainly this one piece of property is a drop in the bucket uh but what we're looking at to do something with Jackson mua that makes sense is bigger than that uh and and I feel from the conversations I've had and from my experience over 40 years in this that it's something that'll be worked out uh could probably could be a dueling gravity going one way to the pump and then from the pump be forced all the way down yep all got oh yeah through the chair um so Mr flatter I get it the sewer service that's a big condition to this project being viable uh in your testimony if I heard you correctly you're you're willing to limit these retail uses and you listed a whole bunch of them did I hear that right that the that the retails that would go into these to the proposed retail building the 5,000 foot the 8200 square foot would be limited to those retail uses you placed on the record that that is correct we we we don't want cart blanch we we don't want something coming in that the board didn't know I want you to know what you're voting at on uh you know I'm a resident I'm going to be here for a while and I I don't want to tarnish my name the um the concept of the buffer is really a big deal um you do have a neighbor between you and the church you say buffer but can you be more definitive in terms of what you're going to do to be a really good neighbor to that uh to that residence so that he's not or she's not whoever owns that property is not going to be adversely affected because there's going to be more traffic going in and out of this as opposed to what's there now I I I would recommend an8 foot fence along the property line if the board agrees with that we do eight if not we'll do six and then we we're giving 35 ft of buffer and we will plant that buffer in accordance with the ordinance requirement for buffer planting I don't know what that means I don't know if the ordinance planting is really sufficient and I'll seek feedback from our engineer and our Planner on that well I I I would represent that we would do a double row of uh a an evergreen uh probably arbites uh and and we would we would have a landscape architect design it uh and and have it reviewed at C plan by your board professionals so that we we provide a dense screen that separates both uses that these people aren't looking into there and then and they're and vice versa and and bringing bringing the building so much forward it really does amarate much of the impact on the residents um I've lost my sense of direction but the residents up along to the north yes i' see the swamp yes um and and we're also proposing a buffer along their side and and along the river of the property as well and it would be the same 35 foot buffer with a fence and and with the AR proving thank you and as Mr feffer stated I just want to put on the record as Mr feffer stated there's a long history with this property I am sure that those rear neighbors would appreciate greatly that 35 foot buffer I think they'd appreciate anything they'll they'll probably appreciate Jr Landscaping reloc as well yes well the the plan is first we're going to go get the sewer service area adjusted to to do it we're not we're not leaving that uh vacant uh we would either either put in a permitted use which would be like a daycare or we'd come back and say here we've done this research uh we've done studies uh we'll put in some multif family we'll put in uh something else that makes sense there well the front part's not happening until we come back with the site plan and and we're probably not going to be back with the site plan for two years so Jr landsc aping is going to be there for two years uh when we come back in two years we'll have the details on what's being done in the back we'll have the details on the trees and the fence and all the and the traffic and all the other information to make this board feel comfortable and if you're not comfortable you you don't have to approve it and just so we're clear we most probably if it's a well not if it's a use that's not enumerated we'd have to ask you for an additional use variant for the multi to say it's multif family for the moment which the board had suggested we look at if we wanted to come back here it would be with the two retail sites which you would already assume you vote Yes have a use variance for uh we'd have to show you the site plan but if we're going to do multif family back there we'd have to ask this board again for a new use variant um and really most probably almost reapply the entire application because we're intensifying the site itself so we'd have to reapproved retail uh and then show you what's going to be on uh the back and you guys would have your say in it as well as a site plan so you you guys have your hand then nothing's happen here without the board blessing it yes so it's currently still being utilized as the landscaping business and that's their um the immediate future uh so nothing is really changing on site at at the moment hopefully something gets approved and we he or somewhere else and it it'll get the bell and and we will work as quickly on that as possible because again we started in 2018 we have done a lot of the to push it as quickly as possible so that that scor property it can can can be uh converted to something that we can all all right so just to be clear so we're all on the same page if this is approved and you come back for site plan and are ready to move forward so let's say at least two years Jrs Jr will continue to operate yes yes oh thanks about that both okay thanks um that's that's going to be another approval before you even build this it it will be another approval Our intention at this point is is that would be the starting block of the approval and and and then all of the engineering details would be provided and we'd have we'd do more market research we'd do more we' do soil borings we'd do all the engineering work that's needed to tell you exactly what will work on that site right and and just to clarify as we started on the in the beginning uh is this a bifurcated application we're coming back to the board the only thing that the board if you vote in favor of it um would be uh you'd be approving uh the possibility of up to two buildings no more than the total of the 13,000 square feet in change um that's shown on the plan that's all so if we come back and we're showing 15,000 square feet over three buildings or one Bild that's not what you would have approved it's only and and we would need a new use variants for that so this process would start all over uh which is not what we anticipate we anticipate coming back and maybe having some multif family in back uh to sort of complement the retail uh or as I indicated a daycare is a permitted use but uh we need to get to sewer service area we need to do a lot more work uh both market research and Engineering work on the ground uh in order to to tell you exactly what it's going to be and and that would be in a sight plan and nothing happens until we get that approval thanks for clarifying Mr Hill anything uh yeah so I just uh I want to thank the applicant for um going through the review letters because it has been a while since we've we've written those and agreeing to comply with with those that are applicable to this application from from the from my standpoint U from my perspective there are no engineering issues that we need to be concerned with tonight the applicants agreed that he's going to substantially comply with all of the design requirements if when that time comes which would be at site plan in the future this this is no uh the the board is looking at a concept plan that depicts two proposed retail buildings with with parking and what the concept plan depicts is or shows is the site can accommodate that maybe more in the future but all they want you to focus on now is just these two buildings with parking and the buffers and and um the fencing that they added and so on and the reason for that is that gives them the Comfort level to move forward and invest a lot of time and money to secure the sanitary sewer approvals with without without any approval of a concept for this site they don't have the right to do that with in front of D they won't even talk to them so it could change I mean it could change too right once the Ser once they come back and say you know know what we wanted we agreed to the uh 23,200 ft I'm sorry 13,200 Square ft with parking and we want to put um multif family in we want to put additional retail in or whatever it is in two years but they have to come back in front of this board you have to agree to that just you're any approval that you grant tonight does not give them the right to build anything at this point you're buying into a con a development concept at this point only that's it Mr Peters thank you madam chair um first a piggyback on Mr book's question about um buffers um our report dated May 10th of 2022 had a comment I'll read real quickly that all proposed uses other than single family and two family dwellings shall provide buffer areas along all side and rear property lines which abut area is Zed for residential use and along front property lines on local minor collector and major collector streets which a but area zone for residential use a minimum 10-ft wide buffer should be provided plans depict a 35ft buffer along the side and rear property lines and a 20ft buffer along the lot Frontage therefore this requirement appears to have been met the buffer planting shall be reviewed at the time of site plan so I just it was a comment that was heated by the applicant they've come back I just wanted to bring that issue full circle um as it relates to what we're approving in the idea of future development um just want to be clear they're asking for a use variance to build 13,200 ft of a non-permitted juuse on a 6 and a half acre site they come back with one more ounce of anything including permitted uses later they're still back here for a use variance because they're going to intensify what the original use variance was so you're never removed from future development on this project in my opinion we agree and lastly as it relates to the planning testimony um and the comments that were received both from the public and the board at the last hearing um I do believe that Mr flaner has um provided sufficient testimony for the board to review and decide the application we don't take any exception to the testimony um I believe one of the bo board members was looking for enhanced quality of proof um I believe Mr planer has provided that testimony this evening and if the board has any comments we can certainly have a conversation regarding it thank you i' just like to remind the board this is a bifurcated application which is permitted under the uh Municipal land use law um the only thing that we're really considering here tonight is the use itself um and that requires us to evaluate the the um enhanced quality approv is set forth in the medich case um so what we're evaluating um is a the positive criteria um and we're looking to see uh the special reasons um M I believe Mr fler placed on the record um that it's the applicant's position that this uh uh enhances the general welfare um so we have to find that the property is particularly suitable for the proposed use all right um second uh we need to uh the applicant needs to satisfy the negative criteria and that's um uh you know proving that there's no substantial impact to the um Zone plan or Zone ordin ordinance um and they need to reconcile the proposed use um with the uh Omission in our ordinance as to that use so again I think um that uh Mr flry has placed testimony uh regarding those proof on the record it's the board's consideration as to whether those are sufficient to Grant the use variants but again this is not a site plan application uh we're not considering site plan issues this evening they have to come back for site plan so just uh again my my advice to the board is focus on the use variants alone there no other questions and Mr Flannery call my second witness um Connor I'm not going to put your his last name thank you for raising your right hand do you solemly 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 if you would please state your name spell your last provide your uh affiliation uh to this application and your credentials please sure thing uh Connor montat it's co NN o r last name m o n t Fs in Frank e r r a t I'm here tonight um as the real estate market expert on behalf of the application and I handed out a copy of the report on page 35 is is uh Conor's CV which lengthy in terms of his license yeah don't mind going through it yeah um Master just briefly if you would yeah graduate Ruckers University hold uh two Masters in City Planning and urban planning as well as public policy um like LIC in the state of New Jersey as a State Certified General appraiser and um also work in the Real Estate Field this board accepts your credentials thank you Conor uh We've walked through the the the application the project uh you and your your office had an opportunity to prepare and analyze the site and and and prepare to report if you can just give the maybe the high level summary of that report uh to the board absolutely yeah I wasn't involved earlier on but um in front of you you have a pretty lengthy report for a simple meeting such as this um I serve on planning boards I even served on burough Council for a number of years um the sum of this report was from what I've heard to answer questions from the planning board um in terms of the use itself and how it affect surrounding properties so my task really was twofold was to figure out the market conditions in place for both the multif family use and the retail use and determine if there's any impact on the surrounding Residential Properties and um the short of it is that there's ample demand for multif family use right now um we've seen that Trend kind of accelerate through the pandemic and now again as interest rates hover around 7 and a half 8% on average um residential homeowners who are trying to purchase in Jackson and the surrounding towns um as well retail is pretty healthy here and there's some pretty strong indicators you have a large gap almost in every retail spending category in Jackson except for Like Home Depot Low's Garden equipment landscaping and that's where there's kind of that negative um Surplus really no Gap at all and um so with both uses working that's when we took that next step to figure out what if any Sigma on the surrounding Residential Properties and we looked at Paragon um during construction lease up and since built on a neighborhood across the street from that property and determine there was no impact in this market and we also looked at um Neptune Township which has similar average selling prices around 500 to 525,000 on the average home and looked at Jumping Brook which ab buts Apartments a residential neighborhood and a retail Center in the front right on 33 and similarly there there was no impact on residential property values I'm I'm here for any and all go as as as in depth as as the board would like I just wanted the analysis again the board had asked for for this at the last meeting uh the applicant this is not a a uh you know it's it's a hard application when you're doing a use variants uh the board asked the right questions this applicant didn't shy away from it and went and spent significant you know amount of time energy and money to go ahead and do the report um I also don't want to keep the board longer than we need to but we have the report it's part of the record it's been submitted um and we could hear we could answer any questions of the board May and you'll have plenty of data to kind of extract into your master plan or any any way you'd like uh in terms of population growth age corts the whole night through the chair yes M Mr montat is that it Mr that's correct Mr first I'm looking at your picture in here and you look like you're about 15 in the picture short short that was when that was pre- pandemic and I was like this all kidding inside just a couple of straightforward questions in the concept of value the project is proposed is it your testimony that it would not have any negative impact in terms of the value of the residence next to the property to the residences across the street from the property and to the residents up the street from the property on Cedar Swamp Road that's correct that's my testimony there's no impact on the r I'm not impact that's I didn't ask the question properly when you say no impact I'm I'm taking that to mean that there would be no negative impact and that the resale values of those properties would not be negatively impacted by this project would it would it have a positive impact thinking the flip side of the coin could it have a positive impact and increase the value of the property or do you not know or you don't have an opinion on that yeah actually I think that there's no impact NE neither positive nor negative so it's almost a neutral the data showed only marginal um 1 to 2% differences in selling prices the homes so it it means that there's some other variable that explains for that all right whether it's an inground pool or you know it sold a month later thanks no problem Mr Stafford yes results based oned it was based on the reduced retail space and the U multif family the two uh scenarios the 68 dwelling unit plan and the 44 dwelling unit plan with 13,200 fronting Ben it's Mill just I'm sorry just so as we're not confusing the board as part of this particular use variance application there is no multif family housing proposed is that correct that is correct and again we just wanted to show um when we came back uh we did the analysis of it but to start showing you now it would have been much more complicated to have now a whole mixed use with the retail in the front and the and the residential multif family in the back there would be a lot more questions and it it almost doesn't make sense because we know we're coming back here if if we get approved hopefully we get into the SE service area and then that whole site plan is going to be able to be analyzed as well as we'll need to ask for that use Varian but to ask for it now correct did not make sense but the financial analysis part the board wanted to see you he wanted to give it to you based upon my mon monologue I just wanted to uh my prior monologue I just wanted to clarify the record yes thank you that's correct um you may have alluded to this but could you explain what data you're referring to like how just the quick methodology of how you're assessing that there was maybe a one to two% impact up or down yeah sure it's just the uh uh basic uh paired sales technique where you take two like kind homes um you know one that's sold for 500,000 the other that's sold for 510,000 except that home with a that's sold for 510,000 has an attached garage so you can quantify that that garage added $10,000 in value to that home to the other home that didn't have a garage so I think I think the the question was like thinking the Paragon site how yeah that was built out and didn't have an impact in the surround is that is that the question where so not yeah so then I took that concept and applied it exactly to um what Adam just was describing that I looked at homes across the street from Paragon that had sold and compared them to similar homes in actually in this neighborhood off of uh Phoenix Court and Evergreen I looked at um home prices of those and paired them because the nearest apartments on Bennett Mill is Jackson Arms a mile away so not across the street so that variable is what I looked at okay thanks so you know looking at this um concept concept that you guys have have presented um it appears to me that this is just a placeholder because there there's no way that this could be a cost effective project with just this minimal uh retail space in front so um rest assured the back of that property will be will be developed yes and again we're not trying to to come in with one thing and say oh we're we're gonna not do something different we're telling you right now the maximum that would be on the site would be the 13,000 uh and change for the retail and the reason being is that we think this is the easiest way um to get the board comfortable so that you could say yes a use variance could be granted because you're not cornering yourself later on to saying oh we approved 35 40,000 square foot of retail and now don't doesn't work right now it's vacant correct and and the the 13,000 foot and change is enough for us to go to the next step because when if we get to apply for the sewer service area it's going to be at a on this whole site so once we do that correct money you know dollars and cents something's going to get developed there but this board is going to have that jurisdiction on to see what that is and we're going to have that re ask because as as your professionals correctly indicated once we change one thing on the site we are now intensifying the use variant that you guys hopefully will be granting so if we do one small multif family building that's an intensification of the entire site and we have to ask for our use variants all over again so it's a risk on our end um we're taking a little bit of risk we're asking the board to have some faith in that yes you know we're going to go forward and do all of this um but the downside to to this board or to the township is minimal because we're the one taking the risks saying we're only asking for 13,000 s foot and change on it was a 6 point some Acre Site uh and have to do all the the leg work to run and get into the Super service area so you are correct 100% in saying the finances don't make sense on a 13,000 foot based upon purchase price and building and everything else but um we acknowledge that but this is just the first step because when we came to the board with a 40,000 squ foot uh you guys said this ain't happening come back we came back 30,000 square feet this isn't H we understand we're trying to work we're trying to make this work for everybody um and so this concept of the 13,000 square foot and change I want to say it's a placeholder because I do believe if the multif family all works out that would be the tie-in but if we want one more square foot you guys got to bless it with all that being said I asked our professionals and our councel do you guys um you concur with um you know the risk is all on them and and we're okay absolutely I mean absolutely um I think the applicant has indicated that the project is not financially viable for them just to build these just these two retail uses but your your approval for just this small use or or intensity gives them enough to move forward with securing San hopefully sanitary sewer rights and and you know approve other out State approvals so they can come back with fully engineered design plans in front of them the board not only for this component but also for maybe you know something in the rear so the applicant cannot proceed with the D without some sort of approval and this would be that approval now they can't build it yet you not you're not giving them the approval to build this you're just really giving them the approval to move forward and having a dialogue with the state regarding the sewer I concur with the opinion of Mr Hill um again you know even even with this use variance approval and that's all we're looking at is the use itself um there's no guarantee that this project is going to happen first and foremost u based upon the testimony that I've I've heard tonight um I think that sums it up uh but again anything else that they would want to put on this particular site they would need to come back before this board and obtain a use variance uh for any proposed use not well actually any proposed use that they want to put on the site um and a site plan and a site plan correct so um you know because again you can't especially if there's a mixed use you can't have two principal uses on one lot so these are all considerations so I would agree I think the risk here is on the applicant they're getting their ducks in a row okay if you remember we used to speak about the board of first jurisdiction being the local land use board they need to get this first before they can go do the next thing the Land Development process then come back to you guys thank you m CI so all of that is really good suppose that this gets approved by this board what's that can you hear me now sound like a commercial so let let's say that the the variance gets approved and let's say that you decide to build this project the way we see it today the back property behind it I would assume and I'm asking that back property if this was to be built that back property would be cleaned up conform to conform with the with the project that you built yes right I I know we may I know that this is a placeholder or whatever we're call you but just let's just say because I'm old and sometimes I just want to make sure if this was to be built that property that's behind it is also going to be cleaned so that it conforms with the project you're building we comply with all townships State uh rules and regulations thank you any additional questions or comments for this witness Mr Feer you have another uh I want to call my last I promise you it's going to be very quick I'm gonna ask two questions and then I think we're g to be good good with that witness Mr John Ray uh Mr R thank you for raising your right hand do you s 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 please state your name spell your last provide your affiliation and credentials John Ray Rea a professional engineer with MCD and Ray Associates traffic and transportation Engineers 1431 Lakewood Road manisan New Jersey you accept Mr raise credentials I yes uh testifying as a traffic engineer I I've been before this board before a couple times just a few just a few this board accept that's just this week um John I understand that you had prepared a report um based upon this based upon this project that was initially submitted for a much more intense uh use of a larger retail site is that correct uh yes the original report was for 42,000 a little bit over 42,000 square feet of retail on this property and then project was subsequently downsized as Mr fefer indicated to about 38,000 and I came back in June of this year as I recall June 21st and provided testimony on the 38,000 ft plan with a conclusion that uh it would operate compatibly with future traffic conditions in the area if it were approved and of course now that we're in for 13,200 Ft the conclusions remain the same and the last thing I just wanted to remind the board I think I testified to this at the meeting in June Ocean County does have a plan to improve the signalized intersection of Bennett Mills and Cedar Swamp and Veterans Highway just to the west of us I've looked at their concept plant hopefully it'll be done within 10 years which is the Horizon for the traffic study and uh they're going to do some widening of the intersection they're going to restripe to provide some additional turning Lanes put a new traffic signal in it's all going to benefit the area and obviously should this get approved and we get back here for a site plan we'd have to revise our traffic report to con exactly what what's being shown any questions or Mr Ray any questions from Mr Ray okay thank you thank you Mr fer you have a closing those are all our Witnesses I don't know if there's any your any comments of you're open to the public and I'll make a short closing statement being that Mr uh feffer has given us his closing remarks I'm going to open this to the public I'm sorry oh forgive me you're summary uh any from anyone from the public wishing to come forward good evening if you would please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affm 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 Elanor Hanam H NNU M 7 Evergreen Court thank you you're welcome uh my first question is what is the dates of the traffic study the last traffic study let's give John a second September 1st 2021 okay and that was when we were still locked down in Co right just before the schools wait a minute Miss Hanam wait a minute if you were here during my testimony in June uh and if you read the report we looked at preco traffic volumes which were 20% higher than the 2021 volumes and we adjusted the volumes up 20% in order to do the traffic study it's in the report and it was testified to and and what was the times of day that the study was done the weekday PM Peak Street hour and midday Saturday peak hour which are the critical time frames for retail use okay um so also there was discussion regarding fencing and screening are is this fence going around the entire property all along through the back as well yes okay and where are these orbes being placed they'll really be addressed during the site plan but either way it'll be to the like uh it'll be that to be signed off by the Township's professionals well there's a reason that I'm asking this question are the arbes going on the inside of the property or the outside of the property so there's been no testimony on the type of on the species type of Evergreens a row of ever a row of arites does not meet the ordinance requirements they're not proposing any species at this point but they've indicated they've put on the record when the time comes that they come back for site plan they will have a fully compliant buffer on the site plans that's subject to further review by the public and by the board okay I please let we this is not the appropriate time to get caught up on species of plants height of fence this is purely on the 13,200 foot of retail period that's it okay all the design details come later storm water management so on don't want you wasting your time is what I'm getting I'm just saying because we have barbes by us and the deer just eat them all of course they do that that was my point um so um I just have to say this is a R3 residential property this proposal is essentially changing a residential use the Jr property had a a use variance to sell and I'll quote flowers and trees and G Garden related propert uh products along with running his business he intensified that business and this town allowed it even though the residents in the area uh complained constantly and there was a reason for that um but now I'm looking at a proposal that yes they scaled down the commercial use so a residential property is being turned commercial and now they're proposing multifamily in the back no that's not correct no line so sometimes it's easier for for sometimes it's easier for us to clarify what's already been said so I want to do that I I like the opportunity to do that you've heard the applicant talk about many different proposed uses that could be in the back of it multif family was one I also heard other possible retail I heard other also possible there they don't know there's nothing proposed here now we are only here for the 13,200 Ft of retail nothing else and just the use they're not building anything for many many years it's just the use I still live there and I may live there for many many years so it is a concern because when I kept on hearing what was being read into this record I'm now looking at a residential piece of property that essentially they were told years ago to go to the town to have it rezoned and the town refused so now they're looking to I'll take a step back change a residential property into a commercial use and then I'm hearing commentary about multifamily which is also not allowed in the zone correct they're they're that's why they're here in front of this board they're seeking a use variance it's a residential Zone and they're proposing something that's not permanent in the residential Zone just as jnr JR when they were originally approved in the 90s received a variance a use variance for that non-residential use so you're right they're required they require use VAR and that's why they're here and you know I I'm just going to end with this because I know that there was the LOI uh indicating whether or not there were Wetlands on the property there was Wetlands on the property Jr filled them I'll just end with that anyone else from the public wish to come forward making any comments seeing no one else come forward I'm going to close this to public session Mr feffer would you like to make a closing statement now just just a quick uh closing statement um first appreciate everyone's time with this application it's been SE as you heard it's been several years since uh we've been working on it uh and you guys might be hearing about it for several more years um but but I think as what we could all say is that this applicant has gone has listened to the board listen to all the concerns and is doing what he can to make this the best site um I actually bitly I asked the the client more than once over the last 12 to 18 months I said why are we doing this you could have a much easier path by going to the planning board for a permitted use why don't you just do that his comment was this is a better application he believes that and he spent a lot of money right to do these reports to bring the professionals out um it's not easy it's not it's you know listen gr it to make money it's a living but he believes that he could have made a little I I believe he could have made maybe a little less and and not gone through this torturous uh I don't mean you guys but just the the actual process um and then we he came up with the concept to say you know what we're going with the easiest concept small retail site and yes you are the board is correct in saying this is not all that will be on that site uh we never even thought of the multif family uh the applicant had not the board had suggested it based upon we got gas stations next to us there's a church next to us there's also residential people uh residential houses next to us so a mixed site really probably does work best um the proofs have been put in um I I promise you that there is nothing that we're going to be able to do on the site without coming back before this board and being blessed and we're probably going to have to 99.9% sure we're going to have to ask for all the use variances again so because when we change one little thing on this site you guys are going to it's intensification that we need to get the the use variants reapproved um so with that you heard the the proofs you heard the testimony um we do I do remind that since a use variance we do need five affirmative votes um and I I hope that the board uh agrees with with all professionals and the applicant um and and wants to go along on this ride to try and get into the sewer service area make the area better uh and get a good rateable for the township with that thank you for your time okay board it's up to us for discussion through the chair yes uh put some thoughts on the record Madam chair so the the overarching question at least for me in the beginning is how does this application promote the general welfare it's a key concept that we have to wrestle with when we're dealing with variances um testimony we've all heard it before and we didn't like how intense the prior proposed uses were and that intensification was a big deal still is a big deal but they have made by virtue of this application significant strides and diminishing that intensification and so you know thinking out loud even if they if it's a even if it's a bad financial decision but for whatever reason uh they satisfy the conditions that have been placed under record and they get their sewer service area worked out and U and they um and it can satisy y that and they're limited to the particular uses that they wanted to put in here and they decide to build this and they don't come in for the Mixed use and they don't come in for any additional you know what um I I think the general welfare will be served this site can work for this in this in which case it's it's a suited spot because they are not in they are not creating such an intensification of the use and and they're not although although zoned residential they're not surrounded by all residents yes they have some residents immediate to their to to one side they've got some to the back and the other but yes they do have a church next to them yes they are next to a gas station yes across the street is Wawa so we have some commercial impacts that are around them so it kind of fits in um and there and they would be taking strides based upon what they placed on a record to minimize uh to a significant degree that'll be very important uh the impact on those residents I don't want those residents to be you know adversely negative effect affected so those buffers and how they're put together and that'll all come up later if should it come come to but they've placed on a record that that would be addressed and address satisfactory so um you know based upon those observations and based upon a testimony in in um I um don't have an objection to uh voting favorably and this should the should the motion be made those are my observations chair um as someone who who's been in this town a long time way too long at this point some days I think um I have read listened been part of some of the hearings where the Jr site was concerned so when this first came up I was like 40,000 square F feet are they kidding me I mean you saw my face I'm sure that it it was clear um I know and understand you know and have heard the comments from the neighbors um so the 40,000 was a definite no for me the 30,000 was still a no for me I have to say I'm impressed that it's been decreased I've tried to look at what's best for everybody in that area and although it is zoned residential obviously you're here for a variant because you're looking to do retail I am kind of looking at it as an improvement to the current situation um I would say anything's better than that but I I really do believe that this is truly I don't want to insult your project in any manner by saying it that way because I do believe this is an improvement um again as Mr book stated there are two churches a house there's a a church a house a church a house on one side there's houses on the other side you have wi wall right up the block you have the gas station so although it is a residential area there are other uses in the area I feel like this would be a vast Improvement to what's there now hence my question will Jr still be operating um Mr Hudak did touch on something that I was concerned had questions about and um Miss hannam asked the qu uh made the statement about the wetlands again I don't know all the details but I'm sure when we talk about board testing and all that that property will be tested obviously that would have to be a condition for any improval um you know obviously because you especially if you do at some point move forward with any type of mixed juice on that property obviously we'd want to make sure that that ground and everything is um not going to be a danger to anyone um I have to agree with Mr book I would be in favor of this in the the context that it's in now and I understand it's just a concept but it's much reduced I think it's a better situation than we currently have so any other questions or comments anybody like to put forward a motion if there are no other comments then I'll move to approve the application with the conditions and stipulations that have already been put under record I'll second a motion we have a motion and second roll call please so we just need five votes tonight right five members five posi we need a super majority this is a use variance it requires five yes votes thank you uh Mr B yes Mr ricardi yes Mr Hudak Mr Stafford Smith yes and Miss Bradley yes M pars can still vote oh okay yeah we yes I apologize and then M Bradley Mr Feer it's been five long years motion to adjourn all in favor