##VIDEO ID:kvhLtvCBdVE## all right good evening everyone this is a regular meeting of Livingston's planning board and notice of this meeting has been posted and distributed in accordance with the open public meetings act you uh please take the RO Jackie Mr Ratner Mr Reber here Mr Diner Mr Diner yes thank you Mr Lois here M coochi here miss wishne here Vice chair Santa here chairman Fernandez here we have our Corum we have our board attorney assistant Township engineer and our planner consultant we Mr chairman thank you you can call the first matter that matter that's scheduled for this evening is preliminary and final s plan with variances for a major subdivision with variances 36 38 and 42 East mlon Avenue block 1706 Lots 1819 and 20 application number LLC located in the R4 Zone thank you and uh welcome everyone uh at first just want to go through the general procedure for uh uh tonight's hearing for those that uh this may be their first time here um so after you we'll hear testimony and the outcome uh after the testimony can be approval of the application as presented approval with conditions or denial of the approval uh we may need more sessions for tonight's meeting to get there uh the applic the applicant is represented by attorney who will Who will explain the application the applicant's attorney will call one or more witnesses to give sworn testimony and support of the application members of the board may ask qu may ask the witness questions and when the attorney for the applicant has no more questions for a witness interested parties in favor of or in opposition to the application May question the witness about the witness's testimony when all the applicants Witnesses have testified if there is any entity or group formally appearing as a party in support of or in opposition to the application the party May call witnesses when all the witnesses of the parties have been heard members of the public may give sworn statements for or against the application when reaching its decision this board may consider sworn testimony and evidence introduced as part of the record an applicant must always establish that the proposed development is consistent with the specific Township ordinances that applies to the site that the applicant wish wishes to develop in addition to the site specific ordinance there are other provisions of the township ordinances and regulations that may be applicable again the applicant must meet those requirements for some requirements the applicant must May request waivers deviations or variances for such requests there are standards that must be met by the applicant before the requested relief can be granted uh so is there uh any attorney here uh that want to make wants to make a formal appearance in the matter okay uh seeing none Mr pada all right thank you so very much good evening my name is Matthew pad I'm with the law firm SS cus and gross and I represent the applicant East mclan Avenue in connection with this application seeking preliminary and final major subdivision and site plan approval for the proposed project the proposed project itself is the consideration of three lots which will be reconfigured in order to create seven different lots of those seven different Lots we're proposing five new single family homes and we're going to keep two existing homes and only be demolishing one home in addition for those two lots are going to maintain those existing single family homes they will be reduced in order to create the proposed five uh single family lots um I want to just say off the onset that we're going to be creating a new RightWay off of East mlen Avenue in addition we are agreeing on the record that all proposed single family homes will be fully conforming we will not be asking for any bul variance relief or any other variance relief that would trigger us to go to the zoning board this will be the full application that's here before you guys tonight uh at this time we R receipt of the professional reports from this municipality Beacon including their last revise of July 19th 2024 regarding the planning engineering report from this municipality's uh Department last revised June 17th M McDonald's water and sud report dated July 24th and Livingston environmental commission dated April 10th 2024 also on the record I can say that we have reviewed all their conditions of approval and we will agree to meet those conditions in addition I've also had the opportunity to speak with this board engineer Roco maruchi about some of the conditions of approval and I just want to highlight three of them in particular uh number one he had said that he would strongly recommend that we do downstreaming tests and also TV just to make sure the sewer and water lines are adequate for the proposed capacity in the event that we do have an issue that would be our onus to alleviate that issue so we will agree on the record to in fact do both tests for both utility lines we will also agree to do the HOA for any proposed improvements related to storm water to make sure that it is maintained and managed by an hoi and last but not least I also just want to make note that as of right now for our storm water Improvement itself there is an easement right behind the proposed project that is a public easement we're proposing here tonight to do a manhole in order to connect for our water to flow into that easement itself with that being said before doing any type of connect short or improvements we will also test that pipe to determine whether or not it has a capacity for the additional drainage if it does not you'll here tonight from my engineer that we do have a proposal to redistribute that runoff all within the subject properties and still meet our state statute standards so essentially it'll be up to the board as to which option that we end up pursuing with that being said I'm going to have only two witnesses here tonight I know that this seems short for only two witnesses at the same time too I do believe that especially a testimony from an engineer it will be voluminous so with that being said I'd like to introduce him uh this is Dan Chanel from Dynamic engine in uh Rich do you want to swear them in or you want me to qualify him first the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay give us your full name please and spell your last name absolutely good evening uh chairman members of the board my name is Daniel chanal last name is s n I am a principal of the principal of the firm Dynamic engineering located at 245 Main Street Chester New Jersy and Dan can you please provide to this board whether or not your license is still in good standing and then also just name three boards where you've appeared before in the past and testified as a qualified engineer absolutely uh my license uh is valid in a good standing I'm I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey as well as several other states um I have uh previously been accepted before this board in the past I believe that was back in 2019 for the cryo Port application on Industrial Parkway um but I've testified well over 200 times uh amongst various different board boards throughout the state uh most recently have been before South Brunswick Randolph and neong great this this board accept as a qualified expert engineer great thank you so very much so Dan real quick uh is the subject property located in the R4 Zone uh yes it is have you had an opportunity to review the zoning Coda master plan for this proposed project I have excellent why don't you walk us through we're proposing here tonight absolutely my pleasure uh first I just want to present my my first exhibit um which I believe I'll set up on the Zone I think they'll be able to pick it up on the camera acoss the and this is a colorized exhibit that we had submitted before so we'll have to enter it in as A1 this actually what I'm going to start with is our aerial map this exhibit is a part of the site plan set that was submitted in conjunction with this application this is sheet two uh within our site plant Set uh that was before the board um so this sheet two uh entitled aerial map um for the purposes of orientation North is uh at the bottom of the page in this case um the subject site itself is identified in the the central portion of the page uh the the big red box um and I just want to start by giving you some of the existing conditions lay of the land around the subject site U so this is identified as uh block uh 1706 uh Lots 18 19 and 20 uh which would be 36 38 and 42 East mclen Avenue um Lot number 18 would would be the uh Western most lot uh so it would be the right hand side of that that red box um lot 18 is just under an acre in size about rectangular shape um then the center home uh which would be Lot 19 is also just under an acre in size again rectangular in shape and then finally uh to the uh Eastern portion or the left hand side of that red box and the rear portion of that red box that the top of the page um that is lot 20 it is just over an acre size and it's essentially a flag lot flag lot meaning uh that the the frontage is very narrow and then it opens up to to a large area in the rear portion of the site um in total this parcel is 3 acres in size um and then as far as adjacent uses to the north of the site which would be the bottom portion of this page we have East mlen Avenue uh with single family residential uses Beyond uh to the South or to the top of the page we have additional single family residential uses with Ashwood Ashwood Drive and the Harrison Elementary School further to the South uh to the West we have single family residential uses as well as Mansfield Court um and North Livingston Avenue with a small commercially zoned property at the corner of um North Livingston Avenue and uh East mclan and then finally to the east uh we have additional uh residential uses um so East mclen Avenue is a two-lane two-way roadway with a 25 mph speed limit under local jurisdiction uh an access uh from those existing residential uses on the site back to East M colen Avenue is available via three driveways um Lot number 18 the Le andmost slot or the left most slot on or I'm sorry the rightmost lot on this page um has two full movement driveways essentially it's a use shape uh driveway so there's two driveways along that Frontage same thing with the center home again it's a U-shaped driveway two full movement accesses back out the East Mullen Avenue and then finally the lot 20 which is the the house on the left hand portion of the page is a single full movement driveway uh lot 18 is currently developed with a pave driveway and a two-story single family home about 2,000 s foot footprint uh and most of the rear of the site consists of open and wooden space area um and that site contains about 11% impervious surface coverage the center lot again just developed with a single story residential home with a footprint of about 3500 square foot um and the most of the the the rear portion of that site is wooded and open space uh with about 20% impervious surface coverage it is important to note that in this rear lot the center one there is a small pocket of uh what the township would consider steep slopes so slopes that are are greater than U essentially one on Three these are man-made steep slopes most likely from the development of that home and and kind of flatten out the backyard and we will be seeking a variance to essentially disturb these steep slope areas this is about 2600 Square ft in size uh in total that would be disturbed and uh seeking the variant for the the development of this lot finally lot 20 is the uh the final single family um two-story dwelling about 1,500 foot uh footprint with that lot there's also a detached garage in the uh just to the northeast of that house um that's about 830 squ ft in size the remainder of the site again wooded and open space area about 177% impervious surface coverage for that lot and again there's a very small area of steep slopes which adjoins Lot 21 which is uh essentially that corner that's missing out of that red box uh there's some small steep slopes that were created when we uh developed uh that home when it was constructed that again we would be disturbing and seeking a variance for this evening uh under existing condition conditions the site is graded essentially from the north to the South so this means that storm water generally flows in a southerly direction uh to the existing residential uses directly to the south of us um and again I just want to note that there are no EAS M ments on our subject site however if you look at the screen right now you see that blue um portion directly to the south of our site that is an existing Township owned uh drainage easement that drainage easement uh contains a 36in concrete pipe and it's used to convey storm water um from the south to a Northerly Direction um to help convey storm water for the site uh again you heard that this site is within the R4 residential zoning District where single family residential uses are a permitted use use um and I just wanted to touch that there are some existing non-conformities associated with uh two of the Lots so Lot number 18 which is the lot on the uh the bottom right hand corner of this page here uh the only existing nonconformity is the uh the uh habitable uh floor area uh the Zone allows uh just over 3,200 square fet of living space allowed and uh this dwelling exceeds that by a couple hundred square feet it's at 3,800 Square fet and then Lot 19 has the same existing non-conformity that's that Center Lot on this page um as well as two existing um bulk non-conformities associated with setbacks so the the township requires a combined sidey yard setback so the two sides you're required to have uh 30 ft whereas under existing conditions it's at 23.1 so just about 7 feet short of what's required for your setbacks and then um finally the side yard setback the single side yard set back which would be the uh between the two existing dwellings to remain 10 ft is required and only 8 ft exists so that's an existing nonconform that uh that essentially will not be intensified with this application um so unless there's any questions about existing conditions what I'll do now is I'll switch over to uh proposed conditions and discuss our proposed development a little bit this evening just a quick question the the purple area if you will at the back is that where you going to look for a manhole to see if that's the existing yep so my next exhibit that I'll present this evening uh has not yet been submitted to the board so I will mark this exhibit A1 with today date and all this is is a colorized version of the site plan sheet that was submitted in conjunction with this application so um same as sheet four that's on the screen uh this evening however we just added some color uh to help uh a coloriz sheet correct yes sir yep so that it just add some color to help describe our development a little bit better um same orientation you have East mclan Avenue to the bottom of the page which is north and to the top of the page is South um the on the actual exhibit the dark gray areas are essentially pavement areas um the the darker orange colors are the proposed dwellings and any green space that you see is obviously landscaped area um so under proposed conditions I want to First mention that we would be demolishing the existing res tional improvements associated with lot 20 which would be the the Eastern lot on the subject site and uh following the demolition we will then be seeking essentially to realign the existing lot lines and and subdivide this lot so we'll be going from three lots to seven Lots uh Lot number 18 uh which is the existing lot to uh the right hand side of this page uh will be reduced from 094 Acres down to 046 essentially trimming some off of the uh the rear wooded portion of of that lot similarly with Lot number uh 19 uh that would be reduced from 0.94 acres to uh just under a half acre 45 Acres again trimming some of the rear yard out of that and then the remaining area would essentially be subdivided into five um residential lots uh identified as lots 20.01 to 20.05 those lots will range in size from a quarter of an acre to uh just under a half an acre the the largest is 044 and the smallest is exactly a quarter acre and then finally the remaining area would be utilized to construct or propose a right of way this right of way would be uh 44t in in width and it would essentially be uh proposed to to include this proposed culdesac uh roadway that we're proposing with our development and that right away is uh about 41 acres in size um the roadway itself will be a PA cesac it'll have a 24t wide um travelway or or paved area in the center um with a 50 or a 50 I'm sorry a 40 foot radius culdesac um to the I guess Southern portion of the proposed development um it's important to note that the we will be seeking a variance uh from the municipality for the um size of that bulb or that radius at the end the township ship requires a 50ft radius we're proposing a 40ft radius um again it's important to note that that 40ft radius does uh comply with rsis standards um it just doesn't comply with the township requirement of a 50 foot radius and the reason we did that was just to make sure that we had sizable Lots U for these these residential dwellings um while still being able to maintain full uh turning movements for the Township's fire truck garbage truck uh to be able to turn around there without doing any type of Crazy K turns um um absolutely requires yes that's correct y rsis requires 40 we're looking at uh the township requires 50 however we are seeking a variance from rsis standards for the width of the culus or of the the RightWay rsir requires a 50ft RightWay width we're proposing 44 feet at the front edge of the site can we accommodate 50 we can however speaking with your uh your your board engineer um which I'll get to shortly we are proposing two retaining walls on either side of this roadway that enters the site and I'll explain those further shortly um but the township does not want to be responsible for maintaining those uh those retaining walls so rather than keeping them within the right of way We Shrunk that RightWay down a little bit so that the retaining walls would be outside of the right of way uh which res resulted in the RightWay width being squeezed down to 44 feet versus what RS IR requires which would be 50 uh but it 50 foot would would again fit but we wanted to make sure that we would be responsible to maintain those uh those walls versus the township and that's the RightWay versus the cart way right what's the cartway corre the cart way width is uh 24 ft that's um that so again with the exception of the right of way with itself this uh culdesac does comply with rsis and meets the definition of a major collector or for low intensity so this means that it's a 24t wide cartway but we are proposing no parking on either side of that U right of way um so we'll have no parking signs we'll want to park there so you could still get full access with the fire truck the garbage truck around that that street um also important to note that we're proposing uh 25 foot uh radiuses back out to mlen Avenue so essentially those curb returns those comply with rsis and uh we do have sight lines that are shown on this plan it's a little hard to see in the screen but we did confirm that we have clear and adequate sight lines um from either direction of East mclone alv so does promote safe turning movements out of that roadway um again it's designed to accommodate Liv's uh trash truck and fire Tru um there'll be a 4 foot wide sidewalk that essentially uh starts on the uh western or right hand side of the culdesac and then wraps around that bulb and ends at the uh the proposed lot um 20.01 which is the uh the northeastern most proposed lot of this development um this will be curved obviously with Belgian block curbing um and would include Street lighting now we are seeking two bulk variances uh which primarily are due because of the proposed location of this culdesac or right of way that we are including and the proposed bulk variances are not associated with any of the proposed dwellings they're uh only associated with Lot number 19 which is that Center lot so the minimum principal building uh setback for when you're dealing with the side street so now where we're adding this street the existing side yard of Lot 19 technically becomes a front yard so the township requires a 35 foot setback from the right of way line to essentially the side of the dwelling on Lot 19 whereas we are proposing 14.9 15.1 exists between the the existing lot line and that house and we're shrinking it down to 14.9 to get that uh the right of and um and roadway in there uh in addition to that um your planner essentially identified a variance for proposed Lot 19 which would be on the western side of that Center dwelling um because they are now considering that side yard to now be a rear yard since you have a front yard from this proposed right of way the ne now they are considering the rear yard which would be the western side of that property um as the rear yard versus the sidey yard the township requires 35 ft where there is 8 ft currently existing that's not shown on our plan because instead we identified the rear yard as the um uh the the back because again the frontage of this house front's on East mclen so we were seeing it as essentially two existing side yards in the rear yard and the back to remain however your planner uh felt that you know reading the Township Code that essentially should be reversed now that we have two front yards we should have two rears as well um so either way that you skin it we would essentially be required uh for a variant for that existing improvements on Lot 19 because of the addition of this CAC uh but again no changes essentially to the set or or the location of the building on Lot 19 essentially looks the same from the frontage we're just sneaking that roadway in from the existing lot 20 uh and as a result of that uh we are essentially resulting in two new variances before you move sorry before you move on from that um from what I understood before before you're shrinking the size of both Lot 19 and 18 um and taking that into the area that you're going to be building the new yes sir and there were um certain um uh not UNC non-conditional uses that were there before that were approved but did they now change and or variances now required for those because you're changing the rear lot line uh my understanding is there isn't that the only variances that we've identified were these two new bulk variances that I noted based upon the setback of this uh of that Lot 19 dwelling okay so the the lot size still conforms uh the coverage requirements still conform it's just those setbacks now that get okay that get impacted because the side becomes a front yard yes it's to our understanding just to clarify is that the propos the modified Lot 19 is going to trigger the SE bulk variances in addition we'll also need relief from the steep slopes as well noted in the planners report asked whether or not it was going to be a decorative wall or retaining wall if it's a retaining wall which you just described it would to requ require relief so we don't need that c bulk variance relief and since we're on the topic of C bulk variance relief I just want to bring up to the board that when he's when my engineer discussed the relief regarding variance relief for the right away that relief itself is design waivers it do not see bulk variances correct it is a retaining wall and I I'll touch on that a little bit more in detail shortly um could I just say what did you say the front yard setback is proposed that um so the I believe the way it's defined in the code is the principal side street setback 35 ft is uh required we're proposing 14.9 okay thank you um I just want to note that there is no modifications proposed uh to the existing dwellings on Lots 18 and 19 uh the only minor modification to Lot 19 is just the reconfiguration of the driveway on Lot 19 um because the existing driveway would extend out partially into the proposed culdesac so we're reigning that u-shaped driveway uh to make sure that we provide separation and it's two separate driveways from uh the proposed culdesac um all of the proposed dwellings as Mr pada mentioned would be conforming as far as the size of them and the location within the building envelope we do not have formal architectural plans at the moment but uh should your board act favorably on this application obviously an architect would be um provide formal architectural drawings that would be required for building permits and they would comply with the uh the bulk standards for the size and location of these dwellings so the single family rendering that was in the packet was an example an example yep they had a roof height of 33 I think it was like 33 and A2 correct 35 35 is what's permitted and it we would not exceed them right and given the fact that this application requires C bulk variants relief as this board knows you absolutely have the jurisdiction to have conditions which would limit the proposed Improvement sizes so we're conceding to that um as far as other improvements that we're proposing uh each one of these five new dwellings would be provided with a uh a driveway um the driveways at the curb line would be 12 feet in width and then as you would uh get up towards the house where we're proposing two car garages this would then widen to 20 feet in width uh which would comply uh with rsis standards for a dwelling uh to have up to four bedrooms so we'd provide enough parking at each lot for up to a four bedroom house and that would be a two-car garage plus a space in the driveway for two to three vehicles um all of these improvements that we're proposing tonight do result in the increase of impervious surface coverage of uh just over 19,000 Square ft however we are proposing a storm waterer management system system to mitigate these impacts um and also reduce the rates of discharge uh when we compare to existing conditions um we are proposing an easement uh we are proposing a 25 foot wide drainage easement along the rear of the uh the properties you can see that shaded uh going around the rear of the five um uh dwellings that we proposed as well as a 20 foot wide easement between Lots 20.05 which is the um I believe it's 20.05 which is the uh Northwestern most lot and 20.04 which is the lot that's in the western corner and that would be essentially uh for some of our drainage improvements which I'll touch on uh shortly again we're grading the site to essentially maintain the existing grading patterns that exist currently uh in order to accomplish that we are proposing three retaining walls there will be two retaining walls alongside of the uh culdesac as you enter the culdesac um they will be again located outside of the right of way they will not be decorative they will be retaining walls the Western uh retaining wall which would be the right hand side of this page uh would be a wall with a maximum height of only 2 feet and the roadway the pr roadway would be on the high side of that wall and then on the opposite side of the roadway the eastern wall would have a 5 foot maximum height and the road would be on the low side of that wall uh and then finally we are also proposing a retaining wall associated with lot 20.05 which is essentially just to the rear of existing lot 18 uh that wall will be 8T at its maximum elevation uh the existing uh backyard of Lot 19 would be on the high side of that wall and proposed dwelling on 20.05 would be on the low side and again that is just so we don't disturb the the existing rear yard of uh Lot number 18 uh to essentially maintain those those trees and the uh the grading back there uh but to accommodate the the new dwelling that we propose can you just hold back a second on on the height above ground of the retaining walls what's the maximum height that will be above ground so the highest wall that we propos will be 8 ft at its highest point and that would be lot 20.05 so that is the proposed dwelling that is directly to the rear of Lot number 18 existing dwelling 18 18 will be on the high side High exposure yes it'll be exposed to the new dwelling which would be lot 20.05 lot 18 which fronts on East mclen Avenue would be on the high side so essentially the proposed dwelling um behind would be on the low side so that would be below the back and on the low side it's how what height eight feet eight feet on the high side but on the on well it's flush on one side flush on one side yep so then you you drop down so you have lot 18 up top it drops down 8 ft to get to the proposed dwelling which is 20 so concern obviously is that somebody walking over there comes on to a wall That's 8 foot high on the other side and goes down 8 are we doing anything with regard to fencing yep so what uh existing lot 18 will have a proposed 6ot High vinyl fence along the rear property line and that essentially runs concurrently with the top of that wall so the wall would be protected and then along uh East or the the proposed uh culdesac uh there's a real short wall That's only two feet high along existing Lot 19 uh same thing there will be a fence along that it's only a twoot wall and then a 5-ft wall along uh the existing Lot 21 which is not a part of this application but they have an existing fence and a a tree line uh there that's very dense that would protect anybody from from going over the top of that wall as well so just on that wall the wall exists to the side of the new lot behind 18 or does it wrap around to the Mansfield cour so I'll show you screen that the proposed wall this line so it's not has nothing to do with the drainage the underground drainage system the backyard it's strictly just to maintain the existing grading uh for the rear yard of lot 18 I think our ordinance may require some sort of fencing on top of the retaining well essentially the the rear yard the the rear lot line for existing lot 18 will have a fence and that's set I'd say about two feet from the top of the wall we could shift that wall further well I we'll absolutely comply with that if I recall I believe it might actually require a 4ot fence on top of the retaining wall is that correct yeah okay and we have a six foot fence so we'll we'll make sure we comply with that okay um as far as bulk standards I just want to make sure that you understand all these proposed Lots those five dwellings will completely comply with all the the township bulk standard so we're not seeking any variances for the New Lots that we are proposing um the only bulk variances are for that lot number 18 uh we do comply again with the parking requirement for rsis for a four-bedroom house we're required to have 3.5 I know it sounds funny but 3.5 parking spaces per dwelling and we have um I'm sorry 2.5 spaces and we have what RSI would consider 3.5 parking spaces in each one of those driveways and garages so we do comply and just for clarification the bulk variances are for Lot 19 not 18 correct correct thank you absolutely um we did take a quick look at uh the uh in uh the institution of Transportation Engineers trip generation for a residential development of this size um because I know a lot of people are always concerned with traffic but for a development of this size at the morning peak hour so the the very peak hour of proposed trips we're only looking at five trips in total so that would be in and out of this proposed colis Act five trips the PM peak hour so in the afternoon we're looking at six trips so six cars making turns in and out of the P cesac but if we want to look at the weekday 24-hour period we're only looking at 64 total trips and then the Saturday uh 24hour would be 47 trips it's important to note that the New Jersey Department of Transportation would consider a significant increase of of trap or trips or or traffic would be 100 or more trips in the peak hour we're only proposing six trips in the peak hour so less than 10% of what the dot would be considered a significant increase in traffic so definitely no proposed traffic impact uh in this case um moving on to everyone's favorite topic would be storm water management uh so this site does meet the definition of a major development because we're disturbing more than an acre um so we've designed a storm waterer management system to comply with both local and state standards in order to do that we essentially look at three main things we look at storm water quantity quality and what's known as groundwater recharge and essentially what we do is we start by looking the existing conditions we figure out where the existing storm water is going and we quantify to figure out how much storm water is leaving the site under existing conditions and then essentially we apply the same test to proposed conditions we figure out how much storm water is going to be generated by the new improvements um and then we essentially have to design a system to capture that storm water treat it detain it and release it at a slower rate so in order to do this we are essentially proposing a series of underground infiltration basins uh which essentially would be a series of 36 in um perforated pipes and that would be located within the proposed easement that uh essentially um wraps around the rear yards of a proposed development so you can see on the screen here uh those gray lines are essentially our underground detention systems and what that will do is we'll collect the storm water it will detain it it will infiltrate some of it back into the ground and then larger storm storm events it would release it at of controlled rate it's also important to note that we are capturing all of the storm water that is generated by the driveways and the proposed roadway uh by a series of inlets that storm water would then be conveyed to what's known as a manufactured treatment device which is located uh between proposed lots 20.05 and 20.04 um it's essentially a concrete box that has a tree growing in it and what takes place is a storm water generated by the roadway is collected and then it is conveyed to this box that has a tree and soil in it the storm water then seeps or percolates through the soil that's in there it gets cleaned um by that soil and then it's collected by a drain that's below the soil and then it further gets conveyed into our storm water detention system in the rear portion of those lots again those are perforated pipes so some of the storm water will be infiltrated back into the ground so it's not even leaving the site it's going back into the soil and then for larger storm events it will be uh released at a slower rate than it does under existing conditions to the proposed manhole that we were proposing um in that purple uh existing drainage easement to the south of our parcel are you also going to be able to collect and put into there the the storm water coming from the houses we are yep so that's all going into the same absolutely so the the storm water generated by the roof areas will be collected by roof leaders and conveyed directly to those basins the landscape areas would essentially sheet flow and be collected by a series of inlets to go into those basins and then again the storm order that's generated by the road and the driveways would be collected by a series of uh grates in the roadway conveyed to that treatment device and then sent to that detention system so under the state and local requirements we need to design for the 2 10 and 100-year storm events and what we have to do is we have to look at how much how quickly that water is leaving the site under existing conditions and then under proposed conditions we need to reduce that rate so under proposed conditions storm water is going to be leaving the site slower than it currently does uh for example the two-year storm we have to reduce that rate by 50% of the existing so under proposed conditions the storm motor has to leave the site essentially 50% slower than it does under existing conditions we're reducing that um all the way down to to 27% of the existing runoff rate we're only required to reduce it to 50 we're going all the way down to 27% so we're not even we're not only meeting the requirements we're exceeding them and it's the same case for the 10 and the 100-year storm event the biggest storm event which would be the 100-year storm event we're required to reduce it to 80% of the existing numbers we're reducing it all the way down to 69 so again we are exceeding what is required by local and state requirements uh for this development so it's my professional opinion that post development that the storm water that's generated by the site under existing conditions will have a less of an impact to the surrounding area under proposed conditions due to this storm water management system that we're implementing uh and again all this will be underground so you're not going to see a big Basin it's not going to be a pond full of water it's essentially going to be captured underground infiltrated back into the ground or released at a slower rate back to that same drain ement to be conveyed uh off site so it'll be less of an impact to the surrounding areas uh that would be the requirement of uh the HOA that would be set up for this uh they would be required to maintain it wouldn't be the Township's requirement and it's also important to note that we'd be required to prepare operations of Maintenance manual that would be deeded to this property it would tie be tied to the property um run with the de of the property so the storm waterer system would be uh required to be maintained for the life of this development uh Dan just a few questions for you of course today for the existing conditions are there any proposed storm water improvements and or management systems on the subject sites there is not the storm water flows completely unded uh to the South to the South and just for clarification again you said the north is what fronts mlen Avenue and the south is those residential single family homes that is correct so would it be fair to say that they're burdened by the storm water runoff today that is correct and in your estimate what type of reduction would they be seeing if in fact we were to get approved tonight and propose and develop the proposed um storm water management system yeah it's a significant reduction again we're exceeding what's required by state and local levels the the tutor Steeler we're reducing it all the way to 20 27% of of what exists today and the largest storm we need to design so we're we're reducing it to about 70% of what they see today whereas only 80 is required so despite the increase in impervious coverage of about 19,000 Square F feet we are actually reducing the storm water runoff in the adjacent Parcels that is correct thank you absolutely um sticking with the theme of of utilities sure thing system obious yes it is considered a u subsurface infiltration Basin which is green infrastructure per the New Jersey uh regulations and I keep forget to put my mic on and um are there other um stormm treatment facilities on the site that are you know more or less traditional swells rain Gardens Etc to supplement the underground storage um the only other uh item that might be new to to Residents would be that manufactur treatment device which for lack of a better term we call a tree in a box because it it essentially has a tree growing out of a concrete box that has that soil media in it that filters the storm water that's generated by the roadway so that again is considered by the D to be green infrastructure because it treats the dirty water cleans it before it's discharged off the site but there's no other type of swells or or rain Gardens or anything proposed just those subsurface infiltration basins and let's say over time the underground system becomes you know block doctor congealed um that then becomes the obligation of the homeowners association yes it does and if they don't have the money to fix it what happens then there would be a lean placed on the properties so the town can go in fix it and charge back to the yes absolutely uh so just touching on utilities we've uh received willingness to serve letters uh from the township for water and sewer uh showing that uh there is what's uh anticipated to be uh adequate capacity for both water and uh sanitary sewer we've also received willingness to serve letters from uh psng for gas and electric uh noting that they could provide service to these new dwellings um as far as water we will be proposing a 8 in water main extension down this prop proposed CAC we have spoken with your Township's Fire official um he's accepted the design we're also proposing two fire hydrants one right at the intersection of East mclen and the proposed um culdesac as well as a fire hydrant at the very tip of that culdesac um additionally uh sanitary sewer would essentially be accomplished by a force main so we would be pumping uh the sanitary sewer that would be generated by these dwellings uh to a manhole essentially at the entrance of our proposed culdesac and at that point it then becomes gravity fed uh back to the missible system and uh as Mr pada mentioned earlier we have agreed to video inspect the existing sanitary sewer uh make sure that there is adequate capacity make sure the lines are in good shape um in order to collect our flow uh both Water and Sewer we will need to submit to the D for tww approval as well as bws approval uh due to the main extensions for both water and seore which we will absolutely do as a condition of a favorable approval by your board um and Gas and Electric Service would be underground uh down this right of way as well uh providing service to each one of these dwellings can we just back up to the the sanitary abut so there's going to be a force main where you're pumping it up to a point that it's going to then take it out yes and is that each house or is that going to be a pump a little bit more yeah there's a pump station that they're all going into no each home would essentially have an ejector pump a small pump for each dwelling that they would be responsible for that would then pump it to that gravity manhole and this was was disussed one of the questions that was raised MH 150 years ago at the track meeting was that if we lose power you've got five houses that don't have sewer um that's an issue and I think we had talked about it perhaps at that time there may have not been individual houses or you were going to put it in one place and then pump it out but the potential for a generator to maintain those pumps if in fact power goes out so that the sanitary in those houses can be used yes we can agree on the record to propose the uh generators in the event of a storm water surge okay um as far as lighting as I mentioned this proposed culdesac would have um lighting within the RightWay essentially it would be 11 pole mounted LED decorative uh style lights um that would comply with the request of your board professionals um for this the style and type of light uh would be very low intensity lighting um just you know to to essentially match what you would see in a typical residential uh neighborhood just enough to provide uh adequate lighting for safety within this culde-sac um would be you know warm in color not super bright or anything like that um only about 04 uh foot candles which does comply with IES standards for residential lighting and then final Landscaping um each one of these dwellings when they're constructed obviously would have a typical residential style landscape design however for uh the purpose of our presentation this evening we did provide a landscaping plan to show how essentially we would buffer these uses along um the proposed storm water easement so we are removing a a uh an area of of wooded area of trees um one compared to existing conditions but we are planting um about uh 112 new uh trees both Evergreen and aidus uh to help buffer this proposed development um as well as provide some visual interest and soften the hard lines uh we'll absolutely have to comply with the township requirements for tree replacement um when and if the board votes favorably on this application we would hire a tree expert to identify all these trees quantify them figure out what that tree replacement quantity would be and if we couldn't meet the tree replacement uh on site we would obviously pay into the Township's uh a tree Fund in order to meet that requirement um but we did propose to do some evergreen trees to both buffer uh the ex existing Lot number 19 as you see on this uh plan in front of you as well as the uh the surrounding residential uses as well so just to clarify we are proposing landscaping and fencing to create that screening that is correct and and you're right I failed to mention along the the existing boundary of the site uh for these five new dwellings we will have a solid six foot high uh vinyl fence that essentially follows the property line to help again buffer or screen this proposed use and just going back real quick to utility companies have you submitted and received will serve letters we thank you I have no further questions um as Mr pada mentioned we did receive and review the uh the review letters generated by your professionals um and we are prepared to comply with those requests uh We've submitted to the Essex County planning board where we received essentially a waiver because they do not have jurisdiction over this application with the exception to the subdivision we'll absolutely file a formal Subdivision plat uh if the board votes favorably on this application and uh we've also submitted to the uh The Soil Conservation District uh where we've received some minor comments which we anticipate we will address and ultimately receive their certification uh so essentially in in closing we did look at numerous sites uh or layouts for this site and we found that the current proposal employs safe and responsible engineering practices by taking into account the the unique uh geometry of this lot and uh the surrounding uses providing an environmentally uh responsible design it's safe and efficient circulation for pedestrians and motor vehicles uh we're employing those green infrastructure techniques to address storm water management which produces a or proposes A reduced impact on the surrounding properties when we compare it to the existing conditions and again it complies with the local and State uh regulations so if your board you know votes favorably on this application we feel like it would it would fit uh very well with the surrounding Community um and essentially comp complement those existing uses that are in the neighborhood uh Mr pada if I miss anything feel free to yeah just one quick question can you just walk us through real quick what hypothetically speaking if the board were to find in our favor what the uh construction phasing would be yep absolutely uh so the first thing that we would be required to construct is that that culdesac that right of way that would need to be put into place first uh before the the dwellings would go in so that CAC would go first and then the construction of those five new uh buildings can take place after that um it would be the culdesac and the stormw management that's the first uh piece and then the homes would go in after that thank you I have no further questions um I have just for a point of clarification I know that the um Engineers memo of June 17th has a a lot of comments on that some of them that have been corrected and some of them that have not been and uh I just to verify what you had said is that you're going and without going through these one at a time which would take us the rest of the week um you are going to um comply with all of the items listed by the engineer on these on on the June 17th um revision yes sir and I'm sure we'll hear from them but if he has any specific questions I'm more than happy to to address I I have a couple so just looking at this I think it seems like as you approach the col the ACT where the first house is you're at like elevation 301 and then back by the rear of property you're at 300 299 correct so it's 11 or 12 feet from beginning of the new property to the end of it yes sir and the system you've designed you feel can cover that that pitch the storm motor system stor yes yes okay and you mentioned in um the testimony it's 19,000 Square ft of new um pervious yes so that's well less than half an acre yeah correct it's just that includes the road the driveways and the homes yes sir sorry go ahead uh I was just mentioned yeah it was just under half an acre of of surface and then just to clarify there is no bulk variances for the five new correct that is correct only bulk variances are Lot 19 yes correct and there is no intention to submit for a d variance so chck goes to the zoning board we're going to get to that the F we we'll wait for Mr te gotcha any other questions from the board roono you have questions comments or any either of my our professionals a couple questions um I some of them were already answered um you agreed to Downstream study the connection to the sewers CCTV I'm talking about storm water sanitary is separate Water and Sewer that's separate you'll deal with water and sewer and connections with you know TWA and BWC permits but storm water you'll CCTV Downstream study it then as far as connecting to it um it's on private property so there would have to be some type of agreement with those Property Owners to connect yes that's correct if we would be able to connect on any one of the proposed part any one of the existing residential Parcels behind the subject property itself we would more than likely offer a license agreement so this way they can have all the restrictions and Covenants that they would want to see and being that it's a license agreement unlike ement or construction AG should say it is revocable so if at any point in time we were to exceed it they can kick us right off they have complete control on the okay just because we don't own the property that's why I'm mentioning so um and then um um generators or each house would have a generator is that what we were talking about because each house has its own package um ejector pum feed a utility line one we have to do a pum Station instead versus have individual station we have to have a generator each proposed single family home will have a generator itself um and then um the other thing you already mentioned was obviously there's going to be an HOA that would manage everything and own the um drainage system this the Force main itself would also be part of that HOA yes that is correct because the Force main the two apartment does not own and maintain Force Mains correct once it gets to that manhole and then becomes gravity fed that would then and then obviously that Force main was Within within the public right away so there would be some type of blanket agreement within that HOA that you would maintain that yes it would be our responsibility okay um I think a lot of my other stuff obviously was discussed and talked about um so other than that um that's all have Mr P do you know does that require a DC approval a five lot or lot no we would have to submit for a waiver because it's under 100 yeah so if the systems either the the seore or the drainage systems fail right it would probably be down the road a little is there a game plan that there would be reserves established as part of the HOA or is it just going to exist as organization yeah similar to the application that I had presented before the board and you guys found the affirmative green tariffs we had created an HOA system where there would be a reservation of funding in the event that there would be some type of um inadequate servicing right that required the township to come into the property where the township does have the right to access whether it's in an emergency or because the individuals themselves are not holding up their end to the HOA itself so we would have the same situation here where there would be a reserve fund and in the event that is depleted then the municipality would still be allowed to come into the property fix the issue and then attach a lean on all the parcels right but it working properly the HOA would bring the Professionals in fix the system and they would pay them in town have nothing to do with that correct and how do you we know how would the developer what the if the DCA is not reviewing it and approving budget how do you get this well part of the process itself is would require myself to draft the HOA agreement in the master deed and then send it over to both the board attorney and the board's engineer for their review so I guess it would be subject to the Township's reasonable estimate of what that Reserve funding should be that sounds fair thank you just a couple questions um on the culdesac entrance from Colin Avenue I just want to review the lot line uh configuration real fast along the proposed culdesac I want to review the lot line configuration real quickly I believe there's a about a 5 foot strip of land that will relate to uh I'm sorry I don't have the proposed Lot number 2111 that will continue along the along the cue I think the purpose of that is to ensure that the retaining wall is not within the Township's jurisdiction is that correct that is correct okay and is there is there a reason why that area the land that is within the right of way uh cannot host Street trees in that area or can't hold host some Landscaping both for beautification but also to help screen the retaining wall we can absolutely propose that I I would defer to the board if that seems uh appropriate where are we talking about that this is along the along the culdesac along the uh the east side of it on the left side is shown on the screen um yeah can if you go to see they have a total of six I think six Street trees but they're all located oim to the new homes cesely is there a sidewalk no sidewalk the sidewalk wraps around opposite side y dotion the plan on the package maybe not okay and then my other question was you had submitted a sight line exhibit that I think was intending to show the the visibility or lack thereof of the proposal and one one of the questions in the planner memo was about the age and the maturity of those trees I was hoping you could give some detail on that the proposed I shown on the sight line exhibit is that what a is that a tree height in 20 years from now or a tree height in five years after planting yes so I guess good time to pull out their exhibit which was not a part of the site plan application so I will like this exib great with today's date I think we did submit this uh this is entitled uh profile exhibit with uh today's date uh August 8th 2024 and essentially what this shows is three profile Cuts essentially where you see these yellow lines on the uh site plan exhibit is corresponding to these um vertical profile Cuts essentially slices through the site that would show the existing um uh so profile AA would be the very uh this is L proposed lot 20.01 this would be existing home on Lot 21 and this would be our proposed uh dwelling on the plot 20.01 and it essentially shows what the view would be if you take essentially a slice through the site the bold black line is the proposed property line as you can see we would be on the L side of the existing retaining wall associated with Lot 21 and what you see here is the proposed plan there's two different heights it's a little difficult to see you see it groomed in when they'll be planted it'll be the small tree where my tip of my finger is and essentially at maturity uh which yes would be about you know 15 years it would be well above the height of the house but when those plants are are planted they're usually planted at a height of about 8 ft 7 to 8 ft and for the first five uh to 8 years they typically grow about 18 at 24 Ines a year um to essentially provide a buffer but as they grow to maturity they would essentially provide a full screen um in the future for those proposed Wongs and the maturity is between 30 to 50 feet that is correct these are what ARB provid green Giants Arbor VY green Giants and Norway spruce are the uh the Evergreens show us again real quickly where those so if you zoom out on the screen you can see we got techology see this yellow line that's essentially this view so this would be in between the existing Lot 21 and the proposed lot 20.01 and those other yellow lines are essentially the corresponding profile of use uh we lost our technology U for each one of those those section cuts thank you that's all question yes hi my name is Michelle lowski I live at can you spell that Li o wsk Ki I live at 25 Ashwood which is lot 40 um block 1706 which backs up to the proposed development area and my property is one that is mentioned in a lot of the documents um that I've read where the manhole will be installed um I have not been contacted about this at all or um other than reading in the documents I would like to know um the intentions the specifics and all of the details that how my property will be affected by this um my yard um fence plants everything um additionally my other question is with regards to the existing trees on the property that you're developing there are a lot of old trees back there are all of those trees going to be removed or any of them going to be remaining sure so I'll answer the first question regarding uh what's going to happen with your property the reason why we haven't reached out to you yet as I stated before my opening statement we do not know exactly where the proposed manhole is going to be we're proposing right now for it to be law 40 on your law itself which I understand that we would have to get your permission U most likely by a license agreement so you would have all discretion in power with that being said if that were not to work out we also have the ability to relocate that manhole on two other residential Parcels so that's why we haven't started the dialogue but hypothetically speaking let's say if all three Parcels said no we're not allow you to access this public easement we can redistri the water on site itself so that we didn't have to tap into the easement but with that being said if we were to get your permission and you found the affirmative to allow us to tap in on that manhole why don't you walk through what that would look like and what would we do to make sure she's made whole yep absolutely the um the aiel one more sheet back would be she too there you go harder to read that do we know which house this is we know which house yeah it's it's the middle right there in the middle we see little black blocks right there yep that's it pull back a little Jack yeah hard to see that right there n Go Back blackx That kind of JS out in the center of the page up the top that's essentially where that manhole connection would be there's an existing uh 36 in concrete pipe below ground there that conveys the township storm water we would essentially propose to excavate um down to that pipe and we place a manhole on top of it uh where our pipe from our drained system would come from our property and tie into that manhole uh the disturbance obviously would result in a removal of a portion of the fence um to install that manhole obviously disturbing the the existing lawn area that's back there but it would be restored uh to the point where you would just see the manhole cover um it would be at grade there's not a structure above the grade uh protruding from the grade other than just a manhole flush of the grade and obviously we would restore the landscaping and uh and the fence to the the homeowner's liking and that manh hold of responsibility be the responsibility of the HOA correct that is correct we would have to maintain that with our operations and maintenance manual and hypothetically speaking we could if we wanted to relocate the proposed manle and the other two uh Parcels either or yep it would still work correct okay and then real quick can you just walk us through what the proposal wait one second one second so that pink area is is an existing storm water Township of living ston correct got it and then I had mentioned before that in the event we couldn't tap in for plethora reasons you had stated earlier that we could redistribute the water can you walk us through exactly what you mean by that yep absolutely it's not a preferred option um however we would have the option to essentially pump our storm water after it was released from our Basin at a at a you know controlled rate back to the surface and allow it to sheet flow off our property to essentially match the existing drainage patterns as it does today as I mentioned previously in my testimony under existing conditions all the storm water just sheet flows undened uh to the South to those homes we propos to collect it and then pipe it directly to that underground system however if we can't accomplish that somehow we would still be detaining and releasing that storm water at a slower rate but we would essentially pump it back up to grade level and disperse it um back towards uh the South into those dwellings as it goes today but again it would be less storm water at a slower rate than it currently does and that proposal also would meet the state and Municipal standards it would correct can can I just add that that area today um floods terribly um and I understand you're trying you're going to be reducing that water but um that was not always the case it has gotten progressively worse over the years with the increased um home capacity and development um to the point that any mildly Heavy Rain causes a complete flood in in my yard and my down my driveway so I'm highly concerned that this will make it a 100 times worse terrible it's it's it's a flood um it's a flood and in additionally um I will also add that on Ashwood in recent years Ashwood has flooded terribly to the point that the man hole that's at the intersection of Ashwood and Longacre ever since I believe it's Scott Drive was built off of mlen further up um that has a similar detention area to what this is proposed I believe that manhole with any bit of rain water pours out of the manhole and it's been reported to the town and nothing's been done it just pours upward out of the manhole so it's it's not a good situation if I may ask real quick how often does it flood onto Ashwood Year my yard or the both every um my yard with any rain other than a drizzle okay um the water pools in the backyard and um it actually has started to ruin my driveway because of the the water um in the area where you're proposing where that pipe is and where you're proposing the manhole um Ashwood the manhole on in Longacre not as often that's that's a much heavier rain um for a long period of time but past five years I would say it has increased in frequency okay he I definitely understand your concerns and it's you may not agree with what I'm going to say but it is our requirement in order to comply with State Standards is we have all that stormw going to your property now we're required under our standards when we develop this to capture that water and release it slower um so it is my professional opinion that post development you'll see an improvement in that because we're collecting that still and I can understand that however you're proposing to put five additional houses in an already landlocked area that's surrounded by houses in a town where the infrastructure is stressed already so I I'm not warm and fuzzy about if I may real quick Dan would it be fair to say that the storms that she says that she experiences on regular Bas would be like a twoyear storm yeah y real quick this the first I have I mean I've taken pictures over the years of the water flooding if I may just have my expert respond to your questions and then would you say the ones that happen a little more so often that would be a fiveyear storm yeah absolutely is your exer closing today can satisfy that yes more importantly and I hear the Public's concerns their concerns are specifically stating that the existing storm water management system that's there today is already overburdened now if we were to do which we've agreed to do on the record the downstream test with the TV would we understand whether or not that actually is true absolutely it would help us gain that understanding uh if there was any type of blockages in the pipes root intrusions we'd be able to identify that and ultimately help the township Rectify that situation and correct me if I'm wrong but we have conceded on the record that in the event there's any impediments to to the storm water flow in those pipes it would be our responsibility and we would rehabilitate it so the existing concern whether it exists or not would be alleviated by us in the fact if in fact we did find it that is correct okay thank you of course but so wouldn't this be directing instead of just permeating into now this you know lot that that doesn't have homes on now you're directing more of it into the source system and creating more of that going Downstream down you know you a little bit farther from here would that that exacerbate that problem no technically what we're required to do is release the storm water at a slower rate so in theory under existing additions these storm water pipes are getting an influx of of storm water when you have an intense storm water event and it's all trying to rush to a pipe at at a single point what our storm water detention system and infiltration system does is some of that water will be infiltrated back into the ground so that's not leaving the site at all the larger storm events the 10 to 100e storm events those are being held back in those series of pipes that we propose and release slower so when you have those real big storm events when those pipes are first getting overburdened our storm order is getting held back on our site so as the the storm dissipates and the storm water uh reduces its rates in the existing infrastructure in the township we are then releasing our storm water at that point so at that point there's more capacity in those existing pipes because we're holding that storm water back on our site before we can release it out so it's it's intended that the storm water management requirements in the township and in the state are intended to help correct that situation that you're describing because we're we're slowly uh releasing the storm water versus just rushing it all into a pipe at one point thank you uh Scot shell 14 mansvi Court sure k s h l um so just questions more about the storm water because now it's you brought up a lot so now it just makes my concern go even higher because it's been brought up a lot and not knowing what's happening here right now in Mansville Court we don't have a problem with storm water so you mentioned before uh when it rains I mean my my neighbor's here doesn't flood my basement's dry as a bone my yard is fine I'm on the last house on Mansville which the lowest part in the elevation I'll get to my question in a second I walk my dog up that hill so there's it's coming downhill so water we all know gravity F I'm not an engineer but just logic water comes down you're doing the best effort to make sure that nothing happens and affects the neighbors and I appreciate that but you mentioned also there's going to be an HOA in monies if there's a problem first storm there's a storm with four years ago when the town got wrecked was it 5 years that was the 100e storm where it was it was awful our street stayed f what happens if it's not and the water that's pulling here now gets fixed and hits and hits our houses so what's the process how do we raise our hand how do we say this needs to get fixed and fixed not in two weeks like now or two years walk me through if you can please how this works yeah so real quick on the legal sign I think that's where you're getting at the beginning at least is that we're going to have an HOA right and the HOA is going to be a condition for us to be issued construction permits so before we can start doing any type of development there's going to be an HOA in place that this municipality's professionals both their engineer and the attorney are going to review and until they sign off on it we can't record it in that HOA itself it's in to say that the responsibility of all all the responsibility of that HOA will always be born on the developer himself until he sells each one of those Parcels so the benefit of that and the construction timeline you're looking at about two years two maybe how long would you say for the entire completion from start to finish yeah about two years about two years so within those two years I'm more than confident we're going to have a few rainfalls in between and we're going to know whether or not this system works if in fact that initial escro that they established is not sufficient enough well guess what the developer is still there and he's going to be responsible to fix it and replenish those escro funds and if he does not it would be in default and I doubt this Municipal isue Co he was involv of that so I guess what I'm trying to say is that we'll have the added benefit a two-year test period as to whether or not this proposed storm water system actually does work and if it doesn't it's going be the onus of the developer to immedate imate that issue because absent doing that they'll never have a SE okay so they sell the last house they move in we get the 100e storm two days later our street floods out yep it's a disaster yep what's our recourse well the idea of it would be that the proposed escro amount would be something that brocco bro maruchi your engineer as well as the board attorney feels adequate right so what do there they can go and ask their Consultants of what they believe would be an estimated escrow that would be enough to satisfy such a situation right let's say hypothetically they give a large number they say it's $100,000 right and exceeds it it's a half a million dollars what's going to happen there is that that $100,000 is going to go to the repair bit and that that Delta of 400,000 is going to be deaggregated and pro and the pr share will be born on each one of those residential Parcels themselves so at the end of the tax year how we all have to pay our property taxes they would have to pay in that hypothetical an additional $100,000 if not they' be a Rees so it would be a mess it' be a mess so so the concern would be you're taking down about what how many how many trees are being taken down that are there established right now estimated uh about 220 220 you're putting up how many uh currently on this property without you know specialized landscaping for each house it's 112 propos trees they're losing half and we all know the trees with their Roots embedded deeply they're mature they absorb a lot of the water I assume that's what they're there that's part of the nature of what they do but again as as part of our stormore design we have to analyze the existing conditions which takes in account all those existing trees and the wooded surface as well as the proposed which now takes into account all this impervious surface coverage and we have to design that system to comply with State Standards to reduce the amount of storm water that leaves the site so even post development it has to be less storm water leaving the site okay I think this based on what you're looking to do taking down a lot of trees just again I'm not an engineer this is a big concern because ourc Street doesn't have a problem I have no water we again Street doesn't flood HS aren't flooding I see something like this and we have an issue going on right now I think this need to go a lot deeper because I don't see and again I know I I appreciate I mean I I'm not an engineer I don't know and I and you're saying a lot of things that really going kind of go over my head but there's not a problem now and and again again even after developer gone there the homeowners association still has to have this operations and maintenance manual that is tied to this HOA and with that omm there's reporting requirements um essentially quarterly that the HOA needs to report back to the township to show that these systems have been inspected um that they're functioning the way they are supposed to be functioning and this needs to be inspected by a a licensed engineer and if there's anything that's identified that's not satisfactory um it needs to be corrected immediately so it the intent with the state this is State mandated the state requires that you file that that onm um and it it it's exactly for the reasons that you're essentially describing is we need to make sure that this system is maintained for the life of these properties okay understood also what are the hours of operation that you can do this type of construction is that 8:00 a to 6:00 p.m. or Saturday Sundays I think it's no Sundays it's definitely Saturdays like Nish okay start just say one thing quickly because everybody you know certainly we all and nobody likes storm water and we all get concerned about that but so much of our town was built in the 60s and 70s and 80s the V didn't exist storm water wasn't a science the water just flowed wherever it flowed somebody put up a retaining wall it stopped the flow of the natural water so anything that's been developed you know since the early 90s certainly in the last five years the DP has very very strict regulations so to the point of what happens when we get flooded out that's not what they're working on right they're working on making sure you never get flooded out so it's about detension slow Lo the rate and cleaning the water it's an ex extraordinarily you know exact I call it exact science but it is a science guys get paid a lot of money to deal with it the D continues to adopt stronger and stronger rules as we see more and more rain events so somebody mentioned Scott Terrace if you drive down Scott terce there's a detention Basin that holds water from the other Lots those basins don't exist on any of our streets right they let water go hits the street and it goes right into the SE and off to the nearest Brook and let's hope for the best so the there's a lot of what's been done more recently is far better than what's in our in and around our homes now um whether it works with the 500e storm like a couple of storms we've had is a whole another story I don't know that anything works then but at least you should take some comfort in the fact that this is a progressing science that is getting stricter and stricter and stricter including just over the last four or five years that's designed to make sure we don't have water just cascading in every direction and into somebody's basement but it's being collected it's being retained it's being put back into the the aquifer hopefully cleaner than when it was on the street can I I'm just going to ask one more Qui we we're adding about a half acre of impervious do we know how much that adds to runoff a half acre is there any science or yeah I mean that that's all Quantified within our storm water design it's it's not a lot I mean I don't know if the half an acre is a lot but it doesn't sound like a lot for development but is that going to substantially increase the they're half an yeah it's additional volume that's generated which yes it means more storm water quantity-wise it is leaving the site but it's leaving at a slower rate so again as Mr Santo mentioned that first you know on flush of a big storm event the the system gets overburdened but we're required to hold that back so once that system system kind of clears itself out and empties out then we're releasing our storm water when that pipe has that additional capacity so yes volume wise yes there's more storm water generated when you have more inserv surface coverage but the intention of our design is to have those infiltration basins to get some of it back into the ground and the rest of it is held back so it releases once those pipes kind of clear out once the the storm has passed and just to continue what Mr santoo was saying as well is that right now there is none of those kinds of of benefits that exist on this property right and maybe as hard as it is to believe that the building potentially of these houses and this system will improve what's there from from not doing anything and not not to defend the applicant I don't know which way this application's going to go but this is a geotechnical storm water report that was in everybody's packet this is a storm water management summ that was in everybody's packet and this is a storm water management facilities operations and maintenance manual to the point of you know how do we make sure that the system keep working that all of us get you can imagine we all read um but this is the type of thing that Roco goes through with a fine Toth comb and make sure that it's meets the state standards and this is just the storm water piece you know forget lighting and Landscaping and architecture and all the other aspects of the application that come through here so again not looking to defend the applicant I just want everybody to understand this is hopefully not guesswork but science if if you don't get access to the easen how much of a and you do an alternate method of of getting the water off of the site um you know how much does that change uh the water runoff the same quantity will be leaving the site but rather than having a direct connection underground it'll continue to flow over land as it does today but it would still be an improvement when compared to existing conditions because it's going to be again really slower than it is today even though it's still Overland versus underground it'll still just essentially flow overground through those Residential Properties eventually to uh the site or the the prop or the roadway that is further to the South to be collected by that stormwater conveyance Network and be conveyed in the same direction it is under proposed connection conditions with a direct underground connection okay either way it will be a reduction and uh an improvement hi uh I'm Daniel Goldman I live at 27 Ashwood Drive which is uh block 1706 lot 39 um we moved here in um in 1995 and um we're told when we moved here that the land behind our house will always be woods and it's landlocked and it's beautiful and and I know I share the opinion of all the people that live around this entire area that it's it's going to be decimated it there'll probably be beautiful homes but I just wanted to share my opinion that I always thought that there would never I did not get in writing that um that homes could not be built there I was told that they were maxed out in sewers and so so just procedurally this part of the hearing if you have any questions for the the the expert you can ask and then at the end of the hearing I'm sorry no that's no it's fine just I'll you can finish up but just you know for anybody else at the end of the hearing if you have any any uh any other uh okay opinions for or against you'll get your chance I did actually okay um the the purple line um I'm sort of in the middle of there if work has to be done will they be removing trees that are actually on my property to to to do any of that uh work only if we had the direct underground proposed connection I have a sewer I have a sewer corre in the middle of my backyard I have a cap currently we we're proposing the connection as shown our plans to to lot 40 your neighbor uh I'm 39 so you're 39 I have the the cap correct if we were to make a connection onto your property potentially um yes you know we might have to take down some Landscaping however currently as we have it proposed your property will remain untouched we wouldn't be exceeding our property okay thank you just to the point Mr Goldman actually in the late '90s there was a sewer moror in the town there wasn't enough sanitary sewer but you can't just shut your sanitary sewer plant down and not have any more development so the sanitary sewer plant was improved and it was the capacity was increased in the early 2000s the moratorium went off and you saw like a cork pop in town when a lot of these different projects that had gotten approval but didn't have sewer sort of went into the ground at the same time um so whoever told you that wasn't lying but they weren't telling you that it wouldn't last forever uh like if it were Wetlands or you know or Green Acres preserved or whatever there any other questions from members of the public hi Brian sclar 11 Mansfield Court um I have a storm drain in my backyard and um like a a drain pump uh drain uh pipe like concrete I guess that runs under my backyard and um I'm wondering what if you know what the capacity to hold what Tye what capacity of water that system is is able to hold currently so that pipe that you're talking about is actually the continuation of that purple easement that you see above here um as part of our analysis no we did not analyze that the capacity of that pipe um we as we mentioned with your board engineer we will be video inspecting and and making sure that it's in good working order um although we didn't analyze that again with our proposed storm water management system it's going to have a less of an impact to that that pipe because we have storm water getting into that slope so the capacity of that pipe under proposed conditions would essentially be increased uh upon this development so at this time no we didn't analyze the capacity could we provide you the capacity absolutely it's a pretty simple calculation we just don't have it you know here T night but when we make that connection it would be a benefit to that pipe can you explain how it would be a benefit absolutely with with our storm water management system that that I mentioned in detail this evening essentially by holding that back that water on our site infiltrating it some of it into the ground and releasing it slower so again big rainstorm come Event Event comes you get that first flush of storm water that overwhelms the pipes under proposed conditions we're taking some of that we're holding it back so while it's being overwhelmed we're holding some of that water back on our site until that pipe clears out and there's additional capacity and then we're releasing it you know over a longer period of time uh so that it it's a benefit to that pipe so it maintains capacity so are are there any drains on the property currently on our subject side no everything sheet flows essentially just flows overr um through the neighbors that are directly to our South uh to the the next roadway which is Ashwood and then it's collected by the storm water system within Ashwood and then makes its way into that same drainage pipe that it does today so is you're you're saying your system would slow that correct current process absolutely okay and um do you do you know what the uh pipes would be able to hold in terms of capacity because I'm concerned because I do get flooding sometimes in my in my basement and I'm concerned with the extra water uh flowing it coming in into my yard again yes we could absolutely you know determine the capacity of that existing pipe um but again under proposed conditions we're making the capacity of that pipe better by holding that storm water back on our site before releasing it to that pipe so can we tell you existing proposed conditions what the the difference and the impact of a pipe is we absolutely could do that I just don't have that you know this evening because I know it will be a change and a benefit for the better okay thank you real quick Dan based on your proposed storm water management system this Municipal easement with the utility line would be able to accommodate the Run off correct absolutely it it does go through it today it just enters a different way than we're proposing right because today there's no storm water improvements on the subject property so technically speaking 100% of the rainfall is going into there at the same time correct estimate wise what type of reduction are you looking at um across the board for the different design storms about 50% okay so about 50% reduction of it holding the water so that it could permeate through the utility line and then be recharged back in correct okay thank you Jonathan abrahamian I live on a five Mansfield Court I think it's you spell your list yeah it's a long one uh a r a h a m i a n welcome so my question is more about the map itself and I have to report back to the misses so if you can do it in layman's terms for me is there a way that we can zoom in like where uh where I had the question sure where so like block uh 15 right there it's 15 it's right down there to the right yeah so what exactly like itly the of so this line right here proper here all you're getting is aot fence we not touching property when you say six foot fence meaning there will be a six foot fence on the property line between your property and the proposed Parcels themselves and on the proposed Parcels themselves will also include Landscaping as well kind of doubling up the screening if you will so so what what what do these Green Dots like represent that's that is the the proposed storm water easement that we mentioned that's where our detention system will be um located below ground so won't see anything and so there's going to be construction going on like in in this area here correct okay and what stage you mentioned that takes like two years to get to the house is that the first step yeah storm water would have to go in first along with call a sec okay and what would be the concerns one would have if they were living in my house uh about the construction that's going on there noise temporary noise I would anticipate you know but it would only be during permitted construction times so in your professional opinion there's no risk of any adverse effects to the land the water anything of that nature impacting your property no we're not touching your property storm water under existing conditions doesn't go towards your property and uh it'll continue to not go towards your property continues to flow uh in a southerly direction which would be to the top of the sheet understood so and that's all underground so are the trees remaining there or are all those trees going be taken down those trees would have to be taken down in order to put in that new infrastructure associated with the storm water management system but we would be proposing you know replacement trees um along that drainage e that we so there's no there's no construction above ground it's only below the ground it will be the storm water piping and everything will be under good ground after construction is complete during construction yeah it'll be an open hole where they're laying the pipes but they'll close it up quickly and and it'll be landscaped and essentially be open space area with with new landscaping and replacement trees correct correct is is there any way that along the line of so I have a fence that goes along the line it's probably about 6 in to foot behind the fence that's still um that's still my property is it possible to plant trees at the current time that are tall enough to block any of the construction out it's difficult to get really tall trees from the nursery I believe you know usually 8 to 10 feed is a standard uh tree that we're planting evergreen tree and that's what we'd be proposing this situation if I may answer that question if if you would be okay with it we would plant the 8 to 10 foot Arbor V trees on your side of the property that's not interrupting the construction on our site before we commence any construction on either the storm water or the RightWay So when you say on my property you're talking about the property that exists uh in front of where my fence is yes so directly behind my fence yes okay yeah thank you uh my name is Shalon Kai C AI is my last name I live in first name can you spell it sh x i a o d o n g x i a o d o n g x a i o d x i a o d o n G okay okay yeah I live in um Livingston um since 2000 and leave 33 East McCullen D just right in front of this uh lot 18 and 19 um I believe the new road is going to um just in front of our house and you're talking about the construction will be last two years correct and every time like there will be traffic noise um going through and then our two bathrooms in front of U is Balan Avenue and the the new Street New Road will be in front of our house so it will be very bad impact our lifestyle and I'm working for home right now so I don't know if there is anything you know concern you know you know our neighbors you know besides this construction regulation that you guys discussed want to walk through the construction regulations on that would say yeah traffic control again yeah we'll be required to uh comply with the construction hours so the Township Code only permits construction During certain times um of of the week yeah I'm working for home the same time as you're doing stuff as well and I know we mentioned you know approximately two years start to finish but but this is the the most disruptive portion of the construction will be the proposed culdesac roadway to go in that'll be the first phase um roadways they can be constructed relatively quickly I would say that road can be within you know the first six months would be in along with the the um storm water improvements and then the the five dwellings those will techically take about 18 months to to construct start to finish and uh the the construction of a typical residential dwelling is um not as disruptive as the construction of the roadway the roadway will go quick uh it will be in and then you know that the homes go up and they're definitely not as disruptive as constructing a road um traffic control measures would be required for the construction of the roadway the police would have to be notified they would have to be directing traffic when we first you know break ground and start that roadway but with this development set back once that road is in um I I don't think it'll be too much more disruptive than the typical traffic that you see coming down east mclen on a daily basis because once the the workers are here they're going to be there for the majority of the day working on the homes and they'll leave towards the end of the day yeah but in an now you know there's a lot of TR traffic and noises yes as well right but again it's going to be temporary until the construction is over um and then it's going to be typical residential construction or traffic yeah but still like you know there's a row in front of us it's you know totally different you know when when we move in like a 24 years ago so it will be you know impact our environment and definitely impact our lifestyle you know colleges so that's that's you know my concern I know there have big bigger concerns about flooding and anything else but you know for us you know that's my main concern right now and the road just in front of us just just also to help W with your concerns is that the planning board has a list of model conditions that go along with any approval assuming that there's approval if there's not an approval then that wouldn't be obviously but if there is an approval the model conditions which are available on any resolution that's been approved previously deal with the controls of hours of operation cleanliness um protecting areas around the site while construction is going on um if there's blasting the hours they can be done not that that's going to take place here but um that's would be included in the approval if there was an approval of any resolution where construction of this magnitude would take place and it controls all of the areas that you're raising concern about I also you know I don't know like um you know Chinese always has this funct it's sort of like a religion or something the road in front of a house is not a very good idea so I don't know if you you know also consider you know the you know Community you know Chinese Community you know working something like this you know you have do some research on this yeah that's it yeah hi uh my name is Ken Ken last name d n g I'm on I'm mean living in 23 Ash Drive 23 23 which I believe is in lot 40 or 41 or something yeah it's very close so I just I just have a concern about do you really know about how badly the flooding was it it's it's like a it's like this it's like a one ft or two feet deep of torrential water running through the street I think what the question istim question and yeah yeah thanks sorry about that yeah yeah so that's the that's the yeah that's the video no my garage front yard front yard and from the elevation map I think the new development is actually the foundation of the houses is actually lower than our foundation right intensive intensive elevation or we're we're still higher than you um so the our basement elevations will probably be a little bit higher than your basement floor elevation okay but yes your your dwelling at home is below our proposed so we are flush I think a little bit lower but more or less Yeah so basically when this kind of water comes in because they are lower they're first floor or ground floor whatever cannot be used but again yeah it's my professional opinion that with our storm water management system that we're implementing you're going to see a a benefit and I I think you're I can't tell you for sure the flooding is going to stop but I think it'll be an improvement from what you're seeing today because we're going to be capturing a lot of that rather than letting it free flow towards your property L it's a lot of water yeah we're going to be capturing it like three hours 3 hours four hours of torrential like water flow throughout through the street like one or two feet deep of like torrential PL are you able to catch it I'm not sure yeah I mean that's that's our intention it's our requirement to capture the the the the frame order that drops onto our property we need to capture that and put it into our system uh to release it slower to the intention again is to have less of an impact to your property okay gotcha uh so my last command is when this kind of flooding happens they are going to suffer badly much verse than than what we suffer because they are lower than than our in of elevation proper after this yeah again an improvement that's our the requirement of our storm water is to hold it release it slower to result in in less of an impact than compared to existing conditions Dan when you guys designed your storm water management system did you take into cons consideration the existing conditions absolutely it's the first thing we look at the first thing look is the existing conditions correct so in your expert opinion the proposed storm water man management system will substantially reduce the runoff that they experience today because you're going to hold the water longer so it's not an immediate rush yep that is the exact requirement that we're designing to right and it's both a municipal and a state requirement correct thank you are are there any homes that would do in in your pressure cing do worse or is this is just a benefit for for all the neighbors yeah it's a benefit for all the neighbors because we're we're holding that storm water okay hi my name is chichang last name h u n g first name chichan CH i c u n c h i c h UA n thank you okay um uh I live in the 50 East mlen and my lot uh is like 1706 block 22 so if we can take a look I just want to know what are we doing um at a border there yeah want through the fencing and screening yeah absolutely U scroll a little further up I believe y this is your your lot right left yes so I have a lot 22 and a empty lot of 32 yes okay so two lots that is directly on the left hand side of the page there now U so right along our property line between our property and your two lots uh we are proposing a a six foot tall solid vinyl fence um and then uh as was shown onev exhibit um which is exhibit A2 uh we are proposing Evergreen screening uh between your property and our proposed dwelling so on the uh 22 uh right now that's uh retaining wall there so the one won't be touched or uh no your wall will remain it will not be touched okay all right okay and I just wanted to uh Echo what um Sha a case because when she bought a house the house it's uh based on the Fone it's it's good standing that's and then right now when this this uh coming to change her house is facing a a big roow so totally change the fu of her house and you don't you if that's the case then you know most of the people look at F won't buy the house so just want to recho that it's a b concept any other members of the public for any questions for this witness ask sure Brian sclar 11 Mansfield Court um it's your professional opinion that the the storm drainage system would be a benefit to the surrounding area um is is there also plans for an independent engineer to test and give their opinion U as part as the application process we had to submit our reports and data to the municipality's engineer uh who is um standing right here Mr Roo maruchi so I guess the question would be directed towards him so ha has an independent evaluation been done with respect to their proposed storm drainage system system so we we reviewed their drainage system to what they as they mentioned it as it it meets the state regulations because it's major development major development has to meet reductions it has to meet ground water recharge it has to meet water quality so we review the application and the storm water component to that as a condition of approval that we've asked them is they're tying into our storm drainage system and as that they evaluate that storm drainage system and the capacity of that pipe um is there another engineer that looks at it no um it's only the township um our professionals and um the applicants engineer well M McDonald reviews our sanitary sewer and our water our water so we have a we have a consultant that Township engages for um sanitary sewer and for water because they have to make connections they have to get DP approval to make those connections and so we have uh an engineer that reviews that um storm water components and the actual application um myself as the assistant and um the township engineer who's not present um reviews the application so to show that to we review it to as if it beats the state regulations like we mentioned so and in addition to that we also have to submit to the hudson6 pic Soil Conservation District and they will review aspects of our storm water management design as as well and make sure it meets their compliance so so I understand that they have certain standards but I guess my concern is what like will there be an independent assessment of the ability for that system to to handle the potentially additional water unless we engage another engineer um no I guess so just just be relying on and the townships you know our reviews now um as I'm hearing tonight obviously there has been some flooding in Ashwood previously um this application I just want to make clear that this application what they're saying is not going to fix that flooding um but you know I think that there's something we need to look at you know to see if there's anything that can be done I think we have looked at many areas of the Township um for storm water improvements and it's very complex um because as previously discussed earlier much of the township was developed in the 50s and 60s um a lot of the infrastructure is aging and you know you need to start at a certain point and upgrade as you can you know it's not a fix you know everything in one shot so um we could look at doing more drainage studies in these areas to see what we can do okay yeah just uh I I'm I'm concerned that we're just no disrespect you're you have a certain um perspective that you're looking to uh you know Implement with this with this yeah I guess I just want clarity as to will there be an assessment whether this system can handle the capacity that I guess that question's already been answered the municipalities engineer has been the independent assessment he's reviewed all the reports that have been submitted to determine whether or not it meets the standard of both the state and the municipality and he's deemed acceptable in addition it also has to be sent over to soil conservation so why don't you speak about that yeah absolutely so Mr maruchi he he essentially works for you he works for the township he's making sure that our design complies with the town requirements and the state requirements that all towns in in the state need to comply with so it's not only Mr maruchi that's reviewing and and making sure that our plans meets to the requirements it's also The Soil Conservation District that we have to submit to for an additional certification and they're reviewing to make sure that you know we're not eroding the soil and washing soil off our site towards your site uh and they're also reviewing aspects of storm water ad management design uh to make sure that our offsite flow again meets those State Standards so it's us working as the applicant and then we're submitting to both the township who's reviewing our design and The Soil Conservation District so it's two different Engineers that do look at the aspects of our design and make sure that we're meeting what we're required to meet for two different governmental engineer agencies which are charged with that responsibility to look out for your benefit right and and does does the uh evaluation that's that's done does it look at whether the system can handle the uh potentially additional flow was a condition of approval that they would evaluate our system Downstream and then we would review that you know supplemental information they provide us okay the system a series of calculations based on so it takes up how much ground there is versus how much square footage there is versus how often storm occurs it's a whole lot of math that's above my head that Engineers do and it's a standard the state creates that they design and that Rocco and the our engineering department with your tax dollars looks at and decides if it works or not so there's he's like the referee we're not going to trust this guy trust our guy then he gives a report which is available uh is it available which also they said that they would comply with all the you know because you know Rocco went through it and and provided you know a great deal of information and responses back to them they they said they were comp with mhm okay yeah our our our report actually if you go on the uh agenda I believe it's linked and everything's on there and you could see our engineering review it's it's 10 pages long you know so you could see everything before all this all this information is on the website with you know with the tonight's agenda so you you read it at your leisure and if you want you can contact engineering tomorrow I can give you a copy of it also so all right thank you you're welcome thank you lot of exciting stuff there any other questions for this Witness hi hi my name ISO and my uh property address seven minutes for your call and say your name again please uh CSK CAO and last name this is my last name and your first name uh z h o n g q i n yeah 7 minutes for your call I would like to let let everyone know now it's rainning day right um my backyard has uh some water but doesn't bother us to live there but I forgot you guys forgot to take care of me because uh I just I you going to build a new house after you build a new house please make it for sure not going to increase the water to my you know back yeah please thank you that's all I can assure you that the way the storm water flows it will not be going towards your okay thank you that's so okay there any other questions for this witness John bound 17 Mansfield Court there was a lot lot of talk about the uh storm system and you keep saying that you may improve it uh the question question I have is but you you are adding to the storm system that we have now so do you have enough is there enough capacity to handle the additional flow that's my question I don't care what the state regulations or guidelines are you can't trust those guys right the uh again we it's less storm water leaving the site or or storm water is leaving the site slower than it goes today so as a result of that we are a benefit to the capacity of the downstream systems because it's it's being held onto our site and as that capacity or the pipe clears out then we're adding our storm water to it so it goes it's it's entering that system slower so it is a benefit to the capacity of the downstream systems but you're adding something to the system that doesn't exist today no no it it it still goes there today it's going there uncontrolled you you're you're you're you're building a new manhole connection to the pipe correct correct so you so you're adding water water into that pipe it still gets to that pipe under existing conditions from a different area off of um Ashwood Drive so it flows through the residence to the south of us enters the inlets on Ashwood Drive and then enters that same pipe so essentially we're bypassing the portion where it's going through the residential property and we're putting it directly into that pipe so it still goes there under existing and proposed conditions but it's a benefit because it's getting to that pipe slower than it does today so so it it it does increase because the way this was described it sounded like you're adding more water into the system but you don't know whether the capacity exists for that additional water we have a direct connection Now versus a downstream connection connection what you telling me that today it goes to Ash and then into that goes into the storm SE there and comes back correct the way it flows y the the storm water flows from Ashwood goes into this easement it goes through Mansfield court and continues down towards uh North Livingston F because I I do know that it does flood between the Ashwood properties and uh Mansfield court and on the and there are uh drain pipes uh grading there and at times that doesn't take the water away that's why we're holding it back longer on our property so it it gives that time to clear out before we're we're adding it back in there okay thank you any other question any other questions for this witness all right seeing none you going to be calling your next witness yes let call my why don't we why don't we just take like a five or 10 minute break and then uh then then we'll start with your next Witness for e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e okay are we all set got to use this once and Mr pad you know that we traditionally go to 10:30 yes so um you know once we get to that point uh we'll we'll have to we'll have to if you're done great uh if not we'll have to get another date understood okay thank you our direct will be done we can uh call your next witness thank you I call my next and my last witness my planner John ta thank you you're welcome you swear the testimony about to give with the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do okay your full name and spell your last name for the court report my name is John tyina T AI k i n a I'm a uh principal with all things planning and development in South Brunswick New Jersey I've been a planner in the state of New Jersey since I completed my studies at Ruckers University in 1992 I've been lucky enough to keep my license a good standing for the last 32 years they tell me that's a challenge I've testified before more than 150 boards around the state of New Jersey including this one back in May it's nice to be back and I'm told my last three uh my last three boards were Brick bord town and East Amwell terrific does this board accept them as an expert in planning there any questions by members of the board now we then the board accept you as an expert in planning thank you oh in Morristown Morristown well that's four then we've changed our mind Bown is actually a funny one but let's go uh John are you familiar with the R4 Zone in the township of Livingston I am is the subject property located within the R4 Zone yes it is have you had an opportunity to review the zoning warres and the master plan yes I have terrific can you please walk us through the proposed variance relief we're looking for tonight as well as the design waivers certainly um so uh everybody did a nice job of of talking about all the the respective VAR relief um and design waivers that we need tonight I'll go over them briefly um we have existing and most of them are relate to existing non-conformities uh that are being that are being retained or changed in some way uh on Lot 19 the existing home um so we have a uh on Lot 19 we have an existing uh side yard uh that is becoming a rear yard uh that will be uh 8 point uh it will be 8 ft in dimension um we also have a an existing side yard uh that is becoming a front yard and that front yard is proposed at 14.9 FT and that is to the newly uh constructed Road a um and then uh finally we have a uh combined side yard setback on Lot 19 that exists at 23.1 FT and is proposed now at 22.9 ft uh it changes uh minimally because of the uh shifting dimensions of the lot um additionally we have and they will all be uh there will be C1 variances to the to the effect that they uh reflect existing conditions uh such as the non-conforming front yards um and there'll be C2 variances to the to the uh effect that there are anything that relates to the construction of the new road or to the new subdivision um secondly we have uh some design standards some design waivers uh first and foremost is uh for the radius of the uh culdesac uh we are requesting a 40ft radius culdesac which would be compliant with rsis but it is uh at 40 feet that is shy of the township requirement of 50 ft um additionally we have a waiver for driveways uh that um have motor vehicles that can back out out to the street and again to try and minimize our coverage we have driveways on our culdesac where the where the people will just back out straight into the culdesac because there is uh no real traffic there um and then uh finally we have um that's the same waiver again then we also have a excuse me a variance for steep slopes where we do have the steep slopes that we testified to in the middle of Lot 19 uh as we said they are they are existing uh man-made steep slopes from that resulted from the grading of the backyard on Lot 19 uh most likely when the pool went in um because he has a very flat backyard and then it kind of drops off uh as it goes back to the to the drainage easement behind and again that is a man-made condition and an existing condition uh that we are uh proposing to disturb in order to uh construct the new homes um so in this instance uh we have C variance relief um again for the uh existing conditions uh there will be C1 variances that will Rel specifically relate to a specific piece of property uh which is Lots 18 19 and 20 uh in this instance that existing condition is on Lot 19 where we have a front yard setback that actually exceeds um your Township requirement um the balance of the variances will be C2 variances in this instance there variances where the benefits will outweigh the detriments as you know that the standard uh is set for uh in calman V planning board of Warren and there it was uh it was such that those variants were warranted um when the homes in question would be more in keeping and character with the uh with the neighborhood than they would be uh if the relief were not granted um for lots that would be more harmonious in lot size uh could be seen as being substantially overweighing any detriment so we have previous existing lot sizes that were oversized in comparison uh to the neighborhood uh we had lot 18 at over 40,000 square ft Lot 19 at over 40,000 square F feet and lot 20 at over 40,000 square F feet where existing uh lots have lot sizes of around 9500 uh to 12,000 Square ft subdividing these lots to make room for the new single family homes not only provides these homes and properties closer to what the board envisions for this area but also provides the township of Livingston with additional housing options within the M master plan it it stay the R4 district is designed for single family homes on Lots with a minimum area of 9,375 square ft uh we will be uh well in compliance with that and as we've stated I believe four times also be five times all of the new homes will not require any variance relief at all um the second uh balancing test is a Poland V South planfield where uh you look at the benefits the overall benefits of the project as as compared to the uh relief that's sought it's not just as it relate and not just benefits as it relates to the relief but it's the overall benefits of the project at large um and uh that is that's our standard there so in terms of uh our positive criteria as you know we need to implement and promote some of the purposes of zoning I would submit to you there's two specifically uh purpose e to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that promote the well-being of persons neighborhoods communities regions and the preservation of the environment and G to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural residential commercial and Industrial uses and open space both public and private according to their respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens so in this instance uh we are proposing uh an appropriate population density as set forth by the township and this board in your master plan uh with uh roughly acre lots um that's more in keeping uh with the R4 district and More in keeping with what your master plan uh sets forth in terms of um and you had heard extensive testimony about how we're providing for all the environmental uh improvements that are possible on the property specifically as it relates to storm water um I promised myself I wouldn't talk about storm water but I have to um we will be providing storm water improvements those storm water improvements will result in benefits um both to uh the new homeowners as well as to the existing homeowners by reducing the rate of runoff that comes off this property as well as the engineering uh analysis that the applicant is committing to do as part of the conditions of approval so it's not just that we're saying our system is going to work we're also saying that we are going to examine the existing system to make sure that one our water is going to fit in it and two what are the things that need to be done to it to make sure that that can happen and that is a critical critical um condition of approval that the applicant is agreeing to um in terms of and then obviously we need to talk about the negative criteria uh do we have any substantial detriment to the public good are we having any substantial impact on the Zone plan or the master plan uh We believe We believe we're implementing some of the elements uh and goals and objectives of your master plan um to preserve and enhance the primarily residential character of the community to and to promote a welcome and aesthetically pleasing environment to control uh control residential uh development and provide for appropriate encouraging residential development in locations and identities compatible with existing or desirable development patterns and that can be properly serviced by roadways utilities and services and you heard extensive testimony from from our engineer that our traffic is not going to have an overburden on East mcland Avenue and that our storm water and sanitary sewer systems uh will be designed in such a way uh that they will be accommodated uh within your existing systems and again we'll be doing Downstream analysis to make sure that it can be accommodated and to make sure that we're not having any negative impact on our surrounding neighbors um finally in terms of negative criteria uh it's a it is a a standard of substantial detriment to the public good uh again we've we've provided extensive testimony that we are at the appropriate density our uh relief that we're requesting is predominantly internal relief that relates to the existing property on on lot nine Lot 19 excuse me and it's predominantly as the lot lines get reconfigured around it um so we will have we'll end up with two front yards two rear yards and a sidey yard uh it's somewhat of a strange shaped property um and uh one of the questions that was asked before was uh would the configuration of the street put the uh improvements that are in the rear yard in a variance condition and the answer is no because the front yard will be set on on on road a at about 15 fet so anything that's beyond 15 ft from the roadway is in a rear yard so that uh lot will remain in conformance and then finally in terms of Lot 21 the Improvement uh the improve Improvement that was made there was with the uh that 5- foot strip that is on the east side of proposed Road a where again that's going to be a benefit to the township uh and that's one of the reasons to Grant the waiver that we're seeking um is that that Improvement that will be there will then be under the aices of our homeowners association not under the uh aaces of the township and it will also not place a burden on Lot 21 by placing a front yard on that property in what would have been a side so what is their sidey yard will stay a sidey yard what is their rear yard will stay a rear yard so Lot 21 is unaffected in terms of any land use impacts uh from the development of uh of roadway a um and then finally uh impairment of the Zone plan and the master plan we are implementing The Zone plan and the master plan this is our for development uh above 9 9375 Square ft um all of our new Lots comply all of our new development will comply um our all of our relief relates to existing additions on Lot 19 uh predominantly because it's a ranch and it ends up being uh a little overun in terms of your um in terms of your maximum habitable area of the home uh it does not create an F situation we're under the F but you also have a cap so we would violate the cap um by a diim amount um but we do not violate any F standards um so for all those reasons I believe the board has the ability to Grant the the variances and the waivers uh that we're that we're seeking um the uh the standard for the waivers you know uh is that one it's uh that it is reasonable the request is reasonable I think our requests are reasonable in terms of the uh withd of the uh right of way uh for the benefits that we talked about for Lot 21 as well as to not have the improvements in the public realm and then secondly to provide for the 40ft culdesac uh we think that's uh more than appropriate limits are impervious services to to a little bit to cut down on some of the stor witer impacts uh and and we think that they're reasonable and that provi um not complying with them would be somewhat of a hardship uh to the applicant and we believe to to the surroundings so we think we're providing benefits there uh so for those reasons I believe the board has the ability to Grant the relief we're seeking and I'm available for your questions I have no further questions size and if they are not go to the Zoning for any variances yes that is correct as a conditional approval we would agree that all proposed improvements would be absolutely compliant with the bul measurements and the R4 Zone code we would not engage in any Forum Shopping going for C or D variants thank you you um any questions from members of the board I the thank you the side yard becomes a front yard because of the application correct how how does the law treat that words you created your own that create a higher burden on the positive or the negative criter it does not um it does become a C2 variance it is a non-conforming condition now uh in that it's only 8 ft now um so we're in not that side only 8T to the property line correct it's only 8T to the property line now so we have a non-conforming soare condition now um because we're changing it then we need to then we need to We Can't rely on the C1 criteria which would be just that oh it's a condition of the lot it's not a condition of lot it's a condition we're creating so we have the somewhat different and I I think somewhat higher uh standard of the C2 to say that the benefits of of granting this varant outweigh the detriment and again the benefit of granting it is that we we're one we're able to build the street two we're able to retain the existing homes on East mcland and it is a much it's much better for the neighborhood if you will that the front door in East mlen is going to look largely like it does today again with with the road with the roadway coming in for the one house but the man majority of that Frontage stays exactly as it is and the new development kind of quote unquote gets tucked behind so I think the benefit of doing that uh outweighs any detriment of granting that variance because if you don't then you're fine you're putting the road there but you're demolishing the house and we're likely building two new homes uh in in lie of uh the one existing any other questions from the board I think it was mentioned but do we have a a document from the fire department regarding the size of the cck I didn't see it in the packet in my packet any somebody else not me I'm G to call back up my engineer to answer question well no I'm gonna have him answer that question um so we just have a email U from your fire chief which essentially notes that he reviewed the application and um the only thing that he requested was an additional fire hydrant which we provided at the end of the cack with this SP like usen into the evidence mark thank you any other questions from the board from our Professionals for uh members of the public any questions for this witness as to uh his testimony my name is Lucille santinelli I live at 38 East mclen Avenue Lot 19 I heard a lot a lot 19s over there uh I just need clarification when you say you need a variance ises that just mean you're just getting permission to be off you know that you're not complying correct oh yes okay and my other question is um when you said there's a a dip in my backyard you're going to go into my backyard y on my side of the fence let me call up my engineer to answer these questions if Bo doesn't mine no your backyard your proposed conditions will remain untouched other than the piece that we're subdividing off that's where the dip is in the woods it's existing steep area past the pool and everything um and past the portion that'll be subdivided off there's there's a dip it it slopes off so the pieces that you see that will remain your property completely untouched oh okay and when you say there's two um what you call them fronts and two backs is that engineer talk for a corner house yes yes exactly what it is yeah I have a lot of other questions but I'll go through the lawyers please any any other questions from uh members of the public yes uh seeing none is is the opportunity for anybody that want oh hi ch um so uh I'm I have the lot 22 and the 32 which which is conjunction to uh this plan um I'm actually just asking requests whether you can consider to including the 32 and part of 22 as part of your plan to in jurisic of this uh I just use it as opportunity to yeah reest we can ab have that conversation outside and I assure you my C would love more to expand his development yes absolutely but as far as testimony for tonight as far as his hearing that yeah wouldn't be part of it yeah maybe we'll get a broker fit any other members of the public with any questions um so any members of the public that wish to make a sworn statement either for or against the application this would be your opportunity Shon Kai uh 33 is mcllin I already mentioned it um as I said it previously um it's a little bit against our culture you know build a road in front of it when when we B the house yeah sure raise your right hand please you swear to testimony you're about to give this matter the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes thank you say uh repeat it again yeah I live in 33 East Molen Avenue um and the road will be built in front of a house and based on the Chinese fun um it's um sort of not a good sign yeah and it's U noisy it's going to be um of you know impact our life quality yeah thank you Michelle lowski 25 Asheville Drive can you raise your right hand I'll swear you in you swear to testimony given this man will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do um I'm I mentioned my concerns earlier I'm very concerned also about another major subdivision in this area of town there's a lot of um tear Downs going on and new building happening in this area um which also stresses the infrastructure considering this area was built in the 50s and 60s and um with a lot of these tear Downs there are not sewer improvements such as in this project the the schools are also stressed um it's putting a lot of new development in the community in this area Harrison Elementary is the most populated Elementary School in the community um we are not seeing a lot of infrastructure Improvement streets Etc um mlen is a heavily traveled Road Ashwood is a heavily traveled Road um a lot of traffic um I don't see how this won't put um an increase to that and um we vehemently oppose this development thank you uh any other members of the public seeing none um oh yes no okay seeing none uh mrad any closing remarks yes um I think everybody heard today that the only concern the main concern is storm water storm water is the issue as you heard from the testimony from our experts here tonight today existing there are absolutely no storm water improvements on the subject site what we're proposing are is exactly that that storm water management system to not only mitigate but also assist with the existing utility lines spefically specifically speaking we have agreed on the record to test those utility lines to ensure that they do have the capacity and if they do not have that capacity it will not be the municipalities responsibility but rather our responsibility to fix that so for all those reasons above we hope you guys finding the affirmative parties having St that uh and the board members have had reasonable opportunity to hear the evid uh to hear and that the evidentiary record of this hearing ought to be closed absent objection and in the absence of any motion for continuance the evidentiary record is closed and no further testimony or evidence shall be heard or received so the board members now will have an opportunity to discuss their uh thoughts one way or the other so looking at it and and I do think and I know it's uh difficult for the the residents who who don't read these storm water reports and things but um essentially as it relates to storm water I think the testimony did establish that currently you have a situation where you have three plus acres uh completely surface flowing all the way down to Ashwood getting in and ending up in the same pipe and doing it immediately at the the same time as all the other water from a storm and uh what the testimony establishes and and as required by the state of New Jersey regulations is they're retired you know required to retain while there is ultimately some additional volume because of the greater impervious surface um one they are retaining it on site and then Distributing it at a much slower Pace over time so actually reducing the the immediate sear charge and and with storm water it's all about timing it's not it's when when the water hits not necessarily how much water hits uh the same amount of water spread over 3 hours can have no impact as opposed to the same amount of water in 10 minutes um so I I I am satisfied that the the plan and I and I know and I have every confidence and and I want to I think uh Roco sort of undersold himself when he said just the town because uh Roco and and our Township engineer both licensed Professional Engineers uh and very qualified and capable to review these plans in addition there's the additional safe guard of the uh The Soil Conservation District um again that the Lots all do meet meet the standard uh the applicant is committed to not having um not seeking any additional bulk variances uh for the houses so the houses will be limited to the current bulk standards um so I'm satisfied that the overall that they've met their burden for the C1 on the c1s again most of those are existing uh variances for the two existing houses that remain that are already there and they're located where they are uh as well as the criteria for the C2 on the overall planning um I did make some notes of some one one thing I would note as well and I'm not sure and I should have brought it up earlier uh within the actual um site plan package sheet 8 there's a landscape plan um but then we in our package had a separate individual landscape plan that actually did show some Street trees along the entrance Drive which I believe m mcmanis had referenced so I don't know if you guys responded to a comment and submitted a new plan that shows Street trees because I I have that document but um would certainly encourage you to do that and particularly uh if there's an opportunity to utilize the sighting of those Street trees uh that would perhaps soften any view across the street uh to address the the resident who was concerned about looking at a street I would I would strongly encourage that um looking at it I think the street more lines up almost between her and her neighbor as supposed to directly across from her house but um the uhu additional conditions obviously you've agreed to comply with the engineer Township engineer report and the requests and everything set forth therein including surveying uh and tving the existing storm water pipe um also condition you agreed to to have each house will have their own emergency generator uh to at a minimum power the sanitary sewer ejector pumps uh obviously if you go bigger and power the whole house that's up to you but our concern is the the sanitary pipe um I think there was a commitment to plant additional and and at the outset plant Arbor vaita along the Eastern property line to provide some additional buffer even during construction to the residents on um Mansfield uh and then uh would would uh strongly encourage and and for my sent to cents uh any of the three residents it it clearly is a better solution um and and to the extent you couldn't follow it if if the this is approved and they can't tie directly into that pipe they will still retain the water on site but then they will just release it on the surface on their own property and it's still going to run down through the properties on Ashwood get back into the same drain and then come back to that same pipe So to avoid that water running across the properties on Ashwood it would behoove one of the three or somebody to allow them to directly tie in and that would of course be conditioned on you know having a legally binding agreement and also a proper restoration of any fence or disturbance that was done so those those would be conditions I would suggest so also the S lot surface draing application that uh would be submitted yes um and I think all the other conditions that have been put on the record uh just uh that have already been agreed to to be included in you know with if if approved in any final resolution just to add to a bar I think it's important to note that the five new the five New Lots as we said over and over again don't require any variances so you know people have rights to develop their property um and this site you know fits it with very minor variances that I think you know are minor and you know not immaterial necessary but certainly they meet the statutory criteria the other thing I would say that's a that's a benefit here is the applicants agreed we have in town what's known as The Mansion ordinance which says you can't build a a big house that would go in a R1 Zone in an R4 property um without go into the zoning board so we did that a long time ago to try and stop these houses that are don't fit the neighborhood if you so by them agreeing to stay within the R4 standards um they they're saying we're going to build homes that fit you know Ashwood and Mansfield that aren't necessarily giant homes on small Lots so I think that's a benefit to the overall town and I think um you know the more we can try and do that the better right so that we have all different levels of housing within the town and not everything that's built is you know driven to the highest point in the market so we we saw this application a long time ago at the track and it's come a long way I encourage you to look at um Rocco's letter there's a lot of things in there that they'll have to meet um and and uh you know I think overall while people don't necessarily love change I don't see how we can deny is there anybody else so we'll just we need a either a motion to approve or disapprove the application somebody wants to make that yeah I'll make the motion to approve subject to all the conditions that have been put on the record are we going to V on I yeah we're going to get a resolution first we're going to vote now and then because they've agreed to everything that's on the record okay but just want to make sure that we see what's that everything is included on that resolution that was approved exactly right because there was a lot of it exactly okay yeah Mr Lewis yes Mr R there yes Mr Reber Mr reer had to leave unexpectedly for an emergency and in fact he asked me could take his hold on to his stuff I'm sorry Mr Diner yes Miss coochi I can't even hear who she's call yes couldn't hear it thank you miss m is acting in place of member fast yes thank you Vice chair Canta yes chairman Fernandez yes yes thank you motion carries with that if I can have a motion to adjourn okay we're adjourned thank you