i' like to call to order the special meeting of the mor Township Board of AD adjustment for February 12th uh 20124 the legal notice required in accordance with the open public meetings act has been satisfied and a statement certifying same will be executed please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all Santiago roll call please yes Mr CH Mr Goldberg here Mr tractenberg here miss um Simmons here Mr Schuster here Mr benois here Mr Kramer here Mr Woodford here Mr Hanson here Mr Phillips here Mr oler here and I Sonia Santiago here first matter is a swearing in is that correct that's correct M Simmons yes sir would you please stand to raise your we do it right here is good raise your right hand um and just repeat after me I do solemnly swear I do solemnly swear that I will support that I will support the Constitution of the United States the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey the constitution of the state of New Jersey and I will bear faith in allegiance to the same and I will bear faith and allegiance to the same and to the governments established in the United States and to the governments established in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people so help me God so help me God and the uh official oath of office I do solemnly swear I do solemnly swear that I will Faithfully that I will faithfully impartially impartially and justly perform and justly perform all the duties of the the office of the board of adjustment all the duties of the office of the board of adjustment alternate member alternate member according to the best of my ability according to the best of my ability so help me God so help me God there you go welcome back thank you okay now we going to the public hearing uh ba-1 14-23 slocc Acquisitions LLC turn it on MAR thank you you got a light hello hello do I put my sound on on you no you're just gonna share the screen okay okay all right good evening everyone Frank folo Sals com and gross on behalf the applicant I'm going to share screen here we can get started one second here I'm assuming this works in present mode right if I press present it's going to present it too am I getting it let me see here hold on oh here we go okay well good evening again everybody um so tonight um I want to we're going to change things up a little bit um uh and and I'll get to that in a second this is the agenda for this evening that that we'd like to follow um first I'm going to give a just some brief background and uh explain why why we think it's time for a reset with our application um we're going to go over some plan revisions that we'd like to highlight for everybody uh we're going to show you uh the original plan and how we've changed it um then I'm going to show you a broader picture of the actual revised concept um we're going to this will make sense some more later but some examples of some signage and then some questions and discussions um first you know I wanted to say we do appreciate the public and the board input and questions to date in this process um as often times when you have objectors in a case um the entire Dynam Dynamic of the hearings change um the parties on both sides sometimes digging their heels and what should be an exchange of ideas and constructive criticism um it becomes adversarial and a lot of times unproductive um this happened during the last hearing um rather than and rather than continuing down that path which I certainly don't want to do um we thought it would be a good time to reset revise our plans and see where we are on this application and see we where we are with the board uh let me first begin by saying that uh my clients want these homes to complement and enhance this already beautiful neighborhood and I believe that message has gotten lost a little bit during the hearings tonight we're going to refocus on how we intend to be good neighbors both in the way our revised concept responds to the board and the Public's comments and with some new enhancement that we believe benefit all of the neighbors and the greater Morris Township community we're not submitting new plans this evening we're presenting a revised concept for the board and the Public's consideration after that we're going to ask for your questions and your opinions if we believe there's enough support to proceed we'll invest in revised plans we'll submit them we'll bring back our Witnesses and we'll complete our case if despite the r the revisions and some of the compromises that we've made there's no path to five votes in this case we will likely stand down and resubmit revised plans uh during the new affordable Co around in 2025 um we would much rather continue and bring this project to a fruition um so let me with that start into our presentation the first slide I'm going to show to you is a summary this is a summary of the revisions that we've made to our plan and as you can see up on the screen we have the original plan and then we have the proposed Plan before you get too far I don't do we have this already I'm just what I'm getting at is maybe I should just mark it as an exhibit yeah sure and if we don't already have it would you just email your presentation to Sonia so we have it that way sure so I've got copies of all of this um this presentation for the board I'm going to I'll actually hand them out right now this is I'm marking this is A8 there is an A7 that I'll mark in a second this is A8 this is the exact same table that we have here and I'll also give you A10 which is a copy of the presentation that I'm going to show so if you'd like to give every everyone one of these and then they just one copy goes to Mr H that's the uh presentation sure so I'm going to run through these one by one and then um we're actually going to go into some greater detail when we look at the full plan if there's extras um Mr Phillips and uh the engineer could also get a copy so the first item and probably the most important item item for um purposes of of our you know financials on the project is that we're reducing the number of homes in the project from 16 to 14 um so we're reducing it by two homes and this comes um both by comments we heard from board members but also comments we heard from the public and as you'll see in the revised site plan which I'll distribute soon it it does free up and um make the site a little more functional this second part um the we originally had proposed the pocket park um that is not in our revised concept plan um the pocket park became difficult for us to pull off we had issues of access we had an easement behind our property that the property owner who has rights to the easement um does not want us to use for that purpose and said that he will be fighting us on that so um without access in the back without ACD in front you know you're not going to have a park that no one can get to so um instead we're proposing to deed restrict those two lots for up to four affordable Town Homes up to four um on that property the way we do that is we would deed restrict the property and then um we would buy it deed restrict it and then hopefully sell it or have or contribute it to to an organization who could build uh affordable town homes on the site so that's that's what we're proposing for for those two lots in the front with respect to the turnaround there's been so many comments and and good discussion about fixing this turnaround so what we've done is we've taken the turnaround and I'll show this to you from the middle of the Interior roadway and we've moved it to the end so it's a true turnaround and we don't need firetruck K turns or anything like that Vehicles can go around the turnaround and make that movement we've increased the minimum building to- building separation that was also a concern that the buildings were close together from 15 feet to 20 feet there was a concern on the board that um they didn't like or in the public too that there were so many garages that were facing the street so we went from five of six homes with side facing garages to 13 of 14 so only one home in the whole development now has a street facing garage um the board had concerns about access for landscaping and delivery vehicles and mail service you'll see on the new plan we've included a dedicated pulloff for landscaping delivery vehicles and we have a common mailbox that's also accessible by this pulloff we've increased the number of dedicated visitor spaces from 9 to 10 we have internal sidewalks now on both sides of the Interior roadway and these weren't on the initial plans but in the spirit of being better uh good and better neighbors um we thought we were trying to think of ways we can have our have our property integrate better with the community and the neighbors so we are proposing to install welcome to Spring Springbrook or similar um signage or markers at the 202 entrance and also the 287 entrance um of the Spring Brook neighborhood and I'll show you a couple examples of that and we're also willing to beautify spring place with trees and plantings as you come off of 202 past our property and up towards the rest of Springbrook so those are the highlights of the concept that we're going to propose this evening which I think you'll agree address many of the issues um that uh both the neighbors and the board had concerns about next slide this is a this is just a side by side this shows the site plan that we were discussing at our last meeting on January 30th and this on the right and I'll show you a bigger one this was just so you all can get a just a broad comparison of the two plant um that is the concept that we're showing you this evening you'll see that the turnaround has been moved um down to the end of the street I mean you'll notice just generally it's it's less congested it's spread out further and we'll drill into closer into detail as to the uh drop off areas and the visitor spaces and you'll you'll be able to see more uh detail on that so this is a larger this is a larger version of the proposed concept plan um you can see uh from the roadway that there is both guest parking you see the six six stalls along um um along the road and you also can see um this area here I'll just stand up um this is where the pulloff is on uh the interior roadway where you can access the mailbox um we have deliveries you could have Landscaping Vehicles there was concern that they would get stacked up you also see that there's now sidewalk all the way around on both sides of the street um you'll see that there's um more space between the units and you'll also see the um lack of the front-facing garages all the garages but one are now side facing on this and you'll also see that we're not showing the pocket park on this slide um because of the proposed deed restriction for those two lots for affordable Town Homes um these are some examples of the signage that um we were thinking um something that's more than just a um you know a plain sign more of a marker a welcoming to Springbrook to to really not only show our appreciation to be part of the neighborhood but also we think it would be uh nice to have um and demarcate where the Springbrook neighborhood actually is in Morris Township in the end we just want to be good neighbors this is a this is a photo from Neighbor Day do you know that there's a neighbor day every year that's us um so the point of all this was to do an overview of a concept and like I said if if it's something that we think the board will work with us on it's something we'll submit our plans we'll bring all our Witnesses back and you know it's going to cost a lot we're happy to do it though if there's some light at the end of the tunnel here um if it appears that we don't have you know the the votes or anywhere near the votes you know like I said we'll pack up our things and we'll come back in 25 and and we'll give give it another go so um with that I would you know really encourage and um ask for some discussion or questions you know we I hate use the word poll but it would be nice to have a poll to see where we are in this application um Frank you probably are aware of it board doesn't really do a poll no I gotta that's why I was hesitant to say that yeah they'll I'm sure have some questions for you and comments and you'll get an idea sure so I might as well start it off um this past weekend I go over to uh James placed the uh development off of uh uh James Street and uh to look and get enough feel for the 20 foot wide roadways and uh parking situation uh and also turnarounds and I noticed that they were um all the major turnaround for culdesac and I was going to come in tonight and say I would like to see cues act not uh a a turnaround where things can get overcrowded um so the 20 foot roadways I think are very for a small area like this small development uh are very uh appropriate uh James places are much larger and they seem to be surviving fine uh and with the culdesac I think it's a great Improvement so uh I like the revised plans as I see them right now and um you know it's subject to you know what else comes out but uh my first impression is that uh this is a much better plan than what was originally presented uh I do have a question about you said Beed restriction for Town Homes uh those two lots are ra15 is that correct two lots up at I believe so yes okay so that would require variances sometime in the future or would that be part of this application um if if we do require the variance it would be part of this application yes would that be required I'd have to take a look at it but it probably does I don't I think if it's ra15 there's no multif family permitted in ra15 so it'll be a variance all right anybody else with comments Mr chairman yes I think for the board's benefit and benit the public could you talk about if there's not sufficient agreement you might wait till after the 2025 period and what that might mean for the application so we all understand what you're really talking about yeah um so I don't know um exactly what it would mean for the application I know that um in 2025 you know there's going to be an analysis of all the developable land and town and I also know that um at that point there will be if the township hasn't met its number or has to meet its number um there'll be a lot more pressure on the township um to to build affordable housing um we think we have a nice balance here where you know we've integrated now back into the project some affordable housing that will help you on your number um but come 2025 um you know there will be developers and other applicants I'm not I'm not saying it's going to be us but who knows who will leverage that affordable housing to maybe get a more dense project than anticipated so you know there was there were multif family um or town home developments proposed for this parcel I think there was a very strong reaction from this board and the community in general that said they didn't want a dense project like that um I'm just saying if it's not us or someone else um there will there will be leverage in 25 to force a more dense project that's all I'm saying and I'm not saying we're going to do it it could be someone else you know we we think we're staying in this we're committed uh and we'd like to do this project but who the heck knows what's going to happen in a year or two um so it it is a concern I think that this board should have um that you know you you have a chance to have a very nice project that you can help us shape and and get through or you might have a tougher choice in 25 where you have developers and others who uh want a much more dense product here U because you got to satisfy your number and given what's going on the last couple years in the next two years if the interest rates don't go down yeah there's just not a lot of building that's going on right now so it's going to get interesting so you know if this is a unique parcel it's it's on a golf course it's not something I don't think you'd want a very dense project and we're offering this I think as as a nice alternative would you consider reducing the size of the homes um can I ask why though they're very large for a small piece of property um the zoning as you're aware allows for 130,000 square foot homes so it would only fit one home so um your proposal Le before um would be putting 16 and now 14 homes where the Zone allows for basically one home maybe you could propose two um so right behind this property is another 150 acres of golf course so if they sell off this portion four acres and that four acres and that four acres it could get to be a lot of homes and they of course would look for the same density as what you probably would get approve for here so my point is this is a really big predent it's not like it's an isolated piece of property and we don't have to worry about um you know somebody coming and looking doing the same thing it's it's it's not isolated and and so generally speaking OSU in the township it's pretty open property maybe there's a church maybe there's a town hall maybe there's a school you know a lot of the ostu properties are pretty open so this is not going to be open what you looking at here and if you had said well we do a crescent Crescent Road with you know eight homes it it'd be easier to digest you're still looking at 14 homes plus now another four homes so my concern is a precedent where yeah this may be less Dent it may be more favorable I like all the things you presented and I really appreciate you're going back and looking at this and reading the board and saying yeah I can understand this maybe we tweak this and tweak that I really appreciate that um but from our perspective certainly from my perspective it's still a big swing on the zone so what what size homes you know would you think were appropriate just since we're having the conversation well I don't know 2500 square feet if any of the board members want to chime in on that yeah no and and to be fair M Mr W you seem like the one who has the of the board who has the most concerns about the project which is not neither here nor there but I have had I mean we've all been down this road where one of the board members or a couple of board members really don't like a project and they keep making us come back with more and more concessions and then when it comes to the vote they vote no anyway that's not that's murderous to us you know not fair to you and I've seen that also and I want to avoid that yeah and I my suspicion is that I may appear to be the one with the most concerned but I'm probably just the most vocal so so um not that I'm speaking for everybody but I think that these are issues that we as a board um setting president on a zone is really important going forward okay so I as far as the the number now it seems like you're a little more comfortable but the size of the home still is is a big concern well a little more comfortable because you look he came down too um it still seems crowded to me I don't know um my biggest concern is I said this the first night I think I'm afraid that this become like Suburban SP sprawl on Spring Brook and even though looking at the design it's not going to look like Suburban spraw in terms of the the view of the houses but the density and the size I'm afraid will shock the person driving past and we all have experienced that we've all experience going down the street all of a sudden you see they go whoa who who will approve that you know and when I see something like that I think well probably something could be done because I'm the first one to say people need to live somewhere we need to have homes you know everyone in this room if somebody came before the board when their house is approved and said we don't want that house and the Zone zoning board B did not approve the house where would they be living so I understand the importance of having residential construction and having places people can live we live in a great area you know and it's that much more important to keep it that way so those are all the thoughts going through my mind mind as I look at this project and other projects no appreciate it you've really done I really appreciate you coming through and and reading our board's minds and and making adjustments and stuff um I'm not saying I'm not saying that I'm there all the way um but I do have concern about the effect on the zone so point taken thank you yeah so Frank just to follow up on Mr benoa the just remind me the size of the homes that are in the current plan are are roughly how many square feet 35 guys that 3600 feet yeah Max they said some will be smaller and if you eliminated that Park site and you went to 14 homes on the remaining property what would the density be yeah so I knew you would ask that question um and the current plan is not to merge the Lots um we we've gotten enough that we can keep at the same density as we initially proposed with the lot with with the park lot included so whatever we had in our initial application we can maintain um and then have those those affordable Lots separately deeded um from the property so does that mean the property the proposed property line would change how do you keep the same density taking out there's a little well no so there's a little bit of of land that we intend to include on the golf club side okay you know to equal it out not much um and if also with respect to you know our goal has been to try and meet the r-15 because it's the closest Zone um and we meet it without having to merge the two lots on top we still meet the R15 and that was our goal okay and you said up two four town homes on the call The Parks Park lot did you look at it would for Town Homes fit there yes okay I mean it could you know again it could support two three four we don't know what the number yeah like what the town might need in another year or two I mean there would be one one um curb cut on Mount kemell to access those two lots that's how you would there would be no access from the rear um I know that the property owner who has that easement had concerns about any additional use we would not use that eement right at all okay and it's probably premature to ask but uh any thought about it those four units being rental or for sale units yeah no I don't think we have any preference okay I just got a clarification um you said it meets the R15 Zone requirement right that's just for the setbacks it's not for the size of the size is less than R15 Zone density density right yeah density it's more like there isn't one but R 13 it's more like 13,000 rather than 15,00 so it means the setbacks but not the size 15,000 per unit this is where the lawyer gets into trouble testifying on planning issues I'll go back and do the math it seems to me it's about 13 and and after the meeting we're certainly happy to supply a letter clarifying that okay thank you sure okay other board members can you weigh in on this the uh I definitely appreciate the changes that have been made obviously this is just a very surface because this is a concept not a plan we don't have actual plans to look at but what was worrying me and I was thinking a lot about Landscaping trucks delivery vehicles obviously I asked the question about the mail because I'm familiar with how that works in other developments and and I face this every day uh so I'm aware of what those requirements have become so it looks to me like you've answered a lot of the the mail now when you talk about by the way is the road going to be 22 feet all through or just at the Circle yeah it there are there are points that it's a little less than 22 okay but yeah for the most part in the circle and by the way Mr Kramer we I was thinking a lot about uh I mean when I drive here obviously not in the winter I come down Old Glenn Road and when there's a landscaping truck and trailer on Old Glenn Road they Park and they sit there while the vehicles come out and Oakland Road is not a 20 foot wide Road I haven't measured it but I'm pretty sure it's not 20 feet and that is a substantial blockage on the road I think our engineer knows what I'm talking about uh so my thought is if you had a landscaping truck if you don't give them a place to go with your old plan the residents can't get in and out with 20 foot wide road that was my thought process so you have dealt with that a lot better than it was dealt with before so I definitely appreciate where you're going with this uh yeah changing the changing the number of homes is probably a smart move I noticed you took out the the furthest one the one that was in the corner there which yeah it would have been real hard to to get at thank you yes Mr Gold I'll uh agree with Mr benois and uh Mr Kramer that that approve you know appreciate the revised concept uh as I was driving over here tonight I had questions prepared for I thought it was going to be the landscape architect and we were going in a different direction so not having seen having this presented right here in an open form for review consideration questions is appreciated but it is sort of a bit of a you know a shift so um but having said that to Mr Kramer's point about the landscape truck and the pull out for the delivery I was actually sort of leaning towards thinking that they're going to park where they want to park when they want to park there they're not going to necessarily utilize it right if you're an Amazon driver you're going to pull us close to to the residents as you can I mean we've seen it all happening around us on on the daily basis so although it's acknowledged and addressed I don't necessarily know if it makes me feel any better that it's GNA actually be utilized as intended um so I'll say that um I am concerned about the the density the number of homes for the Zone um to Mr bw's point about the sort of sprawling nature of what would be there in the viewshed and what would be observed it still to me seems too dense um and then my last sort of question for you is having thought about this before but in terms of deed restrictions and how they operate um maybe you can help educate me and the board on the option of allowing for up to the four you know affordable units but is is there another option if you were just to and I don't know if this would be I don't know if if there's a a pro to the township or a con to the township but just to have it deed to the township to be utilized in some fashion to be determined is that an option or is that something that's even I'm not sure that the town would want it um to do that you know it's yours if you want it Mr Goldberg what's that it's yours if you want it oh okay because I didn't know again with the financing of you know of having the units there to go to market to you know sort of be as crw as to get the money you know I was just sort of curious if there are other options and how that's sort of viewed so yeah I I mean my without really looking at it too hard I I'm doubtful that the town would want to take the lot okay well thank you that's why I asked I forgot to to add I am very mindful personally of 2025 or whenever the that next shoe is going to drop uh I'm very concerned about what could happen because we've already had uh applications returned to us you should fre think about this again kind of stuff yeah we've had couple in the last couple of years right you know uh and and I personally want to avoid that every lawyer conference I attend where there's developer and developer attorneys they're I mean licking their jobs for 20 so other board members Mr yes um Mr Poo um and I too want to thank you for uh you and your team listening to the concerns of of the board it's greatly appreciated and I think that uh some of the thoughts that you all have um is going in the right direction so thank you very much for that um in terms of the elimination of the pocket part if I recall there was also a pedestrian path that was going to lead to that and and again the plans were really quick so couldn't see whether or not there was a retention of that um pedestrian path or is that going away completely that will go away yeah and then my other question um has to do with the signage that that you all are offering um and you did show a couple of examples um where exactly would those signs be because they I'm I'm gathering that they wouldn't necessarily be on this property but rather into the entrance of the neighborhood correct and and honestly I we would love to work with the neighbors on that and you know even um we could even you know donate to a fund the neighbors could take control of that so it's we'd like to work with the neighbors on it pick a spot or pick spots that work um I'm sure we're all familiar with the the signs into some of these neighborhoods and um we did notice it was a kind of a glaring thing that there wasn't any here nothing to Mark the spring book neighborhood so we'll be happy to work with the neighbors on that we don't think we would dictate where that goes we'd like to hear from the people who who live in the neighborhood you should also give some thought to who would be maintaining it then too yes right even even if it's offsite yeah those sign they're great for the first 10 15 years but down the line you've got lamp posts that have to be replaced yep the HOA would agree to to maintain it and that gets expensive yeah as Mr tackenberg knowes yes he happens to be the treasurer of our neighborhood association oh okay Mr chairman yes so um my biggest issue of the project was always the density um you know the the small Road the the space between uh the houses um and I get it more houses more profitable ability uh my magic number just looking at everything um was kind of around 12 units where the true culdesac turnaround uh at the end of the road so that's kind of where I'm uh I'm sitting right now on the project I'm not going to reiterate what everyone else has has said I I pretty much agree with what's been said thus far um just so you have an idea of my thought process and Mr Schuster if the homes were smaller would that affect your opinion at all or you just have that number listen I think the smaller homes is a is a good idea um you know on on the one side of of uh of the golf course there are larger homes on the 202 side they're a little bit smaller so yeah that's a possibility but it was everything was just so packed in there and I was like you know for such a a a great idea the concept is is good but everything was just so packed in there that I I was really concerned about that and um I think that's a concern of the neighborhood too y thank you thank you anybody else yes Mr drenberg so um I pretty much agree with everything that's been said I appreciate you coming back with this proposal Etc um and I I just um I'm relatively new here on the board of adjustment but I don't understand what it means to be a deed restricted for up to four affordable tow houses could you just educate me on sure that means so uh we would agree as part of this approvals process to um write a restriction in the deed of this property that gets recorded with the county that limits the uh development on the property to an affordable unit or four affordable units whatever the number may be and that's something that a subsequent purchaser would have to abide by okay so you're not saying that you would be the developer of those tow houses you're just saying you would get it set up so that somebody else could step in and correct put them we would buy the property and deed restrict it and hopefully find um and I'm sure we would find someone to come in and construct these units these affordable units okay just from uh logistic standpoint would these Lots eight and nine then merge the one lot I think the two of them it would make sense to merge them if we had four units on the same yeah I don't know how you would those lots and keep them separate from correct 101 correct okay all right Mr Hanson any thoughts really not without a set of plans in front of me dimensions and profiles and stuff like that but from a perspective I was gonna suggest that they drop the last two units and put a cack in they've come around with a different concept now which basically a Loop Road in a sense right without CDE right but still serves the same purpose still serves the same purpose other than that I'd be concerned to see where the storm MERS going I thought I saw an area behind one of the houses that's going to be a detention Bas where the that last house unit one was supposed to be put right so uh it'll be interesting to see how they control the run off since things seem to get moved around a little bit PA any comments I don't have any comments at this time Mr chairman but I do want to follow up on the deed restriction issue on the rout2 lot um so if I'm understanding it Frank correctly is that uh as part of the application your client would purchase a lot put the deed restrictions but uh there's no guarantee that anyone's going to come along and build those affordable units and there it's 100% affordability project so there's obviously going to be some subsidy needed to do that because there's no market rate units to advertise the cost and subsidy of the affordable units uh and the only other thing I might add is this truly you know where a post 2025 inclusionary project you know someone would have to build those units uh and that's something you just might want to think about as you move for no I appreciate it and I and I will say that there are organizations like Habitat for Humanity you know that would take on this kind of project and could build 100% affordable oh no no for sure for sure are affordable housing trust yes you know I don't mean to be argumented agreed no no no I I agree should think that through a little B further yes uh and I I know we had a similar project a couple of years ago where the Carri where a older Carriage House was converted to multif family units and as part of that condition of approval they had to provide I can't remember it was one or two units off site and it was a condition of approval that those units be under don't know a building permit CFO or something to you know because it was it was spun and sold as an inclusionary project so I mean I think it's great that you're offering the affordable but I think from the Township's perspective be nice if we could see that someone's actually going to build it and if it's strictly affordable and you're not building it we all know that the habitats and the other groups Homeless Solutions they they're looking for subsidies because you know no one can basically build it on their own own you know based on the the rents that are charged so just think about that no absolutely thank you all right I just have a followup question sure Mr Phillips's comments um spread a thought uh in my mind I think at the first meeting at the onset of the uh introduction of the application there was a comment made that there's no requirement and I don't know if it was based on the lot size or the way the project was structured for there to be a contribution to the open space trust fund based on the application has I'm sorry affordable sorry for the affordable housing trust funds that's is that accurate to be accurate that because they were not proposing attached housing they are not obliged to meet a mandatory set aside ordinance not the the contribution ordinance to the affordable housing trust fund so okay so the 15% set aside or whatever they don't have to make a because they're not attached housing as part of this application they don't have to provide any affordable housing they're offering it as part of this application I'm sure we're going to hear from their planner yes it's going to provide some Nexus in terms of the the planning arguments in case for that but but just to be clear they're not required to provide an affordable housing set aside for this product that's what I was looking for clarification on um but they're not required to but in your experience Mr Phillips on these types of applications have you seen the developer or the applicant in turn also make a cont contribution to the uh I mean it's their case right is that something you would be willing to consider as part of gonna have to wait to hear from their planner but I'm surmising that this offer on their part is to you know basically provide affordable housing that will help you know the township meet some portion of its obligation but again I'm their witness right but I'm assuming that that's part of this they don't have to to do that and you heard Frank's fre gble about uh in his introduction about you know they'd like to you move something at this point rather than wait till 2025 so all right yeah and it's it's sort of what I was saying to Mr banoa before um if I say yes to you I'm not sure that gets you there so you know we just keep getting drawn down this road you know and and so we're trying to read tea leaves here and it's not easy but I would say m Mr benad too um I cannot conceive and I just bet on the Super Bowl I lost half the bets but I did win um I cannot conceive of any scenario in 25 if this project isn't done here like this that you'd get a less dense project I cannot cons I I mean I would bet the house that no one's coming in here with the project less dense than 14 beautiful homes you ain't getting that I appreciate that it's good for public and everyone else to hear that as well yeah thank you um guess you've got a sense of where the board is on this do you have anything you want to add at this point I also want to say to the public we're not this he is not under oath he's not so we're not questioning him I would encourage uh the attorneys who are here tonight representing uh different uh members of the public or groups of the public to contact uh council with their concerns and maybe have some sort of discussion so you canite if that's okay by you listen I you know from this process started out where um there was a group that got together and they met at the firehouse right um twice um and then we presented to a group of neighbors up at Springbrook but it's a shame really there was never a meeting between us you know there was no meeting where we all sat in a room and and talked about the project which you know we certainly tried I mean I did the Restoration Hardware project we had like six meetings with the neighbors and they were together and we worked through it and we got to a place where we needed to be but unfortunately this process has been more adversarial which I don't personally like I mean I'm happy to meet the challenge you know this is what I do for a living but um I don't particularly like the way it happened and you know it's unfortunate there were flyers and all and it just created this ground swell of information that you know and that's why I said after last meeting I don't want to do that anymore we don't want to do that anymore uh we'd much rather come to some consensus um you know it's like everything else in life when there's a settlement the best settlements in the world is when both parties are equally unhappy that's the best settlement um because you're never going to have one party happy and it just doesn't work that way we all know that so we're happy to meet with the neighbors I mean that's still an we're open to to do that you know of course they can call us with comments and additional questions or what have you and we'll stay after the meeting tonight if if if the neighbors want to talk as well okay great board members anything else anything else you wish to add at this point I don't have anything else um I mean yeah yeah I mean the ownership would just like made a note and it's a it's a good point you know culdesac versus the loop um the culdesac you have less green Less open space it takes up more space and and that's one of the reasons we opted for the loop it gives you more green space um in the project so okay great thank you I appreciate it anything else from board professionals Mr oler now I just think if you decide to go that route um you know it would go back to the TCC for review and some discussion about um the park lots and maybe bifurcating those lots from your application for just the D1 um you know without a site plan I gotta think about that a little bit but I think that's probably the way to go that s a good idea because if you're going to do the deed restriction you want to be sure that the variance is in place right so so maybe we would just bate those lots for the day1 yeah yeah this is why we're having this this is that's a great idea I mean it will you know probably go in that direction anything else that's I think that's all we have on our um our affirmative presentation happy to hear from the other lawyers whoever you know okay great thank you yep thank you very much I appreciate thank you yes Mr just an administrative question because this is a a public meeting right I mean so I know no one's under oath we're not Mr a is not taking questions directly from the public but is there anything inappropriate from hearing from the public if there's anything I would rather let them discuss their concerns privately with Mr Pella rather than having an extended record that nothing that is sworn testimony okay thank you and an application that's not really before the board then with so I would rather wait until for the board uh members of the public to weigh in that makes sense will be their right but I would encourage them if they have concerns to speak to Mr P now after the meeting thank you okay anything else board members so what was do just like so is there any other business before the board now so Frank we're going to conclude your hearing this evening we're not scheduling anything further until you give some thought as to which way you're going to go right right yeah I mean it we'd have to Ren notice anyway right right and but you'll give us any extension necessary yes want you so with respect to extensions though that's a good point um I don't know six months they're groaning I know you need a new plan you're going to go back to the TCC three months how about that three months yeah that's fine okay yeah okay so extend time or are we now middle of February yes end of May so end of May that's fine right okay thank you so we'll say May 31 right yes 2024 okay all right yeah we have to get them on the calendar no not yet they got to go back to PCC what the plans are they can so there will be six months until we see it maybe maybe not we'll see there's a lot of information already there right okay thank you thank you very much Mr chairman appreciate so for members of the public all that means is that this application is kind of going on Hiatus for a little while um applicants going to think about uh filing it in in a different way you should speak to to them with any concerns that you have or thoughts or comments and um the applicant will revise its application go back to the TCC for a technical review before before comes back to this board and there when whenever that is it will be on notice to you same as it was before certified mail and you can also check the township website and for each agenda so you'll in case you miss anything okay thank you if we have no other me business we can make the motion to I move forour I have a second second all favor IJ