[Music] yep okay this is the p l planning board April 16 2024 following is the agenda for the regular meeting of the pp and laks planning board meeting is held in the municipal building April 16 2024 beginning at 7:30 formal written advance notice is required by njsa 104-1 at SEC has been provided to this meeting at least 48 hours in advance of today given the time date and location and to the extent known as at the time the agenda of this meeting such notice stated that formal action may or may not be taken this meeting will be video recorded and be be rebroadcast for later viewing for the public the notice will is posted on the bulletin board outside of the offices of the municipal clerk reserved for this and other similar announcements provided to the Suburban Trends the newspaper designated by the counil and the planning board to receive such notices and file with the borrow clerk please stand for alance IED alance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which he stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for [Music] all for tonight's meeting we need a roll call First okay Mr Simone here Mr fr Caro here Mr tro here M Michael here Mr AO here Dr pendexter Mr keading here Mr Balby here mayor Sarah here councilman uh venon here and we have Andy Brewer and Carl okay thank you okay first two items on the agenda are meeting minutes the first is from February 20 2024 has everyone had a chance to review those minutes and if so what is your pleasure anyone okay motion by mayor Sarah [Music] second okay um any discussion on the minutes from February 20 2024 seeing done all in favor of approval of the minutes of 20 February 2025 signify by saying I I any opposed pres and present okay second one is the regular meeting minutes from March 19 2024 and what is your pleasure on that one move to approve the minutes second Carol and TR what it was uh K oh full King okay somebody it was somebody down that end okay um any discussion on the minutes Mr chairman just on page number two the third bullet I know it's small but it's access to or through Ivy Street bull number three I didn't know if that meant like through Street or is that two [Music] page two bullet three access to Ivy Street traffic movement for a better flow uh just should be through I think okay where I'm sorry third bullet on page two the bottom access through Ivy Street to Ivy Street cuz I didn't know if that meant like a through Street or two okay two I'm good Mr chairman any other directions or comments and if so as um changed from access to through to just access to IV Street uh all in favor I any oppos any present [Music] okay under [Music] correspondence under correspondence we have municipal notice for the planning board coming from the borrow a memo from Liz Brans the municipal clerk notice regarding Financial disclosure statements filing information mandatory filing by all members of the board has to be into the town and state by April 30th so please make sure that you all file that disclosure notice and the instructions on that we're giving in your packets all right um for the general public we have U an application tonight that I'm sure you're here for and we have a continuation of hearing that was first held on February 20th so the Noti requirements were continued to this meeting no additional notices were required since it was announced both at the February and the March meeting um Mr Whitaker you have a presentation and continuation of the project yes good evening Mr chairman members of the board for the record Bruce Whitaker from the fir of McDonald Whitaker representing the applicant as you stated this is a continuation of the hearing that was held on February 20th of 2024 before this board uh we made our presentation that evening and we presented our engineer who reviewed the site plan requests uh being made and the modifications being made to the site the engineer testified as to the variances that we were requesting from a site plan perspective uh we had a second engineer here if you recall from CIA engineering uh they are the manufacturers of the wall that is being proposed to be installed there and they spoke and testified as to the uh structural Integrity of the wall and as it pertains to the procedures that would be employed um if this Ward were to Grant approval as it pertains to the construction of that wall uh that evening we set forth a series of conditions I know a little bit of time's gone by so just to place them on the record very briefly um we uh made the um stipulations that an operation and maintenance manual would be recorded with the deed If This Were approved um maintenance reports are to be submitted once a year every December 1st um we would have a photometric calculations to be reviewed by the burrow engineer and vibration monitor to be used when installation begins and results provided to your engineer um we have uh confirmation that there would be two uh four excuse me four EV stations shown on a revised plan and we have a revised plan that's going to provide for final grading to the wall uh with a chain link fence above the wall um and um with that said those were the stipulations that we had you had an exhibit list of February the 20th that ran through 8813 the last one being uh copy of the county approval tonight we would supplement that exhibit list with an A14 which will be the uh revised plans dated April the 4th of 2024 A5 being the uh lighting plan that we will testify to briefly uh when Mr dou uh comes up to testify and then we reviewed your engineers letter of April the 3D and we provided a response letter to that dated April the 4th I say we do little from his FM of mcdy so that would be uh a16 uh and unless there's any questions of me uh I would call Mr do little back he still underrot for purposes of testifying as to the revisions that were made to the plan uh after that is done I have a planner here tonight for purposes of testifying as to the basis and foundation for granting the four variances that we are requesting pertaining to improved life coverage pertaining to uh disturbance into the slope area the parking lot setback um and the retaining wall height being greater than 6 okay so just for the record the uh documents going back and forth between your engineer and Ward's engineer you said we're dated the latest one was dated the third the fourth fourth our letter third third the response to everything is dated before okay and then you have a response to their comment so we reviewed the entire fact that was submitted including the point BYO letter and it's just update the board on where the item stand has compared the hour letter on the third if anything still outstanding would it be a condition of approval after the presentation um is done I can go through those points there's not many of them I go through those points and uh just siiz it from the engineer stand okay so I just want to make sure that because it's it's been a back and forth mostly between the two Engineers that we have the right dates and the right responses and that each one's covered so Carl would be the guy that at the very end of this will have to tell us um what's satisfied what's outstanding right okay agre go right ahead sir thank [Music] you you can grab another chair from right over there you see in the front there just lift up the left one there you go Mr D you're still under Ro you testified at the last meeting and testified as to the site plan aspects of this application and the four variants is being requested correct yes and on basis of that you have now prepared a Revis plan uh with the final revision date of April the 4th 2024 yes two seats actually one is the site plan itself which is SP2 and the other one is the lighting plant which is li1 so um what I'd like you do is take us through what the revisions are that are shown on the plan and uh you can you can reference them as you go through Yeah Carl you basically highlighted in your letter as well we just kind of responded to yours corre along with everything we pretty much did but we'll touch on most of them and that's why we did not prepare a another letter on top of that it's uh we want to get everything on to testimony and any responses that so up for any particular point I'll add from the side so I think it's probably best if we have Call's letter from cers in front of us and then Mr D's response letter we can just put it on the record that way please proceed yeah uh relative to the complet this letter weled to the letter from Carl on page two under completeness we went through the checklist items and basically a lot of them were either waved or add it to the plan the key map was was recommended to be waved which it was waved the 200 foot list uh for the lot 4.01 has now been updated to the lot 4 and 4.01 on the site plan uh item number three is all structures within the 200 ft that should include lot four which it now does uh location species and size of trees we requested a waiver for that [Music] one uh lot lines with bearings and distances I think are CAG was shut off at the time and that now has been taken care of um areas and dimensions of lot waivers request also that has been noted and taken care of uh the front side and rear setbacks have been on and noted the existing and proposed RightWay waiver requested not rec recommended that has been now shown on SP2 uh the scale 1 in equal 50 is a waiver request at which we requested I believe are at 1 in equal 20 um there's a lot of information on this plant so that makes it easier to read um utilities again we read pested a waiver the location of underground utilities uh intent to serve letter from the utilities we took a waiver on that one that's basically the utilities are in place that basically the site is primarily developed with the exception of the rear portion where we're uh putting the parking in the wall yes uh solar erosion in control we had provided one of that's referenced above and we will go to Pake County soils for their approval uh building envelopes was a waiver reest because the buildings are basically existing statement that all permits or approvals have been obtained uh that the application was previously granted P County unconditional approval on August 29th 2019 the Hudson s toake County Soil Conservation District will receive the prepared soil rosion settlement control plan so you should have gotten our letter from the state County planning board okay we've provided a construction course estimate is that correct yes let me see where I left off here un let you want to read off let's go yours uh easement we will obviously submit and do that at the time that if this were approved correct by me bound subscription to be recorded yes then go into the storm Water Act storm water calculations have been revised and submitted uh they're quite detailed but we went through uh we just grabb the copy [Music] on we went through the standard procedure they're using today it's basically by D the national resource conservation service puts this these standards out which basically we're retaining I think a a 24-hour storm and this be you're criteria and the counties and this has also been approved by the county um Carl you seem to not have a problem there were a couple questions I think there anything we need to work out between us down the road yeah we're overall we're good with it as you get through the letter there's one or two comments about invert elevation we put them we'll get to that yes so that was all done as well I think that was about it water okay uh containing wall stability calculations I think were submitted by cesi that uh was and the go report was also submitted by cesi that covers the completeness then to get into your first review comments at the bottom of that page uh the zoning table was required the Zoning for the 2018 criteria to be added in which we put into the zoning table so you have three now you have the required you have what was previously approved and now was proposed that's correct then two was the application that see we changed yeah we Chang a lot of the items on the site plan from just proposed to proposed amended which reflects a lot of your elevations you talked about Carl yes that okay and the technical review with systems this is number three so for number three it talks about your retention system and the Tren strain yep inverts of Tren strains are provided in further testimony we can do that if need be they're all on the plan now yeah I'm I'm all right with it if we have any questions going constru that's something that can be worked out in the Fielding construction is approved it's just the original plan that was provided that would it was probably a layer in your auto that that was not depicting that information yes thank you uh item number four relative to the drage design again this was approved by the the stake County planning board and they call what is a failure mode because this system doesn't have an actual outflow other than retention into the ground they make a store a substantial amount more water on site which was also part of the county approval if the system does back up or clot it will overflow through the trench grains out by Hamburg Turnpike and go out into the street where they're going right now so we've really got pretty much a foolproof system with still a backup to drain into the road where it goes today and that's pretty much what you reiterated as well we already stated in your to say County letter of unconditional approval right correct we've already stipulated as to the maintenance that will be provided [Music] yep uh number five refers to the pl board appli main oh that's the maintenance you just mentioned Bruce thank you number six was noted and we did uh take care of the dumpster when we do have adequate cover between the detention system and the footing for the dumpster and we will be respons if there's any damage to the drainage system as a result of the dumpster being run into you've already testified to number seven as it pertains to the stor water design and capsulation correct and then that's coupled with the county review letter stating the approval as well so that letter helps with our comment number seven Mr D you've provided the restricted slope plan uh that was submitted yes and have the details of that yes and then we have um uh CC Consulting engineering has provided the additional information they wanted to that was requested um moving on to number 10 uh one question on uh item number nine yes uh so on the plan it shows for an 18t Max wall in the report it calls for a 21t i height just so that we're clear this wall is going to be Max at 18 we testified last time at is 18 it will be 18 as our site plan indicates perfect I'm that okay uh what it we do 10 or we up to 11 10 no geotechnical report was given uh provided a technical review with the following uh number 10 I believe we had respon proved yes we provided to that and we stipulate that the test fits will be conducted in the area of the proposed retention system at a later date yep yeah prior to construction of the uh storm water detention system we're going to require that test pit be performed going to make sure that the ground actually handle the water um as long as it handle the water then your drain design works if for whatever reason the drain the ground the soil cannot handle the water then back to the drawing board with some other type of drainage system that needs to require this we stipulate to that then the rest of these respon responses we gave to the rest from uh number uh 12 all the way down to 17 or to 16 are basically provided on the plan now as far as the generator pay detail voles Etc right Y and the revised lighting all right so let's talk about the revised lighting which is your other exhibit that we've marked at 8:15 just a very brief overview of the revised lighting yeah we basically had uh the lights are now set I think w or building mounted I believe with the exception of the uh Southeast side there two lights out in the parking lot there um but this shows all the uh light intensities where you can see the second line around each Light we' added more lights to the proper eight on the building there's two on the side and there's five in the rear these are mounted at 12 ft High the ones in the back will be attached to the wall and the ones of course on the building will be up 12 ft on the building and then we'll have HS on these two on the right hand side it should look at it in Hamburg so the photometrics of the lighting is it correct to say that will meet all the ordinance requirements yes and there will be no uh uh spillage off site recognizing this property is basically down in a hole yes that's correct and we can also put backflash shields on the sidelines if we need to yeah we stipulated to that last time okay do that and then finally in connection with the site plan itself back to that um you've shown on the plan now a 4ot chain Ling fence at the top of the wall that's correct and that was the stipulation we made at the last meeting right other than that are there any other revisions that were made to the plan uh no that that covers [Music] it we have nothing further at this point we welcome the comments of your engineer okay um have question um on the drainage once the test pits are excavated and you determine that the drainage system is comply it f if you determine that it needs additional I don't know additional piping or whatever it needs that may or may not require coming back to the board it just depends on whether it's something that's underground and is simply done with piping but if it affects anything with the site plan right it creates anything change on the site plan it's got to come back here that's the stipulation I'll do okay yeah I I agree with that um you know there are times when I'll use an example it might not work here for this application when they dig a test pit and there's all clay soil and during clay soil it doesn't allow water to perk into the ground that's a concern so there are methods to uh redo the drainage to make it work or you might have to relocate so for right now let's say for example they dig there and there's clay there but in a different corner of the site there's not clay so it might be relocating the training system from one side to the other as long as it's not impacting everything it's not a substantial change that's something that we can work out between engineer and engineer and a contractor that's fine but if it change is the building or the retaining wall or something like that then yes I agree that would have to come back here be a substantial change any above ground impact correct I'd want to seees back here the engineering is fine between the two of you once you approved and signed off on it and we're good with that so I just want to make sure that's stipulated in What You Did In addition uh chairman I would also say since it's also on the second lot if for whatever reason this drainage system would have to increase on that second lot and impact it more I think it would have to come back here the the uh the planning board as well and we'd have to expand the easan as well corre y so that yeah so e is on this property still owned by the clients so that's a good part right but the main thing is to you know whatever they work out yeah technically in fact that applies to a lot on here polite changes or something I'm not too concerned about it as long as it continues to meet Carl's approval and doesn't impact the site visual yep we've had problems before with sites where people took it uh little bit of Liberty with the site plan and we ended up getting things built that weren't supposed to and it was like well we told you no you didn't so that creates another problem the building department and the approval so just want to make sure that's on the record and that that's fine go ahead and proceed yeah and then the lighting at 12T keep it at 12 the lights you're you're good shap [Music] y lety further then okay you have nothing else I just have the next Witness well okay and Carl you have anything else to add to they basically use my review letter as their template okay you made my easier we appreciate we appreciate it his letter smart move thank you you got question EXC okay go ahead and you want questions from the public now or um no I'm going to save the the questions for the public to the end because it's not going to be a lot more right no I'm just going to give you the planner yes yeah and just maybe while Mr du here if the board has any questions before he steps aside for the minute Mr chairman just so question again about the snorm report itself so your property is kind of unusual because it Bears to the left and it goes behind two adjoining properties one that I think the owner owns as well and then one that he does not when obviously there's a rain event there's a lot of water that comes off that far inside and then does not come onto your property to catch the storm water into the drain but actually comes between the property that the owner has and the one that he doesn't now it's going to be Park a lot to park a lot at that end with the rock wall going around which also picks all the water up coming off the wall Hill cuz there's porest stone and a drain at the bottom of that wall underneath and that also drains all the way around to our detention retention system along with all the new pavment did you see dark there I maybe it's not dark on your but that's Forest pting as well this is the lighting one want me to put it back oh I'm sorry all right I just want to make sure that the part that extends far we're not changing any grave beyond our retaining wall so anything that's flowing that way now will keep coming that way if it gets into the park lot on the lot next to us right that will run down into that corner and it will get into the system so it will run down into the corner so right now today the current there's a steady water flow that will be once the rending wall gets put in that'll be deterred into your retention okay so now on the right hand side of your building you have a pullet for LA but it's a floor drain before it comes to the street yes should there be one then on the other side there's one on each side oh I'm sorry they actually go across the front they come down on the right hand side okay there's just one there there's a couple little cleanouts and then it goes along the front of the building to the other strip drain on the other exit Okay and now what about on the the owner's property to the left is there going to be anything needed doing anything so we're not touching that property on the left even though it's the owner's property we haven't done anything with drainage yet okay we're just picking up what's coming off the rear and getting it into our system along with our entire site as it is now okay but we feel that with the retaining wall being there it's not going to add water in between there directed that way it's not okay very we good thank you okay Mr just follow on what joh was saying in case there is some water that comes off the property ends up on small am inrees respons I think that would be maintenance with salt salting and what the building owner would have to take care of it it was in driveway that's a stipulation of approval I'm just nervous because I I've seen it before where the water sits in there and freezes and then I got a call there big ice batch yep I'm sure they'll have a maintenance agreement for snow plowing and that could be put right into a contract like crew said he go [Music] along okay for my next witness Chelsea [Music] please evening raise your right hand Beed please raise your right hand state your name spell your last Chelsea GL g l i s you swear or affirm the testimony you'll give this evening before this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you got I did M would you give the benefit of the public and members of the board your Prof professional and educational background uh yes I have a masters in urban planning from Columbia University I've been a licensed professional planner in New Jersey since 2020 and I've testified at a number of boards including Anglewood WQ Verona Cedar Gro Garfield Summit and little fa you've been qualified as an expert witness in the field of land use planning yeah and your background is land use planning MH and you are associated with Virg Associates which is a u a well-known uh planner throughout the state of New Jersey that's correct um with that said you've had the opportunity to review this application uh review the plans and review uh the various requests that we are uh making I have um you also had the ability to review the history of this and the prior approval of 2018 I have so what I would like you to do is give the board an overview of your analysis from a planning perspective uh and then to correlate your analysis with uh the municipal land use law requirements under njsa 40 col 55 d-7 C1 and C2 please proceed so I'll start by pointing out two of the previously granted variances which are no longer uh which have been brought into compliance with the current application uh the first being the number of parking spaces the application is now in compliance with the with the required number of parking spaces providing 69 spaces where 66 is required uh secondly is regarding the number of trees the application is now providing the required number of 11 trees uh so that's just a little bit of background to with regards to the prior uh approval so anytime a variance is requested and it can be later eliminated from a PL perspective does that constitute a positive element absolutely please proceed uh now turning to the new variances which are being requested of the application due to the uh installation of the storm water detention uh system and uh the required uh disturbance of the steep slopes and hence the creation of the additional 14 parking spaces uh so just going through the core variances which we're seeking tonight uh the first is for maximum improved coverage uh 6.44% is proposed where 50% is permitted and again this is due to the increased surface area of the additional parking spaces uh and I'll get to the positive and negative criteria and the statutory criteria in a moment but I'm just going to go through the fores and then I'll go through secondly is the uh disturbance to the SL to the sloped area of greater than 15% uh the third variance is the the surface parking set back uh zero is proposed where 4T is required now this there this a similar variance was granted in the prior application for parking in a different area but this same variance is being requested for a portion of the parking uh at the Northwest portion um where the property uh juts to the jums to the West uh AB buding the neighboring property that is considered a yard setback and it is at 0t where 4T is required uh the last the last and fourth variant is the Cons with regards to the construction of the retaining wall which is over the allowable maximum of 6 feet in height and 100 ft in length uh as we discussed earlier tonight the uh the retaining wall will be a maximum height of 18 ft um and uh 15 ft in in other parts as the engineer went through that but the the variance is for over 6t in height and 100 ft in length so those are the four variances and now we'll talk about the statutory criteria we could go through uh two one of two ways the first is the C1 variance route the physical features test for um a property by of exceptional narrowness shallowness uh or shape of the property uh next and the one the route that we're going to take tonight is the C2 public benefits test and regarding that and so the public benefits test and then we'll get to the negative criteria so starting with the Positive criteria with regards to the C2 public benefits test um I already mentioned that the um there's the public benefit of the two prior variances no longer being required but with regards to the variances that we are requesting tonight so first and foremost they are um bringing this bringing the parking comp iance into bringing the number of pran spaces into compliance and providing storm water management where it previously was not existing on the site uh we believe I believe the application furthers the purposes of the ml uh goal a encouraging Municipal action to guide the appropriate use of land in a manner to promote the public health safety morals and general welfare goal G providing sufficient space in appropriate locations for a variety of uses and goal I promoting a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and these are uh just it the application is required to further the intent of specific portions of the ML and these are those three portions that we believe are applicable here and looking at the negative criteria um I see no substantial detriment to the public good uh it's providing additional parking to bring the site into compliance providing additional Landscaping along Hamburg Turnpike uh I see no substantial impairment to the intent of Zone plan uh as I mentioned earlier the master plan recommends um there's a master plan recommendation regarding parking and circulation including moving the parking to the side or rear of the property and that is exactly what we're doing here and lastly uh um I believe it does not impair the master plan goals pertaining to uh protecting and preserving water resources and Watershed lands for flood control with regards to uh the addition of the the the storm water management system so the litus test that is made under the uh Municipal land use law pertains to whether there is a and they use the word substantial benefit that would outweigh the detriments in your opinion based upon the testimony the foundation basis that you've given tonight is it your opinion that these things that you've listed uh constitute a substantial benefit I do believe so and in that includes not only the ability to meet the goals of the master plan by putting the parking to the side or to the rear but also meeting the goals that was not there before of a better drainage system than was ever approved before yes exactly and with that said even though we're not looking at the C1 criteria per se uh you do recognize from a planing perspective that the property itself has uh what's recited in the municipal ands law as an unusual topographic condition yes and based upon the engineering standards here uh your opinion that it's being uh appropriately addressed I do have nothing further thank you Carl did you get at any advance letter or information go any the testimony on this I don't believe so but I did talk to M who handles the plan and Miss Lawler uh we're not concerned with the planning aspects of this um not I I do have a planner's license but I can't testify the planner tonight although what they expressed to me was um it appear that the qualifications are being met okay so with that said are there any questions from the members of the board regarding the planning issues for Miss glaz is it GL GL Mr chairman um so the one when you talk about the negative um I understand all the positives from a Hamburg Turnpike in a commercial area one of the concerns that were brought up the last meeting was one of the residents brought up from now where they live from up above looking down even though the trees and shrubs whatever which was on the applicant's property probably had the right to do whatever he wanted to now opens it up so now it's any kind of protection that they had they don't have and now we just heard about a lighting you know uh study that was being done and I'm sure it's going to be within ordinance but for the people who had shrubs and bushes blocking there didn't have to see that now they have to see that so is there any consideration by the applicant to I know there his trees and he knocked them down but any consideration to put any shrubs back there so that they don't have to see that well we had not I'll address that we had not shown that on our plan um there was testimony at the last meeting that there are still uh substantial growth up there that um with certain catery that would uh for the ability to put additional plants of any substance there um but we also recognize that as far as the lighting and everything is concerned it meets code requirements and that lighting is obviously only 12 ft in height where we have an 18t wall so it's not something that's seen from those people above when they look out so I think at this point you know the applicant uh has you know they they've cleaned up the top of that site uh they're going to put that fence up on the top of that wall and I think that should be sufficient for what's being proposed here okay I would I would leave that then to the uh public comment to see if they agree with that well here here thing um a question for you Mr Whitaker if for example um as a result of the construction and whatnot some of those trees that are there now whether it's at your property or even slightly above it if they should die because of the construction I would expect that those would be replaced with similar type of trees absolutely I would say that if trees are compromised in connection with this construction we could stipulate that they would be replaced and we could do that on the field level with the assistance of your engineer where they Mark certain ones and then put trees in for that purpose I have no trouble with that okay I think you know John's Point's well taken it is yes so I just want to make sure that we don't diminish anything that's not on your property and you never know with construction of this type I mean bulk of the excavation is done which is the worst part but it it's a slippery slope if you want to call it that because of the water and the drainage and you don't know if trees start to topple a little bit so and we would stipulate that as far as species of tree we would leave that to the U advice of your engineer that's but John is that thank you chair when you say trees of similar size you're talking trees that are on that Hill that are 20 ft tall 25 ft tall yeah I'm not I'm not expecting to put in 25t trees because the overburden on the rock may not be even deep enough to do that and the ones that are there now have grown into the into the stratification soils so it would be something that IST would or the engineer would approve that would work because once you get into that area up there you just can't dig a hole understood and you know you're going to run into rock pretty quickly understood so it may it may involve low growth shrub type stuff would still accomplish some of the uh result some form of an arid something that's resistance you know even possibly along the top of the the wall behind the fence white Vines are everybody something just some sort of screening so I would leave that up to as a field judgment Jud with the with the expectation from the board that efforts be made to do that yes problem it's been so stipulated so anyone else in the board have questions okay um as far as the planning goes I I agree most of that's been resolved in Prior uh submissions and tonight you explained pros and cons of how it reflects to the M for land use War that's all great um there is public benefit as you indicated so the one of the decisions the board will make later is do we feel that the public benefit outweighs the bad parts of any kind of construction so we'll talk about that when we get deliberation but I think you answered the questions that we need uh is there any other testimony that you have that we submit that concludes our presentation okay so at this point I'm going to open up the meeting for public comment um going to ask you to if you could come up to the table and state your name and your address and ask your question about anything that you have with respect to the first or second meeting and then there'll be one more opportunity after this to make statements this is just for questions to clarify testimony so please feel free to step up and again state your name and your address and proceed St 174 Ridge Drive on board at Summit falls on top of the hill pleas s r a Darren De Carlo d e c a r l o 87 Lake review Court Lakes vice president of the board Su Falls so um last time we met I believe you said that you were going to put a fence along the top of property as well not just along the bottom we said we would take off fence under the you're asking me a question let finish tell him you're finished and then he'll go you do have a reporter so you ask the whole question then stop then he'll go okay so I believe that you said as friend and neighbor what you would put a friend along the top of our proper line as well as the fence down below so we said we would take it under advisement the problem we have in installing a fence along the property line is that we don't have accessibility to get those type of things up there after this wall is built because of the topographic conditions uh we are going to get that wall built I'm told but after that it's very hard to get back up there unless we had the ability or permission from the association uh to come through your property to place any plants uh in that area or any penting so I don't know that I know you're vice president of the board but that would be something we'd have to uh get permission from uh through the board for say the property to the top yeah so that's something we could definitely discuss we absolutely want to be client wants to be a good neighbor okay can iish we have a sorry have a something we can discuss along with uh what type fence is going to be is that a chain link fence what will be the fence on our side well what we looked at was a chain link fence so we just discussed two different fences though one on top of the wall and then one on the bot correct and that's at the plan if we have permission to put such a fence in there the applicant um would uh be willing to put that fence in as long as as well as Shrubbery that goes along as well Ares or something that we I they could eat like but something that we can put up our position would be one or the other one or the other it's our it is on our property uh there's nothing there now uh we're willing to do something but not [Music] Fus I have a question for you just to clarify this a little bit right now the top of the wall is where it's shown on the plan and your property is set back from that by I don't know maybe uh 75 ft down to maybe 50 or 40 ft and then over 100 ft on the right hand side or the South Side um that's the property line between Summit Falls and your client so the question is if you're putting a fence on top of the wall because of the safety requirements and this second fence goes in I used still talking on I'd like to know exactly where you're requesting it and where where you are proposing to agree because there's a lot of space between the back of that wall and the the roadway on the top which is beyond the property line so if you're talking about the property line and you're talking about the roadway I just want to make sure we understand where on the property both sides is that second fence being asked for I'm I would do a little well you're asking us cuz we're asking I'm asking both I'm asking where they propose and where you request so I can see if there's first a difference and secondly if one versus the other is going to be more effective so we would like it on the property on the property lineer which is in the middle of the woods well I don't think those woods are there anymore like that there's a drop Michael can I can I help you here yeah sure so I walked the property um so what had happened here is there's one corner here and I do believe it's somewhat of a little Hazard so what what you had here is you had two tiers you have the top where the condos are built it came down probably 25 or 30 ft leveled off all right and then it went down again so on this corner right in here of where that lock comes in they basically took that buffer zone out of there so now it's it's pretty steep down to that wall right in this corner is that about where this rock wall is going on there yeah so for about please stop please stop one person at a time so for about 30 or 40 ft it does come pretty steep s so what up so what I saw I think from the Gazebo up to maybe the first condo if they put on that top Bridge maybe uh any kind of fence what they want 2 or 3 ft back off of where that first slope drops off that probably that' probably do it um as far as the what the growth is in there and everything it's pretty sparse there's not a lot of growth there probably because it's a lot of rock um there's not a lot of trees um so it really probably wasn't that thick to start with um from what I saw um a lot of just dead stuff and it just you know it looked like the woods um and it wasn't dense at all so I think if they could agree to it from the Gazebo up to maybe the 20 ft into the into where that first condo corner is that would probably um I I would hope it would satisfy both of them um but from what I saw and I walked it um you know there's definitely a hazard there there's no doubt about it it's steep um from the top of that Ridge down to the wall it's steep so if somebody went off of that they'd go pretty good um so that's just my opinion um you know okay then you're not talking about the wall itself you're talking about behind the wall right up on top of the ridge where the condos are okay um it would just be a say you know a hazard if there's a kid back there or something um what I'd like to do is Define the area that defense you know before we leave here if this goes to an approval I would like to Define exactly what's expected what's agreed to and it's stipulated in the resolution so that's why I'm asking for a little more refinement what do you agree to what do the engineer think should be done and what does our engineer think of that and taking into account the comments the board makes what I would like to do is just have our engineer using the plan show us what you've suggested and pointed out on the board so we understand that I already testified about the foring fence on top of the retaining wall will run around the dark line on here right I believe you're looking for a 4ot fence along this back property line here and down into here is that correct correct right maybe for something like that and we would offer that up the problema is access said whether this wall of parking lot here or not we're not driving trucks and Equipment up this slope bring concrete and fence post and chain in for the fence we have to come in from the top of the hill because this is the top of the hill so with that condition we I think we would be willing to give you that chain fense decision they're going to work out together have anything to do with this work yes because because it's going to be part of the resolution it's not that we're going to get we're not going to get involved with the properties per se that has to come from the board and the attorney to the agreement to allow them to build there because they would actually be working on someone else's property so that much the attorneys take care but I would like the resolution that we come up with to reflect exactly what's been agreed think that the resolution would include a condition that in the event that the applicant receives written sufficient approval from the property owner that will give them access they will construct the F for foot high um chain ring fence that would be delineated by our engineer or approved those plans will be made but it's going to have a little note subject to written approval that is satisfactory to the applicant yes to be installed on the applicant's property applicant's prop yeah you we couldn't do you haven't given notice to do anything off the property so we could has to be on your property within a certain timeline because I I I don't want to say going to say that they're going to do it and then a year from now we still don't have it so things are subject to them getting the written approval to do it so that that can't happen until they get written approval that it's sufficient and then I'm sure that our engineer would make sure that that gets done as part of the so you're looking for Access agreement to get to your property to put the fence just off the prop proper l m on our property corre on your property off the property and it would be something that would have to be completed before we would be um the your bur engineer would sign off and saying that all the improvements have been made and that we have a final Co or certificate of which is why I want it done here and then that becomes a condition am did you have a question yeah well I just want to say I think it should be chain lense to safety I don't think putting bush there would be you know a safety buffer if they want to put bushes there do they can do it I think if it's either or the fence makes more sense well are you agreeable to fencing we are agre and you are agreeable to work with them to give them access to put that fence in abely if your board approves it yeah okay and the 4T High the standard fence would not require a variance and the color of the fence could be worked out usually it's green or black it's a dark something dark yeah and what about the Landscaping that could just block some of the view there cuz there was cuz we'll see in the summer it fills in there and it used to fill in and now it's just like a big hole so if we had some type of Shrubbery along that fence doesn't have to be all around the entire fence just where there that that hole where you saw was that I think that's so on the on the northwest corner of the lot yes where the where the wall takes a turn you're saying in that area that's the closest to your property you have photos yeah so I don't know exactly where that is from D point of view like from the bottom okay why don't we you can you could change this so they can give some test pictures if you want or you can wait till after well caralina has the pictures please what you see how we how we get I want to see to what extent we have an agreement and then I I don't necessarily want to get involved in whether or not you get two shrubs or three shrubs or no shrubs I want to I want to just get the fence straightened out and then once the fence is straightened out we have an area it's going to be installed in there's an agreement that has to be reached between you and that property owner so your board your attorney has to deal with them but that becomes a condition if we should approve this to say that this is going to be part of the the project the two Engineers can get involved to make sure that it's in the right spot and that you approve of the method of construction because I don't believe there wasn't a detail on thaning in here was there for chain link for chain link was there chain link detail I didn't remember seeing it there is one okay well yeah chaina okay so you have make sure that whatever is built is built according to the standards um the Shrubbery thing is going to be really I don't know how you feel about that Mr Whitaker because that can get carried away unless there's spec specific spots that you're concerned about as you mentioned at one spot I don't want to end up with a line of shrubs that are not going to do well in a wooded area anyway well you know what's to say you know the next neighbor doesn't want shrubs or you're only going to plant six but you want 10 you know they they already testified that the fence is going to be just onto their property now you're going to move the fence back farther to allow for planting of shrubs water in the shrubs if the shrubs die I I don't think it's I personally don't think it's realistic to ask for offense and shrubs we concur that's because you don't live this all right go ahead what about like we mentioned before I heard brought out about the trees that are there now a lot of the trees that are there the roots are exposed the they're just running right out the bottom of them exposed as a result of construction or just exposed because it's on Rock no because trees were there it's because the construction the dirt's not there anymore and it's just flowing down when it rains all the dirt just keeps coming down coming down because it's alleged so it's exposing the roots of the trees so now when those trees go down um I think it was Ting that brought up before like they had mentioned that they would replace ones that die or need to be replaced how are we going to make that determination that's I want I want some kind of detail on that that's like say it right now that's to be determined by the board engineer we said we stipulated to that already yeah you STI They stipulated to replacing any tree that does not live as a result of the construction not something that's 50 ft away well absolutely how are we going to have an inspection prior to this how how does that work well there'll be continuous inspection there'll be someone will be out there whether it's in the town or the engineer on a regular basis during any construction and if there's a problem that you see you have you're welcome to bring it to the attention um the building department will have someone out there as well as periodic inspections by the engineer if you feel there's an issue that we haven't picked up you're more than welcome to bring it to K's attention she'll let the uh the building official know and he can evaluate it but I I just don't I just don't want it this to become a a balloon issue I'd like to Define as much as we can and be reasonable about what isn't absolutely I mean when you see the pictures you'll see the Ria hanging there um I I just have a real concern is um and a lot of people in the community have come to the board and ask this question how did they start jackhammering without any inspections of our foundations we have we had complaints while the jackhammering was going on that they felt the vibrations all the way on the top on the other side okay now what happens a small crack happened and in two years that gets bigger and bigger there was no inspections done to our units prior to all the starting so now we have no way of coming back and saying hey this was from and and why wasn't that done that that this board is only allowed this is a passive board boards are passive things come to it nobody on this board goes out and enforces listen so yeah those the inspector wasn't around somebody didn't bring to their attention but that's not this board's and I don't mean to be Curt about it but that's just not what they do it's no problem we can't anything not for this board you're like asking why didn't the police do something this board we're not that that when somebody comes and ask permission to do it that's their job they look at they look at what is permitted in the ordinance and what is being requested if if they if they or anybody does something improper that's not that's not the job of this board this board does what comes to it so is that improper that's what I'm trying to again you're asking you're asking then that's an enforcement did somebody else not do their job that's not what this board does this they're asking for permission now to do something that's all they can do is review that and I don't mean to be cutting you off but that that's that's not within their power see the board the board deals with what we're doing tonight when we're done however the decision is made we create a resolution the resolution has stipulations in it that is then the end of our involvement it goes to the building department and anything that happens after our approval has to be built in accordance and that's why I made to come in earlier about making sure that the construction complies with the approvals here and then it's up to the building department to determine that yes they did comply with that but once it leaves our board from the resolution perspective we we are not involved any longer and anything like that anyway would become a legal issue right between the two parties you're certainly able to do whatever you choose but it's not something we would deal with okay I have another question too with this water filtration system so I don't I'm not an engineer I don't know anything about it but does anybody monitor that from year to year to make sure it doesn't fail or go on fire or I you know I don't know and who's required to do that and how often do they do that that's part of the agreement that the it's in the stipulation go ahead explain the the attorney at the beginning testifies stated about an operation and maintenance manual that would be tied to the deed so let's say years down the road they sell the property someone else comes in and and purchases it there's a manual that's in place that needs to be implemented by the owners of the property on how to maintain the system and every year a maintenance report needs to be provided from the owners of the site to the burrow it's part of the Burrow's requirements for the burrow storm water management permit every town has a storm water management permit with the state of New Jersey so as part of it in application like this the applicant needs to do their due diligence do their homework maintain it make sure it's properly operational and then basically submit a report that's testifying that everything's good to go if something fails let's say something breaks something fails whatever in that report they have to State this broke this is what we did to remedy it and sign off on it and submit it to this to the town the town then in turn reviews everything and then uh submits updated information to the state every year right now each Town's going through it their reports are due uh May 1st or 2nd of every year and it takes care of the prior so so when this is done by December 31st of each year this applicant will have to submit it to the town so the town to do their permitting on it okay and then it was also discussed if they had some kind of seismic machine or something or any vibrations or noise or anything else and who would monitor monitor that the same process they were going to put something in the construction that goes on is being monitored by the applicants engineer would be overseas by the construction Department here in the town okay and in connection with the drainage aspect that I stipulated to we recognize all properties get sold sometime or transfer the reason the maintenance manual and the deed restriction is uh recorded in the county clerk's office so no future owner could uh suggest I didn't know about my responsibility to do this because it's on record and when they close or they buy the property they're told about it because it's in their title okay okay one last thing the lights uh I think it was may be 12 ft or 14 ft 12 ft is can we just have it make sure that none of them pointing towards our shining in our direction of the testimony was that the lighting will meet the code requirements and not bleed over uh the property and we also stipulated that if such Shields would be put on it to P it from the s that was a testimony Mr dul [Music] also just for informational purposes this plan that they provided tonight has a diagram that shows the light spillage and they're required not to have a light spillage on adjacent properties and if you want to look at that plan you're welcome to see it but it's basically showing that zero light spillage will occur off the property in the back so that's more or less your guarantee that you're not going to get light shining in your direction that's concern well if you look down you're going to see something lit because it's lighting the pavement but none of the light spills will shoot up towards the uh buildings and their testimony before was that they put the lights at the right elevation which we require they're not asking for variances on that and they're not changing the density of the lighting so from what the our engineer said it's compliant and I think you'll find that it's it's just not going to be an issue it's done right and then the engineer testified to that on our behalf as well as the applicants engineer so so what they're showing just take you back chairman what they're showing at the property line that rear property line uh it's a zero fo handle so there's nothing there essentially they lose it behind the retaining wall it goes to 0.1 behind retaining wall and then I got to say me maybe uh halfway up on the on the closest corner it turns to zero so that rear property line it's zero according to the uh phot metrics you're not going to see anything question bring I I agree with Mr tro that we have to identify better I think the tree situation what happens if a tree dies at 60 ft in we considering that as it died because of of work done I was going to leave it to the Bur engineer and maybe the assistance of his orist or somebody in his we have your yeah I think that that's that's what they stipulated to there is somewhat of a subjective call but theyve stipulated that our person a person that is involved with to Links will make the determination if there is something that is dying or tree that is dying and the burrow official either our engineer the arborist makes the determination that it was caused or as a result of this construction they'll do replacement that's appropriate we will need obviously approval from the association to get the tree in but that's what would have to be done yes but that mean that yeah to some extent there's a judgment call but they have consented and stipulated that the burrow official can make that judgment call is it caused by it and if so they will repl I me there's no video that is going to show a shovel on the ground causing a root that that doesn't happen but you can make some judgments on what's causing what what what's causing those roots I mean that that is a judgment call thank you all right thank you any other members from the public wish to speak yes ma'am come up please state your name and [Music] address no you got to say it so it's wait repeat it when you get here cuz it's got to go in I'm Lee Rosy I live at 32 R drive and for the last few years dve Paul who is the head of this construction has been um talking with me and promising all of these of these ideas on what they're going to to do to help us not see below and to retain everything excuse me I'm I'm pretty nervous and I'm upset because I asked him to speak with our board the summit FS board it's been on about 3 years he has refused to do that now I'm here hearing that we can't get any help from you so the engineer we have a question here or this is just questions not statements I want to know okay I want to know what happens when they refuse to put put all this everything back the way it was and caralina has my has my photos that you haven't seen and there has been Debs why don't you just explain and I would like the board to see I would attorney to see them is that what you are in attorney sir yes I looked yes problem the the the quick answer is everything that's part of um this appc that they have agreed to do and that they're you know as we said if any of the trees I understand what you're saying but we need help if they don't do it well the the the they will not listen to what he's tell the ultimate result is they can't operate at the site and go do anything until they get their certificate of certificate of occupancy that they have completed all this so our engineer monit and our people in the building inspectors make sure things are going in they will not sign off and allow it to be complete it can never be sold it can never be operated until they get the sign off you have done everything which would include if any trees get killed as a result of this they have to get planted so what about the ones that have been killed during the whole process again I don't know that that well we have phone to Carina has them to show you okay but I was answering your first question your first question is what they've agreed to so everything they've agreed to that get the I don't have to repeat myself that they don't get their sign off and they don't get to enjoy the fruits of getting this done until they do everything that is required by the resolution and our engineer says yes they've completed everything you agree to so for example if they said I'm not building the fence or they don't do it at all we have the ability to force that but they won't get a CO unless it's complete so anything approved here you will you'll get to see that one way or another either that or they won't open up the the facility recognize there's a commercial building there that's not making any income right now so they have I know it's something that propels them to move ahead and get this done yes I hope you're right I have to give to the is there any other questions you have no I have lots of things to say but I don't think you want well if there's no more questions we're going to open up one more time for statements okay thank you anyone else here to have a [Music] question okay I'm going to close the public session um Mr Whitaker as a result of the questions do you have anything else you want to bring forward no we have provided the stipulations to to you I believe under the circumstances we have been able to present to you uh a site plan that meets all of the proper engineering standards um you recognize that there uncontroverted testimony that what we're proposing now uh is far superior to what was previously approved by the basis of uh a better parking situation not only more of it but it's now meeting your master plan requirements and being on the side or to the rear um a drainage plan that is uh much better than before uh that will meet all the required standards and runs with the land for any uh future owner of the property U as far as maintenance is concerned uh and you recognize municipal L law understands that Varan relief is necessary under the C1 or C2 criteria and I believe the testimony that's been provided tonight serves as a a proper foundation and basis for granting that relief so we would respectfully request preliminary and final amended site plan approval and variance relief thank you thank you okay questions I'm going know just Reserve I'm just going to reserve our final deliberation until we have any final comments from the public but anything that's unclear or well chairman I just had a thought the concern seems to be uh with regard to this fencing both from a safety standpoint as well as the ability to block the view from down below why not consider something other than a chain link fence uh something that would provide both safety and a a visual barrier okay I mean gent the gentleman said that they would be acceptable for one or the other why don't you combine the two put offense up that those provide safety and box you okay any other really looking for questions that maybe not have been answered okay seeing none I'm going to ask uh if the public cares to make a statement now I I there's no more questions allowed now I'm going to open it up to the public for statements if you have an opinion you're free to State them now and if not we'll move on okay seeing none I'm going to close the public session and we will now do deliberation um I think the application is fairly complete I've seen everything here that was requested has been um acceptable to the engineer Carl is there anything you need to add to this uh nothing to add just the items we discussed to make them conditional of approval we went over it a few times uh I'm okay with those items okay um anyone else have any comments about the the site before we go to a vote okay chairman I just want to make sure I'm understanding 100% sure they're going to work they have to go back to their board their vard has to vote on what they're asking to let them on the property correct they have to get an approval of that that's right it can't be done by just a couple people here they would have to get their own vote for that and then they would have to work out with the owner on what they're looking to put in or are we determin we stipula to a chain link V if the board uh for the association permits us access to put to install it that was my question yeah so as long as the board is in agreement which it sounds like they would be they will have access to their property from the rear to install a 4 foot high chain link fence that's correct that's correct okay but that's not that's that's all that's not acceptable I'm sorry I I Clos it to the public session and it was acceptable a few minutes ago no well then somebody should have stated that you had a problem with that I think I did I'm sure I did they have to replace can't take any more testimony at this point can that be you can re it but I think go back want the applicant have said that they're willing to do yeah but now now they're saying that they wanted the chain link fence and the applicants agreed to it but now they're saying it's not good enough so I don't know what the not good enough is so I can open it up and see what the complaint is closed I would ask the board if you want they can open it up do you the board wish me to open that up for no no anyone else it's been discussed yeah it's okay um okay so at this point we're not going to go back to the public we've had two opportunities tonight and one the last time the agreement that the applicant has made is on the record and it will be part of the uh resolution and anything beyond this can I ask the attorney a question if the applicant has agreed to chain link fence they go before their board their board says no we don't want a chain link fence but we make it a requirement of our resolution they say no to it he's willing to do it and it doesn't get done it's only a requirement if the board if they get approval from them if they if their approval is for something other then they have not the their trigger for them having to do it has not been triggered they have to get approval to go on to Traverse that property to come on and build a four 4 foot chambering fence in the area that will be delineated on the plans if they get something other than that then hasn't that so then there's no penalty for the applicant if if they are not given permission to do precisely what is in the resolution that is correct okay so if the board all of a sudden decided they wanted a 10t high wooden fence and he said no they're under no obligation to do that right unless if the board said you have permission to go onto our property and build a chain Ling fence if you have to Traverse the property to carry that stuff on and they say yes and by the way would also like a 10-ft fence they're going to have to build a 4ft fence right but if they if they if the board was to say nope you can't come on our property unless you build a 9t fence they have not they will have not received it they will have no obligation to doing that okay no offense at all okay so with the understanding that the applicant has made some accommodations to the adjacent property owner owners for replacement of trees that are considered damaged and or uh should fail in the near future subject to um review by our engineer Andor arborist and subject to getting board approval from the summit Falls uh group to allow construction of the 4-ft chaining fence that we've gotten an agreement for him to do that means that he's accommodated to some degree what their concerns are beyond that it's neighbor to neighbor I mean if you choose to do something on your property that's entirely up to to your your uh your property Al beyond that the rest of the resolution which I'll make sure that we review before we go to a vote um to show that everything that's been agreed to tonight you have that already sure okay so what we'll do is we'll take um since is there any other discussion on any board member Mr chairman uh I think we should reopened this to the public um I think that the folks sitting out here agreed to the chain link only because they didn't consider the alternative which I suggested which would be some sort of a a barrier uh visually as well as um a safety issue and they can correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's uh that they agreed only to the chain link because they didn't have a different alternative at the time I think they agreed because that's what the applicant offered right but at the top they didn't know that there was another alternative so they agreed I would think we're beyond that now in the meeting I I I don't think there is another alternative I don't think the applicant's willing to offer an alternative to the chain L you could ask him he did he he said one or one or the other right but will to put so could we could we ask him if he would consider the alternative close that would have been fine earlier on but it we done was that was involved in the meting we kep bringing it up what do you mean it would have been we can't really have anything from the audience anymore oh all right okay here we go here we go we're going to do this we're going to take straw pole vote right now does this meeting get reopen for comment if the straw pole says yes I will open it up once more if not I will not so straw pole vote open it or not open open not not not m doesn't matter at this point now open so we're one two three for you're open everybody else to know yeah so we're not opening it up again and consequently the 4ot chain link fence is what you're providing if you choose to go further than that that's between you and the property owner okay John so since we're delivery and what hry brought up was a safety issue so there's a chance that we could leave tonight with the resolution being approved and a fence might not be built at all well there's two ISS we want to let do we want to let that happen this the fence on top of the wall by law right has to be there right so there will be a CH a fence along the entire wall on the top so that it's not a hazard if there's an area that's a hazard then that's something that the engineer would have to do determined and if if it's determined to be a hazard as a case of of a of a retaining o kind of thing then that would be something that they would be required to do correct uh yes it would go through building department and building inspector would uh review the item and coordinate efforts on that so if there's a particularly steep area that when you're all done with your grading in the wall if there's a determination that there's still a hazard there that's not something that we would have to stipulate here it goes it would be part of the construction code and the construction code would determine whether or not there's a hazard Bally yeah it would be a code item at that point okay right now what the code item is has to do strictly with the retaining wall okay my code because of how high it is you're you need protection on top of that wall and that's what's on here as far as along the rear Prof proper Y Line uh there's not one there today there may be one there in the future there may not be one there in the future that's between what they're going to be negotiating I was just kind of going by what Brian said what it used to exist a little bit of a drop off and then now it's a drop off so how far is the drop off now to that fence on the retaining wall yeah I'd like to have you know you look at that just to be sure uh even during construction that may need a a temporary fence to prevent anybody from falling uh it's just an issue that mu and S can work out construction department and figure out whether or not there needs to be some additional attention paid especially during construction with with a lot of items a lot of times there's temporary items put up so that there's nonissue this may or may not warrant it I'll discuss it with the uh building inspector okay it depends on what the final what the final appearance looks like whether or not a w offence is needed and that's something that you wouldn't have a say in because it's going to be a building department requirement or not okay this m and removal of trees on their own property has nothing to do really with anybody else it's their own property they want correct unless it unless it affects an adjacent property it's their own decision until the new ordinance comes in yeah you still have the new state ordinance that says that your own private property now you can't take trees out it's amazing all right any Rich you have any comments no okay Tim I'm good Brian good Amory uh Mike E okay and Carl nothing else you have to add I I have one just going to start the ball rolling on the permission that I think would be a condition that within 45 days of the approval the applicant must provide in writing a letter to the association a description of the access that would be needed in order to build this foref fence so that's you're going to have to say we need X and then that will be subject to being approved 45 days after the resolution is adopted yeah so does I don't care when it I'm just trying to you have to do you're the first step you have to put in writing what you need okay okay my comments um are as follows it's been a long process process from the original application back in what 17 or 18 before I was here yes yeah and it's been back and forth between us and the county I think the end result is positive I think we've gotten a uh a better project site it's regrettable that we had to go through the issue of uh project stoppage because of the changes that were made and uncoordinated with the burrow but that's been resolved the drainage system is approved by our engineer and the sense that it meets all the requirements the lighting seems to be in order now the um site plan is mostly in conformance except for the four items that they want to have a variance for which we going to have the attorney review very quickly uh it seems like um obviously the building is not an issue because it's already built so it's just a matter of of whether or not the site has been improved and in my opinion that you know between the wall and the drainage system it's actually going to improve drainage from the adjacent property which is a current issue so I think on the U on the merits it it wants um an approval which is what I intend to vote for um can you just review the conditions and the specifically the four VAR four variances were maximum improved coverage think they're asking for approximately 60% versus 50% um which is proposed disturbance of steep slopes over 15% has provided on plans the exact number uh the surface parking setback of 0 ft far as 4 ft that's required um and construction of a retaining wall over 6 ft high and over 100 ft in length it's going to be between 15 and 18 ft High those are the variants and the conditions were listed by Mr Whitaker the initial ones from the previous meeting were listed at the beginning meeting they're on the record and some additional one we discuss okay if there's no questions I'd like to have a motion for or against the approval or not approval of this application anyone care to make a motion make motion to approve approve the project site in accordance with the auds that the attorney mentioned okay a second oh second second Mr okay any discussion on the motion do we need to add anything more to that or everything you've got covered I cover okay we have a motion in a second any other discussion on the motion if not a roll call vote Please Mr Simone yes Mr fr fro yes Mr tro yes Miss Michael yes Mr Otto yes Mr keading yes Mr Balby no uh mayor Sarah yes and councilman benon yes thank you gentlemen thank you uh we're going to take a couple minute break because I have a couple other things to go over on the agenda just to give a chance for everybody to sign permitted Mr W uh you guys have been in Ramsey for quite a while huh I celebrated my 50th year this year wow congratulations thank you it's great we had uh my friend true Engineers did an awful wanted to go over um some of the things that were uh addressed to us there's a letter that went to Karm about the uh the say County affordable housing and moris County reviewed it I assume because it's an because it was a County Job and they it's you know they went to another County to review so they reviewed it um [Music] they have a few comments that they made I don't know did everybody get a copy of this letter from Morris County okay so it's just a matter of um them having to resolve a few things with the Morris County uh on mostly train actually um so that's something that we need to worry about right now uh there's another letter here from uh this came from the state Planning Commission and it has to do with State development and Redevelopment plan um there's discussions on the highlands as as you probably all know we are in the planning area of the Highlands and we chose not to comply with the Highland preservation requirements so we are only Bound by the planning area requirements um there's a decision the council has to make with respect to who gets responsibility for it and I assume you're working on that and then there's another one this one is uh an ordinance that we're putting out to amend the chapter 190 of the municipal code amending the storm water control regulations in compliance with the requirements of this D storm water rule um that's being handled by the county um Sorry by the town and I believe there's nothing there that we really need to work worry about at this point but just be aware that ultimately that becomes an issue of site plan approval and there's the reminder once again about Fin filling out the U the form that we need to fill out for um Financial disclosure Financial disclosure yeah the financial disclosure forms and then there's a question about uh our site plan I me I'm sorry our uh planning master plan commiss committee had anything been done by the committee that Warr bringing back anything here now no okay who was who was Rec representing as as a chair of that committee John okay so I just would like periodic updates as to you know what you guys have gone through and if there's anything that's coming up for our review okay going to get a consultant to well the consultant has to come after we get funding approval from the town that's why it's sto because that's going to take a lot of money from the town so that's something that you guys have to come up with the funding to get the U the planning planning person from I guess it's going to be um the same person we've been dealing with so um Debbie did it the last time yeah Debbie did it but now we have Kristen Russell so Kristen right yeah so Kristen is going to be the one to ultimately be approved to work with you guys and the board okay but there's no reason why you can't start reviewing and especially with the information that we got from the U the Planning Commission to hand to the the committee so you have that uh assignment so John when it's appropriate I'll just ask you to let me know that we have discussion on on a given night okay little do um I know before Steve Ed letter left we had a couple of meetings to kind of kick it off so we'll continue okay and um we'll open it up to the public for any other comments on and off the Record seeing none close that chair I just have one thing to add to you I I was asked by the mayor of open we go to a meeting CU they're still pushing that cement plant on kofax Avenue at the end of pton and kofax of course opens against who's pushing that the town or the develop County actually count um so of course O's against and I spoke up on our behalf saying we are totally against it we will not support this we might need can go as far as changing our traffic patterns to not allow trucks on cat Mo from our side but there is still big talk about putting this plant in if you know where Peters is right there in Oakland they want to use that whole site for cement plan is that what those signs are yes I thought it said a dump though it's a dump they call it a dump it's a cement dump okay what they do cement so I just want to give an update that that's still trying to move forward I I would absolutely recommend that the town look into restricting the load limit on the burrow portion of coax M and that burrow portion runs from the Oakland line right to the U Jefferson Avenue so a restriction there would certainly keep the traffic in buron County if buron County wants the rateable Bon County can have the uh and I spoke on behalf of you know they asked us tillon you know I deal with the community up over here off Broad Street I mean what those residents are used to every six months and and till comes providing power power washing their homes and giving them car uh gift certificat to clean their cars and they had the street sweeper brought in and police officers these are all things that they didn't think of with this plant was to go over and the neighbors were glad to hear that at least that was going on here in pin so that's why they asked me to go speak over there um you know I I think hopefully it dies and goes away um but if it doesn't it gets pushed through who knows what will happen more so is it an actual concrete plant or concrete recycling Concrete Recycling so they're going to be bringing in and crushing it they're not going to be mixing it okay yeah which is going to be noise and and dust and a lot of truck dve so uh is that something that the burrow would consider doing the load restriction now I would to wait right until they approve we we talked about it the issue becomes and and because what would stop us at o from doing it I think it's it might be called spot zoning at that point because you're not allowing trucks to enter either side to get to to get to an area it's not spot zoning the the burrow of Oakland has to decide what they want for spot zoning if they want to do that they can't get away with it but I mean they could try to try to turn it down but the site itself is in complete completely in Oakland and what they allow in Oakland either through agreeable or through court is one thing but we are entitled just like Riverdale did with um North pumpt and Turnpike that we're allowed to control our own roads it's not a County Road it's a burrow roading well you can't get to part A from part without going through part B and I don't see any any reason why we can't restrict tonnage on our portion of a road and that would be considered something of spot zoning I don't think it would be but people can argue about things whenever they want yes and if they go to court they go to court but it's something with counil I'd rather I'd rather not wait until something approved the problem is that there are some trucks that that use that rout to uh for other things well maybe they can't anymore yeah well that's something we have to discuss yeah I'd like to I'd like that does the board I mean not that we have any say in it per but we could recommend just on a simple Voice vote that I think the master plan committee recommends to restrict it okay there you go the master plan Committee just decided I I would rather not wait until it happens I'd rather if the town is agreeable I would rather the burrow restrict the load limit and you don't have to go to like five tons because you know that basically covers heavy loaded uh pickup truck for the most part that's what you're talking about is really not planning or zoning that's more of the just general police power right what you can do on road so that wouldn't even be in the M plan I understand it and I kind of prob you agree with you but that's not really a planning issue right that's more of a police power General police power issue so they have the ability to change the weight limit on the road the by ordinance by ordinance by ordinance okay yeah and the B would have to do the ordinance and they'd have to get input from the police discussion about it yes I just want to bring to everybody's attention because like you said those signs are up and there's a lot of noise on that end the Town open What's going to go and I would just say that let's not wait until they get to that CU once they get a permit to put it in it's going to be harder for us to to justify making the change and it also has to do with condition of the road I mean I don't know what the construction of the road is between here and Oakland As far as you know the county roads are built to a different level of construction usually so first I don't know we just paid that road I don't know if it would hold up to a substantial truck traffic load like Broad Street does yeah probably so any update on the road between wanu and the Quarry yeah they they as you can see Riverdale they moved out of the Quarry over there again the only thing operating in B is going to be a c p truck plant off of Broad Street but a lot less truck traffic um it's already started there's a lot less trucks going in and out of there now um the road is pretty much completing to WQ and they're using that right now um I don't know what's going to happen to the property remember a lot of rumors of property but they're still going to do the asphalt and right all right and they're just going to gra out that back uh no no no the the esalt is going to be done from inside the tilon area but go through the back road right okay all right so that's why we'll lose all the trucks except for the cement trucks that come in just for the cement so the the really concrete trucks are still going to come this way a couple but not you know it's mostly assol trucks that are going in that's not they're not closing that plant down completely but that has to go out our way that can't go out to W go our way this a waiting station of some sort okay it's still have an improvement but so that's on on progress to get done soon yeah I think they're pretty much done I think they're using it I I actually think they're close to using or using it um you know there's some bigger project being built in Bloomingdale right now so weel projects another phase to Avalon bner um and that's right where they the road is so I think they're coordinating with what's going on over there yeah Bloomingdale has a huge uh project area that they want to develop and again that's on a on a County Road on Union Avenue so as long as they don't have an access to directly to in the middle of our town I don't care and then you have the whole Old Quarry in Riverdale make too yeah what are they going to do over there have you heard there's a lot of rumors interesting to see what those quar is going to be interesting there's a lot of land in there all right anyone else on the board have any comments or questions General okay motion toour so moved second all favor opposed who is the second Mr trop someone down there over there guys down there there thank you gentlemen thank you m