calling to order the Zoning Board of adjustment R and Township New Jersey regular meeting February 15 2024 notice of meeting the notice requirements of the open public meetings act have been satisfied by the placing of a notice of this meeting on the bulletin board at the municipal building filing same with the Township Clerk and transmitting same to the Hun County Democrat The Courier News The Star Ledger and the Trenton Times Roll Call please chair Want to Miss Cynthia schaer here Vice chair Mr rul dami here Mr Steve fario has asked to be excused Mr Randy block here Mr Jim Ferrero has asked to be excused Miss Lindy K brel here miss lorett cretina she is walking in as we speak Miss Donna Drew here here Mr James Miller here board professionals board attorney Mr John drill here Township planner Mr Jeffrey Vella here board engineer Mr reesh Dari pres traffic consultant Mr J Troutman here board planner M jica Caldwell has asked to be excused Township Township landscape architect Mr John Morgan Thomas here and Bor sonographer Miss Jackie clap okay can I get a motion to for the excuse Steve fario and Jim Farrar some moved thank you roll call please chair Miss Cynthia schaer yes Vice chair Miss rul DJI yes Mr Randy block yes Miss Lindsey K brel yes Miss lorett ktina yes Miss Donna Drew yes Mr James Miller yes okay moving over to comments announcements hearing none we move to the minutes we have minutes from the January 4th 2024 meeting any changes or additions hearing none can I get a motion to approve I'll make a motion second can I get a vote please chairwoman Miss Cynthia Schaefer yes Mr Randy block yes Vice chair Mr Russell dami yes Miss lindsy cool bral yes great uh meeting minutes from the January 18th 202 for meeting any changes or additions hearing none can I get a vote please I'll make a motion second oh Randy you can't second I second okay sorry Randy thank uh chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Vice chair Mr rul dami yes Miss Lindsay Co bro yes okay moving to the resolutions resolution R Township Board adjustment Susan and Bruce Miller 101 Old Clinton Road Block five 5.01 Lot 12 application Board of adjustment bo-1 14-223 resolution memorializing Grant of a D1 use variance to allow the construction of a 1500 1530 foot addition to an existing single family residence to be used as an accessory type apartment and two C2 variances to allow fencing within 100 ft of a stream and to animals to graze within 50 ft of the stream resolution number 2024-25 d02 d07 dvion 5 any changes okay can I get a a motion a motion I second can I get a vote I'm sorry roll call yeah Vice shair Mr Russ dami yes Mr Randy block yes Miss lindsy cool bral yes okay moving to the next resolution R Township Board of adjustment Shanti LLC 305 roe2 block 41.0 lot 3 application bo- 2017-2021 resolution memorializing modification of conditions number one and number 13 of resolution number 2022 d11 to allow an extension of the time period to obtain signatures on the site plans to May 4th 2024 and to allow an extension of the time period to obtain construction permits to November 4th 2024 resolution number 20 23-13 version 20 24-1 d11 D version two can I get a motion oh sorry any changes yeah memorializing page six what supposed to be janary 1824 es esang February 15 okay can I get a motion I'll make a motion second can I get a vote please call chairwoman Miss Cynthia Schaefer yes Vice chair Mr R DOI yes Mr Randy block yes Miss Lindsay cool bro yes okay great I'm moving to the applications for this evening uh first application boa case number 08202 3 applicant is theun storage block 63.0 lot 13 177 Highway 202-31 South D variance for outdoor vehicle storage at existing storage facility do you want me to read the uh the letter yeah let's read the letter into the record please okay dear Taylor as peror discussions this matter was scheduled for public hearing for February 15 2024 in light of the re P RTL Flemington New Jersey LLC Target application also scheduled that evening and in light of the board Engineers hearing anything you're saying Jack not hearing anything we're saying are not hearing anything someone's muted or just I don't couldn't hear you at all Jackie can you hear me I can hear you you hear me now not yet barely microne Jackie can you hear us [Music] Jackie Jackie can you hear me in this mic yes I can okay we just need to I can hear everybody except Jonathan okay all right listen I'm gonna yell from the end of the table oh looks like we got the mic working now hold on Jack how about now that's much better have that now that's much better okay thank you okay and of the board's Engineers availability we ask that the matter be continued to March 21st 2024 meeting with out the need for fur further notice of hearing and that the appropriate announcement be made at that meeting we hereby extend the time period for the board to act on this application through the end of May 2024 is that date available yes okay so let's make an announcement that the hearing for the hunter County storage application number 8 2023 is going to be continued without need for further notice to March 21 2024 okay moving to the next application for this evening boa case number 07 d202 s443 DM applicant is Katherine Janowski block 4.04 lot 15 268 Old York Road applications for a minor subdivision with a d variance we have a letter dear Taylor as per discussions this office was recently retained by the applicant as Council they were previously unrepresented by an attorney I understand that the matter was scheduled for a continuation of the public hearing for February 15 2024 we hereby request that the matter be adjourned with a new date in order order that in order that plan revisions may be accomplished and discussions had with the board professionals prior to hearing to attempt to resolve any as many issues as possible prior to the public hearing we hereby extend the time period from the for the board to act on this application through ma the end of May 2024 we will provide new notice of hearing for the new date that you provide okay now is the applicant attorney here by any chance for that matter he just happens to be there what a coincidence um you have any idea of the timing on when you're going to get whatever has to be submitted submitted I I need a little time so if if you want to move this into April that's fine okay so can we move the extension from May into June yes let's for the record the extension is be June 302 that's fine but let's list this at some point so we don't lose track of it you have to do notice in any event right why don't we do the second meeting in April if that works how do we look at second meeting in April oh April am I hearing you again John how we look for second meeting in April and that that is April 18th it's clear there's nothing so you would be the only application so far we're going to tely schedu it straight April 18 2024 but that presupposes that whatever you want to gets submitted at least 21 days in advance of that right and also presupposes that you that's correct okay understood end end of June uh extension 2024 your extion correct that's correct thank you thank you very much okay Mo moving to the third application for this evening 16-22 3 applicant reap - RTL Flemington New Jersey LLC location block 38 lot one 325 Highway 202 application preliminary and final site plan with a d variant for a proposed Target retail store Good evening good evening Madame chairperson members of the board my name is Steven Gruenberg I'm the attorney for the applicant uh re RTL Flemington New Jersey LLC and we're very excited to bring to you this applic to uh convert the existing Burlington cat Factory space into a Target and um we have I'm going to try and uh limit my comments too much in the beginning because we've already briefly discussed this matter at a prior hearing and this the notice had actually been continued to this evening um that first hearing session would connect John I am not hearing you at all the record I don't think it's theic out I don't know I don't have that dat for the record that was wasn't that the first meeting that was the first meeting of the year or January 18th so the hearing technically opened on January 18th no no it's January 18 it was January January because that's when Steve was actually present2 yes that's when the board decided it had notice and then it continued to tonight without need for further notice correct correct okay so I'm going to limit my comments since we um at that time we just briefly spoke about the application without presenting any testimony and we were encouraged to meet with the board's professionals to try and resolve as many issues as possible prior to tonight and that's what we did um and I'm happy to see from Mr dar's report I think we knocked off several Pages which is a good thing so what I'd like to do rather than me reintroducing the application um one note that I will make is that Mr Bello raised an issue uh about the sign variance um the two Monument signs requiring a d variance thato issue today February 15 2024 correct that's correct and I responded uh to the board in a memo uh dated February 15 right after that and you're probably briefly read it right beforehand I've had conversations with Mr drill and um we will concede uh this evening that the devarian relief is required and we're going to request that relief and we will I we believe that our notice covers that devarian relief as well and we are willing to take the risk uh that that notice is sufficient they have a catch all and normally with a d variance with the catch all I'd be a little leery but it's technically sence is an accessory use so it does need a D1 variance but it's an accessory structure it's not like you know some major other use that's not permitted so in my opinion if they're willing to take the risk I'm I don't feel strongly enough to say that the catch all doesn't cover it as long as they're willing to take the risk if there some Challenge on notice they defend not us I'm fine with and I think our notice fairly and accurately represents all of the variance relief and the nature of and scope of what we're planning to do here including signage variances and it certainly reflects those variances of what you were aware when you prepared the notice and one of the purposes of the catch all is to cover something that they didn't see but a board professional picked up and that's exactly what happened here pick it up great so with that I'd like to call um I'll have three Witnesses this evening and the first one would be Robert ster you want everybody I want to swear everyone in so Robert what streker how do you spell that s t r e k r and who else do you have um Melissa courtner okay that Melissa with one L or two L's one and one s or two s's two s's and have do you spell your last name didn't get that you guys got speak come on come on right up to the microphone Melissa m e l i SS a Courtney c o u r t n e y okay by the way what's a Robert cheer is a p I assume civil engineer what's your area next you're a registered architect next John tyina T is and Thomas a i k is and Kelly i n is and Nicholas a planner okay and can the board professionals please identify themselves starting here going right around the r Gard Z engineer Jeff parar toship planner joh Thomas Township St architect J trout Township okay can everyone who's identified themselves now stand up everyone raise your right hand does everyone swear or affirm that the testimony you're going to give in this matter will be the truth the whole do nothing but the truth and start over there with the yeses yes yes yes yes yes yes yes okay set to go may I proceed Mr Striker will you please give the board the benefit of your qualifications sure good evening Robert Striker from bowler engineering uh I am a 1997 graduate of Stephens Institute of Technology in Hoboken where I received my bachelor of engineering degree since that time I've been doing land use development applications such as this I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey as well as New York both licenses are in good standing been qualified in front of over 120 municipalities in the state and in front of this board previously I offer Mr as an expert engineer questions on it qualifications is there anyone I see a lot of people in the public tonight is there anyone in the public that's not somehow connected to the applicant see one person anyone else you're in you have any questions about his qualifications we'll accept you there are members online as well like can you ask people online anybody online that would like to no F question his qualifications you may speak now hearing none we'll accept Okay thank [Music] you Mr Striker why don't you Orient the board to this application and if we're going to present any uh exhibit that hasn't previously been uh submitted to the board we're going to mark that into evidence okay well the the exhibit that I have up was submitted to the board this is the aerial exhibit plan yeah but this wasn't as part of the application this was just submitted a couple of days ago so we'll mark this as exhibit A1 it's a colorized rendering of the plan okay so it's a color rendered version of sheet c101 no it's labeled this it's not part of the plan set this is an exhibit that was prepared for the hearing tonight it's labeled aerial exhibit and numbered c-101 the date on it is January January 18 2024 and I apologize the paper tour right through the middle of the date there so I'm going to mark this exhibit one with today's date thank okay so what we see on exhibit A1 is an aerial photograph of the subject property uh outlined in yellow uh this is the Flemington Marketplace Shopping Center I'm sure everyone in the room is familiar with this and just for the record for people that are joining in Via Zoom I believe board secretary has put this up on the zoom is that correct yes sir say that okay ready yeah all right so the the property we're talking about tonight consists of 20.15 acres of land and this is in your B2 District you can see we're on the southbound side of Route 202 when we're just north of the Flemington Circle Church Street is a County Road way which wraps around the back of the shopping center and ties into 202 on the right hand side of the exhibit and 31 on the left hand side uh the municipal boundary between ran Township and Flemington is on the leftand side of the property outlined in yellow um you know across the street to the north there's the I2 District in the zone and just to our West uh we abought the Wawa property and ultimately Route 31 beyond that uh the site is developed with a 244,000 is 75,000 Square ft in space um and really consists of about 30% of the building area on the property if you went inside Burlington you could see for a while they were continuing to reduce the amount of floor space there were using and there was clear clearly an oversized space for their business it's also reflected uh in the parking area you could see the parking area on that side really was underutilized so we're looking to revitalize a portion of the shopping center and bring life back into an area that previously was really not used uh sufficiently for the space uh shopping center is a conditional use in your Zone there's two criteria of that conditional use that we do not meet first is a 100 foot setback requirement uh to the boundary we have in the existing condition 77.8 feet setback uh to Church Street on the North and 75.3 ft setb to the sidey yard uh that that's over on the Wawa side of the property those are existing conditions that are remaining unchanged as part of this application the other aspect is parking uh shopping center is required to have four and a half spaces per thousand as part of the conditional use um that is not where the shopping center is at today there 's 975 spaces which equates to approximately 4 per thousand as a parking ratio it's deficient in the existing condition as a result of the application we'll be improving that but we won't achieve full compliance so what's the exact amount that's going to be proposed that's on the next couple Pages John 99 if 4.5 th000 is required what's being proposed you don't meet that condition of your standard 994 spaces are proposed right what does that come out to for thousand it's it's just over four 4.06 is the number I'm hearing that's so it's a small change um and it gets lost in the rounding essentially but it is providing more uh more parking than there was previously so just just back to the existing setup there's two driveways from the shopping center out to 202 both are right in right out 202 is divided in this area two driveways out to Church Street as well and there's a fifth driveway that's provided out to Route 31 that's via easement adjacent to the Wawa property and generally the setup for the shopping center is parking in the front that's along the Route 202 Frontage and all the loading for the spaces occurs in the rear that's the Church Street Frontage and I'm sure you've seen that there's a significant burm substantial planting along Church Street which renders the loading area very difficult to see from that roadway what I'd like to do now is to the overall the overall site plan that is sheet c-301 from the site plan that was submitted to the board when you sent this in Via email2 or A3 this will be A2 um I don't think we designated them I just think I provided what did you desate what's the title this is overall site layout plan c-301 purpose color rendered overall site layout ex correct this depicts the entire shopping center and uh the improvements that are proposed by the applicant coloriz for presentational purposes we've added the proposed Landscaping to A2 as well so you get a better idea of what the buildout around this uh portion of the project is wait for the visual go3 you you want us to the A2 is not up there she's working on okay okay um okay so essentially what we're proposing to do is reoccupy the Burlington space uh that's the darker tan color on the Westerly side of A2 and really there's just the smallest minor footprint change to the to the building in the rear uh currently Burlington had one loading dock that sat perpendicular to the rear of the building line and trucks when they parked there would obstruct the rear drive a Target needs two loading docks so we're widening that loading dock to to accommodate two trucks and then we're setting them on an angle so we can have trucks at the Docks they can enter and exit without interfering with each other and they also will not obstruct the drive a around the perimeter so we're taking care of a couple different issues on site but that results in a reduction of 472 square feet on the property that's really the change to the building footprint so that'll bring the total shopping center down to 200 4 4,451 Square ft in space we've also submitted uh as a result of this it's from a DOT standpoint or County standpoint it's shopping center to shopping center we've submitted for a letter of no interest from Dot and received that so they found there was no significant impacts from the project onto their roadways we submitted to The Soil Conservation District and received their certification we submitted to the county and received their conditional approval as well their one condition is a request for an access easement along the Church Street Frontage of varying widths and that triggered some of the conversation that happened this afternoon uh regarding placement of proposed signage in that easan area and how that impacts its application so it sounds like we're going to move forward we'll put the pro on for the variant for those signs but you know just bit of foreshadowing I'm going to be talking about two proposed signs on the Church Street driveways coming up in a little bit um Target itself is going to be open 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. approximately may be slight FL fluctuations uh seasonally what 11 8 to 11m including weekends including weekends right building itself will be occupied because when the store is closed to the public that's when they actually restock the shelves so generally there's going to be people there all the time uh but those are the business hours um people there all the time 247 or something for the most part again depending upon the need right so it's open to the public 8: a.m. to 11: p.m. 7even days a week but the building could be in operation 247 with employees whatever yes correct approximately 35 to the employees on a Max shift so what's anticipated again varying significantly based on season and approximately 115 employees overall so a good Workforce uh added to this area um Target as I said will occupy 75,200 square feet of the shopping center now within that space there's approximately 7,200 Square fet dedicated to grocery there will be grocery in a Target here along with the other Goods that you're used to seeing uh there's also a small area dedicated to CVS Pharmacy of about 1100 square feet those plans are still in development but that's approximately how big it's going to be and then there's also another uh space dedicated for a small Starbucks of 750 square feet these are all within the building itself um and is typical for box stores such as this those sub tenants those are sub tenants of Target not the landlord that the question in other words believe so yeah it's it's minor understanding there only because my daughter works at a Starbucks in a Target that she's actually a Target employee so there's a relationship between I don't know if it's actually a sub relationship all the other businesses in there it's all part of Target it's not that there are separate leases with the landlord for separate space correct so the 70 you said 77230 ft no it's 75,200 75,200 30 30 ft that's Target and whatever other incidentals they want in there correct correct uh just in terms of deliveries as well tractor trailers they receive one to two tractor trailers a day uh those are for both Goods as well as food uh there's a number of box trucks local deliveries vans that go along with this type of establishment as well there's about eight to 16 of those a day and again varies seasonally um trash and recycling proposing a new compactor to be installed at the rear of the target adjacent to the loading zone compactor gets picked up once or twice a month again depending on need cardboard is recycled internally All Recycling is done internally within the building there's a Balor inside the building and a back by the loading dock they generate about nine bales of cardboard a week uh and those are picked up by local uh salvagers who come cardboard away the recycling as I said is handled internally and that's uh disposed of or recycled as needed it's really not a very high generator recycling pickups of the the cardboard tails are through the loading docks or some other some other exit through the loading docks or man door adjacent to the Loading Docks it'll be at the back okay uh so I talked a little bit before about the loading docks and how they're going to operate um what I would like to highlight is across from the loading docks there's about 13 parking spaces and we found that when we ran our truck uh template through there we were conflicting with those parking spaces so what we propos to do is stripe those out so nobody parks there and we're proposing to reestablish employee parking along the back of the shopping center on the back of the building where there's room for it and uh it will not interfere with circulation aisles delivery Lanes fire department connections doors those type of things the exact location for that is okay the exact location for those cars is still kind of being worked out amongst the tenants uh but we're we're looking uh when we submitted the plans and I'm referring to A2 we had those spaces identified behind Michaels but now it seems like it's going to be behind kohs and what we would do is stripe out those spaces put signs on the rear wall the building to indicate that those were for employees only there's going to be a revise set show that so they're asking for an approval with a condition saying however many spaces you're showing in the back now you're still going to have that many but they might be in a different location subject to um review and approval by both the board engineer and a board traffic expert that's what you're saying yes I would just like to apologize I cannot pull up the last two exhibits it's just crashing okay yeah that's see that's what happened to me yeah there's something in the layers of those things it's a big file yeah the cad files keep getting more and more complicated and the PDFs follow I [Music] apologize would you like me to handle this in a different way is it different way for us to do this that's all right as long as the board members can see and professionals ask anyone and anybody that's online if you anyone that's online if you want want to we'll have him take that exhibit and hold it up in front of the camera see if anyone want as best as he can I think many of those people might be my people quite honestly okay bar Barbara's his y hello Barbara okay your right Y no no one okay so uh let let's just keep moving around the property talking about set improvements and since we are no longer held to the AV I will bring up what I'm going to Mark as exhibit 83 how many spaces how many employee spaces in the back are shown on exhibit A2 just so I know what the condition is going to say 13 13 so the conditions going to say assuming the board approves it going to relocate those 13 spaces to locations in the back acceptable to the board engineering expert and board traffic engineering expert correct sounds correct thank you by the way and this Zoom is being recorded correct correct okay okay we ready for exhibit A3 Mr drill so exhibit A3 is the site layout plan this is a copy of the drawing that was submitted to the board this is she c-302 it's the same copy of the plan except again it's been colorized for presentational purposes and we overlay the proposed Landscaping on it um the date of this exhibit is February 9th 2024 so I flipped A3 because this is a blowup that focuses on the area of the improvements that we're seeking to obtain approval for today and there there's a couple key items that are occurring around the front of the store if you're familiar with Burlington you're familiar with that step that as soon as you walk out or up to the front door there's a step there's actually about a 9inch grade difference from the finished floor to the street as part of this application obviously we're keeping the finished floor but we're going to adjust the grades of the sidewalk and the parking lot to eliminate that step so that that's a big wind for the site also going to shift the the door uh to the left side of the building so more to the West are you saying that exhibit 83 has the door shifted or are you saying that you're asking the board if they approve this to impose another condition allowing you no that's on the plans that's on the pl that is on the plans yep okay so the front door is going to shift to the left we're proposing to rework some of the grading within the parking lot and the sidewalks to maintain Ada access and eliminate that step uh there was a question in one of your professional letters about a door to the plaza currently Burlington has a door that opens onto the plaza there is a door on that side for Target but that's for emergency egress only so the primary entry for customers would be on the south elevation of the building um and and looking at the front of the building there will be bike racks provided uh there will be benches and planters these are all amenities that are shown on the plans and located at the front door um this is going to provide a consistent consistent pedestrian access across the front of the Target and also all the way across the entire front of the shopping center uh we will have sidewalk that will tie into Church Street uh there's a sidewalk that will connect to the sidewalk out to Route 31 as well and there's a Ada Appliance sidewalk which will bring U users over to the proposed um Make Ready EV parking spaces on the Westerly side of the parking lot and I'll get into those in a little bit uh one one thing that was can you do me a fav can you just highlight the sidewalk to Church Street oh I'm sorry I I apologize there is a sidewalk on Church Street presently oh yes I I misspoke no problem um and could you highlight the route for handicap access to the building from the EV charging stations sure did you get on the other side of that exhibit so they can see yeah there you go thank you good I was blocking you guys I apologize no problem so the sidewalk is prop Os from the front door of Target to the west across the drive a and over to the EV spaces particularly the first space is designated as the Ada accessible space and that's what the sidewalk is intended to serve would it help if I is that uh you know Wawa has that exit on Church Street yeah if you if you prefer to stand on that side of the exhibit just you know Square it up okay I'm just trying to place it where it's going to be so Wawa has a exit right to the Church Street and then that's where the sidewalk starts on Church Street that's correct so where is this going to be so if if if you were coming from Wawa and heading back towards if you're going from waa you know there's that exit from waa gas station on CH Street and that's where the sidewalks begins that that's where the sidewalk begins yeah the EV spaces are proposed all the way on the Westerly side of the parking lot thank you all the way to where like I'm looking from waa Wawa is on the northwest side of the site right looking back towards the parking lot for Target the sidewalk is on the south side of that driveway gotcha so it's it's indicated in Blue on A3 and the EV space are the first spaces on the right hand side no sorry I do need to square this up no I'm good [Music] thank all right Robert the reason I was asking that question yes sir was in Jeff's report item number 18 it's talking about all these excess lens from W that's what I was trying to place if it's going be any impact to that uh impact to w i i don't Jeff's comment report it's across the access that's why I was asking just to comment and you can just easily tell me yes or no right uh the answer is no there will be no impact okay thank [Music] you um apologize I kind of lost my my spot there for a second all right so parking lot improvements what we're seeking to do is optimize the current parking field that we had and really for Target there's two primary parking spaces there's the one on the west side of the building that is almost completely unutilized right now by anybody uh there's also the parking lot between Target and 202 that's really the primary parking field uh that was utilized uh throughout the life of the shopping center um it really when see a parking lot that's underutilized other things start to use the parking lot like there was a comment about um Wawa excess parking in the Westerly parking field and you know just being out there today or last weekend you commonly see trucks or Vans or vehicles with snow piled on top of them that are still sitting there um when we Revitalize this part of the property and we reenergize it it increases the utilization of that area and those type of things tend to go away so Target is planning full utilization of this parking lot um what we are looking to do is reorganize some of the parking spaces in the Westerly parking lot we change the orientation of some of those spaces and that increased the parking available to us um what we located in this area from a business standpoint though is the shop from home aspect of the the business there's 12 spaces dedicated to shop from home there's a door and a ramp for employee use to bring Goods out to the car and this is an operation that I'm sure you're very familiar with it's similar to many other retailers are doing the same thing uh that's where that is located the signage for that is a placard on a post uh that's not illuminated and has been reduced in size from what was submitted to the board to 2.9 92 square feet was that shown anywhere on exhibit A1 A2 or A3 um no that was new information that we received since the submitt so what's on yes plans what detail on the plan sheets will this Revis gonna have to be another request for condition right well it's it's a give that the applicant is doing I'll get you that detail information directional blade sign or no not the directional blade sign it is listen you're going to pick it up you have it on your list of stuff yeah let me let me I I'll get to you anytime I hear something like you got to JW it down yeah yeah I got you understand um for the the rest of the front on on the front parking lot that's the 202 parking lot we reconfigured that pretty significantly if you're out there you real maybe you realize or you don't there was a single row of parking as opposed to a traditional double Bay of parking yeah so we reorganized that uh we pushed the parking lot a little further to the West so we could accommodate EV parking Make Ready spaces in the future what this triggered for us though was an increase in impervious coverage on the property our impervious coverage increased by 5,495 square feet percentage wise I know you had mentioned it it's point something right yes it's it's decimals but this is a this is something that we need to talk about though because the ordinance requirement is 55% for maximum lot coverage the existing condition is 83.4 so well beyond what the ordinance requires and this change is going to push us up to 84% so it's it's beyond the ordinance requirement and it is a new variance that's being requested by the applicant to offset that variance so what we're proposing to do is storm water man management improvements on the property consisting of forest pavement along the parking spaces up on Route 202 so those will be porous pavement and in the northwest corner of the site we have a bior retention base there as well so we're meeting the standard from storm water management all of our obligations are addressed as part of our resubmission we addressed almost every single one of the comments that we got from a technical standpoint uh there was one clarification that was requested on how we're addressing recharge and included in the drainage report revision was a DP issued recharge analysis spreadsheet that showed we had no obligation for recharge that so that's what I just asked so the storm order management that you're proposing is not required by ordinance you're doing it as part of the application oh no it's required the quality right yes but just to be clear uh I read your report you want to updated not everything has been addressed right because that's what he said all the issues have been addressed I said everything but one yeah but one but I assuming they more than one or having trouble hearing significant amount of the issues that are detailed in our memo have been addressed um there's majority of the storm comments have been addressed actually by the by the applicant um trying to think the one finish and then we can come back it's comment number 13 C yes that request that we demonstrate that the amount of groundwater recharge in the post development is has been addressed in fact uh as far as I'm concerned yes whenever you guys want to do that that entire 13 section 13 I didn't get clarity on that so I would appreciate explanation on how it's done how the storm water systems just how we have addressed all the items just not C right okay A B C D for and you guys decide you want to do it I'm just bringing it up that was an issue you want me to go into detail right now up to you guys that's up to you guys you do whatever wants to he sure well what we found when we tested the soils here is very poor permeability right the the soil the testing that we did actually showed no permeability whatsoever and that triggered comment C13 C let me just address that now when we ran there's a spreadsheet that you run when you do analysis of recharge that takes the existing condition proposed condition into account and tells you if you have a deficit they want to make sure in the post condition whatever water was recharging into the ground you still have an equal amount of recharge occurring post development so when we run that taking into account the geot technical information we show no deficit so there's no change because there is no recharge occurring at the what was your reference when you use that like cuz I I went through this uh last time we're going to go through and I kind of skimmed through all this stuff what you guys had done before stor yeah yeah and the first thing I saw there is the reference of what data you were using am I correct it was like in 2012 or something data which was provided to you about the flow or if that's wrong please tell me what's the data you using for the water I apologize I don't know what you're referring to what study did you use the study to come up with all this calculations we created the study and when was it storm water intensities and runoff and those calculations the r of are all standard values that are utilized by the county the do I'm not questioning the values what I'm questioning is the data which was used with like existing rainfall like how do what's your reference did you use the current because the we use the current standard standard I I agree but the St current data of the rainfall rates and all that that's what I'm questioning yes we use the the current required rainfall intensities that were based on somewhere I read it last time that they used the New Jersey report from [Music] 2012 have ity it was in this or that one minute recess yes yeah okay take a recess for five minutes calling the board back to order so where were question was asked about the storm water rep now I have a clear understanding what we're talking about the rainfall intensities are based on the current rainfall intensities dated 2022 that's part of the green infrastructure uh legislation came out from the state thank you so that is the current at the time of application yep thank you and I I did take just take a look at the storm water management report I believe the 2012 that you're referring that you may have been referring to is actually the water quality storm yes uh intensity and that that is the same that hasn't changed since 2012 and that's what that's referring to is in 2012 the the state and the county uh prolongated one and a quarter inches in a two hour in a two-hour period is the water quality storm uh rate and that's actually what the 2012 refers to and that that's also accurate that's the most current did you and since we're already uh disconnected here uh how you I'm conf still confused about 13A sure and it was the methodology number three and two please just address yeah it's perfectly understandable why why there's you know a question about that the original comment if you don't mind B I'll I'll go through I guess our original comment uh which is the first comment in the storm water management section lays out the the really it's the meat of the what's required for storm water there's four things that that are required as as as Mr ster said uh there's the they're required to meet the uh quantity uh because they have more than one acre of of disturbance which means you calculate the amount of runoff and in the post-develop condition there's a certain requirement then there's a qu quality requirement which the op does not require is not required to meet yes because they have less than a net increase in prvious so they don't need to meet uh re um water quality there's a recharge requirement which again uh you have to provide and that's what Mr ster was we asked for some discussion uh is you're required to have groundwater recharge such that it you were at least meeting the pre-developed condition Mr Striker's uh testimony is that in the pre-developed condition due to the soil condition there isn't uh groundwater recharge so there in the postel condition that's met because they don't have to address it because there isn't groundw recharge the uh fourth requirement is green infrastructure and the applicant is meaning that through the implementation of the bio retention Basin and or bioinfiltration Basin or and the U uh for payment now to get back to a uh that's the quantity requirement so what that says is the applicant is required to address quantity and there's three ways that they can address it the first is to calculate um the existing uh rate of runoff from the site in in the pre-developed condition and in the develop condition they they can either reduce the peak rate of runoff by a certain percentage which are which are outlined in the memo for the two-year 10e and 100-year storms and then the other way is to demonstrate through calculation that that they don't exceed the pre-developed rate of runoff at any point in time during the 24-hour rainfall or 24-hour hydrograph the third is something that most people don't do which is say yeah we we don't meet either A or B but there's no down there's no detrimental impact and that's you know something that most most folks don't go through so the the applicant did provide uh the app was doing really both things so for uh for the various points of analysis uh they address water quantity by the second method which is demonstrating no increase at all during the 24-hour hydrograph uh and then there's a section where uh point is one the dra there's I'm sorry the existing as shown the proposed dra area map is the pr pavement system with the analysis references by retention Basin it's been revised uh all all those comments the bullet comments that are highlighted at the bottom have been addressed in the revised report so all of them have been addressed uh so the tabular data that we asked for to to show that you don't exceed the the runoff at any point during the 24-hour hydrograph that's been provided so all those items have have been addressed okay thank you by the way that area always gets flooded when we have any kind of storm that's why was making a big deal the two or2 Church okay and and that's why in between our two meetings that our professionals met with your professional to address any of those concerns storm water and and site issues to particular because we were aware that storm water is a very important issue for the township yeah thank you again yeah thank you yeah and in the future instead of stating you know this comment has been satisfact addressed just in the beginning we we'll go to the bullet points and just say this is been addressed and how it's been addressed rather than just a blanket it's been addressed yes thank you I think we covered storm water I go all night let's talk about car Corrals you guys have done a you have done a phenomenal job as far as design and all that I went through that so I appreciate the effort thank you yeah um get getting getting back to the the body of the testimony here uh car carousers 12 car caral located on the property uh those are indicated on the site plan um and what I mean by 12 you know usually they have them back to back on either drive a um count that as one and two so each time that occurs so there's six groups of car Corrals on the property uh we'll submit the the detail for that it is not a covered cart Corral it is a tubular aluminum car corral basically and that's it so we'll include that detail on the next round of revisions um in terms of parking calculation uh just to button this up uh 1,11 parking spaces are required 1101 975 exist and 994 are proposed 994 propos that include the credit you get to the E it does I'm not hearing you John hold on hold on just so you know Jackie I'm not doing this on purpose this thing has a sleeping mechanism to save battery life I just have to remember to push the button okay okay so the 994 includes the credit for Ev how many actual this curious how many actual spaces are out there 980 constructed spaces will be present so the variance for the number of parking spaces is for a a what deviation 1,11 minus 994 yes which is s little how many 107 thank you thank you just for completeness uh does target has any data of saying for that size what kind of traffic they get target has a Target in a minimum and minimum number of parking spaces there are parking field uh the west parking lot and the front parking lot park out at 9.48 spaces per thousand the 9.5 is kind of their bottom threshold okay of parking so they are um talk about constraint parking lots they are feeling the constraint on that um so along with that the EV spaces we touched on them before there's 14 Make Ready spaces identified on the west side we included uh setback clearance dimensions on the drawings as requested by your Professionals for the post we anticipated the property owner is talking to a number of different EV providers what we're looking at right now is the the post style that you may have seen before where it's a singular post at the the car um however pushing when we made changes to the front parking lot let me backtrack a little bit initially we didn't have this much planting or landscape island in the front parking lot it was it was more asphalt than anything else and we were trying to not impact the side property line that much based on feack WE introduced this 10- foot wide island in the middle of the parking field and planted it we also introduced a number of islands throughout the parking lot that aren't there right now um so in doing that it forc us to push the parking field a little further to the West so we got closer to the adjacent property line so that is one of the things that part of the reason that that triggered some of that impervious cover requirement it also triggers a setback uh variance or waiver variance both both for the equipment as accessory structures oh adjacent to a property line 20 ft is required uh at the closest where at 11 ft it improves as we move to the north that's worst case scenario as we move to the north it it reaches about 17 feet from the setback the unit the EP units require a variance the uh pavement for the parking stalls require a variance and a and a waiver just a clarify okay thank you question how out of the uh Make Ready e spots what percentage of them will have actual charging stations installed the first year installed day one I don't have that answer they they're still negotiating with providers okay but there is a requirement under the law that you it the statute requires Make Ready spaces to be designated if it's just if it's not residential the statute does not require installation it requires Make Ready spaces would the applicant be willing to make some of those available at the be you know because the reality is this this would be a big benefit to this lot to have spaces actually constructed so that might be something that we ask you to consider a little bit further okay I would have to get back to you yeah one other question again back to the Ada accessibility and the general I don't know if you're going to get into pedestrian circulation at all are you going to get there if so I'll hold my question I thought I was there already so if you have question yeah my question is the from the location and that parking aisle where the EV spots are the proposed traffic foot traffic has people go left cross over the drive aisle and then follow the sidewalk down along the head-on parking on the other side of that lane yes human nature is going to be people are going to beail it for the door um I mean that's kind of the reality and that's what we already see in that Kohl's parking lot where while it's improved with the stop signs and things that have been put in there still is pedestrian conflicts so is is there the ability and I you know I'll ask our traffic experts and engineer to create some um stop signs with some additional crossovers because I I can't see people going all the way down to the left to where that stop sign is now crossing over and then going down to the front door they're going to walk diagonally across the parking lot and right now there's no way for pedestrians to that's designated as a crosswalk across that area to the corner of the building so uh couple things for pedestrians that we're doing here we have a scored concrete crosswalk in the main Drive aisle across the front door right there's additional stop signs or bars that are requested with the professionals we'd be happy to provide that the the sidewalk we're talking about we do have stopar and painted crosswalk as you work your way further to the west and cross the street again we do have crosswalk there that intersection of the kind of the Ring Road for the shopping center on the Westerly side with the driveway that goes past Wawa that intersection is stopped controlled as well um and we have uh the sidewalk like we talked about bringing you to the Ada spaces I think as the shopping center gets more and more utilized and particularly this parking lot starts to fill up with cars it's going to be easier for people to walk on the sidewalk and cross as opposed to walking amongst the landscape Islands the cars and the various activities that are going on in the parking lot so I think utilization of the property is going to lend itself to that uh sidewalk being more functional than what it is today I I guess where my concern is the the second and third areas of Park rows of parking I'm sorry human nature I'm not gonna walk in yeah but but but you have to remember I mean like with the Jack cush property right we had to actually have them put up a fence to force people to walk to the light because they were crossing in the middle street so I agree with you I just don't know what else we could well I I think a striped area and an additional maybe stop sign or something there you know to be fair similar to like is in the other area now but correct me if I'm wrong there's stop signs at right at the edge of it where the access the easement road to Wawa is isn't it yes there there is I'm I'm looking for something in between the front door and that stop sign all the way down there because people aren't going to walk okay and I just yeah no that's just a concern I stood there and I was out in the parking lot and it's like I'm not going to walk 75 feet in that direction and then go down a a sidewalk on the other side of the street I'm GNA try and cut across and that's a tough that's why I was I was I pleasantly surprised when they did the Landscaping because to me it forces you to go around the Landscaping to kind of walk around but you're right so I would ask Jeff or our professionals what are your thoughts stilling on the EV okay just finish that yeah finish finish what you guys are doing fire away get back to yeah I I guess I'll just put it this way I'd ask that that be looked at because it's a real concern i i j it down let me by our experts in the board I chot it down as a potential condition if the board's going to approve add additional stop signs and crossbars for pedestrian safety if the board engineering expert Andor the board traffic engineering expert requested that's what you that's sort of thing you're looking for [Laughter] sure Jackie did you hear bring up yeah yeah okay the only thing I was going to bring up is that the remaining uh portion of the shopping center they do not have the stop signs at each crosswalk so something that yeah and in fact discuss J you have anything else Jeff your item 20 is talking about call I extra stop signes yeah than what you guys had approved so uh John I like your suggestion for all that they need to sit down and come up with the right solution here with the concern the appli fine with that conditioner Yes red we're happy to work with the board's professionals with respect to stop signs and and bars and going back to the EV we're we're willing to provide two EV parking spaces like not just the made ready but actually at the time you're saying 12 Make Ready two actually install but the question is where did you guys come up with the 14 because looking at the toship ordinance which is ordinance section 296 [Music] 155 ordinate section 296-155 point1 d as in David then you go to D2 it says a condition of preliminary site plan approval each application involving a parking lot not covered D1 D1 is residential so D2 means non-residential install one make ready space if there will be 50 or fewer parking spaces and it has this sliding scale installed four Make Ready um if there are 101 to 150 install 4% of the total parking spaces as make ready if there are more than 150 parking spaces so you have 994 spaces now you have to go before you take the credits right 980 what's 4% of 980 29 290 I've just been handed a law saying that it's limited to the number of spaces that you are affecting Steve can you repeat that I can try let's answer first what's 4% of 980 39 39 now what you say you have some law that that overrides the ordinance yeah I'm GNA have to why don't we wait on that for Mr teina he's familiar with the law more than I am your planner planner the planner okay I'll wait but I want to see that I don't want to hear it for the first time testify just pass that down to me now I can multitask listening in the other stuff I want to read that okay okay okay yes okay uh so Landscaping Islands we kind of touched on this earlier we had conversations uh with your professionals to provide additional Landscaping uh ordinance requires a landscape Island every eight parking spaces as I'm sure you're aware the existing condition is far from conforming what we did was try to become closer to conforming in in the parking area while still not losing parking spaces so what we did is we we borrowed a little bit from one Island to the other and um just ignore them I'm trying my best they're annoying we created additional Islands kind of midpoint of the front parking field and we created additional Islands on the Westerly property line too where those islands were not wide enough or 10 feet wide we're proposing to include um structured planting Ed soil underneath to help the root root growth so the trees can flourish so those are areas where trees are proposed uh with a smaller Island that's what we're installing uh we're also proposing a number of plantings around the perimeter of the parking Fields um and we're improving the situation but we're falling short of strict compliance uh if I may John your report if I read uh item four on your report related to the parking light Landscaping did I get it right he's doing better than he's supposed to it's 15 required and it's 17.9 I'm helping you Robert that's what I read here where are you well I you said item number four yeah so dated your memo dated the 13th February so there there kind of two two separate issues involved one is that relate to these the parking lot planting yeah one is there a requirement for parking lot Landscaping as a percentage of the overall plan so that's that's one requirement and I asked the applicant from the last meeting to provide to show graphically how they calculate because the ordinance basically is fairly Limited in what essentially counts as parking lot Landscaping it's 15% of the and so they did provide an inset on the plan that showed it and my comment was basically I looked at it and they they showed an area 15% was required I think the plan say maybe 17 point something was provided I don't think everything that was shown on the plan technically counts under the ordinance there's some perimeter that really doesn't count toward the parking lot Landscaping what the I'm not super concerned about the exact number because I think they're getting pretty close to it good and the way the ordinance is written it does allow the board to consider a adjacent planting as contributing to it okay and then my my General comment is you know if you're going to kind of take that approach which I think is what's necessary to happen here is that it should be more than W so I think there's some areas that could be improved on like along the B of the building some other places but I think that's that's my response to comment number and if you want me to talk a little bit about the number of trees involved and and Mr Striker said yes and I think the plan is has been greatly improved over the original obviously they're dealing with an existing condition they're they're adding trees but so I think and and I did have a conversation with his landscape architect and they did add this structural soil system my recommendation right so they could use smaller islands and still functional so that's great there's still a defit about I might count of about 20 this point looking at the plan I'm a little bit more concerned about having trouble hearing you John keep on refreshing um so so I'm a little more concerned quite frankly about the number of trees than the number of at this point yes that's how I so my my biggest concern was let's let's get those islands that are there with those additional trees and it's mainly the trees in the aisle along the building have no trees and the aisle along the I'll call it the west side or the South side of the building that don't have any trees so that's about 16 more trees that they could pick up in existing Islands that don't impact parking so that's my yeah so what's your what's your take on that um he's exactly right uh there's a couple issues and concerns right obviously from a retail standpoint trees immediately in front of the store is a concern I know we don't like to talk about it but that's a fact the retailers are concerned about the trees in front of the store second of all is that um why is it a concern the trees is going to grow so high that they won't be able to see the store there's a concern about visibility yes doesn't have a big Target with a big circle up on the facade that's going to be above the [Music] trees the what's the visibility concern it's the the concern about visibility they they want going to grow how how tall are these trees going to grow John well they could grow to they could grow to 30 ft T but I mean again here's here's my take on visibility U first of all it does have something to do with the the exact type of trees that are being used second of all my observation in all the shopping centers is that the trees were pruned correctly meaning that they were limed up as they grew you would have that visibility from down below looking up at the looking up at the building so I I I have to say that I I've especially with this type of use that in my opinion not in the retail business but you know this this store will be as visible as many other shopping stores in in in in the township we have we have a Walmart that's has no visibility from the road we have a Home Depot that has no visibility from the road so I so I feel pretty strongly that the the tree should be located here we can have a discussion they they've got some trees along the same aisle to the West that are an upright form of of GCO it's not a native tree but I think it would make sense to continue those long um and and the same thing along the uh along the other uh the other the other property line the other place where I think we're a little deficient again because there's no I'll let Mr uh Mr Striker speak to this but there's no trees in the entire there are no parking lot islands in the entire Bank of parking where the uh where the poest pavement is that may be an engineering requirement but uh uh I think that area we could take care of by providing the required number of street if I could sure couple things these islands closest to the storefront are premium from a lighting design stand not everyone has lights in it every other lights in it and it's necessary consider is I don't think the afan has problems with trees per se but trees around the perimeter do much better than trees inside the the parking area we're proposing a ton of vegetation we have 41 trees that are being proposed 465 shrubs and 115 grasses and that doesn't include what's in the biosphere uh the trees that are out on site now if you look at the ones that are around the perimeter of the site around the borderline of the site those are averaging 6 to 10 Ines in diameter the ones that are located on the interior in these islands they're four to six maybe somewhere around there so the trees flourish more around the perimeter you know there's a balance point between everything we're talking about I'm sure it will work it out one way or another but the preference of the owner is not to put trees in those Island immediately in front of the store just to be clear there are trees in the front of some of the islands on the other part of the property if not there I mean you're showing trees being removed in islands that are there correct so this shopping center has survived with trees you know for eons back to James way so I I guess that's where my preference is that our landscape requirements be met um you know the trees the trees not only do uh heat island effect and reduce the heating and cooling they reduce the storm water flows they they provide a lot of benefits and you know I think we've got a good Landscaping standard that I would encourage the applicant to and these are and these are yeah I mean these are this is the required planting yeah this is the required planting and we're still not even with putting the tree reason we're still there words the other to not put them in you need an exception so you have to you have to put some proofs in on why there's some peculiar condition to the property and the visibility argument it's not going to fly right not too good you know the the other thing that I wanted to point out as well is when we look at mark on the interiores I we around the perimeter perimeter areas are the most efficient in terms of parking as well so when we we do have a pretty large Bank of parking along 202 but that's where we maximize our parking space so again keeping in mind the balance point between the plantings and the planting islands and number of parking spaces that are needed to support the store that that's another reason why we're seeking so we are asking for relief in the number of islands that are required were short there's no question and the number of trees that are required as well were short there what's the reason for the request for the exception in both of those areas my reasons that I provided and we have a planner who can speak to other reasons as well um guys sound like you like them very much it was visibility which is a factor it was proximity of lighting on the site there was the performance of trees in islands versus the perimeter which has been established on site that we can look at um that's really what I'm so so I guess my my question was in terms of the performance that's based on what's there now and I agree i' I've observed that but I my observation is also that since since I was involved in the approval of the shopping center when it was renovated the first time that the the soil that was provided in the islands was not sufficient there were a lot of reasons why those trees aren't doing well that you'll be taking care of with the improved detail on the planting so so in your opinion visibility doesn't matter performance is not a good argument either correct and then I'm also hearing that on the other side of the mall where other shopping people are they do have those trps so it's also issue of why why here where there's the uniformity come in and cers who met this requir y of of one parking y Island every AG spes with Tre John the other question and maybe they can address the whole I guess it's western side of the building um yeah the wa I'll use it this way the Wawa the Wawa side where it currently has trees all going down it it is being reduced from a 20 foot to a 12 foot planting area but there's no Landscaping proposed well and I think that that part of it speaks to the parking lot landscape requirement and I think that's a I think that's a pretty simple fix there is a planting bed there there really isn't enough room next to the building for trees as much as I would like there to be and I understand the issue of how they how they got there but uh I I think we could if if we're I think it would contribute to the parking lot Landscaping if there were actually some Landscaping other than I think that's a so what I usually like to do with Mr th sorry what what I usually like to do is you know we we've always had a good working relationship with the boards professionals um we'd like to work to come up with a landscape plan as a condition of approval that would be satisfactory to him to provide additional trees within those Island area so I put condition something like add trees to the satisfaction of the board landscape architectural expert knowing that he's a reasonable guy and if there was ever a disagreement with him you always can come back to the board to try to have the board yeah just say what an unreasonable guy he is that that would be acceptable but that's in line with his recommendation that we get the trees that we are asking for and we work out on something on that island the planting area along the the side of the building yeah the planting area along the side of the building I think we can come up with plantings that are are provide the security uh address the security concerns of Target and at the same time provide a nice visual uh for for the township but it it's so hard in a public hearing like this for all of us to say you know this should be this and this should be that it's a lot easier for the professionals to come to it and like Mr TR suggested if we really don't we come to an impass we're going to have to come back before the board but we would appreciate doing it that way and just for record John uh we are very big on this so we're entrusting you do the right thing here we don't have much more to go over here lighting lighting let's talk about lighting I think they want to talk about lighting okay um let's talk about lighting uh what the what the applicant is proposing as part of this application is to maintain and continue the the existing lights that are out there now those are recently updated LED light fixtures that are out on site uh we measured the height of those fixtures the mounting height we found them at 26 feet tall where ordinance requires 25 so we're asking for Rel for that now uh there will be relocation of light poles that are out there today there'll be some new poles that are installed but they're all going to look the same in uniform with the rest of the shopping center 26s are existing the requirements 25 you're what you're saying is it would be imprudent to have to replace 20 an existing 26 foot with a 25 foot for the just for the purpose of ordinance compliance correct correct but what about the new ones could you put the new ones in at 25 and not 26 no one we could put them in at 25 but it wouldn't match the remainder of the shopping center do you think put in at 25 will be that you think people will actually be able to tell the difference between 26 and 25 I think so are you saying the rest of the whole shopping center 26 that's what we saw Yes okay so we're trying to match what's out on site okay board's call I I think consistency would be more important than yeah look uniform yeah yeah though I do have a question maybe you'll bring it up later but those things about which I rakes I spoke with you about something about four points and five point yeah ratio get that microphone the uh the ratio of the average illumination to the minimum illumination which on the revised plans it's actually a little bit closer to compliant it's actually yeah it's 4.66 to one where the requirements four to one before was 5.51 to one yeah but my the way we are making concession for the height it's because of the uni uniformity I would want to see same similar situation of the visibility like yeah uniform to the whole Plaza so what is for the rest versus what they are doing that that's very good question that's one of the I guess the testimony that I guess I was expecting is that the that deviation is so you can match the rest of the plaza is that right yes tell me what the deviation on this one is let me get two sentences of testimony on the bre and I'll give you that information but so what we're doing is we're moving 18 poles just moving them around the center okay so those poles will generate a uniformity average foot candle to minimum foot candle of 4.66 six within the Target parking lot this is consistent with what we see on the remainder of the lot the photometrics were actually analyzed by the manufacturer who did the installation so we're very confident that what we're seeing is consistent your ordinance requires 4 to one the difference visually between 4:1 and 4.66 I couldn't tell you I don't know but it's really not much of a deviation because you're comparing a very big number on the top to a very small number on the bottom when you go average to Min so any kind of difference is going to throw those numbers off yes sir what you're saying is it would be imprudent requirement 4:1 it's 4.66 to1 you can't really tell the difference the imprudent to require strict ordinance conformance just for the sake of ordinance conformance I I think the you would not really notice it yes I I agree with what you're saying I can't hear you well more important it's uniform with the rest of the more yes yes that's okay so the color of the post will be the same yes okay and the view of the lights yes Jeff if you keep this up you're gonna have to donate quarters dollars I've learned the hard way sorry for the interruption no problem um that that's all I had to to say about the the lighting have the two issues we have is pole height and uniformity uh so I think we've addressed those yeah okay uh let me refer back to exhibit A2 and start to talk about signage a little bit let's focus on driveway signs minent signs that are proposed on the property there's one that exists today at the main Plaza driveway that's a larger sign it's 150 square ft it's a multi-tenant sign and internal that's remaining as is we're not proposing to touch it um I think that sign has been there for a very very long time probably since back to the original renovation what the applicant is proposing is a sign at each one of the other primary driveways that is ass sign at the two driveways for Church Street on the northwesterly corner and the northeasterly corner over by Chili's so we have signs proposed at both of those and we're proposing a sign at the easterly most driveway off of 202 all three of those new signs are proposed at 45 square feet in size and six feet tall that six feet also includes a twoot stone pedestal on the bottom the detail for this is submitted the pl set that was submitted to the board she sheet C- 906 and it's detail one and it shows multi-tenant sign with the stone base like I said the remainder of the sign the body of it matches the color scheme and texture of the the site this these will be internally illuminated the size is consistent with your ordinates but your ordinance only allows two signs um One sign for each roadway Frontage right so we're asking for an excessive number of signs um you're asking for three you said we're asking for three new signs where one exists so total of four signs instead the ordinance allows two okay and is that because we actually have um one two three four entrances uh onto the property yes uh we these four entrances not only do we have four entrances we have multiple approaches to the site because it has really State Highway on the front and a county road on the back both are used quite frequently for access to the property all these driveways are difficult to see from each other too as you know if you come off of 31 the the driveway that you get to on the backside of Target it is pretty obvious but there's no sign there whatsoever so we're proposing a sign the setback complies uh and we are actually going to move it further back to get it out of the county easement that they've requested from us the the next driveway is 1300 feet away from the driveway at the back of Target so and you can see on exhibit A2 there's also a significant Bend and we talked about the trees so one drive you can't see one driveway from the other that's my point and there's no sign indicating this is the driveway for the center either the trees that are around here do make it difficult to see the shopping center and the buildings that are located there and so we're asking for a variance for an additional sign here same size 45 Square fet 6 feet high uh this is proposed to be located within the future County easement um and will be part of the the variance relief that our planner testifies to but again the approach from the intersection at 202 and Church Street onto Church Street really it lends itself this is a good spot for a sign and it makes sense to have one that What's the total linear footage of Road Frontage these four driveways Pro the line out for your Le area what do you think the total the circumference of the side no not the whole site just about 1300 1,400 feet of Frontage along Church Street and along 202 we have 850 ft between the two driveways so the total Frontage for that is500 linear feet of Frontage on 202 uh3 huge fontage yeah the shopping center is long and narrow yes absolutely particular so I have a same question but in a different way so I'm going to ask our traffic engineer uh the sign especially near Chile's side yeah from CH uh 202 to church that left turn you have to take if you're coming from 202 I've seen that area very congested would the sign help or it would make it worse having the sign there well I I think having advanced warning to the driveway and the location I'm talking about making the turn I'm talking about having a driver make a decision at a crowded inter section and identify where the driveway is for the place they're trying to go to most of and I I think it's a benefit let me let me just explain most of the people when they enter that Plaza usually get in from two or two they'll take right to go to chil or continue and then go take another right to P or whatever or Bellington Court Factory which is Target I'm just wondering was there any reasoning there and are there other kinds of traffic issues which wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait okay we're talking about Church Street yeah okay at the far end where 202 is okay so everyone there would most likely be making a right in because anybody making a left would have come on 202 to come into the major that's what I'm saying that's exactly what I'm saying so okay so I think it would be very I don't think any I think the number of people making a leftand turn into that would be very minimal and my question you wanted to ask the board's traffic engineering expert this question yes because today there is no sign there and they're proposing a sign so is it going to create a negative impact or or it's going to be what positive positive in my op in my opinion identifying a driveway for a driver on the road is a positive okay that's it question about identification four tenant spaces on each of these signs how is that going to be determine what Target get one of those think that's been determined yet it'll be negotiation with each of the tenants to who gets placement are there any other site plan issues that you have to go through Target we got to talk about sign comment specifically number 19 sorry did you say that again item number I'm not hearing yeah Jackie I asked if they could testify yeah that's the question was with respect to number 19 in Jeff's report dealing with the status of the site plan waiver and SE variants relief that previously had been uh granted by the the board the planning board and the intentions to still proceed forward with that it just hasn't been uh hasn't occurred but that is going to take place okay all right so next thing we want to talk about is signage that's oriented towards targets specifically so for that I'm going to talk off of A3 and then I would also like to enter in uh the target building elevations we're going to have the architect that's going to talk to the AR tecture and we'll bolster some of the testimony I'm going to give you now but I just want to while we have the cine up I want to orient the board so we can proceed is that archit is that a color rendered architectural plant that's got to be marked as an exhibit or is that in the package that's provided this is provided it's in the package right yeah yes okay so it does not need to be more okay do you think we might be able to take a break yeah can we take a five minute break calling the board back to order um we'd like to bring something back up okay so um my board member colleagues um were talking about the signage and one of the questions they had or concerns that they had is over by Chili's the entrance on Church Street if they put a sign there which supposedly there was a sign there many years ago that people would see the sign and possibly then start trying to make left-hand terms and um some of the board members said they have seen it that previously there were accidents um so we're not asking what we're saying is I don't know if we want to discuss here I do want to ask Jeff are professional to please consider going to the police station or the police and asking for a report like we did in another application because sometimes people we need to see what's happening both and and the easement of the entrance over by Wawa which is not one of the main entrances again people make lefts and that's not part of this signage discussion and I don't know how much we can control um other sure [Music] micone the sign you're talking this that's includ in one of their four or that's an additional yeah it's included in one of the four and so we're asking just for to table it or consider it we just don't know I guess we're on there you go I um I I think we've impressed upon you how we're under time constraints and the the uncontradicted testimony this evening was from your own expert that a signage there actually helps yeah and and it's a better situation and not having signage at a driveway um you know we we really need to move forward on this application suggestion what they're saying is yeah it might work it might work too good people might start making lefts so if you don't want to have to get kicked out another month maybe you just withdraw that sign for now come back later for it so it doesn't up it doesn't hold up your whole application that's my suggestion or or or we proceed forward with the sign that we have on our plans right now that your own expert has said is a better thing rather than letting me make my argument on it he said it's better to have it signed and not signed what the board members are saying first of all the board members do not have to agree with their own expert let alone any expert but what they're saying is it might be too good it might people might start be making less that's what they're [Music] saying I was asking if that intersection is already I thought I could speaking close enough to it I was asking if that intersection is already signed for no left turns already if there's existing signs believe it is because I don't remember yeah I don't remember I don't usually come in that way sign where if you're coming in my understanding is you're talking about the Church Street side coming into the shopping complex but you're coming in from the 202 end of Church Street and you make that left turn in that currently that's illegal correct yeah and is it signed then to make for no left turns there do we know that I don't I don't think so okay I can't I mean that's a fair question I mean if it's not signed then is it it's not but all also you run into problems of overs signage see it used to be yeah I it used to be no le left turn because there's an actual triangular um but the the triangle still there sure yeah it's not signed I see no I have a suggestion that maybe it's a resolution that we just do the sign on the one side going as you're going from 31 so that there wouldn't be a sign coming from 202 so the one by wa I'm Sor one by one-sided sign my thinking is if our traffic engineer our traffic expert is okay with it then I'm okay with it I would defer to his judgment yeah so the one side it would deal with the people making an illegal La I had that idea too not even an engineer that's a good it's a good idea Jay you're I agree I think it's a good good idea because you still have the identification for the traffic that's allowed to use the driveway but you're not inviting the traffic that shouldn't be making thec across from Royal Road yes so the proposal is to modify the monument sign across from Royal Road to be a one-sided sign facing eastbound church thank you thank you okay one other thing I'll just put on the record is that we're going to agree to provide the Make Ready spaces of 39 as required and how many that's that's 39 make ready how many actual install two huh two does that meet the state statute of the percentage that's required just ask yes thank you okay I got John sit [Laughter] down Target signs just a clarification so you'll work with the professionals to identify the additional locations for the EV ready that's correct and and and that they would be split on the site so they're not all in one spot because otherwise they weren't going to be very useful yeah we we'll work with the board's professionals I'm not we not in a position right now to say where that would be but we will work with the boards professionals great thank you target signs okay here we go uh Target um obviously has multiple building elevations facing multiple different approaches right they're requesting variance for multiple signs right um in general they're looking for relief from the number of signs but you're going to hear that the size of the signs especially relative to the building face that they're attached to are inline and small than what the ordinance requires what we want to talk about first is I refer to the size complies the number what let me let me get to my detailed testimony and I'll give you that information let's start instead with the A3 and we'll we'll just go around the perimeter of the building that's probably the the easiest way to do it on the side of the building that faces the plaza that's the easterly elevation there's one sign proposed as 64 Square ft and that's the target Bullseye logo itself right that's an 8ot diameter sign um facade it will occupy 3% of the facade your ordinance permits 5% for the front the side as the measure for the gross total of signage that you're permitted right so as I go through all the signs we're going to exceed what that gross total is right but what uh the point that I'm trying to make is for the most part what we're looking for aligns with what would be permitted on that side um with the exception of this next side of the building though however on the the front side of the building and there's there's a mistake on my plans we call out the allowable for that front facade is 307 Square ft that is not accurate it's 5564 so it's a bit less what is proposed on the front is 171 171 square foot Target sign so it's the bullseye and the word Target underneath that's one sign there's a 45.8 square foot sign for CVS that's shown on the building as well and a 62.5 6qu ft drive up sign that's an indicator sign for the drive up pickup area on the side of the building all total for that facade [Music] 279.899 so we are technically over by half a percentage point but really it's not as bad as it seems can you just do me a favor that correction going to Jeff's going to Jeff's February 15th report his items eight through 11 and just tell me what numbers have to change because I'm doing this because obviously I got to do a resolution there going to be a a ton of these things yeah I don't comment number 10 he notes 307 square feet as permitted that's the number that's wrong that number should read 2564 is that the only correction on all those that's the correction on my numbers yes moving over to the West facade West facade [Music] is the the parking lot on the Wawa side uh two signs proposed there it's a 10 foot diameter Target logo sign at 100 square ft and a drive up logo at 57.2 n ft totals uh 2% of that facade so again less than the five on the Northerly side that's a side that faces Church Street there's a logo proposed there at 49 square feet it's just a Target logo and that's 1.1% the facade so for each face from a size standpoint and a scalability we meet the standard except for that half percentage on the front facade uh but we do need relief for the numbers and and technically the gross number of square feet of sign uh but you'll see they're they're all in scale with the building the architect will go into some some more detail on the architecture deping on how that works but I think from looking at a202 which is the exterior re rendered elevations you can see the size of the sign and context with the building and I think it aligns well question for you um for the front of the building the uh pickup or whatever the sign says with the arrow um do you do you feel the drive up I'm sorry do you feel that as necessary because I also think you have um signs that are on the pavement the standup signs that would Direct people would it be possible to remove that and leave these um standup signs that you have on the corners to D direct people I I think I understand what you're saying I think the benefit of the sign mounted on the building obviously is a greater visibility those directional signs I was about to get into those are much smaller uh in square footage as well as height um these signs are all internally illuminated I don't know if I mentioned that before but the the position of them is meant to give drivers Direction coming onto the property where they need to go so they're not making decisions right in front of the store they have an idea and they can move effectively to where they need to go all right thank you microne there's a directional Post in front of the building as well there are there there's actually two directional sides I'm into right now there's a directional sign that's called a that's called a blade sign it's referred to that on the plant it's a total of 10 square feet in size and is six feet tall so really that is a directional sign but it's focused more on the ground for people in close proximity to the to the store uh it's nonilluminated and it it's really directional in nature the second sign that that is proposed and that is located back northwest corner of the parking lot that's what's referred to the drawings as a beacon sign that's 12 feet high and 24 square feet 24 square feet because it's foursided so it's six square feet per side um that is illuminated and the unique thing about that is it has a solar pan solar panel on top of it to power a battery which illuminates the light uh so those are directional those two signs like I said 10 and 12 feet tall really focused on narrowing the scope where people need to go this when you're just about there giv you guidance where go the building mounted signs are seem to be repetitious but really the building amount of ones are to give you direction from across the shopping center where where to approach um there's also a canopy sign that's proposed as well the canopy signs over the front door and it says order pickup is the text of the canopy sign your ordinance limits that to two square feet the applicant is requesting 17.6 so that [Music] is this is going to be difficult for you to see from across the room but it's in your package it's uh literally just the word order pickup and it's to identify that when you order you can walk into the store to pick up that coincides where you have those parking spaces for the pick up no those parking spaces are on the side of the building this is on by the front door uh there's also so functionally the reason for that sign is when they're walking in to me c fores when they're walking in but when they're there there's a shop from home and there's where they bring stuff out to your car there's also the aspect where you can order online and go to the store and pick it up that that's the aspect that they're trying to address with this and just for completeness why do you need that exception like a bigger sign uh well two square ft is very very small for that purpose and T to see it yeah that big so you can see it from a calculation is it based on the size of the building the height or any any of that or Bas a standard Target thing either way I just want to know it's based on the letter height and being able to see it from a distance away and frankly you know they had their sign and we're trying to align that with your ordinance and pick a sign type that works that really meets the intent of what that is and that that that's what we pick just because it's sitting over top of the canopy and I think that's how we got to the size versus the ordinance thank that's so I think that's what it I just have a quick question for the order pickup has there ever been like the confusion of people are going to see the drive up sign on that right hand side when you pull in so has is there a potential that people are going to think that that's where they stop to get their materials picked up or I'm just asking in general if that's like an issue or anything because I feel like as someone who might not know that that's an internal signage for them to walk in there could be confusion if we're pointing that way and they don't necessarily know to go all the way around right and the way the pickup works is it's similar to other stores right you have you pull into a space you text they have your number and they bring your stuff out if that doesn't work they're going to come out and ask you where's your order you know so there'll be dialogue at that point so if there is confusion it might bless you it might get resolved there at that point and then people learn the process a little better so can't tell you there I was just asking in case just because I know the flow of traffic I just want to make sure that people aren't stopping there and thinking that that's where they would be picking up their packages so I don't know if it makes sense to have the signage that's in the front directing specifically a little bit further down or wherever they need to turn at the corner just because and I've seen people stop in the middle of the parking lot to get their order so I just want to make sure that it's clear directionally for everyone yeah because it would seem kind of intuitive it says order pickup you think you're going to stop right there at the canopy sign as opposed to traveling around the corner to the actual pickup so is there is there a a a clarification to that word because that's you want that signage so it so if people did shop from home and want to come into the store and pick up it's kind of promoting that service okay so I it I may not be the right witness to answer that question okay yeah that's fine so let we'll we'll regroup we switch okay yeah I I think it's a great point of I would ask if in the parking stalls where they call in to have the order brought out I've noticed in a lot of other places can't hear me oh in a lot of other places grocery stores for example they'll have a sign when you pull into the parking sawall they'll have a sign right in front of you text or call this number yes okay they'll have something along L okay yep yeah I think the pickup is just to identify it on the building in terms of that that service is available and but you know I unless there's real concerns about that I think we can move on to the other signs if you can yeah we're so close finishing I will say people will probably only make that mistake once I think so and you know just to talk about the the signs that you were just referring to for pickup again those are located on the Westerly side of the building there's 12 spaces identified for that we said earlier in in the night we're proposing to reduce the sign from what's being requested on the plans down to 2.92 square feet uh so that would be under the three square foot threshold but there's the condition going to be reduce what signs that are now what square feet to 2.92 Ft these are the drive up drive up post and panel sign drive up post and panel signs from x square feet to 2.92 square feet what is x five thank you is that a per signage there's only one sign left to talk about excellent It's a window sign and it's a little difficult to see on the elevations but it's there it's a window sign for Starbucks and on the elevation just kind of peeking around the corner uh your ordinance allows up to 25% of the window area to be occupied with the window sign this is 0.8% of that window are the sign itself is only four square feet so it's pretty small yes okay okay good so I have a I have a question about overall facade is that with you or should we wait for AR okay um but let me see if I could help yeah it's more to our planner um I know there's a lot going on in the municipality with planning about looks and all that of the building I know it's an active thing going on is it relevant here or not with the discussions which are going on with the signage and the and the over yeah um so that was actually one of my comments what what number Mike what number no Jeff number 21 that report you Reed them when you say the board approve the facade plan for Theon Marketplace in a resolution it was part of the plan uh approv and there is there is modification specifically to the to the Cole's tenant space and uh that relates to your previous question number 19 or not no no no so what would you the resolution up the top of your head Mr gr do you know what he's talking about no I I think just there was Prior improvements to the shopping center saying that uh to allow for coals to have facade changes and I think correct me I'm wrong I don't want to testify but that this is a shopping center and and is it fair to say that these proposed changes to the facade from Burlington are consistent with what existed and and currently exists trouble hearing you you're not talking country God I'm just talking so loud too is it fair to say that the uh Target facade changes are consistent with the uh prior Burlington Coat Factory facade and the existing facade in this shopping center it's not like we're putting in uh a completely foreign type of retail use this is a retail use in the shopping center let's just see what the planning board resolution says before we answer the question sure this planning board resolution number 37-2 2001 I just want to see if it says that you're supposed to have some kind of overall you know coordinated sign plan or not if not then appears to me to be a nothing if yes then it might be a something s all right what Jeff report is referring to the planning board resolution number 37-21 there's a finding number 20 like look there's no condition the finding just just listen to the finding is the applicant provided rendering for for facade signage the uncertainty F the identity a number of tenants precludes the submission of a plan which is sufficiently detailed to be approved the signage issues will be resolved at the time of final site plan review so there's got to be another resolution Jeff the best of your recollection since you're under oath but this is before your time unless you can find the final site plan resolution you recall if there was a I condition that it had to be a coordinated signage plan throughout the whole Shopping Center or not from the research there was a facade plan and some sort of conversationist and comments based on the facade okay is there any ordinance requirement that you have a coordinated sign plan for a shopping center I think he's talking facade facade facade no no facade requirement but as far as this as far as this project and application there was discussion discussions on we we would propose that this is this is what we're proposing okay yeah not not it's matching the existing shopping center and the uses in the shopping center and and this is our proposal this a national this is their National signage in order we're not we're not going to make Target as an orange or a purple you know we all know that that's what targets look like yeah any board members have a problem with that no right I just like to ask a question I like to ask a question are there any outside cameras that are going to be uh yes they there'll be cameras security purposes yes and in particular by the uh the pickup area Okay so the employees can see what's going on by by my notes I think we've addressed all of the board professionals correspondents we tried to go through it in our testimony rather than having to wait to look at the reports at the end so unless the board professionals have any further questions if Mr streker or the board I'd like to call our next no question yeah great well if anybody in the audience or online has any questions please speak now okay hearing none if not the only thing I'm going to say just found this other resolution the final site plan resolution so I think his point is that he wanted the board to specifically review thead signage plan and you know either approve it or say you had any problems so you guys I take it approve it yes okay yeah because that's what happened in the final site plan okay so I think we've seen what it looks like and I'm gon to skip over the architect and go to the planner unless anybody has any other architectural questions because we kind good idea anyone have any architectural questions materials I mean just in general brief overview of what the materials are is it metal is it stucco is it just quick hello I'm Rob shriker again I'm just GNA answer briefly sure uh obviously I'm an engineer but the the face of the building largely is going to be e is consistent with the remainder of the sh I can't hear you right and explain what Eis is exterior insulated finish system which looks like stucco correct correct oh way to go Mr drill good job what else in addition to that are going to be wall panels that are cement fiber but really they're intended to look like wood so that's what these gray stacked areas are that you see highlighting various areas of the facade and obviously there there's a bunch of Glass on the front of the building on the side piece of the building as well um so in that sense it is going to be consistent with the rest of the shopping center it's made a similar materials so the red material is what again that's ephas ephas okay yeah Stucker Stucker fake Stucker okay anything else on that no down red the curve thank you thanks thank you [Music] Steve Steve I need you to speak into that microphone please please clearly hi uh my name is John tyina IP say your name again I'm sorry John listen it's 9:30 we're GNA make it go slow so she gets everything you said take the Brooklyn out of my voice I didn't have to say my name is John tyina T AI k i n a i the principal of all things planning and development in South Brunswick New Jersey uh that's right smack in the middle of the state if you don't know um I've been uh a planner since I completed my studies at Ruckers University in 1992 in 1992 and I've had the pleasure of keeping my license for the last 31 years they tell me that's the challenge uh most of the time I do this I testify before planning wordss and zoning boards around the state of New Jersey this is my 147th different board that I've been before in uh the last 30 years and uh I'm pleased to be here and your license is up to to date my license is current and up to date thank you I offer Mr tyina as an expert planner any questions we'll accept thank you um so I'm here so I'm here to talk about uh the relief tonight uh we do need three different types of relief uh the first one is a D3 variance for a conditional use that does not meet all the conditions uh the second is a our combination of C1 and C2 variances or bulk variances as are commonly called um and they are enumerated in Mr vella's letter and then the third type of relief uh that we require is a D1 use variance for an accessory use that is not permitted by your sign ordinance and that will be for the now one-sided sign that is located um at the uh Eastern Church Street driveway so in terms of the in terms of the D3 variants um there are uh it's covered by What's called the Coventry Square case as you as you know all the types of variances have been widely litigated and uh the different cases provide us with kind of the steps uh for the board to make the appropriate findings to approve them so uh for a D3 variant it's not as serious as a use variants because the governing body envisioned and the planning board envisioned we did the master plan that this would be a shopping center it said shopping center for conditional uses and it just said you have to meet these certain conditions but under centry we only have to look at the things that that we don't comply with and for those things that we don't comply we need we need to work with the board to have the board make the findings to ask is the site still suitable for the use even though we don't comply with those uh few conditions one being impervious surface second being parking and the third being the front yard setback third being what front yard setback and then um as with uh oil our variances um we have to further some purposes in Municipal anus law and then we have our negative criteria are we going to have a substantial to the public good we going to have any impairment to the Zone plan or the master plan so the question is um are we still suitable for the use uh in this instance um the it's an existing Center that has been uh in operation in its current form since its modification from an interior Mall in 2001 the proposed improvements that are proposed tailor the site to the desired anchor tenant and provide needed aesthetic and functional improvements storm water lighting Paving land and Landscaping improvements that helped to bring uh this Center that that has been present in town for many many years uh that helps it bring bring it closer into the 21st century um and so the fact that the existing setbacks will remain has really no negative impact and it isn't something that needs to be overcome it's existed and it's been fine the parking we heard extensive testimony that the parking is adequate you've heard that the specific parking for Target is adequate and I want to make sure we get that right referring to Mr vella's letter approximately 281 spaces are provided in what we call the the target area and that is a ratio of about 3.7 per thousand uh targets uh ratios now for requirements go all the way down to 3.5 because of the changes in shopping patterns online shopping and order pickup because now you can do your order online you can pull up into the parking lot in those designated spaces they put it in your trunk you leave you're there five minutes instead of being in the store for 45 minutes so that decreases a part demand so all these things that are continuing to Evol evolve in the industry uh all uh lend Credence to the site remaining suitable even though it doesn't have that amount of parking and then finally uh is the um impious surface um we do have a minor increase in ovious surface of 0.5% um but what that has begat Beyond increasing a little bit of parking providing an appropriate location for those EV charging spaces uh that are desired public policy in your master plan dating back to 2019 so you were three years ahead of the state in terms of where you were with with electric vehicle charging electric vehicle charging um but what it also does is it begets the storm water improvements that are being made in terms of water quantity and and water quality and uh with the bio retention and the poorest pavement for the for that 5,000 square feet of pavement the applicant is buying off on a a little bit more storm water than you really would have expected um to meet these new regulations and that is a h an improvement that is facilitated by that point 5 or 6% of an increase in in ovious surface so I think that because of these improvements um it again it Still Remains appropriate even though um even though that uh that one element isn't isn't address um I'm not going to enumerate all of the uh the C1 this the C1 and C2 variances they've been discussed in um in great detail uh already I'm not going to try and repeat myself uh I will say that in each instance as with all of our C1 or C2 variances you need to find that they specifically relate to this piece of property they relate to 325 Highway 22 and no other property they don't just give a which are the c1s and which are the c2s the um the C1 variances um that are present uh are uh the steep slope Varian um the and the um and the requirement uh really just the Steep SS the rest of them are um c2s are c2s and your argument for the see2 is you're improving the overall condition of the site and there's a case law saying that if you you can look at the whole project as a whole and improving it that would be a benefit and if it's sub outweighs any detriment which in this case you're basically saying there's hardly any detri in the board to Grant the variance is that your testimony yes I'm going to throw that page away um I I do want to uh provide what those specific uh benefits are the parking variance reflects the current industry trends for Less parking due to the order pickup the sign variances all provide for identification and way finding to serve the traveling public and direct patient to the appropriate site and I and I do want to point out one thing you asked about the the order pickup sign that is on the Eastern end of the facade and your concern was that folks would stop in front of the main entrance in the center of facade the blade sign that directs you around the building when you're coming down the facade from east to west is all the way at the at the western edge of the building so it really you'll be able to see it there and it'll direct you and kind of pull you past uh the entry so you're saying it's this one right here actually at the end it's not showing in front of the you walk in it's not right in front of the building where you're walking it's all the way at the western edge of the building okay referring to the same exhibit you're on um when you when you look at the um you see it best when you look at the uh actually at the rear elevation so this is the from Church Street this is that blade sign so you can see it on the side of the building um so it's all the way at the Western Edge yeah so Lindsay's concern which has been bothering me too that people are going to stop in the middle for that pickup it may create some issue there's a sign you're saying is 50 ft in front of them it says come this way okay much much much better because that was a valid absolutely that's why I kind of jumped out of my page here to make sure that I address it okay um uh the park so um and direct patients to the appropriate locations the parking lots in question exist in place and are adequate um while increasing the buffing re um Rec increasing the buffer areas would uh reduce the the available parking and it would reduce the area where spe specifically we are providing for Ev spaces so we think that um providing that additional parking and providing EV spaces is overall benefit and then finally the EV space is located in areas accessible with power infrastructure and visible to the traveling public that's a critical thing as the infrastructure needs to be built out that um that they be uh accessible and and to overall traveling public is the general is the general policy and I understand people like well they're so far from the building that's kind of okay because you don't necessar we don't want people to feel like you necessarily have to be shopping and Target to to go and and use those EV spaces they're kind of far enough away that that you don't feel that way you feel that they're just out there for you so uh it's not like when you know you want to use the restroom laa but you don't want to do it without buying something so it's kind of the same thing you know you you go in you grab a soda or a candy bar or something but um we want to make sure with the EV we don't have that um that type of thing in terms of the um positive criteria and the positive criteria will will relate to all three variances so it relate to the um the D3 variance for the conditional use it relate to all the C variances and it will also relate to the D1 variance I'm going to talk at the end um so the first one is a to and these relates come right out of the ly saw that we're implementing these are just for the c2s you don't need it for the D3 don't need it for the D3 but I will need it for the D1 for the D the first one actually is the one that goes right to the D1 so it's to encourage M A to encourage Municipal action to guide appropriate development in a manner which promotes the public health safety and general welfare so we believe that um that additional sign that we're proposing at Church Street on Church Street that is within the easement there um that that is going to promote uh as Mr trapman said that's going to promote safe identification of that drivers can understand that driveway is there uh and make an appropriate turn there and not have to go all the way through the intersection Etc um Bo made a great recommendation uh for one-sided again that's why the these local boards that are F familiar with these local conditions um are so vital and that's why so much power quote unquote is invested in you because you know your locality is the best and I I give my client a lot of credit that we that we listened um because you know that's that's an important thing and this one for that D1 what the negative Criterion the board impos a condition you have to obtain County approval to have it in the right of way I'm sure that wouldn't be a problem correct we have it it's in the easement already that's correct we're fine with that okay we've already provided it in my letter today but we're good with that um secondly is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses um public and private in accordance with their environmental requirements to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens this is G um again we're uh we're providing this is obviously the right place to have a shopping center obviously the right place to have a Target in a shopping center um and by having Target here and making the improvements we are doing we're going to improve the environment whether it's through our St storm motor improvements or it's through our Landscaping improvements um either way it's an improvement uh I is to provide a desirable Vision environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design and Arrangement again I think this modernization of this end of the shopping center is certainly rep representative of a good design working with your professionals it's only getting better I think the building that is proposed by Target by tpg is is outstanding it is a nice mix of of standard traditional materials with the modern enich panels Etc that kind of bring it up to the 21st century standard um you know and I think they did a nice job of blending uh between uh you know between the old and the new and then finally to encourage coordination of the various public and private procedures and activity shaping Land Development with a view of lessening the cost of such development to the more efficient use of the land um so finally the proposed site reusing the existing site is the better alternative to a new Greenfield site resulting in lower cost of development for the developer as well as lower cost for the community you don't have to extend Services out the Greenfield site you're reusing the site bring it up and adding value to something that already has uh improvements and is already uh envisioned and welcomed in your community um and then finally the The Proposal seeks to blend all the requirements that's kind of the part of this that that isn't uh focused on a lot um you know for somebody to go and get get this approval there's about nine different agencies we need to go through so we answer to nine different Masters and they all kind of end up running through you but they all have to be coordinated so I I appreciate the fact that your professionals understand what the dot does and what the county does and that we need a County approval for something that is associated with the Reas Etc so that that purpose speaks directly to that and I think that this application again by dealing with all these agencies uh certainly advances that um so the last piece that I want to do because then I'm going to do the negative criteria together all at once because that addresses all of them is the relief for the sign not permitted in the RightWay the location is in a County Road widening easement area uh which uh your staff is interpreting uh your definition of public RightWay to include um rights of we owned or contemplated uh so I guess the easement though it remains within uh the shopping center shopping center owners this way Captain chase the county said you can have it there right the county said we can have it there they said they would have it there what possible negative could there be to have it there none okay next I think Mr I think Mr Joe's getting tired it's fine so so so because so because the county said we can have it there we believe it's particularly suited to be in that location uh we don't from Michi standard we don't believe the municipality and the governing body ever would have envisioned uh that there would be a conflict between future County Road widening and go is particularly suited for safety because they already had a case where they had one of these in the in the right of way and they told them not to do it just stick with particularly suited for safety thank you so in terms of our negative criteria um there two prongs of it the first prong is that we don't have substantial detriment of public good um in this case uh we're large the existing conditions for an existing shopping center where we are simply improving it U providing offsetting benefits to landscaping and St storm water it's not a noxious use and this Improvement will have a benefit for the center as well as the surrounding uh centers and surrounding um surrounding retail uses the second wrong is uh are we going to have an impairment to the intent and purpose of the Zone plan or the master plan your B2 Zone states its purpose is to Divine and control the major shopping and business areas of the township serving the needs of both Township and Regional populations and Transit Highway users so this proposal does exactly that Target is a regional use um and it's going to draw Shoppers to this shopping mecca uh that's here in Ron uh your 2019 master plan reexamination uh sought to limit growth to existing sewer capacity check existing roadway capacity check and permit additional non-residential development check reutilizing and revitalizing exist existing Center will accomplish these goals certainly not impair them finally the re-exam sought to promote smart growth policies including potential locations for EV charging and environmental sustainability again the proposal to reuse the existing site and the existing building because we've seen so many of these older buildings get scraped and that's not sustainable when you throw it away more sustainable thing is to reuse it and that's exactly what we're doing here those purposes from the from the master plan what are you reading from which master plan or which I'm reading from the 2019 master plan reexamination recommended goals in section four at what page that on I don't know rely on Mr grber get I can hand it to you in a moment I'm just not reading from that congratulations I mean three years ahead of the state therefore I believe you can make the requisite findings Ava available for your question just the for all the same reasons that you gave in support of the C variances and the D variances do they apply as well to the design waivers in terms of the Practical difficulties for strict compliance yes okay any questions questions any any questions for the planner okay hearing none and sure Jeff microphone I just have one question maybe just a clarification the signage that is by Wawa that was previously in the right of way being relocated right that one sign right you're only seeking thank you the D1 for the sign that's really in that right we're going to make that one comply correct the Western sign is relocated out of the easement the Eastern sign remains as one Ed Facing East traffic and comply with the 5 foot setback yes the 5 foot setback is L property line to the right then we have to comply actually we we'd like a c variance for that we're g to get it out of the right away but that that's like 50 feet I think there so it just that sign is just nipped into the right away if you pull it back five feet from the RightWay what's the difference between having on the edge and five feet back from the right away we're okay with that yeah yeah okay and Mr drill I was reading for page 27 of the master plan reexamination okay so um hearing no other questions for this professional Mr groomer I am not saying a word good move confirm that there's no more members of the public so are there any members of the public that have any questions for the planning expert hearing none oh yeah Cynthia I'm sorry I have one thing that is kind of a point of clarification with the applicant's agreement to put in the additional EVS charging stations they in fact might not need the parking variants now no no no they need the park huh 1101 is the requirement right and and they were 80 980 plus 40 credit for the new spots is 1,020 right so they're still short short 80 the report say 1001 okay okay okay sorry didn't mean to get people didn't mean to get people excited it but so the parking table there should be updated to reflect the additional EV credit that the applicant agreed to you want to say it now so you'll have credit for more spots on on the site so so Jeff uh this is for our completeness in your package you had attachments from the Fire Marshall and from the recycling issue so has that been because we're willing to do both of those things hear what you're say we will comply okay okay are we ready to close for deliberation yes we can anybody want to start I okay so first of all uh I want to thank everybody and uh Steve if you recall when you were here month ago whenever that was we were very big on a few items and uh you guys have addressed them very well right I'll just summarize those items one we I'll emphasize because it has a m so we're talking about safety we're talking about uniformity and we're talking about storm water storm water was one of the bigger items and I'm so glad not only you guys have addressed those but it's going to make that area better so so that's great and thank you for that uh Landscaping is still an issue and I'm I'm hoping that you guys will do whatever it takes to get us aligned uh because as a board member and member of the community I'm very very very concerned about environment and floodings and all that that's happening and I think this Landscaping is going to help that okay but given that um um I will support this application and I think it's a very good thing for the community um from a business point of view I believe this is going to bring uh good economy and business in the area and will provide better Services which we need in the area so I'm I I want to welcome personally Target in the area and thank you for everything yeah anyone else want to go I'll go so I want to thank you for all the work you've done and especially when you were here last time and the improvements you made to make this uh feasible I think the Landscaping is greatly improved I know we're still a little short but I am so pleased with what we had what we have now versus what we've had before and uh the storm water management um I think you've gone beyond uh above and beyond so greatly appreciate for our community I think this is an overall uh great modernization and overall will be a great Improvement for the community um again I want to thank you for the uniformity in the in the marketplace um making sure that you know it looks the same as fits in with the rest of the shopping mall so I do appreciate and I would be able to I would support this application I'll go next um so I appreciate your patience and going through all of our questions on this um and also working with us to kind of find a middle ground and I know we're still working on a few things but definitely agree with my board members um I think just ensuring sinuses signage is as effective effective as possible is really key for us just knowing how traffic is in this area and knowing people aren't always following directions so appreciate your um diligence in kind of explaining that further um I do think that it's a great added value to our community just knowing that typically I have to go to Bridgewater Princeton or another town to go to Target right now so um I think it is a really good add to our location and um looking forward to having it come towards you anyone else want to speak just uh thank you for for agreeing to do the additional EV spots I think getting more EV parking in our community is going to be really important especially at that shopping center I I think that's great and uh I look forward to a resolution of The Pedestrian circulation issues in those external parking aisles because I I do think that's something that we really need to pay attention to because we want to make sure every all those good people coming into Target can get inside safely anyone else before we vote yeah I would just uh well first off Taylor do I get to vote tonight or not yes you do okay yes you do I'm alternate number two so I never know that's why you should always attend everye exactly Stellar attendance record um well I'm actually glad that I got to sit on the U meeting tonight because I've been saying for years that Target would be a great addition to the community um I'm really happy with the give and take we had tonight and things seem to be working out well I will say though please take seriously our concerns about the Landscaping um um I'm I would be willing to die on that Hill if we if we can't come to some kind of a um a good a good resolution on that uh other than that I I would very much support this because I Steve's been here enough that I trust him and I know I know John Morgan Thomas will do a good job we're at 959 Randy do you have anything to say I'll be brief I'll be real brief um I appreciate the patience of everybody on um that came to to um deliberate I mean we deliberating but for the planner um for everybody else I think this is going to be a great Improvement um for the community as long as all the conditions are met couple Jackie not getting this coming out okay normally I say come up close a little back Jackie am I right now yeah much okay thank you um I think this is going to be a better Improvement and what brington was it before I just think we we have some issues with with um Landscaping we have some issues with with the parking or have issues with the signs but I'm glad that um we rectified it as long as all the conditions are met okay thank you we running late because of Randy but that's a story of my life can I can I get a can I I'll make a motion the motion would be to Grant the D3 variance the C1 variances C2 variances the D1 sign variance the exceptions and preliminary and final site plan subject to all the conditions that I've written down and the board's usual conditions in its rules and the waivers waivers are exceptions I'll make a motion so move second okay roll call please chairwoman miss cythia schaer yes Vice chair Mr Russ dami yes Mr Randy block yes yes Miss lindsy K bral yes Miss lorett ktina yes Miss Donna Drew yes Mr James Miller yes thank you very much it's not my fault we're at 102 thank you thank you very much really appreciate the boards input on this application thank you um can I get any motion to adjourn so mov say all in favor anybody want to stay later okay iceam is Clos