the meeting will please come to order the um January 17th meeting of the board of adjustment will please come to order adequate notice of this meeting has been has been that on January 17th 20 2023 a copy of notice specifying a daytime and location was posted on a bullet board outside of burough Hall given to the clerk administrator mailed facts to email to the curry news and or the uh norstar Ledger and placed on the burrow website if any member believes that this meeting is being uh held in violation of the open public medeia act please State your views at this time these proceedings are of a Judicial nature only those items on the agenda will be addressed adequate uh judicial decorum must and will be maintained next item swearing in of Eric Alvarez and Order de I'm sorry Mr chairman swearing in the dere oh all right and all right all right we have two we have two officials to swear in actually first and foremost we have our distinguished chairman uh who I will be happy to uh if you will if you will raise your right hand uh repeat after me sir I Arthur Adare I Arthur Adare do solemnly swear do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States that I will support the Constitution of and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and that I will Fair pardon here that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the governments established in the United States and in this state and to the governments established in the United States and this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people and I will faithfully and partially and justly and I will faithfully and partially and justly perform all the duties of the office of Zoning Board of adjustment chairman perform all the duties Zoning Board of adjustment Zoning Board of adjustment so help me God so help me God congratulations thank you you you Mr Alvarez thank you very much uh if you would if you would repeat after me um I Eric Alvarez do solemnly swear I Eric Alvarez do Solly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey that I will support the Constitution of the United States in the state of New Jersey that I will bear truth true faith and allegiance to the same that I will bear truth faith and allegiance to the same and to the governments established in the United States and in this state and to the governments established in the United States and the state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people and that I will faithfully impartially and justly and that I will Faithfully part impartially and justly perform all the duties of the office of Zoning Board of adjustment member perform all the duties of Zoning Board of adjustment member so help you God so help me God actually according to the best of your ability so help you God there the forms a little bit um all right very good uh congratulations all right okay roll call please chairman Adair here Mr allet here M carpinet here Mr mlin here Mr O'Neal here Mr vsky here Mr Flores here Mr Alvarez here Mr Daniels here we have a quorum next item Pledge of Allegiance pled Al to the flag of the United States of America to the rep for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all next item election of officers we have nominations for board board chairman second move in second are there any other nominations someone would like to move that the nomination be closed second it's been moved that Arthur Adair U be elected chairman would roll call please chairman Adare abstain no you know yes Mr allet yes Mr carpinet yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr vsky yes Mr Flores yes thank you very much next item U election of a vice chair I'll nominate as long do second mve uh for Ed uh any other nominations someone move that the nominations be closed second all in favor roll call for Ed chairman adir yes Mr Ellet yes Rich Mr car yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr vinsky yes Mr Flores yes okay um uh nomination for um appointment of a board secretary administrator I'll nominate Jenna laruso second moving second any other nominations okay someone move that the nomination be closed move so move second all in favor roll call please chairman Adair yes Mr alet yes M carpinet yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes m Mr vinsky yes Mr Flores yes okay let's choose a planner SL engineer coun okay we do close I'd like to interject right now okay not sure exactly how to word this however we received request for we were going to take care of that yeah but I want to do that now okay this what we talked about earlier yeah we talked about this we had request for qualification I don't know how we got them but they came to us late in the game but they came to us and I'm very uncomfortable not addressing that I'm not saying they have to hire or fire anybody but I'm just uncomfortable voting for something that we haven't talked about you know we've had we had the request and I don't know any of the people other than I just who sitting here and I'm not advocating for anybody or anything but for us as a body just not discuss it no not talk about for vote I think it's inappropriate I don't know I don't think it's illegal I'm not sure but to me it's not ethical and I've got a problem with it okay um we all received that those U those names um it was not on the planning board reorganization uh agenda I was as I told you I want to talk with um Brian and Bernie to see what's up and that I would move that we table those um applications until October when we do get our fqs from our professionals and we can take a look at them also if those people are still interested do you think that they would be somewhat disappointed about not hearing that we as a board discussed their our because obviously something happened their these went out so they're fully expecting to get vetted I would imagine think it would be service and we also May preclude them from preparing a a new proposal in October because if they weren't going to be heard now why would they want to do a new proposal like I year we received this so to the planning board and the bual council and nobody has acted on it yet that's the problem nobody's acted soon as I got it I sent an email out to everybody on this board and to others saying that we should at least discuss this word back until you called me today which I appreciate but it's been silence and I there's error of transparency I don't think we're being transparent well nobody we don't know where it came from um we we had we had the meeting uh a couple months ago or a couple weeks ago the planning board and had come up that the DSA would like to have your their choice of planners uh one from colum a one from Colum be u a planner for right-handed hitters a planner for left-handed hitters a closer you know um what we got we have't we're blessed but yes we should take a look at it and I think that uh the three boards should get together we should get the input and see where we're at and why what precipitated this what three boards Council planning board and the and us okay yeah I I agree we should talk about it I think that's that's my point we should talk about it and I didn't propose that we reappoint them as for 90 days or something so we have time for talk about this go longer than 90 but I I just think it's we're not doing the town of service by just ignoring what going on here again everything is transparency today and we're not being very transparent well that would be include all three boards there nobody's moved on it yet well you know I used to take the nozz out of fire I was always ahead and I mind doing tonight but I'm telling you I'm just uncomfortable that's all I'm saying I'm not saying it's right wrong or a difference I'm uncomfortable ignoring it just well I was uncomfortable with the way it went when they started talking about having more than uh giving the applicant the choice of the council or the planner that's going to work for the burrow that we're going to pay for right very you I got just stuck in my crawl but we never discussed it and I think there in lies the problem I think we really have to discuss it whether it's in an executive session or whether it's a public session I don't really care because I say what I say anyway but I just think we ought to be talking about what we're doing and and I'm not for or against anybody and I'm certainly not against the guys down the end of the table here but I just don't like ignoring stuff that's come to us and just say let's just go about our business we don't care what anybody says I'm uncomfortable with we do it and I was the fire chief I was yeah I mean just doesn't sit I can understand it and appreciate your comments there's a motion on the uh floor for Clifford Gibbons I'm moving move second any discussion any other further discussion roll call please chairman Adair yes Mr allet yes m carpinet yes Mr McLaughlin no Mr O'Neal no Mr vinsky yes and Mr Flores yes Carri uh would someone make a notion a motion for a planner SL engineer I'll move it second second any discussion any further discussion can we yes I would like can we postpone that and as Rich had mentioned maybe 90 days or 120 days I'll tell you the other reason why in full transparency I believe that everybody on their board has received various letters over the last 90 days we have not discussed any of those letters at all you just mentioned the one about the DSA but there's a couple of others that are out there and and I think that we should discuss it in executive session and to go over it and again so everybody on our board is aware of you haven't received letters but if you have I I think we should discuss them okay set it up for executive session and again as rich said Mike nothing against you but I think that we need to discuss it I think that as a board I don't think that should be ex public well and Council it's a what do you recommend does does it go public or does it go executive well I mean you can certainly you know the the letter itself as a number of us commented on has some you know was you know I guess that was the DSA letter was controversial uh I mean it could have been taken up by the board in the normal course of its Affairs I don't think it need to be dealt with an executive session um and the only you would only want to do executive session if you were discussing Personnel for example the terms and conditions of a contract with your professional or if your professional or if your professional had you know undertaken something that led you to want to fire him or her or you know something along those lines you know a letter such as the one you're referring to and I know there have been others though I have not seen them um you know that should be taken up by the board in the normal course a public session uh the board the the board re received the letter publicly so it should be dealt with as such and I know that was brought up at the planning board meeting um Larry Larry Cleveland was very vocal about it and Bernie want to um handle it in public um executive session but if the board wants to do it in executive session I mean in in public we can do that but let's schedule for the next meeting I think we're talking about not just one letter we're talking about a number of letters that affects our our board and I think the planning board at the same time well you know last year we had a couple applications that members of other boards saw fit uh to get into our business and um I kind of resented it and I talked with the then mayor about it um we know know what we're doing we're a damnn good board we are as good as any board in this state um but there was there were rumors there was interference which really ticked a lot of people on this board off to the point where you know they talked about doing um uh sending or filing a complaint with the Ethics Committee on some of the things that that we were interfered with we know our jobs uh just like some of the other things certain things were supposed to come before us and was diverted to other boards and decisions were made that also affected the planning board where they were bypassed on a few things that's what we got to discuss yeah we need we and like you I said we had a a joint meeting with the planning board several years ago to discuss the P Zone I think we really all we need to do is have a joint meeting with the planning board and the mayor and counsel about which direction we're going in this town um the mayor sitting right there I know he's he's taking um he and I've talked and he's um he laid some groundwork out on January 1 which he wants to talk about today and give us our marching orders but we do have a nomination on the floor Michael Cole Co and Associates for planner Engineers been moved in seconds we've got any more discussion was it modified or was it not modified that's more yeah can can we modify that so that we let's do it for 90 days and certainly within the near future that we have our meeting and then what do we what do we want to do vet the other uh no applicants I think we should maybe have a need to talk about what we're going to do do it tonight get the hearings done since that was my motion then my question is if we put a timeline 90 days what if any implications does that have for anyone who is presenting plans to the zoning board or has an application before the zoning board and now we're telling them well it's possible that one planner will begin the process but 90 days from now we don't know so I I well that has happened before yeah but I don't Rec from for me being here I don't recall that so planed initiated stay with to the end but if we only are if we're putting a 90day period on it and it goes beyond 90 days they continue they choose they want to stay with it they finish the job it's very difficult to hear everything oh talking to the mic oh I'm sorry complaining I'm just you know no that's okay my my question was if we put a timeline you know on on on Mike's 10 you know if we say we'll review this in 90 days what if any impact does that have on any applications that are received now and are in process and may go beyond the 90 days well from a legal standpoint thank you from a legal standpoint there was a substitution that would you know you know stretching this out to its uh possible implications if Mr Cole for example were were here for 90 days and his contract was changed or the board went in a different direction the new planner or engineer would pick up you know would essentially pick up in midam Midstream that is a mixed bling at best honest with you it does visit some potential difficulties upon the applicant because it means the charges can be duplicative against esos so it's a uh it's not an easy situation and I I know the board is sensitive to cost and things like this that would essentially potentially greatly increase the cost for because you're essentially paying for two professionals to do the same job well if we if we go with that c then we're talking about never changing the planner ever ever again even January 1 I mean somebody's got to live a 100 years I mean that's not realistic I mean things change ordinarily you do it from year to year that's ordinarily what's what is the difference and I'm not following the difference planners change members change lawyers change and the world goes on somehow or other it continues to spend and and that's just life I me I I don't think we can freeze everything to be this way forever because afraid to change Mr O'Neal I'm I'm not claiming you you should do that I'm just explaining what would happen do it I'm explaining the other side of it I I understand I think the work around could be is that and let's say that it was Mike certainly we would want him to stay on to hear that full application sure that's another way to handle it yes right and and yeah it's not a not a drop dead don't want to hurt any applicant any Resident that's coming before us nor the town or the town or the professional for that or the professional my my other question would be um can I I think I think with regard to the governing body sometimes you can just carry someone over until a decision is made can we do that can I here's the thing you give somebody a job for 90 days at the end of 90 days it you could put that person in an embarrassing professional situation and that that's not right to do that can we can we just carry over until we have a decision if we're going to discuss this next month make a decision then and be done with it you can carry over I think the other thing is is that you know there have been boards that have done it month to month which is not necessarily recommended it either I mean it would probably be that you would want to select the date certain okay this is January you you want to talk about 90 days it would be till I don't know March 31st or whatever the uh whatever the end of that period would be April 1st or you know if you want to do it for you can also do it for uh because under the law it's it's January one to December 31st you know any appointment is generally that way I mean certainly the board has the and and the governing body also in those situations has the authority to you know do what it has to do to operate so um yes it can be done what I'm what all I'm saying is that it it you know obviously has some it has some implications and you have to be considered of those as well I'm not I'm not saying in any way any of these things any of us who are in this profession understand that none of these appointments are lifetime uh I don't think anybody ever considers that at all uh but it's also I know when I've been special litigation counselor special Council I've been to many municipalities you know there can be a depending on the circumstance there can be a time limit Set uh or it can be set you know to the end of uh the end of the year here or something like this so so the bottom line is you can do it but you need to know all the implications of what you're doing that's all but I think we also have to know the implications of not discussing this stuff and I think there in lies the issue and I'm only asking for discussion I'm not I we request I'm not making a decision but no we didn't request that this word of transparency you requested our accuse I don't know I didn't do it if we didn't request them we got I know we got them but we didn't request I didn't get anything I got one letter from you and I think I got one from jenes I don't even know what you guys are talking about the one from Jenna as I recall listed a bunch of applicants right for the various position but it was one letter but Morgan said he received multiple letters I didn't get multiple letters so I mean really I don't know what you guys are talking about right I mean I kind of do but I don't have anything official except an email from Jenna that's what I got and that's what I'm concerned about so we if we had people somehow people applied or presented themselves and quite frankly we were ignoring them and I don't think that's a good thing Kevin did we put out for cues the the borrow put out rfqs they were received back early in November they we've done done it every year um it's a transparency process that we've had we shared those with the uh I shared them with Jenner Jenna shared them with the boards um it's a process we we pretty much do every year for just about every position so this is the first time Kevin that I've ever seen this in my 12 years I I I will tell you uh Mr McLaughlin there there's usually not a lot of responses to the rfqs um this year they W okay so now we know where it came from okay because I know we get the rfqs from cliff and and Mike every year for this and the planning board and Cara this year we have got some other people who might be interested and there we get back to that transparency issue we got it now what do we do with it it's like catching a hot piece of coal what do you do with it I mean we I think we have an obligation to deal with it so just just so I'm clear so rich because because now I'm just getting confused so what you would like to do is review the people who responded to the rfqs a as if we have a job opening and you want to review the resumés which sounds which sounds diff sounds different from these other letters that Morgan is referring to so so what what are we so you want to interview people well maybe not me personally but I think we ought to know who they are and what they can do and I just don't think we can ignore them I mean that's how do you ignore somebody we just they were asked to present the information they presented it and we blow it off I just don't think that's a good idea I have trouble with it and I'm not in favor of anybody I don't have any no I'm just trying to I because now I see there are two different issues here am I right there're two different issues here totally what Morgan's talking about is totally different I'm just talking about the request for qualifications that the burrow received we receive and we don't we just said okay let's forget about it I just don't think I got a problem with that I just I'm in business if I if I send something out to somebody at least tell me no so it's so what would your solution be for someone I I I'm just trying to like narrow this down not trying to that's a good idea so would your solution be for someone on this zoning board to review the applicants and then have letters sent to them that say we either want to interview you or thank you but no thank you well since we've got our administrator sitting here what does the burrow do when they get something like that we we've never done this before what I mean I get resumés sent to me at my job all the time and I'll just say thank you very much I'm not looking for someone right now I do the same thing but we have a I think we have an obligation to this town okay who we represent I to look at this to be fair the town must have a procedure I mean I don't know I've never had yeah I don't know what the the Burrow's procedure is so now Kevin's in the hot seat yeah I mean the the burrow Council ref uh reviewed I mean they were offered to review the rfqs that came in for other positions I mean not not L positions but other positions that are open they did make some decisions on January for prior to to that and advised me on Janu prior to January 1st and they made those appointments the ones that didn't make decisions on um they're they're reviewing them still and they're going to make decisions on those will be done probably you know within you know within the next 30 days uh they have meetings scheduled for we fall to that same bucket yet we haven't reviewed it and now we don't have to do the attorney because that's done but we still have an open position that's not done and I just don't think we can just don't want to ignore people just don't want to do well how how many how many applications are we talking how many four four is this concern or concern all us the Planner yeah you've been voted on already I understand I just it's it would seem to me I mean you know now speaking as the board's lawyer and with some knowledge of the uh local public contracts the fitting regulations if if your planner whatever planner it was uh if B specifications were were sent out by the by the administrator as they were I know because I answered them um and they were answered in a time of s then at that point that's the that's the uh the group from which or the or the individual from which the board has to decide I mean unless it you know unless it reject all the bids which is you know highly unusual usually that's only done if there's some sign of real uh violation or fraud uh you know ordar the board would would make a decision from the uh bids and the responses which you received in a timely fashion uh again I can't speak to anyone by myself I know that I a great deal of trouble to make sure was received on I always have delivered by you know some some kind of receipt situation but if for example and this doesn't just apply to Mr Co applies to anybody who works for the board applies to our reporter or anybody else think if you if you put out specifications and you give a deadline which is what I understand was done then I think theard itself to that process and honors and honors theate respon honors the responses they consider them and then they make decision on I don't think you redo the whole process I think it would be you know very unusual and it would be hard to support so so Cliff your advice is that we review the the proposals and then make a decision once we have reviewed them well it seems to me that you you've already received the proposals I mean I I I you know I guess were they not were they not reviewed at all I didn't review them not as a not by the Yeah I never saw a proposal I just saw names I I can I don't know what to say in that situation that's very unusual um I mean I know our our administrator is is very effective and you know he gets things done I work with him all the time so I don't know what happened to those things I know that we were you know we were all very uh we were all very respectful of those limit you know time limitations and and the bidding requirements and everybody got them in on time it seems kind of unusual not to at least frankly honor honor those who acted honorably that's my point exactly what I'm saying transparency and awareness and that we have it done will I take this into executive it may be in this situation Mr chairman that you should yes okay someone like to move that we go into executive session we can go in the back room I'll move move second second all in favor I I okay [Music] back record the stream will continue so when you come back out you'll be live but um I just want you to know that I can't cut that off and restarted true okay that's fine that's what we'll shut off the camera though Jenna I hope I get a chance to Ser some by the way everybody Happy New Year e for e e spe spe five EX e spe spe very e e somewhere Sun be e e for for e e e spe e B e sh is so have all everything not to it's that's e for think you that's that's will that father e B any e to e tell e e I 30 so e e e e e e for e e e e e e e I e e e e e good discuss okay oh you're not gonna do like you did last night are you what you're not gonna do like you did last night no I didn't do that last night everybody else did it think last night talk little bit they had a problem except for Brian that one over okay would someone move that we go uh come out of executive session make a motion come out executive second second all in favor I I we go back to the regular meeting now where were we oh I think we have a motion and I think we had a second a second and a motion to discussion right and that's what led to all it okay we we're still missing Jenna Jenna Jenna Cliff okay the stream's on a delay so I actually don't know if you're sitting down yet so if you just give me give me a minute I can let you know if you're being recorded on okay the okay ready okay we we have a motion in the restroom okay okay we're out of executive session we have a motion on the floor has been moved and seconded any more discussion roll call please this is for the appointment of Michael Cole and Associates chairman Adair yes Mr allet yes Miss carpinet yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr vinsky yes and Mr Flores yes okay um approval of the minutes of the December sixth meeting so moved second moveed second roll call please chairman Adair abstain Mr allet yes Miss carpinet um abstain Mr mclaughin yes m Mr O'Neal yes Mr vinsky yes and Mr Flores obain we have some resolutions um I'm gonna get to you Brian okay someone want to uh move the uh resolution 46 West Main Street I'll move that moved second on the resolution second move the second roll call please chairman adir yes Miss carpinet abstain resol 4 Mr O'Neal yes Mr vinsky yes Mr Flores yes Mr Alvarez Mr Daniels yes carried next um next resolution is Fifth Street these were all sent out ahead uh and I I I have not I did not Mr Cole had a couple of minor comments but you know they were nonmaterial so everything is as it stands I certainly commend to the board to adopt these resolutions as presented so move and second it I'll move it move get a second second second any discussion roll call please chairman deir yes Mr Ellet yes Mr O'Neal yes yes Mr vinsky yes Mr Alvarez yes Mr Daniels an a resolution for West End Avenue I'm moving moved second moved second any discussion roll call chairman deair yes Mr allet yes M Carpet abstain Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr Flores yes Mr Alvarez yes okay we have all the other stuff taking care of Mr Gallagher on this board 42 49 uh total of other boards I did it pales in comparison to rich in his 112 years on a [Laughter] fire with Tom and Jerry a and a lot of it centered on back up years ago L ofel Zan years we termales of in I know St the has chst to some but I think to others it's going to bring a lot of and that's ofle started but you know it's a very different approach you know technology was a in Midwest young team people said why do something I'm not suggesting this why don't we actually eliminate andology have and can disagree as ladies and gentl going to took to thank you you all thank you Mr Beer thank you Mr going to have a busy year it's going to be good as as we did several years ago when we saw a problem not a problem but a lot of activity to P Zone and we set up the joint meeting with the planning board and got those changes initiated um I think that's what we'll be doing a lot more of looking forward to it okay congratulations Cliff Jenna mikee just want to mention Mr chairman and Mr Alvarez I'm gonna ask you to assign your o of office which I will notorized uh I can pass these down now or when the meeting is over I stop on we can do it after the meeting very good okay okay land use applications we have one um we refer to as the granits building they will not be heard tonight so if anybody is here for that application they won't be heard they've asked to be uh come on I guess it's going to be April Jenna um chus yeah April I believe it's the 17th that's just the uh meeting so if anybody's here on that application it won't be heard tonight yeah okay the next application the Bank of America we need to I was going to say I think we're we're going to need to make sure that's considered and approved by the board in one more what what's that Michael meeting schedule oh I'm sorry the meeting schedule yes I'm sorry and the newspaper as well yeah okay thank you uh need a resolution or motion to approve the meeting dates for next year year and for this year and January 1st of next year that they be advertised in the krya news and the nor story Ledger if necessary put on put on the bulletin board outside of burrow Hall and placed on the website second move second roll call please chairman Adair yes Mr allet yes M carpinet yes Mr mcin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr binsky yes Mr Flores yes thank you okay I want to thank everyone for their patience while we were in executive session it was very productive beneficial for the town okay what do we have good evening Tom my name is Tom lazia I'm an attorney with the law firm of tropman Pepper Hamilton Sanders in Princeton and I'm here representing Bank of America National Association uh which is the applicant in this uh matter and is also the owner of the subject site a notice of this hearing was provided in accordance with law including publishing notice in the official newspaper which is The Courier News and mailing notices to owners within 200 feet by certified mail the uh required affidavits uh were uh filed with Miss laruso so I believe this board does have jurisdiction to hear this matter and I ask for confirmation from your Council Mr Gibbons uh yes sir Mr LZ you uh I concur with you the board has jurisdiction to uh consider this application and vote upon same thank you uh the subject Bank of America branch building is located on property identified as block 112 lot 9.01 on the burough uh tax map and it has a an address of 10 West High Street the property is located in the Burrow's p-r Zone which is professional office resal residential the bank use is a pre-existing uh non-conforming use in the zone and it has been determined that the changes uh we will be discussing this evening uh by the bank uh which involve updating the HVAC equipment and uh new signage that these improvements constitute an expansion of an existing non-conforming use which under the municipal land use laws is considered a D2 uh variance and uh yes I don't mean to interrupt you but um could you just give me for your sure uh the block is 112 and the lot is 9.01 very well I just want to make sure sure thank you very much go ahead okay so as you know uh given that there is a d variance involved this board uh has jurisdiction over the matter yes sir so we are here tonight to present plans uh for certain updates at the branch uh site uh these include uh installation of updated Business Signs uh consistent with the bank's current national branding uh the bank is updating signage at all its branches throughout the country uh the proposed signage consists of One Bank of America sign on each face of the building and one of new freestanding uh Bank of America sign at the corner uh this is the same amount of signage that currently exists at the branch in addition there are new directional and clearance signs uh proposed to be updated also consistent with the uh new branding uh for the bank uh the second category of improvements is uh as I mentioned uh new HVAC uh equipment uh the existing equipment uh at the branch is obsolete it dates uh back to the 1970s and it requires a constant repair and uh however due to the system's age uh the bank is unable to obtain parts so replacing the uh equipment is is critical uh in order for the bank to function uh properly uh which currently has little uh to no air conditioning uh the proposed uh new system will be more modern and efficient and uh the current condenser unit is located on the roof of the building but the new modern uh unit has more internal components which makes it larger and heavier uh and the bank uh building roof cannot accommodate the heavier uh unit uh therefore in this application we're proposing uh new units uh located on the ground other uh site improvements include regrading of the uh Ada parking uh areas uh some pavement maintenance and some Landscape Maintenance and that's the extent of the proposed improvements now there seems to be some confusion perhaps because of how certain items were identified on the plans as to what are proposed new improvements versus existing improvements that are not being altered and I just want to clarify that that uh for the board first we are not proposing any changes uh to the existing lighting at the site uh the lighting shown on the plans is what was previously approved and uh it's already installed at the site and again we are not proposing any changes so any lighting design waivers that may have been identified in uh colon Associates review letter are not applicable uh to this application uh second uh the water line uh serving the bank is also existing and is not changing now uh on to the variance relief I mentioned the D2 variant and there are uh some C or bulk variants uh variances being requested in connection with the application uh I can say and we'll uh provide uh more info on this we are not um the extent of the C variances that were originally being requested have now been reduced um and we'll explain that in more detail the the variances relate to the signage I want to point out that the um again the proposed signage that currently exists is being replaced so the same number of signs but the signs are somewhat different in size because of the bre landing and originally we were proposing a um freestanding sign that did not conform with the ordinance as and as we will explain tonight uh the bank has decided to uh modify the design of the freestanding sign to be in compliance with your ordinance I guess the other the final category of potential variance relief relates to the canopy sign signs that are directional in nature that are on the uh the drive-thru uh at the bank in our view these are in kind replacement signs uh we're not uh changing the number of signs again we're just changing the the new look of the signs uh actually the the new signs in terms of size will actually be a little bit smaller than the existing signs so in my opinion I do not think a variance is necessary but uh the board and its Consultants feel it needs a new variants we can address that the uh the last variance relates to Improvement coverage uh the existing Improvement coverage on the site already exceeds the 50% maximum allowed by your ordinance uh there is a slight uh increase uh in this uh in this proposal however uh based on a recommendation from your engineer that's set forth in his report about us to make some changes to the driveway at the site we are going to be able to add more Landscaping which will offset the additional uh impervious coverage that we were being proposed and therefore that variance is no longer needed for this uh application and again uh our engineer will go through the uh specifics regarding that there are some other um non-conformities that were identified uh by uh your uh attorney I'm sorry your planner and engineer uh relating to uh front yard setback and parking location uh those conditions are not being uh changed at all under this application and therefore uh there's really no variances involved there and then finally uh design waivers and these relate to uh Shea trees Street trees and storm water grates I can uh report to the board that uh we will agree to provide the additional trees that are um requested or suggested uh by uh Mr Cole as well as um we will agree to stall bik bicycle safety grates uh where he noted that we did not have those uh safety grates uh so we're we're going to eliminate those waivers uh from this uh application so I apologize for the long uh introduction but I thought it was important to provide the context and now I'll turn this over to uh uh Mr mut our uh civil engineer as much you need to be swor stand please you saw start the testimony you're about to give this matter will be the truth so God I do please state your name and spell your last name for the record Paul M em and Mary UTC from Stonefield engine thank you very much Mr LZ you your witness sir thank you Mr Gibbons uh Mr much uh let's begin by having you briefly tell the board uh your educational professional back C please certainly I am a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey I graduated from ran University with a bachelor's degree in civil engineering I've been practicing the field for roughly 11 years with specific experience on applications similar to one you're going to see this evening and I've been accepted by more than a 100 land use boards in the state of New Jersey as a professional um as an expert witness in professional civil engineering testimony could your name uh three locals who sumers set I've been before the planning board in summer Ville um and I've also been trying to think of what else is local to here basically everywhere good you're good so Mr chairman I offer Mr M as a we accept civil engineering thank we accept Mr M um I'll start by um placing the exhibits on the screen here for the board's use the initial exhibit that I'll be speaking to are the submitted site plans I don't believe we need to mark these These are the submitted site plan sheets prepared by our office and and part of this application package briefly described the site I think everybody's probably familiar with the Bank of America site it's it's a it's been a subject over the years Bank of America is making many investments in this site over the years you've seen lighting plans utility plans and upgrades as well as parking lot repaving projects and things of the like and they're continuing that Trend here and continuing those investments in this in this bank branch um to continue to refine and improve the site overall um the the current the current um proposal kind of brings it full circle we're doing the final what we'll call site improvements that are associated with the bank and upgrading The Branding and the signage to what is um the new National brand and that was that was put into place in 2018 with some different lettering and Logo looks but all Sites across the United States are being upgraded to the current signage um there's a couple of Nationwide programs that are involved here you saw the there was a lighting project that came um back a few years ago that was part of a nationwide upgrade to energy efficient lights this current project is part of a nationwide effort to in to enhance and maintain the existing sites that's why you saw the parking lot program that came through and repaved the parking lot and now we're making small site upgrades as well to ensure that the the quality of the site is there and then of course the upgrading signage is Parts part of the Nationwide upgrade from the old branding to the new branding we'll get into that in more detail um the important note and and we've already we've already put it on the record this evening there are no changes proposed to the lighting plan that was approved and installed as part of this a few years ago there's no change to the utilities as far as the water line that's included in the plan there are no changes to the storm or changes to the site overall as far as the front yard setback variants that was identified it's an existing condition um as part of this you know for this application so we're not making any wholesale changes to this site other than what I'll get into now you heard about the HVAC upgrades this is to bring a modern and efficient HVAC system to the bank currently the bank is without air conditioning um because that system is unable to be repaired it goes back to the 1970s as you've heard um and we are moving those units off the roof and onto the ground and those will be screened with a 4 foot high opaque fence to making sure that the that the look Remains the Same behind the bank yes certainly so on the rear of the bank you'll see this small area um we'll call it the northwest corner there are three condensing units that'll be located within a 4ot fence and screened from visibility in addition your engineer asked for some additional plantings on the northeast corner of the bank there is going to be an upgraded condenser unit there unit there as well we'll install Plants around that to ensure that it it kind of Blends into the background on that side of the bank so um the HVAC is a pretty simple piece of the application it needs upgrading and we're bringing a highly efficient and modern system to the site um in to to continue down the road of the site improvements that we are making to the site General site maintenance is the focus overall and then there's been pieces added to that over time as we've been to the site we've worked with your professionals and the like the general site maintenance includes curb sidewalk and trench drain repairs to existing um to existing facilities that are in disrepair we are agreeable to the comments in your engineers letter as far as um upgrading any curbs that are in disrepair on the site and we're happy to do a site walk and identify those areas as as condition of this approval and if the board does look favorably on the application this evening the trench strains are are dilapidated and causing some issues on site so those will be fully replaced as part of this application as well looking to maintain safe and efficient operation on this site through those through those features we're also upgrading the Ada parking on site part of the bank's initiative as they move into um different construction challenges is to upgrade all of their Ada parking spaces to concrete to ensure that at installation those those slopes are compliant with the federal Ada code but also over the long duration of that pavement um you don't have the the undulations that come with asphalt so all of the Ada parking spaces will be upgraded to concrete as part of this application in addition we're going to be making a small change to the Ada parking spaces located on the next to the drive-thru we're going to swap the striping here to comply with your engineer's comment on those Ada parking spaces so we will not need any sort of relief for that 88 parking space for a conversation we had with your board professional I'll just show briefly the other location that does have conrete pavement for the Ada spaces closest to the bank entry and the main parking field associated with this Bank in addition to those small site improvements we're also infilling upgrading and enhancing the Landscaping on site most of the Landscaping that you see on this plan the various circles and other shrubs are existing plantings the more the darker shrubs are intended to replace shrubs that have died over the years we're looking to infill and replace anywhere where there's there's Landscaping missing from what was intended to be there in the past we're adding those screening plantings for the condensing unit along the rear of the bank and then you you've also heard heard from our attorney this evening that we are happy to agree and bring the site into compliance with both Street and St shade tree requirements there's five shade trees that are missing or or would require relief from the site today that we intend to install and there's three additional Street trees that are required that we will install those will have to be located outside of the security lighting radius associated with the ATMs and entrances but we believe that there is sufficient room on site to provide those trees so we're not seeking any relief for landscaping this evening specifically we're upgrading the trees um to bring the site into compliance with the ordinance um one one question and one and one significant change to the site that I think um we had an opportunity to discuss with your engineers that the existing driveway exiting onto West High Street is extremely wide today and currently there is Gore striping and and in the proposed condition and the plans that are in front of you there is only Gore striping that is restricting that area what we've agreed to and we've discussed with Bank of America is we are going to be installing landscape islands and curb to reduce the width of that it'll be somewhere in the 20 to 25 foot range wide as you egress we'll also be directing cars to make the right turn out because obviously there's left turn issues that are being this close to the intersection so we intend to work with your engineer to to finalize that design but that is part of the reason why we're not asking for an impervious coverage variance this evening with those islands you're going to get somewhere between 1,00 and 1500 square fet of additional landscaping area on the site and it'll certainly offset the small concrete pads that are associated with the HVAC units behind the building so that is something that basically where you see the the gore striping today that that that channelizes that driveway we're going to upgrade that with curb and Landscaping and that design will you generally follow that striping with some adjustments to make sure that people understand which way you can turn and which way you're intended to turn out of that driveway and channelize those movements from the drive-thru so we think that's going to be a significant Improvement to the site overall um there are no proposed improvements or changes I'll say to the existing storm water management system other than the fact that there are a few inlets that fall below current code we are going to replace those Inlet grates with the bicycle safe grates as well as the eco-friendly grates to ensure um that we meet the current code so anywhere those are identified on site um that are that are non-compliant we'll upgrade those with with new grades I think what we'll do now is we'll move into what I'll consider the main event of the evening this this evening which is the signage package that we are proposing again this is an upgrade to the Bank of America rebranding that occurred in 2018 um and I've prepared an exhibit and this one was not submitted so I think we should Mark it if you'd like I can mark it A1 or however you see fit Mark that A1 lety yes copy of that we I do have a copy with me if you if you'd like to mark it I can mark it on here yes sir yeah you want me to get it now or should after the meeting um it's up to you I I hate to interrupt your I hate to interrupt your uh stream of thought would you provide it after the meeting and we'll mark it A1 certainly yes I'll provide the hard copy I'll mark it in here as well on the PDF so so we're all so this this exhibit that I'm going to refer to at this time is is is labeled a signage exhibit it's prepared January 17 2024 by um Stonefield engineering and this is a blowup and and just a more simplified version of the detailed signage information that was submitted as part of the package just to try to show a side by-side comparison to the board in a clear manner of what we are trying to accomplish as part of this application so one significant Improvement I think we've been able to make over the last last few days on this application is previously we were we were requesting two variances associated with the new what we'll call Monument sign here we were requesting both a height and area um variance over the time because that was the smallest sign that comes in the corporate package for Bank of America over the past few days we've been working on a custom sign that reduces the sign to comply with both area and height it will comply with the 42 inch regulation to the top of the sign as well as the area we are permitted 12 square feet the sign comes to about 11.99 square feet so as close as they could get it'll essentially be an exact replacement of what's there today except that it'll be the new branding and the new look so there'll be a little bit more color and a little bit more modernness to the sign but generally the same position we are shifting it a bit to comply with the two 10 foot setbacks from each um from each property line but it will it will comply in both height and sign height and area which um which I think is a positive movement in this application there is a variance associated with the positioning of the sign there is a 50 foot sight triangle associated with the intersection that was identified in the review letter this sign will be outside of any true sight triangles with either the intersection or our driveway so we're not going to see an impediment of of the traveling public and it is essentially in the same exact position that this sign is has existed historically it'll be similarly illuminated if you look at the sign that's out there today you can tell that the paint's starting to wash off a little bit so it's a little bit brighter but the new signage and this goes for both the monument sign as well as the wall signage will be back lit in letters and Logo only the white faces that you see on any of the signs are not illuminated they're simply an opaque um white background that allows the new deeper and more Rich Reds and blues of the logo as well as the lettering to pop a little bit more and have that contrast so it looks sharper it brings an aesthetic appeal so only the letters in logo are internally illuminated though all signs will be dimmable so there won't be any concerns about installing a sign that is too bright we can work on that in the field if anything were to come up but I think really the intention is to have a low glow of those letters not to overly illuminate them so I think it'll be a successful signage package match what's there for the monument sign the change with the illumination comes with the wall mounted signs the existing wall mounted signs have kind of two things that the Bank of America branding team is moving away from first and foremost there is no illumination prop provided in the existing um Bank of America signs so at night if you're not near an area light it's very difficult to see those signs in addition it doesn't most of the signs do not have the white background that The Branding team of Bank of America is looking to establish to provide that color contrast and make those signs pop the the the the signage on the front edge which we're looking at now does have that white background there will just be letters installed there that will have the internal illumination similar to The Monument sign and what we're doing on the front of the building is today there is an existing Bank of America lettering and logo and then they're adding the logo above the lettering in the proposed condition so the um overall the lettering will stay about the same size but they are installing a larger logo just kind of feels like as part of The Branding of this bank that that that upper area of the of that Eve there is is kind of begging for a sign and and the bank is proud to provide you know kind of that way finding sign for their site on on the main entrance there so that is that is the first sign we'll talk about it is the the West High Street Frontage sign they are adding a logo above the lettering in this condition so there's a little bit of a change to the signage and it'll be internally illuminated I'll go through the rest of the wall signage as we go they're essentially like for like Replacements with one adjust adustment generally the text of Bank of America will be slightly smaller than what's there today it's just a massing of there was two capital letters now it's all capital and slightly reduced so we'll zoom in first on the North Bridge Street Frontage the existing sign is located on the brick which they're trying to move away from for visibility and aesthetic reasons and in the proposed condition they are installing that white background again it's important to note that white background is not illuminated only the letters and logo or illuminated the white is meant to intend that that sign can be seen from a distance it's not mounted on the brick it makes it makes it a little bit easier to see brings an aesthetic appeal to the sign part of the Bank of America Nationwide branding when they are mounting signs on buildings that are brick so we are looking to install that the size of this sign is compliant with the ordinance but because of the way the ordinance is written we're not actually permitted to have Wall signs because we have the monument sign out front so it's kind of a horse trade in that way what we're looking to do is replace the existing side signage in kind we're not looking to expand it other than the white backing we're looking to place it in the same location that it's historically been provided on the building which you'll see as we go through the remainder of the signs which are the rear of the building the sign again will be replaced with the new Bank of America branding white backing um letters and logo in the same position at the same elevation and the same goes for that sign that's located adjacent to the um the drivethru on the side of the building as well replacing the letters you can see especially in this letter you can see that the letters that are proposed are smaller than the letters that are there today so that illumination area will be smaller but the white backing just increases the size of that sign but again they all comply with the percentages and the allowable size if the signs were were allowable per code um as part of the non-conforming use so that's a that's a summary of the signage the bank is proud to bring um their branding package to this site and they're looking forward to introducing the new branding to this site as they continue to make upgrades over time again we talked a little bit about that signage relief but I'll just put it on the record again the we are proposing the four signs to replace in like they are not permitted per ordinance but they are replacing what is there today and then there's also a variance for the overall height of the um of the sign only one dimension per the code is allowed to exceed two feet so technically these proposed wall signs the the white backing of these signs is over two feet in height so you have two dimensions on that sign that exceed two feet the lettering itself is roughly we'll call it 9 to 12 inches depending on the sign and then the logo itself is is in that two foot range as well so we're not looking to drastically improve or in in increase the size of the signs here or the illuminated portions it is just that white white backing that's requiring that variance you'll hear more from our planner this evening um with that um I'll I'll turn it over if there's any further questions or we can open up the board and anyone from the board have any questions of the uh testimony just given by Mr M how high is the white overall height is 2 feet 7 and a half inches letter height on these signs is is nine inches thank you anyone from the audience have any questions of the testimony just given uh yeah I I run by the West High uh exit all the time so I'm glad to see that you're shortening it I'll feel safer as I run by it um but you I see a right turn sign there a right turn uh arrow on the on the road or on the apron to to the road will there be a no left turn sign we can certainly provide that sign I'm not sure if there's one today um but if there isn't it's not we we would object to okay and then also the I mean if it's a right turn then the angle of that exit is actually in the it's encouraging a left but yeah the the current striping certainly is when we install the curve in landscaping it'll be it'll be the other way to encourage that turn yeah certainly you'll put the no left turn sign in there certainly anyone else management your opinion that adequate run off is adversely impacting the roadsound yeah I would I would agree with that and I I I'm not aware and I've been on this site and we've been working with it a lot I'm not aware of any um issues that they've had over time with this storm water conveyance system so I feel comfortable stating that I'm comfortable with the design yes okay thank you Mr MCH thank you I now will call Thomas REI uh do you saw the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so help you go yes I do please state your name and spell your last name for the record Sor Thomas REI last name is spelled r i CCI business address 92 Park EV Rutherford New Jersey thank you very much Mr liia your your witness sir thank you uh Mr Richi uh please uh briefly uh describe to the board your uh educational professional background please any you appeared before us before I thought I did but it wasn't on my list but I have appeared before boards in the area okay okay again just briefly I'll run through it yeah licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey certified by the American Institute of certified planners um I've testified over 100 times uh in front of at least 70 boards throughout the state of New Jersey and New York um some recent ones uh Franklin greenbook Manville sou planfield you're good thank you Mr so you you heard both from me as well as uh your colleague Mr mut U the variance relief that is required for this application can you quickly uh summarize for the board what the V belief is and then provide uh your planning opinion as to whether those variant variances are Justified yeah absolutely um so as you've heard um Bank of America currently exists on the property um this is a corner lot it's a pretty big lot when you compare it to the surrounding area um it's almost two acres approximately 74,000 square feet um most of the improvements just relate to to signage um some Landscaping um really just refreshing and upgrading the site um we're in front of the zoning board tonight seeking a D2 expansion of a non-conforming use variant um because banks are technically they are non um conforming use in the p district the professional office and residential district um so this is different than a straight D1 use variant because the use already exists um and the use is not changing um we just doing as we mentioned these minor sight improvements um so in my opinion it's it's not even really what you would think of as a normal expansion of a non-conforming use where you increase um building footprint where you add additions we're not doing any of that um this is more of a technical trigger of the variant because um we're adding those HVAC pads in the rear of the building and then we're adding new signage which uh necessitates variances so really that's what what triggers the D2 um but I think you know the most important part about the justification of the D2 is nothing about this proposal is intensifying this nonconforming use of the site um I think that's the most important piece here is as I mentioned there's no there's no building additions there's no increase in footprint there's nothing that's intended to increase build parking or traffic or anything like that um that and the fact that we align with uh in my opinion two very important pieces uh purposes of the municipal land law uh that being purpose a which is to promote uh safety and general welfare um which I think we're doing we're upgrading signage um for traffic visibility wayfinding purposes um building identification when people are driving down the road that all goes into that safety and general welfare uh category for people being able to use this site the way it's intended to be used and nowhere to enter and exit um and then I think purpose I which is promote desirable visual environment um you always want to be constantly keeping um your signage current and your logos upgraded and doing these types of improvements to keep the lot um aesthetically pleasing and also very functional um so I think that's those are the just justifications for this D2 um expansion of the non-conforming use um with regards to the C variances uh it's my understanding that we eliminated the free stand ing um area sign area variance as well as that freestanding sign height variance um so that pretty much leaves the variances for the wall signs uh as Mr mut mentioned there are four existing wall signs on the building there's one on each side um they're not permitted when you have a freestanding sign um but really these are just a replacement in kind of what already exists on the building building um we're simply upgrading them I think it's notable I find um appropriateness of the four wall signs given this is a this is a pretty large lot it is a prominent um development on this corner uh the minimum lot size in this area is 10,000 square feet so we more than seven times that um you theoretically could chop this up into smaller Lots than everybody El every new business gets ass signed so I don't think that this goes against what the ordinance is trying to prevent which is usually signed pollution um I think it's appropriate given the size of the building given the fact that it's on a corner lot giving the fact that we're just um replacing these and really Bank of America wants to put their new logo um in the same location that they already have it um and then as Mr much mentioned we're seeking a variance for the dimensions of the wall signs um you're you're allowed to go uh two feet on these wall signs and I think one of the most important things that he brought up um is that it's triggered really by the backing and the backing is for visibility now that they have this darker text when they're mounting these on these existing brick buildings I think what the backing does it creates that contrast that allows greater visibility for people to you know be able to identify the building uh and safely pull into the site so the lettering is staying um generally the same as Mr much mentioned we're in that around 7 to 12 inch range um so I think you know it's important to note that while the sign does exceed that that height of of 2 feet um you know the lettering is substantially under um under that two foot Mark um it's one foot or less um we are seeking relief for putting that sign in the 50 Foot um sight triangle that's formed by the street RightWay lines um as Mr M mentioned from a traffic perspective that is outside um any true um traffic site triangles um that sign is actually currently non-compliant with the setback um it's about 7 feet and we're actually pushing it back even further to agree with that 10- foot sign setback requirement so it's going to improve on the existing condition so that pretty much SU up um the variance relief that we're seeking um really as Mr much mentioned this is an application um and an effort really by Bank of America to provide upgrades to all their site they got a new logo in 2018 new branding basically going across the country and trying to update making sure that the signage is current um that it's relevant that it's aesthetically pleasing um and then in doing so they also provide all these other improvements like we're doing the Landscaping Mr much mentioned that we're actually uh removing impervious and fixing that driveway and and adding some of that grass back in I mean I think that's a big positive um the lighting plan which is shown on the plan but it from my understanding it was already approved um and is installed now I think that goes along with this whole branding and improvements um effort by Bank of America so I take all of these positives all of these upgrades that and effort that this that this um company is doing to their site I put them in the the benefits or the positive bucket and what we do as planners we weigh that against the detriment um and I think that what we have here the detriments of you know the slight increase in signage variances but for the most part just replacing them I think it passes that that C2 test where where the benefits of what we're doing here uh sub stantially outweighs the detriments the master plan also talks about um improving areas uh non-residential areas and Commercial properties and I think that's what we what we have here is you have you know Bank of America I I checked the the aerial imagery um this building has been here since what appears to be the 60s um so it's you know from my understanding it's a longstanding uh tenant of Somerville and what they have here is an effort to to continue to improve their site operate in the area um I love Banks next to downtown areas where one block from Main Street I think it's I think it's a good thing um of what they're doing here and that's why I think it necessitates approval first national Central Jersy what is that that's an old First National Bank of C that's correct 1960 wow he was the first national New Jersey Savings B New Jersey Savings right right so I have no further questions on Mr avilable questions any Bo board members have any questions of the testimony just given by Mr REI anybody from the audience have any questions of Mr REI thank you Mr REI thank you and I was thinking of another planner spelled it same but his he pronounced it Ricky Paul Paul Paul yeah he's around we're not related but we always joke about it Mr chairman that completes our presentation and we hope uh you will uh agree that uh this this appications of approvement of the back site met our legal burden for the various belief and we hope you grant us monitor site plan together with the2 varant the cces for the sign Mr liia may I ask you uh will your client consent to as a condition of approval compliance with the recommendations and suggestion the comments recommendations for Mr Cole's report uh I believe we are uh satisfying you had mentioned it I just wanted to get it yes yes we do agree thank you sir thank you theard knows submitted a sound study show that the compressors all comply with State I wasn't mentioned but the study was given it's in the report yes and I think I asked for science seal copies for the we agree yes but uh sound not an issue ites what the state always just on signage it's a non pered use therefore signage analysis pered so technically this board there technically no criteria for the sign non use but it's there for the reference which I agree with the analysis done so that the board happens with the nonconforming use that they come back and change all this because it's no standards any change increase gets kicked the board automatically or the site plan stays with this they would change not the signage but change the circulation that would stay with this board because it's not use not use that's all my anybody from the board have any questions or any comments I think it's an improvement I think it's a slam D yeah yeah someone like to move to close the public portion of the of this application I'm mooving second moving second all in favor I board what your pleasure as you said it's a no-brainer I think we just go ahead and make a motion to approve it only comment that I have is you have nice business over there but over the years there's been complaints about your flag your American flag flying out front several times had to call it's time to take it down could you just watch it um refresh your flag like on a regular basis mean it's yeah it's torn or yeah okay yes we agree Cliff conditions uh the only condition we have is the report I want to make sure we're going to get a hard copy of the uh A1 yeah we have it yes and thank you and no that that was it I did not discern any others else okay someone want to move for approval I move it second move second any more discussion roll call please chairman ad yes Mr Al yes M Kat yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr vsky yes Mr Flores yes did you notice how he talked about the good and the bad and didn't even reference seeka no balancing test this wasn't inherently beneficial use so the balancing test I mean that was great that you did it but the balance uh wasn't necessarily you know in place but you took the extra step and counselor I high respect that thank you thank you very much is there any other business to come before this board someone move to adjourn I move it move second all favor words of the famous actor Leo Kio let's win it was Sum your