oh e [Music] are she going on for a little while I know right we can change that chairman real fast like I said we can fix now now Demolition Man you just have isue you a ticket for no no jaity they didn't memo me I don't know why s i I hit your name I still send stuff to Clinton I fixed it oh my God yeah no no no har they miss you okay say oh we say yeah they're struggling a little bit well H they without someone for two months and that's Jake for Jake [Music] I think I was put up there I'm pretty sure it was in the paper I'll double check I know I had two of them one yeah all the [Music] subscriptions I the other one yeah I both got in pretty sure all right yeah that's why again okay you know I saw it and I was like okay all right say anything about and then somebody you there was about you know okay yeah about you know what too on that I got bad news for you unless you already [Music] heard I'll tell you the bad news beond joke good news you based on the number of people tell me you can actually sit up in the next seat I move to over oh okay yeah so that we don't have an empty seat up here and then that's there would you message about CHR I saw it Wass yeah he yeah he was new right wasn't well relatively speaking compared to the know I think last October or [Music] something now I'm doing it now and another you do or you don't see they were both blinking at different times they're both solid [Music] now so Denise are you ready yes I I was going with your list your list only has six I think you said seven and then that's okay is let me know [Music] when okay looks like we're good all right and Accord for the open public meetings act please note the following all bur B planing board meetings will be held in person in the meeting Hall here on the second floor of the Bernville Municipal Building at 166 mind book Road meetings will be also be live streamed on YouTube but with no opportunity for public comment members of the public wishing to offer comments at ask questions will be required to attend meetings in person the YouTube live stream access for all meetings is YouTube at Bernardsville bur streams this link will also be available on the agenda for each meeting which is posted on the burrow website which is burnard bb.org and on the bur Hall public meeting public buing board at Le 48 Hours PR meeting notice these changes has also been emailed through the Burnville news and theur is by posting a copy on the B website and by filing a copy with the municipal long January 1622 is the intention of the board not to continue any matter past 11:00 p.m. at any regular or special meeting of the board unless a motion was passed by the members then present to extend to a later specified T off time and the same shall be announced that the open meeting in addition the board do not intend to begin a new hearing after 10 p.m. nor begin testimony of a new witness after 10:30 p.m. any hearing conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board may consider in reaching a decision the Corum appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at alls roll call please yes Mr chair Miss Gardner yes Miss Geller is absent Mr Graham yes here Mr Horwitz here Mr McQueen is absent Mr Simo here Mr Walden here and Mr zazarino you have a car Mr chairman thank you welcome uh meeting minutes any comments on on October 12th the 16th we're carrying Denise to next meeting yeah I sent them out late so so just the October 12th meeting minut it's I have good on page three and one is a typle and it's um the bulleted items the last one correction needed in the code to remove detached accessory dwelling I'm assuming it should be unit okay you see that yeah and then the next paragraph it's just a a comment about I have a cottage or Cottage for apartment it's either a ctage or a apartment not full you see that I don't have it in front of me right now so okay it's just take the A out oh gotcha there's an extra a in there yeah just take the A out and then the rest is okay got it um by giving permission for these rental units comma it gives us the right to inspect them and ensure that they are safe okay okay although I was not here for this meeting um the paragraph starting with Mr Zabo advise it's not clear to me what actually what that explains maybe it could be a little more Mr Z advis that because the board already found the prior work where prior work me was not inconsistent you can find the new one not inconsistent but with the recommendations of correct regulation be relocate I just think that should be more clear about what we were talking about okay I'll have a conversation with Mr Z to clarify that um and that's it okay thank you any other comments I'll move a minut with adjustments that parent just suggested I'll second pass yes yes okay the motion carries um just extensions of course for the absent members right it was just one or two two oh yes okay thank okay um on the communications I didn't read this one but anything on this do ligh anoculus anoculus that would be the legal to do some improvements to the just head wall and scour hole I guess Wasing it back C cross was under 202 your Peasant Drive okay it does look like it's compared to the bridge it's just to be probably it's eroding after the C okay haven't all right but they just need to just give the notice that apply for and I apolog I didn't mean to mean what was being done was inous but it's not related to anything to the board evening no no it all right um is there anyone here that wants to discuss anything that's not on the agenda so [Music] visitors 51 I'm sorry Aaron okay and the address was 51 CR one word um really thank you gotcha thank you um I just wanted to quickly uh respectfully ask um for a status update on the board's consideration of the parks and wreck master plan report um the last I remember was in April last year there was a working group meeting some suggestions were made some areas of additional inquiry and then it was on the agenda for a while as you know a pending matter that was going to be a public hearing TBD um and it's since fallen off so I just kind of wanted to figure out where that stood and if and when it's sent SP to be back final John well chairman uh there were some there were there were meetings held by the board to discuss the plan and there were some modifications to the document that the consult made on behalf of the buau as requested by the board and just a matter of reviewing that document BR back on agenda just never made it back I don't why got the B time well I guess The Bard might be in our court I can I can review where we are with it and advise the board and then I can advise uh Denise what the status is and then we could schedule for let's say under the work section we can get it adopted okay I don't think it's it's at a point where I think we find a lot of that's I thought it was pretty yeah the consultant changes in response to comments that I and the board had they weren't subsided but they were amendments so we need to be considered because because it is being treated as an element of the master plan we need to have a public hearing and notice any why do we why do we Circle back put it on the on an agenda to kind of review it one last time and schedule a public hearing and then advertise for it and adopt it right and if I made dbta off the suggest good suggestion by the board plan John um I I'm just noticing we our our pending kind of turned into pending applications which is maybe a little too narrow uh Al be accurate item I uh it should be pending applications and other matters and that way you know it really should get back on uh there because we only have applications that are forthcoming even those that are not deemed complete yet but we should have all our other matters that are pending in there together with okay yeah yeah and and thank you Mr D do we need to do anything John for um and yeah for uh CL change uh my firm submitted a proposal go back at the the mayor and Council see you know what was submitted to them see how they wanted to proceed okay so that's kind of being handled over there I'm sure I know we have to add an element something that time goes by and and the issues that will be covered by that uh plan become irrelevant to put the town gos and then you can't go back and undo it so the should move ahead even if it wasn't required by another amendment of plan so the Press you're not precluded from doing it right desite gu so if you do press Counsel on me I'll follow Ury on that that would be great I'll follow up on that what do they call that more no prepayment penalty do it the mandatory triggers s of changed to your master and sett but just like exam you have to do it every 10 years you can do one continually so I think it's prudent and I will go back and on that yeah I was they were so okay great couple resolutions okay all resolutions uh 114 Claremont resolution I had one comment on that uh one of the variances that we are noted in the is that they committed could remove more than 50% of the trees and that we did approve that that variance but I thought it conditioned on their plan and replacement trees because the theory was that the trees that were there were kind of weedy and crummy and uh that they would plant additional trees that would replace uh the other now maybe that's covered in the Landscaping plan but if it's not I think it should be explicit there supp to PL other substantial trees to replace the ones that're cutting down yeah it didn't excuse them from having to replace trees it allowed them to um delete more than that 50% cany but if they remove a tree they have to replace it or make the necessary one way or another there's still a requirement to plant a certain number of trees if they can't need then they have to contribution they were never what we can do is condition eight that speaks to it the applicant shall plant the requisite number of replacement [Music] trees and uh make really leave the rest as is and make any necessary contribution to the bur tree repl based upon how much they we plant that affects how much they have to pay to the tree fund uh so we don't really need to change that language no you don't need to but that I think would that make it clear enough yeah it should be clear that that they can't replace a big part with well that that's pursuant to the that's also pursuant to the pre protection ordance in other words it's specific as to what's required to replace certain trees with [Music] what diameter you know Cal caliper yeah the tree and the like yeah so we know enough to be dangerous but yes so see that that's Incorporated in in The Language by virtual incorporating uh uh the ordinance provision but thank you for pointing that out so with with that change if there's no others that would be the motion to adopt any I'm move the adoption of the resolution second and then both the board members have a list of these make sure you I'm sorry I'm looking at the at the resolution itself you got it thank you okay so Mr Graham yes Mr harwi yes and Mr Walton yes I'm sorry Mr sim yes sorry wrong okay uh the second resolution m Road urban renewal Associates this is the 63 reard application that's exactly one of three 100% affordable scatter sits uh the first one to be approved with respect to amended and final hopefully we memorialized it accurately it certainly made it Rounds Around All board professionals and applicant professionals but we're going to hear now few few things we missed one of the things is that there was the provision that appears in several places in conditions that there' be three parking spaces That Couldn't park over L and it's a little confusing whether how many times they have to do that but I thought the point of those three parking spaces that they were supposed to be sufficiently near the garbage dumpster as to permit the um the K turn in there and that's mentioned once in the um in conditions but the uh that other condition spots I think repeated three additional times and I think little confusion I think if you're looking for them it's um five little Roman 3 five woman two wait the the um this one it's a lot of sub categories in Romans uh Al together I think it's like page 30 P page 30 you can point me to where we actually have the detail and then I'll make sure it gets repeated in the places it needs to be repeated um look at uh on page 35 five three the lies there um and it's in the paragraph above okay page 30 number five Roman small Roman TW two and three two and three the applicant shall designate three parking stalls with the northernmost row of proposed parking spaces as guest and overnight parking saws right and three covers the point of that supposed to provide for the Turning Radiance radius they're never tied together so you know as it's written they put those three spots any place on the okay so we can tie those two together and then repeat it where appropriate in subsequent condition or delete the repetitions we Happ to have counsel for the African here so we don't normally do this but since we had the Opportunity Counsel for the African we able to follow that do you have any objection or uh to that modification no objection thank you um and the concept I think has been sufficiently explained so certainly the board can adopted tonight I'm not saying that's the only one there might be more with that with that change without having to see it again in my opinion but is there an next there was a duplication of propos proposing it somewhere if you look for the word proposed it's like a the applicant proposed and then it says proposed again it's like oh it's somewhere in the resolution we'll find it we'll CLE you'll see at the beginning of the sentence it'll start saying and then it'll immediately repe it we will find it that's also a change that to be made did you want to because I know you did the research you work with the applicant so did you want to put anything in it about the total uh the aggregate of the three projects because on the face of it you can't have six singles oh you're talking about the allocation of the the offsetting doubles and triples in other words the only reason you can have six singles in this development is because they're doing the other two as well I know we we referenced the global scattered sites yes um but I guess we did not reference the fact that in totality uck is fully complied with that as to among other things bedroom distribution exactly uh I take it there's no objection from applicants Council no will add that yeah yeah did all the works might as well the it so someone doesn't say hey wait a minute yeah look at it in isolation uh and they're focused on it like one one of the few of us might be yes the uh um affordable housing allocation uck Global all three sites is my little note for myself again a concept that I I think with the particularly with the simulation of the applicant Council here on behalf of the applicant uh we can adopt tonight trusting me to accur made that change absolutely is there any other comment and then you have who qualifi to vote oh I know you do because it's right here I only have one other I only one other thing and it was it seemed to me it's in OB bance it's kind of we're going to we can do the project we're giving him permission but there's the whole issue of the drainage going to the west or going out to grow and it was sort of well we're going to work on that you know because we need to get the rights to access the drainage that's where we've left it right generally and maybe Bob can jump in but generally as the board knows uh uh generally there are things left over for some review and approval of often times engineering uh uh uh sometimes planner and very occasionally attorney uh the um so you know that may fall under that scenario but if you want to refer to the specifics or Bob wants to address it for simply for resolution adoption purposes well as the plan is now they need demonstrate that there's capacity in that system engrossed then there's the appc going to have to look at options so if they wanted to so they proven they can do it that's the whole big you can do the you can do the plan and you can comply and so forth but there optimization there often are field optimizations and so for so so I guess that's open if it's there was an ability to get access to that F goes through theity property so we're leaving it that way intentionally that's the point it's okay I just they that that was my understanding yeah okay I just wanted up couldn't burn now I was looking at it which and there's all the Steep SLO variances and so forth if they pitched the land back from drain to the back to the to the West would they have needed those steep slopes I believe so because I think they're up near the kind of that elbow of Avenue slopes down to the neighbor's property so I don't know that that would eliminate but I know they had to they had to elevate it to this to to get it to flow I'm not going to follow up I just wanted to be sure it was still open they have the flexibility to do that if they can figure out how to do it I guess we it sounds engineering preferable to run it into that large pipe that's that's there if they can do it if if they can and good teachable moment for our newer board members because uh there's uh never is everything 100% done and definitive uh and that's not the board's job uh uh but the board's job is is to make sure feasible uh and approvable or not you know the applicant has the bir appr that's yes you know essentially so there always condition and a lot of subject to review and approval yeah and when they build stuff they'll bring bomb in and say you know we can't just do this space in this way how can you do it you know and that's one of the things you'll often see conditions where it's if this then that but if that then this type of thing and that that that's appropriate and a good way of of for the board to handle things can do everything you know things do change okay but we have a thorough board we're blessed to have any other comments on the our professionals or board on this you it twice already I don't give a third okay so um well the same threee so uh someone okay I'll make a motion I'll second it okay Mr gram uh yes Mr Horwitz yes and Mr sim yes again [Music] Musketeers we're paying the bills at the front end now okay no just pay the bills right and then do business they're all sa I think we should no bills were the only ones that came in in the interim okay for the board's interation I have nothing to do with that's that's right yeah that's not your office and and and and John had nothing to do with that skipping up from the end of the agenda to the to closer to the beginning of the agend well it's nice to know happy the rest of the are they that's a motion second and a voice V any comments no just motion a motion to pay the bill just to P John's Bill ma' get a total toal yeah I didn't $21.25 I'll make that motion with that amount 5,21 25 don't forget 25 cents who gets the 25 cents well wait a minute Mr zaro made the motion so I already motioned I guess I didn't say the dollar that's okay okay Mr Z we understand the motion we got a second and voice I any opposed any Mr the rest pay live okay some hearing all right so now we're to to the main event um the public hearings uh the first hearing is M Brick Road urban renewal Association uh this was m road it's block8 15 38 it's an affordable housing Zone pick up this was carried from January 11 and we have an extension of time to act so we continue to have jurisdiction and is everybody eligible I I just want to record show that I this watch en video of that meeting so right and you will sign certification if you haven't already as soon as the provides it to you but the uh ml only requires that you make that representation you can sign the certification uh at any time my recommendation is sooner rather than later so do have six qualified members more than a quarum so we not only have jurisdiction we can effectively hear in decide the case tonight thank you very much Mr Warner good evening Mr chairman and members of the board Nicole Maniac M A GDC a of the law firm Dave Pitney here this evening on behalf of the applicant as was introduced we are here for a continued hearing on the amended preliminary and final site plan application related to the property on Minebrook Road this is one of the three affordable housing sites we were tasked at the end of the last meeting on the 11th with a A list of a couple items to address for this meeting we were able to prepare a concept plan by or concept layout plan that incorporates a trail easement we also were able to provide that to Mr pigeon the Burrow's attorney who related it to the director of DPW John McDow we have been in communication with him as well and he has provided us some feedback on the proposed location which we find to be acceptable and feasible so we'll be able to present that tonight Mr brightley also reviewed that plan and had some comments as to some of the features and locations of things and we're also able to incorporate his comments so we'll address that this evening as well so we are hopeful that that brings the trail easement and access issue um at least very close to a resolution for the purposes of the planning board to a resolution and we'll continue to work with the burrow on that item we also um were able to as part of that shift the building because we had to gain uh 10 ft on the boundary of the property in order to provide for that EAS so you'll see that in the layout plan as well this evening and the impact that that has on the wall we also have some amendments to the floor plans by the our architect so he will be able to describe what has changed the biggest change is that we have relocated the community room to the corner of the building that is most impacted by the retaining wall so that we can eliminate living space in that area and just have the community space so we don't have somebody who's living full-time in a unit near the highest point of the wall um so that will be explained this evening as well and then we um also have information from the fire department our engineer was able to reach out to the fire chief and they had a very productive conversation so we have some comments that we didn't get them in writing from him in the form of a letter to the board we can represent to the board what those comments were and the fact that we can comply with them so with that I'd like to introduce Kevin shell who is our engineer you remain under and I think your license remains a good standing yes it does and I think it the board will continue to accept as an expert in the field of civil engineering Mr sh yeah wonderful good evening um if I have the ability to share my screen again oh I might need to hold on should be I thought I you and then got distracted I had the last one is exhibit 84 from last time that comports with your notes can go to 85 for the next exhibit when we get there uh wonderful all right so we can mark this exhibit 85 penworks it is a colored site rendering of the project it is dated today January 25th 2024 and again we Bas off the feedback from the last hearing um comments about the proposed trail head take a laser Boer out um our recommendation or we put together a concept plan that showed um access uh to the trail head coming uh across the back of the the property uh sidewalk behind our building extended to the trail head um hard to see on the plan of the trees here uh but as one of the members of the public had brought up at the end of the hearing that it appeared that the DPW had already physically relocated some of that trail uh starting in that back corner and running up the hill um Mr Mall from the DPW had confirmed that as well for us um when we provided the concept plan um so the idea was we took all the building the part shifted it back over to the to the right hand side of the plan 5T to provide a 10ft easement along the western property line um and then we connected a a path for the residents of this community uh to the current location of the trail head that's been recut um so one of the again the the concept plan was provided to the to the board professionals Mr brightley had a recommendation uh that instead of running the the walkway behind the trash and closure and connecting it in that we put an opening through the wall run the path on the on the upper side of the wall uh and connected to the trail head while sliding our trashing closure back um which we were able to accommodate and what it did was it allowed us the opportunity to get an extra surface parking space uh out in the front uh at the last hearing if you remember we had testified that the plan submitted had 50 parking spaces we lost three underneath the building uh to account for a larger water room to account for the backfall preventer uh to make sure there's no hot box outside the building uh bringing the parking total down to 47 spaces which is still compliant uh but again we were able to add an additional parking space um as a result of this plan change uh to bring the total parking to 48 um so again I think that that is a net positive for the project again residents the community um have access to this Trail uh to lead up the slope um and at the end of the day I think it was uh you an overall net positive uh we also had um the recommendation was to reach out to the fire chief about comments we haden't received the letter but I reached out to the fire chief um and spoke to him uh yesterday and today about the application um he did not provide a formal letter but there were some comments and recommendations that he relate to us that he would like to see one of them was uh 1 hour fire rating within the stairwells and community space which we're happy to comply with it was a 13 uh a 13 fire uh sprinkler system inside again the stairwells and the hallway corridors which we'd agree to comply with uh recommendation that we push all EV parking spaces with the exception of the handicap accessible EV space out from underneath the building uh which we which we would agree to comply with as well uh and the last one was that there's no electric vehicles or electric bike I guess uh charging in the units or within the lobbies which is again we would agree to comply with um so I think it was a it was a positive conversation you talked through the plan um and some of the the reasonings behind those recommendations what they're seeing from a fire safety standpoint um and we're happy to comply with those recommendations and we would just continue working with his um the chief regarding exact location of the Ada parking space the EV space under building and look at those final details uh with him as the plans get uh finalized and Mr Shelly as a result of sliding the building in order to accommodate that 10t easing can you just Describe the impact to the wall yeah sorry uh so again the building the parking and this portion of the raining wall shifted 5T uh back to the the right right hand side of the plan the back corner here where the retaining wall is the highest uh I testified at the here and two weeks ago that the maximum head of the wall was about 21 and 1 12 ft now down from 35 shifting it back over 5T only increased the height of the wall by about a foot and a half uh so again it's a maximum height in this corner of about 23 feet again that's only in that corner as you start passing the the corner getting towards the the front of the building or to the the rest of the back that wall is dropping to 15 ft and continuing to get below that uh for majority of uh the back of the building here it's really just this kind of back area that's uh the most significant in terms of the height of the wall so again minor foot and a half change to the height of the wall as result of Shifting the building back build 5 and Mr Shelly overall the wall is still significantly lower than what was previously approved correct yes correct what did you say was in the west the northwest corner there was something like a utility no no no no where the tree is you see where the tree there you said there was what's there uh we would expect that's probably where the Transformer goes that's what you said okay that's where we would propos it that's what I remember okay thanks yeah we had the sight sign that was another change we at the end of the hearing it was recommended to US based off of the uh speeds on the road and maybe talk about making that sign a little larger um it was previously 7 feet wide we're proposing to extend the base to 10 foot um which makes the actual sign area about 9 foot in width uh not making it any taller making the letters a little bit larger so they're easier to be seen from uh passing vehicles uh so that was one of the other changes that we had made I'm sorry what was the new dimension um 10t total and and I gu SL and what are the dimensions of the letters that you have uh I increase the letters uh the the main Community name let me zoom in are 5 in in height the address at four and the r community at the bottom at three it's still a 2 and 1/2t sign area but we would try to maximize no it's part of it's on the sheet it's on the sheet it's all one thank you sure um let me Circle back to just the base is 10 ft the overall height the side remains 4 1/2 ft tall the sign area itself will be 2 1/2 feet and height by 9 ft the bottom is a stone based IM matched building 2T x 10 foot but we're going to increase the size of the letters to try to maximize visibility the letters I can just Chim in 5 in letter is visible for 150 ft the manual uniform traffic control devices which dictates letter sizes for Traffic Control signs it's 30 30 ft per inch so if the letter is 5 in you can see it at 150 ft which at 40 m hour it's about 60 ft per second so you can see it from about 3 seconds 4 seconds if we have the ability to make it larger again we want to make sure it's appropriate um to maximize it but still make sure that it's not just all the letters all in there at once on the plan but you know I think 5 in is probably the the minimum we would go again if there's I don't believe there's any ordinance about the size into the letters I think the signs in general are just not permitted as a whole but included right um as we as we prepare mockup and things like that of the of the sign if those letters can subject to review and approval and reasonable discretion of our engineer yeah that' be fine with this the sign L there's uh uplighting from the ground yes but it's not like an LED backde so those are the changes to the site plan that we had made as a result of the you do go back to the corner zoom in so someone wanted to do the trail on this walk up andge between the parking lot and the neighbor that what what would happen is there's this 10 foot space is an easement that we would be granting to the burrow to provide access to the trail the walkway that we are providing through the wall and around the back of the wall physically connect to the trail would be for our residents we're not promoting outside uh visitors from walking through the the site and the improvements that go access the trail that's the purpose of the whole 10ft wide easement on that side where if the burrow were to phys you know we left the trees the Landscaping that was there previously still on there that's something that we're happy to talk with the board's professionals about whether we leave the area clean lawn and open or whether there's a desire for landscaping in there that would not interfere with the potential Trail physical Trail being extended out to the roadway um but the improvements that are shown on the plan would be for the the residents of this community okay so so people want nonresidents wanting to access the trail don't have to go through above under the Tain correct the idea would be that there is a a additional trail out to the right of way that would be the burrow and you're going to regrade it anyway right regrade what the area 10 foot area isn't that part of your grading plan the yeah the area in between the parking and the property line would be regraded and either landscaped or lawn seated whatever the desirable uh finish for that area will be right I think that maybe John's firm take a look at that make sure that the landscape being lay on property yeah isn't there a little a teeny like retaining law on the border between your property and the West property of the West is it on your property or is that over that's on theirs I can I can look the survey can't tell you at the top there curbing that's right down the property line c yeah whatever just long as you figure out what you're doing with it that's all well yeah I mean the the idea would be there would be 10t between their curb and our curb and yep there is just some existing stuff there that's I think there's a BM kind there's a BM and like a little wallet there and it's like I think they built that burm to keep the drainage from run it into the when the bur cleared that area to use a staging that's seems like probably something that they would do to make sure that they're not sending their run off on to that neighbor all right I think the BM is actually right up against the uh gravel area it's not it's not close to the property line the um there just something there L 15 or 20 ft away from the parking lot I'm pry that's all okay right I think that was it right those those are the items uh that he's covering then there's the discussion of the community rooms right yes um and what you thinking putting any more maybe a different but any more trees like on the front of the yeah we talked about the last time we work Mr Z about the appropriate landscape in the front yard whether that's we made some PL com they agreed to [Music] work no invasive no invasive just just one comment onr easement I know it's not sh but it's probably about a 45 degree angle once you get past the retaining wall um speaking with John MCD he wasn't exactly like it should located GPS unit yes absolutely that's something that we would go out there locate the physical trail that they cut into the embankment and we would Center any Department was okay with the fan the whole thing where you got they were fine with the delay of the the underground parking um but the exhaust in front of auxiliary fan I guess yes never been on before all right yeah there's no more board questions Mr chairman I don't know if there's any other professional questions none for me okay we can then we should just do public if any questions real quick not quick I don't know questions public questions again um I think you said 10 ft I just wanted to confirm the uh width of the is that correct yeah the width of would be a 10 foot wi until you get then you're going to do me and downs around correct the idea is the 10 foot eement at least along the property line we we would propose it to follow the same if the trail is wider than that we would provide appropriately with easement up the trail till it hits the back thank you you're welcome any other questions from the problem for this sness thank you thank next our next witness is our architect evening every your your name and address again walk mes b c walk is J 632 pmon Avenue Cedar gr you were sworn last time you understand you may not and I license remains a good standing it is I'll assum L board accept expert in field of AR please receive thank you okay so we'll mark this as A6 well it's actually the oh no this is [Music] the it's [Music] mine again go oh [Music] I don't [Music] know but she said she so this will be A6 yeah this would be A6 and what is it so this is a retaining wall cross-section um we show the uh various sections around the highest sorry can you just give us a date on oh sure it's 126 12523 24 24 to 23 uh 125 sorry it's labeled wrong but it should be 24 we'll take the intent change 125 24 I'm sorry please continue um okay so here there's a key map of where the uh section cuts are being made so uh we took a section section B is section B and D is uh essentially at the highest point of the retaining wall and cutting through where the uh community room is now and then eight is a further uh little uh South and see is um moving East where the retain the retaining wall start West starts uh to step down so the section section A the retaining wall is 16t 4 and A4 uh the building is is 10 ft away you can see that the second floor um opens up already uh you would already not be looking at the uh retaining wall on the first floor 10 ft away would be the retaining wall and it's 10 ft away I'm sorry my name is Chairman it's 10t away the Comm vi from the community room no well that's that's that's from a unit at section A and as we move through on the first foot okay section B is section B is where the community room and section D that's right B and D but not a and C there we go right here we have uh retaining wall is about 12 ft away and this is essentially the highest portion of the retaining wall uh 20t 42 Ines um but at that point you could even see even though the second floor is still looking at the retaining wall uh you would have uh a clear view uh to uh Sky section D again cuts through the community room 10 ft away um 216 and section c is it at the uh at D 216 is the height of the retaining wall right and I had a question for Section D um being that the community room is now on that corner you're showing the entrance to that room to the community room from the exterior on uh this facade on the back facade uh and it's a covered entrance how wide is how far off the building L is that Ro 4 feet it's fouret m so just not drawn correctly on the pl I'm looking at the the plans that uh aren't that haven't been shown yet but uh it looks like it's about 7 feet on the plans so you're saying it's there's going to be a roof that overhangs four feet so it'll be 6 feet away from that walk uh well yes if it's if it's 4 feet but well we'll go through the plan and we can look at that together yeah from the edge of the canopy to the wall is 6 feet uh and then section c is 17' 6 feet away and the retaining wall as you can see starts to now step down and it's 10' 6 in this location so this is the new plan A7 so A7 A7 this is sheet A110 and it's dated 12324 updated layout I'll zoom into this area here yeah I see what you mean um yeah I think we copied it over as as it was on this side um it doesn't need to be as deep I mean even if it's 6 feet it's still 4 feet away from from the wall um I think even 4 feet although no it needs to be it needs to be at least 7 feet I think or six six feet uh the the sidewalk or and so you can see here the community room we've relocated it um it's essentially the same size 1153 Square ft we ended up making a uh two-bedroom here uh this Lobby and management office got a little wider um due to that relocation of the the two-bedroom and then we took advantage of this whole relocation and ended up putting our three-bedroom in this location here and um I think one of the board members asked last week if we could um essentially bring out the setback that we had here which was probably about 10 ft uh last time and we took advantage of that moved that wall forward and created another bedroom um or the put the three bedroom in this location so I think it it worked out rather well did you do that also on the it looks like you did but the other bump out wasn't it pronounced but right yeah this was this was already done though that one was already there yeah uh we and the uh uh manag that's supervisor whatever the sup apartment is in same same place that was went the lower yeah that was going to be the two-bedroom um I'm not sure did we call that out location no we didn't call that out yet the location of it but that would probably most likely be on the ground floor and one point of clarification from preliminary site plan uh condition 18 of the resolution at the time had required that the the super Unit B on the first floor near the elevator and the community room but now that the community room has been relocated it's impossible to put the unit near both the elevator and the community room so we would ask that that condition be revised based on those amended PLS do you want it near the elevator on the first floor but not near the community room to stay with what I think was the intent of the board at the time of preliminary to have the super near the entrance the main entrance to the building or you want to give this super the cppy apartment of right lower right hand side with the next to the community you should just with board's permission we can make the appropriate amend yeah um if I chair was there an issue with respect Council to council to um some language with respect to the superintendent uh uh uh unit in the ordinance uh uh resen development being restricted only affortable units I don't know if there in my mind there sort of an interpretation there whether it's a strict construction or or or otherwise interpretation of some language that was in our uh uh is in our ordinance uh the uh so maybe you can address that issue while we're on the super unit sure yeah so related to the super unit the um potential interpretation is whether or not that unit is permitted as an access essentially an accessory type use to the overall residential Community it was always contemplated it was also part of the application for preliminary so to the extent that a strict reading of that language would require relief from that particular section of the ordinance we are seeking that relief so that we can locate the supers unit in this building on the first floor and just for the benefit of the board what's that oh the board's all the board members uh uh ERS of public there's a provision in the ORD in the ordinance residential development shall be restricted to only affordable housing units and shall be subject to all terms and conditions pursuant to Article 13 of this chapter entitled affordable housing this is an affordable housing 100% development like the other two uh and a super unit at least in my experience and one interpretation is that's assumed to be accessory and and part of you know the affordable uh uh housing you know it would still be 100% affordable uh and and complying with uck requirements and the like but that said a very strict uh interpretation could be well technically the super sup unit might not be an affordable housing unit per se so I think what the applicant is doing I would concur with it from a legal perspective of being uh of abundance of caution is saying uh uh to the extent someone might determine us to need uh uh relief from the strict interpretation of that provision which be kind enough to give it to us uh since that was what was intended all along I guess would be a paraphrase uh and I would you know call that you know a deviation um you know maybe a bul variant certainly covered with the catch all language in the notice that was provided so the board certainly has a jurisdiction to grant that relief again this is all to the extent necessary and if you remove that one unit it doesn't mess up the IH or whatever I me because we'd be taking one away so it was always contemplated including at the time of the settlement agreement that the buau entered into that there would be a super unit so um correct if you take the Super unit away we're still compliant with not only you have but also with what the bu is required to provide I just wanted to be sure we're cover the only thing you get is you lost the super oh we have to pay him so little okay so I the board understands that that the appropriate time if indeed the the the approval is granted it would include the relief of that thank you uh one more change that we had on the plans um the last time we were showing all the PTAC units the air conditioning units underneath the windows so we removed them from the plans since we're no longer doing them and then um one item that the chairman asked if we could try and do was reduce the height of the roof um we essentially ended up moving these walls in at the roof and it we were able to lower the roof height by uh two feet right when you remove those air conditioning units I don't know engineering wise did you do you have to put something somewhere else uh Mechanicals somewhere yeah they go on the roof or where where the the condenser goes on the roof so essentially you'll end up with a uh split system inside the unit in the closet mechanical closet and the condenser on the roof and did you need to show that on one of your we have we had them on actually yeah I believe you stated that you had it shown on the original plans in case you had to switch it so it's all those okay individual condenser units where the center of the RO yeah we keep which is where they're generally requested to be and it was I mentioned it but it's our gard's opinion that it's far enough away from the Neighbors at the top of it the top of the hill so as not to be intrusive visually units visually or sound you're not being asked to do any kind of sound backles or anything like that on those units they're really super quiet units any really super quiet good thanks and just for purposes of the record can you just identify the sheet sheet oh that we're going to call A8 A8 a130 and then we might as well call A9 she A200 which is the revised elevations with the lower roof 2 ft and A8 was a130 revised which uh the title of that is roof plan and they're all dated 12324 thank any questions you have my plan on there what plan well there's no theard the question yeah I don't know if there's a question or not but we have the exhibits did you consider changing the shape of the building to reduce this the height of the walls uh not at this not at this point we we looked at your sketch um a potential sketch a potential yeah there was yeah I think they I think the RO there was a there was a if I understand correctly Council uh the preliminary approval the retaining wall was somewhere in the neighborhood of 35 1/2 ft uh and there was a request and a condition of approval that good faith effort and power phasing uh made to try to lower the retaining wall height and if my recollection is correct the retaining wall height was reduced down to approximately 23t approx 23 ft from was about 30 60 35 Qui math that's about 13 14 ft probably 40% or so reduction uh that's bad man that's why I went to law school the the uh uh from the preliminary that was approved with with with the good paay effort condition to lower it uh to this plan is that accurate yeah okay so I guess the quite AR or the engineer um but but but I think there's a the question now is uh has there been consideration and is there to lowering it even further yeah our I just this would be classified as like a value engineering assignment because what always happens is another eye looking at it comes up with some different way of addressing the problem and if I can discuss that what what my value my quote unquote suggestion is to you know to reduce the ball even further I'm not an architect I'm an engineer so I can't talk about the interior of the building but I came up with some ideas for moving moving the building further to the west or reducing the building to the west and making it an L-shaped building and which would because of where the critical area is is on the east side of of the property because that's where the is most critical so that was that was my suggestion and then what I did is I I proposed lopping off or reducing the width of the building by about 44t because that's what I originally thought was two B about approximately two bed or two units per floor and then I added I made the building an L-shaped building and I added 64 ft instead of the and then and the wall went wall on the back corner went from 22 ft to 15 ft and in the and the L-shaped wall went down to 12 ft so I think that I mean it's just something to consider I I certainly understand the exercise and I'm just sorry just for the purpose of the record because we're flipping from one expert another keep both out here but so this is a fact the engineer who remains under oath Mr sh it yeah um so imagine the more appropriate I don't want to say more but one of the two appropriate people experts to address this inquiry to so uh so please proceed I I think the exercise of looking at alternative options again is something that we had looked at um try to explore other avenues um I agree that any type of l-shape building one does reduce potential disturbance in height of the wall on the east side but I feel like it creates additional implications on the north side of the building where we're now cutting significantly into that slope into the trail um that portion of the retaining wall that would run around any type of L shape that went deep into the property is now um saying into the slope 10 12 15 ft in height now all of these ground floor units uh all their windows are blocked by retaining walls again we're lessening the overall height of it so it's one addressing some issues on one side but creating additional issues pushing the building further back into the site uh more potential disturbance at neighbors back behind it where now you have potential for looking down onto a roof area with condensers on it I think it it it solves not solves it helps address some issues while creating additional ones um I agree one of the a couple of the problems are a couple of the issues are not problems is it reduces the width of the building as as you look at it from 202 mind road because it goes from 20 call 26 260 ft to 215 ft so the the width of the mass of the building is decreased and then as I said in the I I added in my sketch I added 64t and I took off 44 ft if you you want to make it the same dimensions and it was a positive impact of putting the community room at that corner so maybe some sort of combination of addressing these issues could be put forth you know if you don't need the 60 64 ft in depth you can only do it with the same and then I I left the width of the new area enough to get a double Road double load of parking Out Underneath so as I said I put some thought into it and I made some recommendations but I'm you know this is like a value engineering assignment where you you work with the applicant and you work with the layout and you maybe maybe this is not the optimum maybe the 64 ft would only be 44t and then we just with interior layout you but I but basically there's a center hallway that makes a 90° turn and goes north that was that was my idea I'm looking at the that you had and I'm looking at the elevations um it looks like your ground elevation for the parking is at 350. 33 and the elevation behind the wall where the um trash is is uh 353 yeah the trash is about the same elevation the ground par about behind the wall yeah there yes so if you did make an L-shaped building the parking would actually be the part below grade there depending on how far back you so the first floor is above grade there so if that L if again we're considering an L-shaped building we're talking about you know how far we would have to go you would have to go back and then we would have the same painting wall issue really you wouldn't it wouldn't be as drastic as it is on the uh on the east side yeah the property SLS down yes you still have an instance where that wall is 10 15 foot in height in your ground floor windows are not so it's now encompassing that whole ground Flor as it would go around again I I I understand and think that there's uh potential positives as you work on different scenarios of reconfiguring a building but again I think it it also does create additional concerns as well where I totally understand from my point of view uh I I was thinking there was going to be a little bit more engineering design changes to the plan from what we spoke about um I uh you know my one of my concerns is that back wall 260 ft straight across now you all you have a um canopy that's over there that's 6 feet away from the wall uh it's going to be dark is grass going to grow there it's like you I just have issues with that about creating that Valley I mean you're talking about a wall taller than that 10 ft away um with now a roof in there a 260t wall with no undulation at all that's just perfectly flat you have two stairwells that can either be pulled in or pushed out to give a little bit of design to it or a little bit of something to that huge mess um again I was hoping for something so was I so that's why put pen to paper CAD to paper and came up with and then I'm not tied to this layout I just looked that maybe there's a combination of your layout and what I proposed because I'm not an architect so I couldn't tell you about the interior of the building but I I tried to take the same outside dimensions and come up with something that hopefully would address the the mass visibility from because we reduced it by approximately 20% of the width and 15% of the go to Frontage because there was the concern that the building was just too long yeah I mean from from an architectural standpoint um you know we a bar-shaped building which this is it's a really efficient uh shape uh cost wise building wise um I mean I think we gave it a really elegant front whether the back is a little flat we could always bump something in and out but again uh it's it's a really efficient layout the stairwells are at the ends there's a certain means of degress distance that we have to meet uh for fire purposes and you know as you turn in a building it's one it's always posle um and then to wrap the corner of the building surrounded like a mo with a wall um we thought that while that back corner was somewhat High um I think we did address it by you know moving over the community room um and maybe that front unit gets affected with the wall but mostly everybody else will have more light in air rather than turning and going deeper digging into the to the mountain that front corner is now under this sketch is only 2 and a half ft for wall so I think there's many ways that yeah somebody could look at this but the the application was before the board at the time of preliminary and was approved and then now we have tweaked for the purposes of amended preliminary and final but the in the interim um were addressing comments that we received at the initial hearing and that were conditions without completely starting over and redesigning the project so this is an affordable housing project it is in the bur's plan um there's importance in in having this application before this board and having it approved and and I think that the applicant did address many of the comments and as you heard from our experts we do believe that this is a good plan for this particular lot we obviously are constrained by the slops that are on the lot but um given the features of the property have done the work in between the time of preliminary and this application to reduce the wall significantly as as you had heard it was previously 35 ft we heard the comment that that's not the size wall that this board or the burrow wants and we're able to reduce it by approximately 12 feet so though there are other options for what this could look like this is um what we saw as the most efficient option for this project and in keeping with what was previously provided to this board without going back to the drawing board and and start and I'd be compelled to add uh so again the board has all the information necessary to make an appropriate reasonable nonarbitrary non ctitious and non unreason a reasonable decision uh that in addition to the board having given preliminary approval uh to a project that among other things had a wall that was 35 or % higher as approved than it is now uh they produced it by about 35% I think we're doing that math right um the uh uh the law that governs this board as Council was just referencing uh is in our housing El fair share plan uh and uh it is consistent with the law and uh it reads the bur of Burnville uh and this Bo we're dealing with the food development plan as are governing zoning ordinance uh excuse me the housing fair share plan in the zone zoning being our governing ordinance the bur of Burnville will focus on comping with New Jersey administrative code 5 93-1 portable housing uh regarding ensuring the elimination of unnecessary cost generating features from Municipal land use ordinances the municipality will eliminate development standards that are not essential to protect public welfare and will expedite open CR quote FastTrack end quote and brand approvals uh SL denials on inclusionary that's that's inclusionary development applications this is 100% affordable no market rate uh the bur will cooperate with developers of inclusionary developments and by extension is going assume all the more 100% affordable housing development applications uh uh uh in scheduling etc etc um so special meetings etc etc so the point is under affordable housing law and under uh the governing uh provisions of our housing own fair share plan that we're obligated to abide by uh cost generation is not something that you view when you're dealing with market rate applicant saying uh uh I don't want it to be too expensive I want my profit Etc to be more this is a situation where it's 100% affordable housing and we cannot uh uh uh require things that would be quote unquote cost generative I'm not saying that on behalf of the applicant I'm saying that as the board's attorney uh to make sure the board understands all the law uh uh and Provisions of our own housing fair share plan that govern what we do because that's my job to make sure you know what to do when you do your job well if I could just add one more comment this sketch this value engineered sketch reduces the heights of wall by about 60 about 40% so the I mean the most expensive site element in this development I would think is the is the walls and you know if you can reduce the the cost of the wall like 30 40% of what was proposed it's about half of what the it's even less than half of what the original approval was in the 30s M got it down to 15 ft when this latest submission haded about 22 feet I just think that something to look at just as a cost benefit where you can save the the cost of the site cost and and I'm just asking that you considered a a little bit different layout to the maybe you don't put the the T or the extension to the back at 64 ft if you put it at at 50 ft or something less and then you can you can give and take all these elements if I if what the board is considering and I don't know and I don't know what is going to UL deter but if the board uh is considering the possibility of approving ultimately the application as proposed with the condition that the applicant uh give consideration to an alternative plan or somewhere in between what's proposed in an alternative plan and if it's determined by the applicant that it is C beneficial and value added as at least one board member thinks it might be uh uh the applicant can make the determination to do what is in the economic interest of the applicant um but I don't know that the board should be guessing what's in the economic interest of the applican or more to the point what isn't isn't cost generative for the applic can't uh do something CL generative I don't know if that's what the board is or might be considering but I guess I'm posing it to the applicant if the applicant uh uh would STI the B so desired uh to in in in context of receiving approval this evening for the proposed plan uh uh having a condition that they will consider the alternative and they have the right the applicant uh uh to proceed with the alternative if it's in their economic interest to do so and not C generally think to piggy back on on Mr Warner's Point as this is a 100% mun sponsor project economics is important because the town is a partner in this and we'll have to put the bill to any cost any cost savings would benefit not only the applicant but the but the burrow as well and if the alternate plan does that then it achieves that purpose um to the benefit of both because we're ingly tied to the project by virtue of the housing plan and the agreements that have been reached between the buring it's more than that it benefits the burrow dramatically and that was correct but we don't have un we don't have all the information and to impose it without additional engineering and cost analysis in terms of relocating the spaces the parking and all that that goes into it it's hard to determine I'm not I think it has Merit I think there's an interesting thought here in terms of value engineering I I appreciate you know it's not unknown that board members would like to see you know designs and that work in your mind better but but I'm concerned about the agreements that are in place I think what Mr Warner is suggesting works because you still have the opportunity to implement something like this if it's beneficial to the burrow economically into the AF and it would be mutual and it's good for one it's good for both if it's not good for one ultimately it's not good for both but there has to be an understanding that if they go with an alternative they don't select the full process over again with a py time is economically detrimental both not to the applicant But ultimately to the as we're aware so we're trying to work out a solution here to open the door to Alternative if it's economically beneficial to the burrow but but not delaying the project such that you know it doesn't happen without a substantial investment on the part of burrow tax dollars to make up the difference in in any County they L while we wait for all this engineering and architecture to be worked out as we addressed last time I'm sure the board remembers uh the facts on the ground are uh that the opportunities for low-income housing tax credits are dissipating very quickly and we've been advised that the alternative is the bur puts the bill so 100% affordable you're on the hook so so uh uh not only you came with the answer so I don't want to belabor this now the answer is you what you describe which is they're aware of this they can investigate it at their option if it's cost beneficial they benefit we benefit more if it's cost beneficial than they do but they can investigate it at their according to however they want to look under the scenario the it's not part of the resolution well the board would be approving what's proposed giving them the option of saving everybody money if they make that determination yeah something's considering I just wanted to make sure that the applicant was STI late to it or else you know we give them this plan I assume the the stipulate what I proposed or what what the board May did did um so the applicant would stipulate to that again confirming that it's at the applicant's option to investigate further and to make the determination I so discretion recognizing that it's mutually beneficial or it's not uh and and that benefits you the board's comfortable you'll do that benefit Bo and the bur um but the approval would be of the plan as is if indeed that both be what the board s so it should Mark the plan in evidence should you mark the plan the concept plan the the uh the alternative concept plan as as that's fine we call it pardon me as yeah that's what I just wrote I was just about to say but that's okay B1 coming to the board not coming from the appen so B1 is a a concept plan we call alternative concept plan uh so that we have a document that references the stipulation thank the note I have one other thing coming back to the issue of the space in the back of the unit you could consider you know you have the bump out back there you could consider pushing the wall further into the hill it'll be higher but further into the hill to create more space where the community center entrances okay just oh think about it in other words it's you know how to engineer and an architect is just this a thought just you may not care about two more feet back there and I'm available to to help out actually we we don't that wouldn't be appropriate but at least at this stage one thing in consideration when I was a kid I grew up in an apartment house that b and my bedroom bed an air share and screening up to look up see the blue sky isn't the way you want to live and I think the extent these face out onto a blank wall will have the same effect I you should consider the impact of any of these changes giving a better visual out window more fresh air and more sunlight not only on the profitability to the town and to the um owner but also on the morals and health of the residents of these you know we're building affordable housing we should make it abely as livable as possible is there a c on top of the wall do you have to worry about that is there would be offence on top of the wall for all right are there any questions I think we on the board and our professionals are there any questions from the public what the bench design will be not solid black lre probably black aluminum open pick style at the top of the fence at the top of the wall for fall protection but open open so not a solid black fences that are open disappear so the I I just want to on the rec sorry condition so are there any questions of this witness from the public or if I may work for the engineer since he gave additional testimony to oh sorry just a quick question on A6 that's the section plan I think it was a good idea moving the community room but the question is do you need those full height Windows it doesn't do anything for the second Flor but you need the full height windows in that back corner and they be part of that J room be buried a little bit um like a trans window or something there I think your point of trying to bring the grade up outside to lower the height of the wall is that yes exactly that's going to be a cost factor 16 foot high wall where she 20 high wall if we're able to do something in that area by not having those windows that's certainly something we take a look at to see if that's something we can may work in that area it also it does increase the cost of that wall because it becomes a retaining wall now along around the community room right have to bring up the concrete can't do just stickering this is essentially like slab on grve uh oh the foundational wall for the but we can look at it and see if there's anything we could do in that air massage grade further impress that wall it would be a slab on ra you actually have parking below so and that to come up yeah or even something where you step the wall back once or twice or something like that you the wall goes higher but instead of 10 ft away it's 12 or 14t at that at least at the second floor height especially that area where the community room is in the back and the the overhang around the front door there the back door there um we need to be mindful of our overall disturbance you we're right at our 1 acre threshold so anything that we're doing in the back of massaging the disturbance we want to make sure that we stay within that obviously we go above maker that triggers all sorts of different storm water components that are we talk about cost prohibit to a project that's something we'll keep in mind I think we have some variations in that jog of the wall there if we can kind of maneuver that around that walkway area that's certainly something that we'll do take a look at as we try to had to to this design and another motivation I had pulling the wall away from the property line is you've got like a 22t wall only a few feet off the property line the way you design that wall and tie it back and falling down and maybe a banner a batter I needan you this way you have you have much more width to deal with between the edge of the wall and the property line and make we don't get we can make sure a copy of B1 makes it to our Bo CL all right well you you look at that it's a construction tradeoff and that's cost and however you construct the wall and so forth so fine so no any questions from the no more from any questions from the public none is that your last witness yes thank you go right Public public questions for okay so any comments from the public um if there AR down this time you get Spork you swear to got to affirm that the testim you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth Mr dck thank you um I just want to say I uh like that trail quite often little Trail great trail and I appreciate the work that the applicant did and keeping access to it um my couple comments on how it lays out when you get to that trail head where you have a sidewalk coming one way when you're coming down that hill and obviously I don't know what the um aspects going to be when there's a a building there but right now um you know when you get to the bottom from from that way you're kind of coming like out to the Light from being in the woods if you have that um sidewalk that just takes that left and goes into your um private property people got go there and one of one of the issues that we've had well and coming back to the Parks and Recreation plant um one of the things people are asking for haven't asking for and I believe it's the board's Express intent to give them is is connectivity um within our um you know between our green between our residential areas and getting to the parks um so I would respectfully suggest um you know like um Mr Shel said you don't want to encourage people to be coming into see your property um have something there um to say you know residence only I don't I don't know if it has to be a gate um but you know something to signify you go this way you're going into um the resident area you don't want to do that and just I guess suggest from Mr sa firm is when you're looking at the landscaping for that 10 easement um really something a lot of problems we have with our with our easement and connectivity is we have easements they're just not marked people don't know about them um so really kind of make it clear that this is a place where the Public's allowed to be and can be and should be if they want to get to the trail um also on that um point I missed the last meeting so I don't know whether it was mentioned but I do remember was mentioned last year when this application was first here uh going back to connectivity was the idea that we wanted to be able to bring these residents um and and the the residents further up the hill there uh down to Rose bow and to the ner new nervine Trail when the dam is removed and and uh and that's reestablished so I there was conversation about maybe the applicant taking the ball and running with it on getting a crosswalk across 202 there that would connect the um residents to the Rose B baseball field get you know kids over there place to play as well as the access to the trail that would then behind ver Hall there and and up to the park so I don't know whether that was discussed or whether that's something that um could be done but I don't know I just feel like having more connections more people you know asking um sometimes our phone calls to D don't get returned as quickly as maybe other people's I don't know just something I thought i' mention but yeah thank you for for your work on on the could the experts um would that be the respons of the town for example like uh to Mark with a sign that e would that be on the town as opposed to the applicant um in future I guess technically the applicant the applicant can do it with the township with the bur's permission should be responsibility we signage the bur wants to be sure what I'm hearing is there needs to be a clear delineation to what's and what Tres are directed like aing sign proper Trail I think that's in everybody's does it make sense it may make sense if the applicant so stipulates to have that subject to the negotiation discussion with the T Comm bur committee bur Council my AP uh the the the uh that's why you say governing body with the bur Council to to uh uh uh to decide who and how and where is that something the applicant can stipulate to as far as the demarcation for the benefit of the public and we work out plan condition we we'll resign it and we'll keep that in mind when we look with the appli thank you I was just looking for the yes any more questions what is the status of the do application uh there's a pending application to do they provided some comments um there is some discrepancies between the applications the originally being signed by the applicate not by The Bureau they want a traffic control plan review the storm order um so that stuff is still pending uh couple details taper on the new proposed curbing along mbrook Road um all items that we're sending back to them to to get back into their Court uh to continue that approval process do you need dot approval to be your financing we would need do approval to close out our board compliance compliance uh before it would get to the stage of construction but um well my question is does that hold up your ability to draw from the available fund so we have to complete resolution compliance and then have our final set of construction drawings in order to file for financing so all of the conditions inclusive of Outside Agency approvals have to be you can pull ability permit without the it's pending they the regulations required for a COO the do regul we working for municip we would never issue any kind of BU without do either letter of no interest or permanent God forbid something happens and they they know B project so sign plans that's a condition of approval all other government agenes that's standard thing so we love to help you out but that's one that you know you got deal with say do regulations say that they can you can pull a building permit but you don't you need a CO for the do that would have to be a specific condition okay for us to sign yeah plans so we say it's at the applicant's risk yeah then that that should be clear in the resolution because we're tied to the condition to the resolution and what other funding Grant good there any number of considerations if that's what they needed building they I'm say need to be authorized to do that agcy just saying those are do regulations you we can we can require for C which would help them uh I will you to get that first you on no you adds well it's it's a risk yeah yeah the timing may you know you may need it for timing should make that're about to hear from so I think part of the challenge is that when you file these applications for financing the hmfa looks at their checklist of items and one of those is that you completed your resolution compliance so if it's a condition we have to have it if it impacts the design of the plan in any way um they're going to ask us about it so so we wouldn't be doing them any favor is that the bottom line it likely would not help like we wouldn't be able to bypass it financing anyway um okay yeah we we closed the public did now and and so we're waiting for summary summation sure I will um keep it brief so as we stated earlier this evening we are here for amended preliminary and final site plan relating to this 100% municipally sponsored affordable housing project uh we believe that we have heard the comments from the board and your professionals and have returned with plans that address those comments um providing a great building for these units on this property we believe that we have reduced the retaining wall sufficiently in order to provide enough light and open air and also make it constructible um we've addressed the trail easement and will continue to do so with the burrow so that we can finalize the actual paperwork for that easement um we as youve heard through testimony this evening also we're able to address comments from your Fire official to make sure that the the building and the plans are um safe from their perspective as well so overall uh we think this is a great project and it will certainly s satisfy the um affordable housing requirement as to this property and the overall um or second of of three overall site so um we hope that the board lets fa on this and if I may Mr chairman I just want to confirm with Council the relief of being requested on the board before the board deliberates and decides whether or not to Grant sir the the amended preliminary and final site plan approval and the deviations I have in my notes uh please correct me if where I'm wrong we still have front yard setback 16.6 feet versus 35 ft minimum required yeah we still have exception foring setback from property line 5.2 ft versus 10 ft no that was eliminated thank you parking setback from M Brook Road 14 ft versus 25 ft uh where are and then the only other one I have so say applicant Council please let me another one other than this one the is the one we did this evening which is the stri instruct relief from the strict construction of the affordable housing provision to the extent it would require SE Rel for a superintendent apartment yes and also signage signage which is effectively roughly the same if not the same as uh the except the relief that was granted to application same size it's a little bit larger just based on the the limit of this particular Road um and four and half tall by 10 foot in L wi I guess loation and the location in front yard right I just ask a question on clarification of the sign uh you have a generic name that says Community something have you named that um building yet not yet so it's not just going to be the number the address it will be Snappy like today we be a name and address and then RPM community at the bottom and then what on the bottom an RPM Community was that is that everyone's agreement that those are theist just the front yard is there also sign just description right so and the board has so the board now knows the belief being requested if it's a grant I'll assume it's a grand with all the stipula conditions unless you want to not require any of them let me know if you're taking any out uh but that's what I would understand there's be belief granted to the board just want condition Mr R we also have um that our exception potential exception from rsis if they require the utility poll I was going to ask that [Music] for and I'm sorry for theity about the no if they require a new utility pole on our side oh instead of going under yes that the board's familiar with that one well same reason what about a flexibility on the rear set back oh you want to leave in the event that turn which could also result in slope disturbance that may need for uh we could still give them step back and slope disturbance to the extent requires uh if the alternative layout is benefit purs and the C2 benefits argument for that would be the savings and cost and be better uh design that satisfies purpose I think I but um with better design Alternatives so there's visual envir correct thank you Mr and that would that would cover that I think still a better lawyer uh as a planner than I am a planner as a la whatever we know okay so I did is that all the Rel that's all the relief and again I'll assume it's with all the STI conditions if it's an approval of four out of six or more uh for passage of this 100% affable housing project uh pursuing through our settlement agreement housing own fair share plan and resing Origins okay so you need a motion right who wants to move resolution I'll move the resolution that not think that is a motion conditions thank you seconden second hey Miss gner yes Mr Graham yes Mr harwitz yes Mr Simo yes Mr Walden no and Mr zarino yes the motion carries 521 thank you very much good don't go anywhere uh if you does anyone want to break for 9:30 no andone else okay so take a break until 9:30 so we're ready when you are to Here we are now ready to hear the mbook road renewal Association uh their proposal the third uh which is for 18 Mount Ary Road uh it's block 124 lot one uh there're seeking amended preliminary and final major affordable multif family site being complete back in July last year and for those that don't so we are ready Mr chairman as applicants about to give the opening I just want to remind the board and everyone that uh uh the notice was provided for uh December 14 I believe at which point we uh found that the bo the notice was sufficient uh and the board had jurisdiction we carried it without further notice to January 11 and then again to evening January 25th both without further notice and we do have the appropriate extension of time to through at least the end of this month uh uh and I believe once once we get rolling I think we might need to confirm that we' been the application being complete for both our plan and our engineer and proceed but still appli Council thank you Mr Warner good evening again go back um so we are now here on behalf of the applicant for the purposes of the record Nicole miac m a g DZ a k of the law firm day Pitney um Minebrook Road urban renewal Associates LP is seeking amended preliminary and final site plan approval related to the property at 18 Mount Ary which is designated as block 124 lot one on the Burrow's tax map as some members of the board may recall this application received preliminary approval by resolution October 13th of 2022 to remove the existing paved parking lot that's currently on the property and to construct two a two twostory multifam dwellings for a total of 12 units the amended application that's before you this evening continues to seek approval for two multif family buildings each to contain six units we're proposing eight two-bedroom units and four three-bedroom units in this particular development um we are also um proposing associated parking and Landscaping sidewalks so other related site improvements what you'll note from the testimony that you hear this evening is that there are several um I'll call them main changes that were made to the plans between the time of preliminary and now this amended preliminary and final application um the building was actually slid back within the lot so as you may recall there was an easement shown on the plans initially a potential easement to New Jersey American Water we have since been notified that EAS net will no longer be located in that particular spot so we were able to move the building back away from the road which was actually a comment that we received at the time of preliminary we also relocated the drive aisle as far south as possible on the site and we eliminated any Windows facing the neighboring property owner which was a concern at the time of preliminary so with that I'd like to one address completeness and make sure that the um board and this professional consider this application to be deemed complete and then to the extent that that is determined we have two witnesses this evening one is our engineer Kevin Shelley and our architect Aon Kumo Mr chairman I took the position that this is an amended deling final and that the details that were not provided they agreed to provide as part of the preliminary approves we' already granted those waivers so I figured let's proceed with the application I felt that that to mention think Mr PR had a things that we wanted to see W technically and iction to that I carried three items that were in the original completeness review that we have agreed to do cont within 100 property we did have a question on whether the height of retaining walls are going to be based on the Contour information provided stru within 300 ft I know there's an aerial on the plan kind of hard to see the Adent structures from that we Rec be increasing size the other one is the property own list usually there property own list on plans they agreed to that prior know haven't been done but again those were third one the property what property owners list oh property own on plan plan traditionally it's on the plan obviously there's a list because it's sub the application notice is given and it's reviewed established for hearing but it's it's a good thing to have on the plan then you can observe you know who's affected but also if you have any conflict with I know every board I know likes to see that for the benefit of the board members and any members of the public the these are this is item four on page two of Mr brightley August 18 2023 memo le as I see it and those are the pre checklist it are there so they were previously granted plinary he they were granted the understanding they put on the plan so that should be carried if the board complete should be car condition in your opinion can the board hear the application and have those three conditions of approval I have no issue with that okay do I good okay so does the board deem the application complete then and uh recognizing that one or more of those conditions would be condition of approval I all anyos none you've been do complete I think we can continue with the chair's permission first thank you um so with that we'd like to introduce our first witness Kevin Shelly oh since this is a new hearing Mr Shelly I would while I swear you I'll ask else who's going to testify allow me to swear them in including our board professionals Mr Mr bright so please raise your right hand do all of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony is about to that you're about to give truth hold truth nothing but the truth I thank you Mr Shelly just because this is a new application can you just provide the board with your um background education and confirm that your license is first sure I am a licensed professional engineer New Jersey since 2012 my license is current and in good standing um testified in Fr of VAR Sports across the state previously from sport including as long ago as five minutes we'd like to offer him as an expert and engineer except thank you thank you um at the beginning here I would just like to um Mark a couple exhibits that I would like to use this evening um the first we can call as exhibit [Music] A1 which is a colored site rendering of the proposed development it is dated January 11th 2024 um I have exhibit A2 which is a colored site rendering of the application that was presented to the board for preliminary approval that plan is dated August 4th 2022 and I also have another exhibit A3 which is just an updated layout plan um based off of the uh changes um that were made to the plan recently uh as it was indicated that the New Jersey American B eement has been taken away so we made a couple modifications to the plan that is shown in front of the board again that is a updated layup plan dated January 11th 2024 and Mr chairman with your permission if I could ask for clarification am I correct that when you say the easement was taken away that there may not have been an ement actually ever located uh uh JC J New Jersey American Water uh on the site was perhaps an expectation that it might be located there but if I understood correctly but actually it will not be located there it will be located elsewhere all side is that accurate correct it was a proposed easing at the time of the initial concept planning on the site we were advised by The Bureau that they've been were negotiating with New Jersey American Water to provide an easement through this property and we were asked to work around it um which we had tried to do set away um for a small property a 25t wide e was pretty impactful to our development options um so again we were advised that the burough was no longer pursuing uh an easement through this property with New Jersey American Water uh and so the plan was updated accordingly um was on the plan so they've updated the plan oh yeah no absolutely yeah more to nure but just so everybody understood it actually never even existed correct was always a proposed e yeah it's not being moved offsite it's just not originally being moved on site it's it's starting elsewhere so the subject property is located on the Eastern side of Mount ay Road just to get everybody familiarized with the project again bus the railroad property to the north again currently a municipal parking lot um it is 74 acres in size it is a flag shaped or Panhandle shaped depending on your n cature here um and it is located in the affordable housing ah6 zoning District the applicant proposes to construct two twostory apartment buildings totaling 12 units all of which are low to moderate income affordable housing units um which are permitted use in the ah6 zone at we'll use exhibit A2 now to show at the time of the preliminary hearing the design for the property had the dry vial in the northernmost ENT of the site AB buing the railroad property uh again it was trying to respect New Jersey American B easement that was proposed at the time with the buildings pushed the far southern end of property um main concern at the time was the drive a and its location to the over pass over the railroad tracks up battery we ran out of battery um at the top of the plan uh there are concerns about line of sight um and and visibility concerns from the side [Music] entrance there uh so the drive VI was located on the Northern end of the site um closer to the overpass over the railroad tracks then currently exists today for the municipal paring L um it was both comments from the board as well as comments we received from Somerset County um and the recommendation was and what we portrayed to the board at the time a preliminary was we would uh come up with an alterate concept that took this drive a pushed it as far south away from the railroad crossing uh as possible to give as much line of sight looking that way as possible um and that is what we have done again flipping back exhibit A1 no not the exhibit that's exhibit a um so again the drive a of the property is now located as far south as we can uh you can see in the bottom left corner here there's an existing uh utility easement for Transformer on the property uh the proposed drive a is pushed right up against that easement our parking spaces are pushed right up against that easement to try to maximize the space um the parking the drive a comes in past the first building uh turns 90 degrees we've got parking spaces up against the rear 16a building and the other parking spaces uh located along the southern property line here the main change from the plans that are that were submitted to the board as part of the amended and prelim amended preliminary and final application uh is now the removal of that proposed New Jersey American mortar easement uh which previously and on the plans in front of you took this first building and pushed it right up on the drive line uh not ideal but we were trying to work within the constraints of that American Water easement uh without the easement the building shape was reconfigured a bit the building was pushed back from the prop from the drive vile now uh so it is now 11 feet back from the drive while there's no need for variance relief um for a internal roadway proximity to building there um so we're able to eliminate that one condition um and really it creates a better flow uh for the development uh we've got parking spaces located along the southern property line um similar as the time of the preliminary application this site along with all the other sites that we discussed for the affordable housing plan uh requires retaining walls to flatten the site in order to uh create a development pad for for both buildings so along the southern property line uh the Eastern property back behind building 2 and along the northern property line along the railroad tracks uh are retaining walls the walls in total sure giving you the best information here um the northern wall will be a maximum height of 5 feet and there'll be a solid vinal privacy fence installed on top eastern wall back behind building number two is about 2 feet in height and again there will be a six foot vinyl privacy fence on top and the Southern Wall along here will have a maximum height of 4.7 ft there will be a guide Rail and installed between these parking spaces that abut uh the retaining wall and then again a 6ot solid vinyl privacy fence will be installed behind the guard rail on top of the wall um the privacy fence will provide visual screening from any type of headlights that are parking in these spaces so they are not impactful to the neighbor um the um again so we're talking about the retaining walls they five feet and under uh the development site is on the high side as opposed to the m Brook property that we've just discussed where that was located on the low side of the retaining walls and those walls would be impacting uh the residential units um the subject properties on the high side of all the retaining walls um so that is the wall design is not impacting the um again an updated application was submitted back to the county for additional feedback uh the county has requested additional survey work in both directions along um Mount AR Road uh which we've uh obtained in all likelihood based off of still again the drive is is as far south as possible we can't push it any further but in all likelihood there's still not going to be the appropriate site distances from the drive a looking over the railroad crossing um further north which would mean that we're expecting the the the county would limit the Turning movements leaving the site there would be a no left turn out of the site it' be required to turn right um out of the property uh based off of the the visibility again there's not much we can do with the overpass uh and the abutment and fencing located along the railroad there um so that we believe that in all likelihood is going to be the outcome of our conversations with County all right are they going to require be channelized I don't have that information from that they haven't provided that we believe though just based off of the additional survey information that they requested and what we found during that survey that there's not going to be an appropriate line to say from here to there so we don't believe that they're going to permit their to to be that left turn movement out of the site I don't have any other feedback from the county at this point besides um besides their request for additional information where's the current I mean the current parking lot current parking lot I can the the driveway for the curent parking lot is a little bit further to the north this is an improved sine over what's there it's improvement from what is there now and that is the argument that the traffic well yes the argument the traffic generated by 12 units compared to what a municipal parking lot is is much much less substantial but again in all likelihood we want to make sure that there's a safe um safe maneuverability out of the site and that's why we believe the likelihood that it's they will limit it to to not permit a left turn out of the site want make go down Anderson Road make a left on M You' got the ability to turn down sorry Mr chairman I apologize but as the board knows it's a hearing we can't have conversations on the day it just has to be testimony and back and forth one individual speaking at a time all right well you you obviously know today it's a worse condition than what you're proposing and yeah uh but they have the option saying well it's not quite whatever not so good corre we made the application we've made our points and Analysis at the end of the day it's the County's jurisdiction as to what happens with the Turning movements from this driveway we've improved them to the maximum extent that we can um and that's where the applications at and what about left turns in they mention that they not mention that can't get in anyway that's okay sorry we live here so know I understand keep going um in the application uh we are proposing 18 parking spaces uh for the 12 units that is a parking ratio of one and a half spaces per unit uh rsis requires 24 parking spaces with a 10% reduction for the EV so the total required for the property is 21 and again 18 spaces are being proposed uh which will require variance as well as dominous exception from maras and if I may Mr chairman just on that one item if I recall correctly and this was able correct me from wrong but more importantly I think I I I stole that memory from something Mr Z told me but there is something built in to to the definition of that parking requirement as well as a part correctly RSI uh and that is uh an exception for proximity to uh uh downtown Andor Transit oriented development you know railroad etc etc that might be applicable for the board to consider again if I recall correctly not so not only in the context of variance relief but also in the context of if a variance is even been deemed necessary by the board because the board has flexibility I hope I got that close to right yeah it's page three of my report section 20.7 A2B talks about the relaxation of plan requirements where the applicant burdens on the appli to demonstrate the board satisfaction that the standards can be reduced and and the standards are derived from the rsis and it talks about uh proximity to and availability for example public transit if that's viable you know that the should address that as part of am I correct that they the board can consider that based upon the opperation both in the context of whether the variance relief should be granted but also to the extent the variance relief is I know it's another way of saying it on semantics but but is uh uh or or the requirement is alleviated so that perhaps even the variance relief is not necessary correct also yeah yeah you can determine that H it's all say can determine based on proper testimony that the variance is not required and just as a further statement RSI is a Statewide while in Hoboken you don't require the same amount of parking as you do when to exactly so rsis permits alternate parking standards based off a variety of different aspects um household characteristics is one of them and the second one that I'd say is applicable to this site is location of available mass transit the fact that train station is qu mile away five mile walk to this site is a huge bonus five minutes no mile away um but the main aspect is household economics here and we're talking about affordable housing um the we have worked on hundreds of affordable housing projects across many different municipalities across the state um RPM has thousands of affordable housing units within their portfolio that they own and maintain and manage there are in instances where we've had to develop sites as 100% affordable housing developments following RSI for apartments and it ends up being a massive sea of vacant parment spaces that are never used that would be better purpose as Green Space um in almost every instance one and a half spaces per unit for family developments is the maximum that they see in terms of highest occupancy um and that's not even accounting for developments that have the availability of mass transit we're talking about Suburban sites that we have that one and a half spaces is the maximum that you find it's just not the economics of affordable housing are different compared to a market site development where some of the units have where everyone has a car or people have more than one car the reality is on affordable housing sites some people won't have a c many people will not have two vehicles the one and a half spaces per unit for affordable housing development Falls well in line with um what RPM sees as they manage all their graphs um it's in line with with what we found on other affordable housing projects that we've worked on all across the state that one and a half spaces for a family site regardless of the availability of M Transit is more than adequate but again for this particular site but the location and the availability of that Transit that's an extra bonus um for this property as well and Mr sh planner will also support that and his testimony or her cor as well part of the planner engineer with maybe it's appropriate Mr as a planner if you that has been my experience as well there's certain demographic differences between inclusionary 100% developments where uh we're noticing that parking standards are over greater than for the reasons that Mr Shell has uh tested so I could prer that that's been our experience and that's what we've observed as what's the green uh box in the center lower the Center what is that green what is that that's just a small curved Island that separates the last parking space um this area here is U an area for vehicles back up um out of these parking spaces for the trash truck as it pulls in to be able to have an Avenue to K turn and get their way out uh this is just a small grass medium that's in the way so it's not all asphalt what's the bump bump the little bump uh to the right of the what's again that's a backup space for a vehicle parking here you want at least 5 feet from that ve from the edge of that parking space for that car to be able to back out pull out of their space and be able to make that maneuver to get out so it's a turnaround space for vehicles as well as the the trash truck as it navigates the site so that it's not ending up in a scenario where it's trying to back out um it can pull in pick up the trash back into that area and get out so I did value engineering too so when we get to it okay gives you two more parking spaces more parking spaces ni and I don't see explicitly that you define the one what amounts to a b accessible space um it's supposed to be 11 ft wide you see the Slash the the the hatch yes the hatch section is always five the by code yep the if it's van accessible it's 11 ft which you've got the space for we typically show all of our spaces at 9 foot and then we add that extra and then at the end once we finalize the details that Island striips down to 5T it also has to be 22 ft deep so you got to have allow for that in your access way so do do we do we have that again the the building here is not near the front set back if this building needs to shift forward to that additional depth we we can there's a way to do it yes like I say I can get two more spaces yeah that that I was just getting confirmation on the record that they can do it Fe they'll be able to but they have to know they need to do it yeah to accomplish but your site plan shows a different shows the parking space to the cased area to the North and the parking space to the South correct this this crosswalk acoss here has been has been shifted uh the handicap accessible space has been mirrored as well what is your handicap obligation I mean clearly you could when once you have the five the 11 ft which is that'll be which is a van accessible and the 5 foot hash the space next to it will comply as to be eight yes you need at least eight these spaces do you how many you only re you only need one does it it has to be van acccess yes and it also has to be EV right so that's where there's the new EV rules we found that short answerers we have the flexibility to make this an additional handicap accessible non EV space yeah to make sure that it complies with the EV rules the ADA rules okay because I know you've got a lot of opportunity I'm just saying we can get to two more spaces for you so then it becomes the minimum or whatever you're arguing 1.5 you can get two more okay keep going the other oh by the way when you were explaining the shortcomings of the first plan yes the first one it obscurely had you got out of your car and you walked around the building to get to your front entrance it was totally un un there was several shortcomings of the plan to try to work within all those constraints yeah you did parking wasn't great the circulation none of it was ideal no I think this plan greatly improves all those shortcomings it improves the visibility out the intersection to the to the maximum extent that it can um so I think this is a much improved plan versus what was originally shown to the board and we told you we were going to do these things and yeah we believe that we follow through with and the retaining wall on the North Edge is not kind of retaining walls we've been talking about it's a retaining wall that lets you build to the line right I yes we are the high side you're the high side and you're filling in raining the other one is the reverse EV okay yes mind Brook is a completely different type of no you know develop it's you're filling into the okay and another question about the county count I believe has this is a what is the RightWay and what proposed right away the yeah mount I believe it was 66 feet is the request um where does 66 so we've we've the that was in the County's initial review was to provide a RightWay dedication we countered back with an easement along the property Frontage um in lie of um the dedication which they agreed to I'll zoom in so everybody can see it on here me meaning the county accepted the easement as opposed to the dedication corre correct correct yeah a dedication then starts to trigger all sorts of impacts a building of coverages setback issues so the county agreed to take uh an easement along the frontage um in Li of right of identication so 33 ft from sunent line corre yeah that's where the pushes are correct yeah the improvements here there's a dash line along here this line in the front is the current property line This dash line here is the new easement that would be dedicated to the county if they for whatever reason decided they could ever wideen the road there and had enough there's a Transformer on the right side of the E the correct side no it is the Transformer would not be impacted the signage would not be impacted then we'll get into Transformers fine Transformers fine y then while we're on the topic a monument sign is proposed at the front of the property uh variance relief variance relief is required sign size it is 4 and2 ft tall by 7 1/2t long the sign area itself 2 and 1/2 foot by 6 foot not going too fast through there is it thewest located on so I wish I had delivery the base is 2 foot by 7 and2 foot with a masonry veneer to match the buildings it's at the E Line it's at the eement line which in that area it's 10 foot back from the M are Road Frontage but it's located outside of the the county the same sign that was proposed at 63 burnard for context again it's located the detail of it is on plans here reference and VAR 63 bur as far as dimensions and and and Set uh location and set than set on yeah this is 10 foot from the property line and outside of the count us so so front yard still is a deviation as well as the size of the sign as well as the sign and what is the step back 10 foot no I mean what is a required set again I don't know if there is a required the sign is not permitted oh so there's no set the other one was Z on the property line but there is no setback it's just said it can't be in the front yard right and do as we did with the other application I would suggest we wrap that into the variance to allow a sign and to the site plan this sign is provided for identification purposes corre correct um one other change that go the layout plan just so everybody can see again this is exhibit 83 which is just an updated site layout in the very front corner of the building here um if you look on the opposite side there's a jog in the building there was previously a jog contemplated in this corner um we've had conversations with New Jersey American Water about the property um they've been very helpful with providing some initial feedback to us um and right now the the concept for this property to avoid having a hot box out here we've enclosed this area of the building or expanded this corner of the building to create a water room uh water service from Mariner Road will come into the building where we will have back FL prenter all required uh water equipment located in this water room um and from there water lines will exit the building go service the back uh site as the the building in the rear as well but there will no need for a hot box um everything inside will be private once it leaves that water room um so we've been able to get that feedback from American Border to make sure that we don't have a hot box um requirement now as a result to that um well I'll talk about the tras enclosure here as well too um the was recommended time with preliminary um and in Mr bry's letter again that again the burough ordinance is trash enclosures have a roof structure over them to prevent villag and the Gage out into the uh the roadways into the stormw system uh We've agreed to put a roof structure over top of the enclosure um again when I say roof to me that means it's part of building coverage um with the addition of this area as well as the addition of this water room the building coverage for the property now it's exceeds the required just want to make sure I have all the areas written down yeah the the 25% requirement um and 25.5% is what is proposed uh so this is a additional 154 squet of roofed area added to the development .5% of coverage the building itself meets the 25% but when we add in the covering over the trash enclosure as well as the enclosed water room that puts it over the 25% threshold um again if you looked at it as if there's a hop a good thing or a bad it's a variance we're noting a variance that you need it's variance that we need the alternative is we don't cover it and we have a hot box outside no no no no I just yeah just for the record we have the Devi 25.5% versus 25% and I think so Mr and I are hearing uh is C2 argument that the benefits outweigh the detriments the benefits being no hot box and the cover D yes Mr you believe this is a better design alternative from a pling perspective absolutely is there anything that would prevent you from sliding the Box the dumpster 3 feet to the left you could still open the gates you to the left uhuh is there some distance it has to be from the building or anything like there's nothing right I mean you could slide it there right yeah I think in theory we could ship that yeah the the a needs to be 10 ft from build the the uh the answer is then that it's got to be 10 ft away oh just the aisle the AIS the aisle right so this curve line here is 11 ft but you see where the doors are hinged yes that could theoretically be to the left 3T or 2 and 1/2 ft then how do you get to the left side of it enclosure you don't get to the left side it it's open through the front door there is no left side of the enclosure I'm asking because this is where you can get an extra parking space okay so it's just part of it I just want to know if there's anything that would no so again we've got the ability for if this drive a needed to shift and it became two you know less than 10 ft of this building building the building has the ability to the back don't F the sidewalk to the back of the dumpster just slide the dumpster over three ft it's so the door just opens straight that's all okay well come back to it later okay that's so Mr Shelly as part of our preliminary application we had a couple other deviations on the plan requiring relief relating to the proximity of the parking aisle to the buildings the parking spaces the lot lines can you just run us through which of those deviations we still have on the plan and which ones have been eliminated sure the only deviations that are still applicable again the drive VI in proximity to building one requires no relief the a wave or guess variance is required for the internal roadway um and parking area again we've got this turnaround area that is 3.2 feet from the Southern Property Line uh whereas 10 ft is required we've got parking spaces along the southern property line that are 3.8 ft from the property whereas 10 foots required and then we've got the parking spaces in front of building two in the rear of the site that are 8 and 1/2 ft from the building whereas 10 ft is required um so those would be the three rear rear set backs good right uh for the East Building correct there's no setback variances for any of the buildings over there on the right hand side everything's good correct we comply with the setback departments for for both buildings it's the proximity of the parking to the property line the drive bile to property line and then the the parking to the front of buildington and Mr Shelly generally the magnitude of this relief is similar to that which was granted previously at the time of preliminary approval correct similar yes there's instances we've been able to eliminate some of the inconsistencies we talked about the shortcomings of the original plan and the the lack of access to be able to walk across from one space to another because the parking spaces are up against the building so we've improved that uh but the magnitude is very similar if not reduced from the preliminary application and in your professional opinion the circulation that's provided for here is improved over the prior plan and is safe for residents that are access yes what is what is the purpose or what happens to the stam property so wall yep you can see there's a wall here uh that's required to create the flat head around the building that wall ends up cutting off access back to this uh back area so once the site is constructed the wall is built the fences are put up that that piece of the property um there's no access to it that there's no access around the buildings again your building is 5 ft from the property here um that's not enough space to even try to promote any type of access around to get back to that space uh and we believe just that that space in general um again it's a it's a very small area that provides little benefit to um to the community uh in general well if he put some steps acoss the wall and could he use that some sort of passive Recreation it's in theory could you could we put steps through here yes getting residents around the corner of a 5 foot building up against the wall again I I don't think that's a great plan but that might be active Recreation instead of P I'm sorry it it is it viable to put three steps through the wall here the Wall's only 2 put yes it's viable to provide access back there is any aspect of the plan you know the ratios and covered and so forth depending on the Flag Staff or the Panhandle area does it the it weren't if it weren't deed to you by the town yep does it affect the application yes Theo 25.5% building coverage is dependent on this property needs yes okay put a while right I don't know how practical it would be to utilize that back piece it might be better there's be more discussion on this topic I I know there so as you know so but uh I think that you know it's a recreational I think it' be hard it it requires great vision to figure out how that might happen given the state it's in I agree with you well I I'm not saying that it should be used recreational but if it is deeded to you you have to maintain it in some way you have to make sure that it's kept clean and and safe but if you have a wall there how are your maintenance people going to get back there to maintain it again there there would be have to be a means through that wall to access that space whether that's an area that's open to the residents Community is is a different topic but if it's a maintenance area that we need to be maintained then we need to have the appropriate measures to live access is a retaining wall or a fill wall you know the two different types we just talked about is this a wall where you're filling to to create a level corre a total level okay it's not a retaining while we're holding back no we're not holding anything back we're building up to create a flat flat head for this steps would be to the right the steps would be out into that space correct again it's only a twoot wall in that area it's continuation of the wall on the that's on the North Boundary where you're filling and has around cor there to to keep it LEL gotta what else that's something I have anything regarding the canal on the building and where where are they relative I'm just thinking of the neighbors sou so there's Mechanicals that are in these little cutouts back behind the building that's where the condensers are same thing in this bump out back behind the building okay uh they'll be screened appropriately in accordance with the bar ordinances um but they're tucked back behind the buildings and where are the buildings excuse me where are the buildings the houses unlock where is the house on lot four uh it's not where you're it's it's not back here we will have Landscaping as well as the six foot Solid V privacy pretty big backyard on top of concern those those lines there they would to show the entirety of lots four and five in other words Lots four and five don't end there no aren't back up against the railroad or whatever correct they do not end here we can extend the viewport to show exactly where they are I was one of Mr Bright's comments about just adding in anything within um 300 that we would go and expand and add any you know additional structures that come up it is more of a concern for lot1 2011's right there so you you can see them on the a right look something get the hous is there front the street yes great Point thank you you see this is that lot for these buildings are frontting the street over here yeah pretty deep yes but that one that we created 2011 that's that's right next to this that's why the mechan yeah that's the house that's closest to yeah spr Clos still there yeah access the water line would just come from building one run through the site tie into the front of the building and the sprinkler flipping same thing building one still has a small spring flp room on the right corner but in the front left corner is where the water room backb prenter all that stuff is going to go with all your experience with um affordable housing do you find you have to you need to put bicycle RS in yes we would or people bring them into their houses or no we we would want the bicycle rack outside somewhere on this you want put one in somewhere correct or two whatever okay any more questions needed on the plan with a detail on the location professionals or board members of this witness I was asking if our board if our professionals or our board members had any more questions for this witness CU then I was go ahead just going to wait to your discussion about additional par spaces to see where that ended up before I asked well I don't know when they would like to talk about getting additional parking spaces I was just the set back from the parking space building to can that be made to comply there can be a little more Landscaping between That Sidewalk so the headlines are not you know aiming at that's the 8.5 get it to you have 11 you have 11 on one side yeah that was 10 n and a half probably close enough right yeah the building would Shi for first building without the ship board slightly to take everything and move it accordingly um yeah but I think it's something so I wasn't sure if you needed that strike aisle to the EV parment spaces or not I I don't think it's a requirement it was something that we thought when we have parking on the opposite side of the drive aisle giving somebody at least a designated path across would be nice I think when we start shipping Drive AES and moving things around that would be something that would get eliminated it's just two cars that are going to have an AIS so yeah is there a way of from the northeast corner making that a little bit wider to get access to the prus part of the site right there reducing the building to get around it if you move the building are you move the building to we we've been mindful to ensure that this building does not get closer to this property line on the souly line the the rear building will not shift in order to get the 10 foot from the building the parking the front building would shift forward by maybe a foot um and then the whole parking was Shi with it but the building itself will stay in the same location you're northeast corner of the East Building is that's right on the setback line it's literally right there it's 5 you put a walk again it's 5 foot you've got the retaining wall that starts on the property line retaining wall again it's a 5 foot wall little bit of batter fence back behind it in reality you're talking about fourt it's you're really yeah just what you said you're really 5T but there's stuff on the property 5T with AIT extra there is a door back there I it's somewh accessible the only door that's in the back of the building is a sprink Clos I see all the other doors to the units are from the center called an Atrium but there's a covered entry way with all and there wouldn't be access around the bottom right corner because of landscaping is that uh correct so there's no access around the bottom side there's some yard inlets to be able to get drainage away from this area it's not a again it's not a a travel area that what about fire accents SP fire chief uh we've spoken to the fire chief about the M Brook site I have no comments from the part about uh this site Beyond um because what they want to get to the back of the building not we don't have any comments you have Windows you have bedrooms with Windows on the back of the building there'll be windows on the back there's no windows on this side of the building facing the southern of property line that was one of the items that we talked about at the preliminary no I just me from the standpoint of the bedroom it's like you know it's an emergency access you window it's expected that someone could potentially save you out of that window but I'm going to suggest something a little crazy but it what would happen if you took the north wall of the East Building and you angled it and you made it parallel to the property line I know it's wall words suppose you said I want that wall to be set back 10 ft from the property line all the way along the wall right so it's big up front and it Narrows to the back and I know it's definitely not what your architectural design is but it's something to just think about potentially that it will be beneficial to have Side Access for various purposes that'll come up and I don't want to create additional cost right so I don't I just don't know know the the implications of the construction you were to do that I'm not asking you to step it I'm not asking you to reduce the floor space it affects two units right that are they're both three I can let our architect come talk with what that is in that area and all right uh are there any any questions chairman I just want to just double check one thing Mr brightley didn't have anything in particular in his report I just want the applicants engineer and councel for the applicant uh to confirm that the app will stick out his condition proov all items set forth in Mr bry's uh nine page report August 18223 that's the last one the last one based off of the plans that he had we made some changes to them they actually any remaining yeah any remaining of the letter yes we'll work with Mr Bradley and Mr as and I didn't mean to take away from Mr Bradley had any specific ones he want to identify just if not I wanted to make sure you to all them really substantive I mean something you want us to a lot of these are carried carried our resolution know address I think are they're all addressable they're all you know there's nothing honorous essentially luring and and is that the same with Mr sa's planning now okay yeah not too many items but compliance with the electric vehicle Landscaping Landscaping Landscaping work with the afri I major issues enh minor enhancements so cheap non invasive and and affordable housing compliance of course and the like well like what we said I want this to be mutually aware of the three projects for the because this is exceptionally unusual to have an affordable housing environment with no singal and we need and we know that and but we know that in aggregate right they're compliant with the minimums and in fact this development is needed to make the other application compliant oh yeah uh the resolution will have the same Preparatory yeah you did all the work y yep yep AB absolutely I wanted to the bed the uhak bedroom requirements are complied with uh uh on a com or aggregate amongst the three sites yeah I just want to make sure we that we'll be it will be in this okay um I think there are no questions from um Mr Zoo's memo on the this development listed 11 uh condition of the previous uh preliminary I'm sorry yeah yeah and have we addressed those or we assume that those conditions will continue my my recommendation is that they carry over to the extent they're applicable and combined with the final I was merely pointing out that there are still things that need to be not lost in discussion from prior and that's part resolution upon yeah we carry them all forward I understood when I asked my question and got the answer that they can comply with all of them uh was that it included that as well is the entirety of his report including for a through K well can we we we should make the effort and and as you know like you've had some resolutions with 70 terms are we going to make we're we're going to do the reconciliation Recon that's what you're refering to cond absolutely the cha out of it okay yeah all right the plot from the Jets okay now any questions from the public for this I see [Music] one c o l l a r yes good to see you again and don't need to be sporn in as you know just for questioning so please proceed nice job on making the changes that we uh we requested and it looks good the one question I have is the the tree line just you know my property is the one next to it the tree line that you put in there um what type of trees are they is that planed yet is that along the southernly lineer pull up our Landscaping plans so I can accurately tell you what CL there so the plan that was submitted shows some Landscaping between the parking and the wall um that Landscaping due to the need of a um guide rail for those parking spaces is not viable that area will be finished with a a stone finish again there's a six foot vinyl fence so this area is screened from from your view there will be some trees um in that area trying to zoom in here one tree we have closed up in that area is a is a magnolia tree 6 to 8 foot in height uh probably some trees up in the front trying to screen that front Transformer to the to the Limit that is allowed by the power company there those would be some Evergreens 6 to8 foot in height again most of that will be screened by the the vinyl privacy fens so I guess my question is just along this section here where my property looks out at the building so first taking the windows away fantastic and I really like it but creates a stock view of the property so my wind my living room windows have going to look out on to that to a certain extent so what I asked is if you could put some screening I would say there probably 11t in elevation change between my window and the ground so some trees that would kind of break that uh break that view up R the M directly at the wall from my living room um I'll let our architect go into what the Aesthetics of what that sidewall looks like um we don't have any l Landscaping proposed between the wall and our building right now because you can see on our plan we've got some drainage infrastructure that picture that the color rendering had trees in there right that that's what tricked me I guess uh yeah the if anything goes in that area it would have to be small enough to not interfere with those pipes underneath there so this is these would be some small shrubs some ground cover again it's not above the fence is there anything you can do working with my property line to put something along there because again it's just that's going to be a stock view that I'm looking at um I I understand the drainage issue and that that was going to be one of my questions actually you requesting the applicant put some Landscaping in your property and you giving them a license or reason or right to do so right yeah if it if it means that I could gain some kind of blockage to just looking at the property from that just that set from here because this this would have been perfect those trees if they could have been put in there and be tall enough but if it needs to come onto my property I'm okay with that we can work with you on ADD right and then go ahead landscape screening can I just get some specifics as to where it would be it'll be subject you so it would be in the area along the southernly side of the rear building that some supplemental Landscaping may be placed between the the hose building and the adjoining neighboring building to the South uh joining uh lot two 20 2.0 2.01 yeah 2.0 2.01 yeah yeah I know I have 2 second still two years year and a they the uh okay yeah lot 2011 number 20 the the uh okay and and is is there sort of a ballpark linear length there um give you a hey it's about 50 ft the size of the building including the at the area that we're we seem to be mutually agreeing right so the length of this building here is 50 ft I'd say we know they the back side of the property they from about that yeah yeah sure so you're talking about a 50ft section here right um again we would have to kind of see exactly how far your building is from the how do you build the there's a real retaining wall there that you're building right in it's not a pill it's a real you got a real wall there your level yeah it's just the barrier two foot high to allow us the ability to get drainage around our building that's again it's not a significant wall it's minor so that we can flatten out the area you won't have any problem constructing that it's not like you need oh if fin only could get onto his property no no we wouldn't need to and and from what I see here I would think again we would just see how close we could get to the house without it being an impactful but you know a larger type of tree that would grow taller and kind of break up your view of the building there I think versus any type of row of Evergreens I don't think that really serves what you're talking about of that two story massing a building here where I think maybe just a larger at the time of planting Shade Tree on that side as long as it's the proximity to your actual house is appropriate that we could come up with something we could run by Mr zabo's office from a landscaping perspective as well as run it by you but yes I'm thinking maybe just a larger shade tree that we could put in that area that will grow and kind of fill in that space yeah just to break up the the view no again the LA of Windows for me is perfect but optically by taking the windows out then it's it's a little bit star to break up is would be great yeah I think we could accomplish that and then as far as the drainage just full disclosure from my backyard that tree that you got L Mark with the back there very back corner there is so much water that runs down there so just just as an FYI I'm sure you're firing for it but that's where all the water pulls down to so just make sure you got guess that's a common not a question sorry no and the fact that we're implementing some drainage in that area should give that yeah if not I'll s in right now retrospectively for all that we just said if you raise your right hand if you swear to God iir the testimony you just gave as well as any further testimony that you make this proceeding is the truth the all truth and nothing but the truth thank you all right when you ra when youall two for wall War run down to the wall then you have to gr on his prop Fe to run east west no we won't need to create on the property we're going to take that corner of the site cut it down put the wall in the water will drain towards the wall hit the stone back behind the wall and get down through it and we'll actually give it a halfth to you just may have a waterfall feure seriously and so what we can do what we can do is increase the size maybe have some good information to have so that we could accurately put in some maybe additional infrastructure on that uh back side of the wall to a little more Stone a little more you know drains back behind it to pull that water okay get it somewhere to go so one other question then the SI so does that mean you're bringing the elevation up from where the parking lot was so the property is going to be higher what I look at today no so in that back corner of where the building is is the only area where we're going to be cutting down into the grade the rest of the area up in the front of the parking um again it's a small retaining wall along here we're going to be taking the grade at they now and lowering it okay all right close to the tracks where they're going to have to fill the tracks is on the high side your Le side it's a little cut to bring it down um so really you're not even going to see the wall you're just going to see the right we're going to have a very minor wall on that side all right and then 6ot fence runs all the way all the way along your entire Northern property line 6ot solid B fence all right I think that was it question the way you the pan handle I'm looking at it the Google area that heavly wooden yes if a tree blows down which is happens now time we have tornadoes here and everything so and you have to get equipment back there to remove the tree how are you going to do that use a chain SI and cut it up take it out you only if you need a um any kind of heavy equipment you only have five ft of space to squeeze if a tree falls down you could cut up any tree with with a chainsaw and take it out in small little pieces you deal with what you what you have um in order to work with but how do you get past the the corner of the building again we talked that there's four feet behind from the building to a a fence on top of a wall that's enough room for somebody from maintenance to be able to walk past it there not an area that we're promoting as you know residents to to frequent that area but it's a wide enough area for somebody with the chainsaw to pass through there and get back to that area um to address that they'll have to put some kind of r or something or some kind a gate in the wall and two steps down for a guy to go by with a chainsaw he's going to be have to go back with the wheelbarrow okay it's gonna have to be wide enough to do that it's not a f easy job but there's enough path and access for somebody to be able to do that type of M we would leave that there's not I need to stop I need a motion whether board wants to consider hearing the [Music] next we done we caring what's that we need a motion to it's 10:30 and we need a motion to [Music] we extend and that we agree to hear another witness after 10:30 both items okay and do I have a second second okay all in favor I I'll oppos any you don't one don't know that carries so we're extending to 1130 and we're to hear your next witness thank you thank you our next witness is our architect even everyone you just for the record provide your name and your business address yes uh first name is Aron lesy Kumo P business address is 632 pton of Cedar Grove New Jersey and for the benefit of the board I know you've testified before this board has been accepted as an expert in architecture correct yes is your license is still current yes it is and can you just very briefly provide your education and background uh sure I The Bachelor of architecture from NJIT as uh Nicole mentioned I'm licensed architect in the state of New Jersey and I'm an associate at engl architecture we'd like to offer her as an expert in the field of art we're willing to hear her testimony thank you I'll I'll be brief thank you so um what's on the screen right now is what what are we looking at we are looking at this was actually submitted as part of the application this is sheet a100 more than 10 days in advance not Mar as a00 and what what is that floor plan this is a floor plan y thank you um just a real brief this is the uh original building location before we ended up shifting it due to the uh proposed easement that's no longer proposed um so I'm going to go to our exhibit I don't know what number we're up 84 84 this is uh building one revised layout and the date is 1124 thank you I'm going to zoom in here uh so generally speaking the building is the relatively the same shape um same number of units as before the main changes as Mr Shelly described was the water utility room here in the front which would hold the back flow preener for for the site and then there's a sprinkler closet back here which we had in previous design but uh was not eliminated so I wanted to make sure that was on the record um building functions the same as it did before each apartment has its own entrance uh three units on the first floor uh three on the second floor um I'm going to go to the rear building just to point out um the location of no windows along the adjacent property line uh in relationship to the floor plan we're talking about this wall here you can see there's no windows on it um and I'm just going to go to the elevation me one second so we're looking at sheet five or is this an old one no this is an old one yeah we're looking at sheet A200 uh elevation number five this is the building two rear elevation that uh is adjacent to the uh property the adjacent property owner um so as you can see there's no windows on it but there is a change of material so it's not the elevation isn't comprised of One Singular material there's a couple different materials there's a fiber cement lapid a and a fiber cement board and mat and siding which would be two different colors so give no articulation or anything but different colors or breaking it up correct um and then I will go to our colored elevations this one will be A5 yes this is A5 and this is dated 12423 so this is building one this is the front building um it's uh shows you the the color scheme proposed which is in line with the other developments in this um in this project um we're proposing stone veneer base fiber cement siding in a variety of colors um gray tones and whites standing seam metal roof and black windows and uh we have a wood toone accents at the porch overhangs um again this is the front building and then the next PDF uh which I guess is A6 this is also dated 12423 and this is building two this is the rear building um with the same color palette um for Clos as well and I believe I the same materials as previously described correct um just I know you mentioned it but how many two bedrooms and how many three bedrooms are and is it eight and four there's uh seven two bedrooms and five three bedrooms yeah well you know thank you for because now I'm hearing what I had and before before I think um Bernard have and mind Brook swapped units so we corrected the unit breakdown on those two sites but this one actually never changed chair take this moment since we're talking about bedrooms to address the fact that there are no bedroom one bedrooms here that's compliant with beack section five oh no I know it's just it's compliant it's comp theual no developer would develop without single bedrooms that's why they put that into the law so that's okay but the real the real key here is to be able to use these bedrooms these units to allow the number of one bedrooms in the other units that's what's necessary right so in order for them to comply with the bedroom distribution it all three together fine it'll be y how I thought these were like over under in terms of engineering there's like a two-bedroom on the first floor and a two-bedroom on the second floor how how do you come up with a odd distribution like how does that happen construction wise you know it's it's like SE two bedroom on the first floor two bedroom on the second floor three bedroom on the first floor three bedroom on the second floor so for I'll just um this is the this is the originally submitted plans so in the front here there's a two-bedroom in the middle there's a three right in the back there's a three bedroom if we go to the second I'm sorry you talk a little oh yeah yeah thank yeah yeah louder clear please and uh uh in the second floor there's a two-bedroom in the front a two-bedroom in the middle and a three in the back and the main difference is the middle unit which I don't have them side by side so I'm trying to see what's different okay so you have a three-bedroom on the first floor but a two-bedroom on the second floor that's correct in that case and then the rear building just for that building basically the rear and the rear one is let's see a three bedroom at the top here a two bedroom and a two-bedroom at the bottom here and the second floor these are Stacks so the second floor has a three bedroom at the top a two stack and then a two stack as well so it's just that all right that one so the way you got five three bedrooms is you use see middle section of the first building to be a three bedroom correct okay that makes it clear sorry you can continue I don't have questions oh I wanted to clarify um doing the angled wall earlier is this um were you talking about angling this wall yeah yeah yeah how how could it possibly be done to give a little more clearance to create a corridor between the know the wall and I'm not expecting an answer I'm just saying well there's something and we can look and see yeah I don't like say cost or whatever I just I don't know maybe you just step it a little bit I you know maybe that's the easiest instruction is just slightly step so you keep the same for space but you get clearance a bit of clearance using the back portion coverage your coverage C so conceivably it should be part of the accessible part of the L we have to provide access back there well I'm saying you know the plan so far have doesn't have what access right yeah well we mentioned you will add a s g John does the property have to be accessible in order to be cons considered part of the total area of the lot I'm I'm sorry but suppose I had a lot right and it's got this amount of space let's say there's a clip you know and it's the back side of the lot it's just not accessible at all you just can't get to it for some reason it's still counts has to by by law by defition so accessibility has nothing to do with lot square foot right you have to all right that's what I thought it was interesting question uh any other questions for this witness uh professionals any questions for the witness okay any questions for the from the public for this Witness n okay um now I can ask for comments comments not already provided any any members of the public any well our professional we'll we'll come back to our team here um any any uh members of the public that want to comment on this application [Music] none okay I have a few things to say um thank you very much for redoing it I um I do have what did you call it something engineering value added engineering to give you a few more parking spaces um which I can just give you then you can decide as long as you're going to like you proposed X number of parking spaces it become some kind of an issue then fine well not fine um I have two major uh no major additions that you need to address me personally and the board may have others uh the first is I really need you to obtain from First Energy real estate department an official statement that they do not expect to have any right away or access to your to your pandle or Flag Staff or whatever so I need legally that to come back to us right now there are pools that that are necessary to keep Bernardsville functioning that have to be maintained and you uh your property is where the trail is that the vehicles ride on to maintain those poles so let's just find out they may say I I don't think there's an easement that's registered with Somerset County they're notoriously bad at registering easements but they may have right away historically and it's like adverse possession as possession risk prescriptive or whatever these they're each Ling each other on um so number one need that don't underestimate how hard it is to get them to talk to you go you go I go and sit in the LA yeah I I Al say you almost have to have somebody Mars sit wait for somebody well can you write a letter says response they won't read it okay no you really do have to contact them and and I'm just saying don't think you know oh I'll wait a couple of days try doing this no like you you really need to do it right away the second major thing that you may or may not be aware of is that this is a burough parking lot there have been many resolutions that have been passed that have required the applicant to purchase decals to use this parking lot as a con as a stipulation essentially for their ability to have implemented that application and so what I need you to do collectively is to get to the council who's driving this and say what are you going to do and they have plenty of choices they can revoke the ordinance many of the resolutions will stand in the past that say oh well if if anything fail the typical verbage some aspect of the resolution is no longer relevant it drops but everything stays the same they need to decide if they're going to change the ordinance because we need to know how to provide parking relief but if we can anymore and they need to decide mostly their problem what they're doing about the deals they went out in December and people are paying money to use these parking spaces so it needs to be I would say s talk to Jack pman um I suspect it should be a executive session of the council um but we are um and the planning board we're dependent on the guidance from the council and there's this obligation well I you've can figured it all out but basically there are people that expect to park in your lot so I mean because that's where they Park and they have a detail that says they can and that has to get resolved and I know they're doing a parking survey and there's a lot going on it's you can work it out with the town is exactly what needs to be done we need to know that this has been resolved from the council's perspective legally so I think in terms of a imposing that as a condition what could become problematic is that we don't have control over that so it's a a burrow property transferring the prop they can't transfer the property to you correct but so as we heard previously in order to file our applications for financing we need to get through resolution compliance so we can certainly send formally send a letter to the council identifying that this can create the stipulation that you will contact the council and and and so forth we can't say we can't determine can determine what what the answer is going to be we're just going to say it's that you stipulate you will uh work with them and also here to help make sure that people understand it but it jeopardizes your legal situation and it certainly creates a problem for us um but I understand that's I believe with our guidance that would be the expectation is it would be written as a stipulation that you'll work with the council but without any guarantee on your part you can't stipulate to there being an answer your partners your partners with the council it's their problem it it's an issue to the extent it's an issue that impacts prior Bo approvals and I'm not saying it necessarily does because uh invariably when there are board approvals over time years decades Generations stuff changes uh uh centuries uh think Dynamics change and conditions uh become impacted uh the the uh so uh the governing body entered into all these various agreements and and and ordinance changes uh knowingly uh and so no no no no let's not go that far well we have to pres let's not go there okay well well here's the thing we don't know if what if anything needs to be done no and what we do know is that um the government if if what if anything needs to be done uh is will be addressed by the governing body yes it will and this applicant to the extent it's necessary and that the governing body hasn't already been uh notified by this board in essence to these proceedings or forap matter isn't aware of it already didn't need anybody to notify the Govern them of this um you know frankly anything more than asking this applicant to notify the governing body uh you know not just not collaborate with their partner yes well I don't know what and that can be their definition of collaboration we've done Mr chairman I'm trying to I'm trying to trying to scale it back I'm sure the board stays with within its Authority and doesn't do anything outside its Authority or arbitrary thees are unreasonable then we that is we've defined what that is and there will be a stipulation that they will interact with the council to help resolve this and it's the council's decision it's it's not theirs they can't control it all we're saying is have and we pass stipulations like this frequently not for this topic but frequently when when when something that the applicant is required to get or pursue from the governing body yes this is a situation where I don't see where the applicant is required to pursue or obtain something from the governing body the governing body is aware of the issue and the and and to the extent it's there's an obligation on the governing body's part uh it there's no obligation candidly that I can they can ignore the stipulation Steve but they need to stipulate the they will at least contact the governing body about this issue yes that's what I said contact and work with the governing body I don't I don't understand we don't know the government will ask them to work with us what are we ask them to do so I condition say okay this is what we're going to do in the meantime well I to that asking what this afcan could be asked to do in this circumstance I'm trying years with the council not the no but what about the there's been multiple approvals with conditions that they had to bypass this no no I understand that and that is an issue that the governing body is aware of it has to address what I simply asking because I'm happy to ask for stipulation from this applicant as what they have to do Beyond notifying the governing body of the issue um and when you say work with them yes I want you to I need to know what we are asking them to work with them to do and what obligation we are putting on this uh on on this applicant so that and this applicant needs to know what it is you're obliging them to do so they know whether they could stipulate to it or not if they're not going to stipulate to it I got to know uh what you're going toose so I can kind advise you whether it's whether it's within your Authority or not or arbitrary reason why or not and you can take my advice or you ignore or not but but but we haven't gotten it yet what are you asking them to do so clear you tell them to work with them how how yeah I'm sorry give me a chance I'm sorry um when how do you determine whether that condition has been satisfied you don't care well because it's it's volunt it's a voluntary stipulation like we do so many other times you say could you please try to do this could you please work with an engineer could you do something and it's a stipulation it's not binding it's not like oh I got to deliver something the situation comes to mind when we had the um uh Bernville Center we had a similar requirement that they work with the school board to connection the gate between the gate coming down the hill we never could determine whether they had met that condition or not because they said we had we said we haven't done anything uh and it sort of went limbo so what I'm suggesting is that you sort of Define what it is we want to do to do as work with it so you have an objective standard that you can apply determ whether they met that requirement and then I have a question what about what about the conditions of pre all the previous approvals that's that's the T no board approvals yeah we understand that I address reques and divide five spaces in the Amar the CLA is nullified what happens to that approval nothing nothing changes with that approval as I said before and I'll say again uh over time uh conditions uh uh may be impacted by circumstances in the evolution of development in any municipality uh so so if there is an obligation for someone to address that I think we've all understood and established in degree that obligation if there is an obligation uh can only be the obligation of the burrow where if we're going to ask them to stipulate or we're going to impose an obligation on them to notify them and work with them as board member har pointed out what does work with them mean to accomplish what when have they done their job when have they not done their job and I'm trying to in my mind what we can require them you're talking about trying to solve the problem and that's the council's problem to try to solve notify them I think they parking variances in the downtown in the downtown district were granted as a with a condition yes yes that condition what happens to that condition for the third time I'll tell you that conditions sometimes are impacted by time and developments that occur and that's why I'm telling you I'm not telling you there's an obligation specific of the governing body to do anything but if there is an obligation anybody to do something not telling us that but there is an obligation the Gover body to do something if there's if there's an obligation there is no but ten because find the decals that have parking now Jack would tell you no one ever needs that parking no one ever uses it I think that's pres okay let's get to the point so here's the compromise they will notify and they will attend the town council meeting to present the situation one meeting will the applicant stipulate to notifying the governing body of this issue and attending one governing body meeting to address this issue so we're happy to notify the Town Council and we're happy to attend a meeting assuming that the governing body will allow us to present this issue fine okay we have a stipulation I think that's what happens to tenant a that got a that parking variance with the condition of providing the excess parking in the AM blot I think what we're talking about here Mr Sim to the extent there's an obligation of anybody to address that issue if it's the governing body and and the applicant has stipulated to notifying them and attending a meeting to to address it what but what happens to that approval they're not notified no the applicant has stipulated they've not notified the people that I didn't say that the applicant has stipulated to attend to notifying the governing body and attending a meeting right right right to address it and and the governing body will have to determine what if any obligation they have and if they if the governing body concludes it has an obligation the governing body will have to determine what they're going to do with respect to said obligation it impacts yes yes so does the does the bar the parking variant become void yes no no the variance does become void become void what I'm thinking of is the reverse if I have a condition that I have to use a spot or purchase a decal at out and then it's a municipal lot and the buau decides to develop it and eliminate it change you though that's the change that's that Mr war is talking about I think that obligation is relieved because it's no fault of that that development and I think that was a conscious decision by the council no there are two sides to the question the first side is I don't want to pay for a decal I don't even want to do any parking you're just making me as as you're just holding me up and making me do it as part of my resolution right that's set it let's say it did you know then there the other set of people that said I really do want some parking spaces I really do need I've got 10 employees and I really do need a couple of spaces this is the deal the council has to deal with both sides one is just forgiveness yeah don't worry about it it's under the bridge things change there's the other side where does someone actually need the space and the council has to figure that out they got to go to Every applicant and have your decal entitlement whatever and they it's not a long list by the way it's like 12 Enterprises that have to be founda and they have to determine and say here do you still need parking spaces and they have to figure that out and maybe that's part of the parking study or whatever they that's a broader broader planning issue for the development of the downtown I think that this is a very tactical one they just have to figure it out and everyone may say I didn't never use those parking they the Jack pigeons perceptions everybody's just buying the decals because we tell them to buy know we're getting into bar now we're talking about zoning enforcement if if I was required as an applicant to get for decals but nobody's parking there there something wrong we can't address that now no no we're not we're not we're not here I respect request we move forward yes thank you uh are there any those were my two big items um I do have which I can show you um we can figure out some way how to get the Extra Spaces are there any other comments discussion from the board before well we we already asked the public for comments right we're going to there was no public comment beyond our number 20 l01 uh Mr caller's public comments during the questioning and we'll let summarize but right comment yeah maybe what we can do real quick is just confirm Rel again as we did before that the board is going to make and the relief is uh liim and final site plan approval uh I have a parking variant RSI exception the extent this board doesn't determine that it's not required because of proximity to the railroad and its affordable housing uh uh IE less parking required generally uh of 20 one uh uh spaces R was 18 uh proposed uh uh that's with the electric vehicle credit uh in addition to that parking uh variance and rs exception uh I have the following I have internal roadway to be approximately 4 ft from building one correct wrong on any of this and approximately 2 ft from building two that's CH look at the the the uh I know we have 8 8.5 I'm sorry the 8 yeah but now that's going to change 8 8.5 ft versus 10 ft between parking and building two right to the extent that's not modified as discussed the 8.5 may increase um 3.2 ft uh between parking and track boundary and 3.5 ft between parking area and track boundary uh where 10 ft is required uh I have 5 ft uh between internal roadway and track boundary uh where 10 ft uh versus 10 ft required in one area or is that been eliminated it's been liated okay um and uh so with the parking r s exemption and the couple of parking uh uh uh area location uh uh exceptions that I just listed we also have Monument sign variances for size and front yard location and the building coverage of 25.5% versus 25% given the additional uh uh uh back prevor uh uh enclosed area in the building and the covered down I had misspoken the the addition of the water room brought the coverage to 25.5 the addition of the covering over with the traction closure brought the building coverage to 26% so each of those total 26.0% total okay 26 each of those components is a half a percent 26% versus 25% maximum permitted building coverage um that's the those are the deviations I have does that comport with what our planner and the has yeah that's what you're voting on also on um the Zeo 11 um I'm sorry the disable list of 11 conditions dis conditions follow we're GNA carry those over but obviously conditions seven and a nine can not be carried for carried over you said we were going to reconcile them right yeah yeah those but seven says that hand handles your the original intent was to use that as space that's not valid the extent that they are valid or still relevant based on the revisions that's have been presented tonight and that that Cod n def correct correct I Ag and Mr Warner we are also unsure on this property whether or not a poll is going to be required so to the extent that a utility poll oh the RS exemption again if it is required by as we did with the last application as we've done with many applications of late uh uh because we require everything to be underground uh but uh our requirement is one thing and jcpnl requirement is another they don't always jve I guess uh uh so to the extent necessary they would be asking for uh an rsis the Minimus exemption uh from the requirement to extend our Ordinance do we have we have it here this one I don't know if we have it in this one we don't so it's just an RS exemption uh uh from the requirement that uh uh uh utilities be underground for new construction new residential construction we going have a condition about jcpnl yeah First Energy jcpnl there has to be something significant first uh Community safety because basically I don't know how they're going to get to that pole reconcile access you need to get the official answer from First Energy and I'm looking at the previous resolution there's a requirement that the U they approval from the the fire chief that would continue right yeah Carri forward [Music] yeah we'll go through each resolution and everything that was presented tonight and and add and subtract as we need to that's why with the last one uh uh and no doubt with the two this evening assuming there's an approval of the second this evening uh uh we have multiple rounds of reconciliation to ensure that all the all conditions uh uh carried forward uh they're modified as necessary they're eliminated as necessary new ones are in as necessary although we pretty much address them all the extent you eliminate materially modify condition and we have a list of those so we're not TR do our own reconciliation of the oh you want you want to a table what right because there were 82 condition right yeah without spret or a document with a table that shows resolutionary res amended [Music] final to to double check us all and you on a cross reference reconciliation sure I say sure only John said volunteer volunteer you I'm probably being even more Frank candid than I usually am so must be the hour good yes so that's that's Rel I'll assume it's conditions and and same as before we have six I think she should summarize right oh I'm sorry I I I never catch you thank you I you were starting to deliberate I want to make sure we had the belief so so please it's thank you Mr War thank you Mr chairman so as you heard this evening in our testimony we are here seeking amended preliminary and final site plan approval along with the relief that was just listed by your board attorney relating to the property at black 124 Lot 1 18 Mount Ary for this 100% affordable housing project there are 12 units we believe that the plan that was presented this evening provided a significant Improvement in both circulation and location of buildings um also the impact to Neighbors from that which was approved at preliminary and we're hopeful that the board agrees and we'll view this application favorably thank you thank you okay motion [Music] I so Jeff moved second but not on the resolution that as a grant of the all the relief so together with the all the conditions to right with a resolution between the previous with the reconciliation reconciliation between the previous well that'll be something that be on the obligation to Mr Z he right that's all right we pay him well that's tonight he's the only one all right is there a second yeah that was Ken okay hear thank you okay Miss fer yes Mr Graham yes Mr harwit yes Mr simar yes Mr Walden yes and Mr zazar yes motion cares thank you very much thanks for bearing with us just trying to make it better that's all and you did CH you changed this one a lot thank you the only the only public comment was fa oh wait the uh engineer we teach you that in school [Music] get EX