all right good evening everyone I'm to call the meeting to order it's brige order Township Zoning Board of adjustment regular meeting May 28 2024 it is 7:00 uh both adequate electronic notice of this meeting specifying the time place and manner in which such notice was provided in accordance with the open public meetings Act njsa 10 4-6 specifically on January 9th 2024 proper notice was sent to their Courier News and the Star Ledger and file with the clerk of the C of bridgew and post on the municipal bulle Bo please be aware of his only Board of adjustment policy for public hearings no new applications will be heard after 9:30 p.m. and no new testimony will be taken after 10 p.m. if you're able please rise PL to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all good evening Roger sir have a roll call please yes sir Mr fo here Mr widley I hear M Min here Mr Sweeney here Mr presco here Mr bonjour here Mr gaski here Mr Cat here Mr kulak here Mr vessia here Mr Gavin here cor oh I'm sorry uh Mr Allen here Mr Burr here miss San here all right thank you very much have another uh gentleman here Joe Fishinger thank you sir all right uh thank you everyone for squeezing in here we have the voting machines have arrived next door and uh the room is now locked and ready for uh uh voting so thank you for uh adjusting call an audible tonight and Miss Mater set this all up at the last minute so I want to send a extra thank you to her um want to open the meeting up to members of the public start something I I already did started Roger confirm that we're rolling we're yes tap off ring good thanks Bruce um open up the the meeting to members of the public that would like to speak on any land use matter that is not on our agenda this evening all right seeing none I'm going to close that uh board minutes we have none and we have one resolution that's for Ravi and that's um 97 Ivy Lane for comments and changes on the board Mr chairman one uh minor comment at page four third line from the bottom where it starts the board with the words the board says the board for and required additional d4 variant should be a instead of an other than that I think we're good all right good I move make a motion to approve all right that was motion by Mrs amend second by Mr Wy Mr F yes Mr Wiley uh yes m a v yes Mr Sweeny yes Mr vono yes Mr kulak yes Mr vessio yes Mr Gavin yes right thank you um Rich could you take us through the Myriad of cases that we have here showing up on the agenda yet but um not being heard this evening so if uh there are any members of the public here for Chimney Rock Self Storage that's 1661 Route 22 or belly Holdings LLC which is 19-21 Mount Pleasant Avenue or 1200 route22 land investors and 1200 route22 LLC holding those three applications are not being heard this evening they are um being adjourned to June 11th at 700 p.m. at the regular meeting room there'll be no further notices from the applicant on those and then um anyone here on CX towers that application is being carried to July 23rd and uh there will be a new notice from the applicant on that application how many meetings are we have how many are we have on the 11th I'm not sure they're all really going to be heard but I would assume chimy rocks going to go forward and and Bell's going to go forward right so we're going to move forward with Bridgewater Real 2 AKA our star thank you Mr chairman hello Mr how are you very well thank you um Henry Kent Smith Fox Rothchild I'm the attorney on behalf of Bridgewater realy the applicant before the board tonight as a board recalls this is now the third hearing that we've had on the proposed Starbucks which is located at the corner of Route 22 in Morgan's Lane uh this uh property was previously approved for a garded school that's not moving forward and so Starbucks now is looking to take that uh parcel that was the the guarded school on the previous approval and uh constructed Starbucks so as the board recalls there were a lot of questions that were raised at the February meeting I mean get a lot of design issues so we decided that the better course was discretion and we just presented a concept at the uh March 12th meeting which was revisions that you know I think by the end of the meeting I think everybody felt comfortable with some of the most all of the design changes we were then uh moving forward with a basically uh redesigned site plan so we're here tonight uh to present the redesign site plan we also due to questions raised by the board have undertaken a thorough traffic analysis a complete traffic report that was submitted unfortunately we did not get uh Mr fitzinger and brigh View's review letter until about a week or or a little more than a week ago in that uh review letter uh Mr finger and briew have raised some concerns that require further study and knowing how important that issue is to this board it doesn't make sense for us to go in started on traffic when you're going to say what about this and what about that we're going to study those issues we're going to address each one and submit back to Bri View and this board a uh revised U updated traffic analysis to address the specific issues that breit view raises with the hope and desire that by the time that's done and we come back to the board the traffic analysis will be as complete as we can possibly make it I know this is a critical issue to this board and we want to make sure we've got all our eyes on it and te cross and don't want to just waste time asking questions which you know you're going to ask and not have the answer so we need to have those answers so for tonight then I'm going to start with Mr michelo as he'd been previously sworn uh asked the site plan engineer to go through the revised plans that we submitted uh at the beginning of April and then Mr chairman before you dive into that I have a question for Mr M I see him in the front row and accounted for um our Township Council has basically alerted me that there's been a a request for a liquor license transfer in that request the way it was explained to me by the council president there was two boxes one was a simple transfer what was a transfer in an expansion under this specific instance it was that expansion that gave them a bit of pause um so your testimony when you testified and you did a great job it very clear was that there would be no loss of parking um and there would be basically nothing changed from the original plan um according to the liquor license transfer and expansion that there's plans for an outdoor venue and a loss of some parking spot so I just want to kind of give you the microphone or the the day us there to kind of speak to us and let us know what's happening and if you can just give us any Clarity that would be I'll just give you get started you're under oath you remain under oath so just thank you thank you okay uh I found found out about this when uh it came back to me through my Council that the liquor license transfer was initially is stalled the right word or denied I don't know concerns were raised concerns were raised about two months ago right so I proceeded to read my tenant the full calorie version of the riot act and I said what are you doing um I have an application going on before the board right now uh our lease is you have this is your 697 73 Square ft this is your building this is your liquor license this is how this is what you're going to run uh period what are you doing goes oh I just this is Mr desiderio who is my tenant I just thought I'd try to get some extra seats outside and my answer was no and that was it so I said go back to the liquor license Authority amend your application get the Eraser out this is what you're this is what you lease this is what you're going to run period end of story it's my understanding that yesterday the council approve the council approve the transfer the liquor license got with a four walls box inside the building that's what he's going to build that's it so they approved the non-expansion so back to the original one is what they approved yes what we discussed right no outdoor yes I wrote him a what would you call it a flamethrower yes yeah I wrote him a flamethrower worthy of me so your your testimony is still valid there's no changes to it correct we're updated and corate you letting us know and making that all correct I hope I've clarified it for you because I was really angry so good glad we're clear and I appreciate you letting us know all right thank you I hope that was unambiguous no no Perfect all right thank you very much all right thank thanks for the opportunity to clarify no no problem all right it's all yours all right thank you Mr chairman I'm glad we got that uh clar so then I'm going to start with Mr michelo we're going to defer traffic until we can get that revised analysis back to the board and to the Consultants so that we can have a complete a review of everything so then the last question is we do have our professional planner here Mr toia um I can't complete his planning testimony because he needs the traffic in order to do the negative criteria but he could get started on special reasons and Mr chairman I leave that one up to the board I'm profer that we can start Mr toia but he will have to come back have to come back when we go not to put the cart before the horse I just want to let you know that you know rich and and Mr W Deli were talking you know July 9th seems like your next go dat if you want to you know start thinking about it but after that things get really crazy where this board they weren't already crazy um and this is not putting pressure on you to finish on that date but boy that's a good Landing date July 9th you can have the whole night okay put it to a vote deliberate if we get to it but after that things do get to the end of the year so just between you and me m you're shaking your head no right so the oh oh you are you conflicted on the night yes so June 25 was okay for me July 9th is not did you say June 25th is residentials were booked up country oh so Mr chairman then since I can't go anywhere without Mr Toby and he's going to be out of the country on the nth understood what are we looking at here next year afraid you say a or August 6th no that's PL um so we don't know about that right no that's definitely is it okay uh August 27th August 27th August 27th Michael good good all right good getting tired put it in there and don't okay all right so given that and and you think will Mr chairman have that night the whole night I do okay it then would it would just make sense because then we could get all of the reports back Mr Fish we could get everything tied up in a nice neat bow come in on the 27th and just do the whole thing so let's just favor when you have the information all complete can you get it over to us so we can yes like try to wrap it up then yes yes absolutely yes yes um and we'll make the announcement at the end okay hearing very good very good all righty so then I think that's got it restaurant intend to open before the end of do you have an opening date on that they find out they're working hard over there I hope so I'm not going to speak for my tenant but his rent triggers when he opens and I'm getting very frustrated they doing a lot of work over there doing a lot of work over there yeah I am happy that he's doing the work and unhappy that he's not over so well then the hope is that we'll go over there for a drink afterwards right yes only it won't be the first time that's happen um so with that then um Mr michella if you would be so kind um you can have a seat I'll stand up it's actually kind of comfortable yeah yeah yeah so Mr michello just to remind you and to confirm that you are under oath and you remain under oath yes and nothing has changed relative to your professional license J or any other aspect of your professional credentials since last time you testified nothing has changed good all righty so then you had prepared a fully engineered site plan based on the comments that we received from the board at the uh March 12th hearing correct that's correct we submitted revised site plans we also look to address the review comments that were in the planner and engineer and Traffic Engineers review letters that were pertinent to the plans at that particular time some comments wer we address as many as we could and that was outline and the respons that and if you could identify then and Mark for the record the site plan that you'll be testifying about today I believe we're up to A8 for the record yeah that's what I had rich A7 was what was seven was the concept plan seven was rering which was the rendering of the concept plan I had a sketch proposed second plan is A6 huh H we did have something that we didn't we did Mark A7 because it's sitting right there um just pull this let's just so that everybody's clear this was what we had marked as A7 at the March yeah we're up to pass I'm sorry this is actually what we marked this is the A7 formal exhibit so what do you have a six what do I have six because this building signage plan I have marked as not having been marked oh you know what that was on on yeah but this never got marked let me see on one second let's get this take I have elevations mark6 yeah yeah I have an architectural handout yep page numbers 2 through S would be six yes right yes yeah and that was in fact uh there was comments raised by the board relative to the treatment of the back and the side so we've got revised architectural that we've submitted back in okay sorry Seven's the site plan and then Eight's our new number eight yes so we that is what is marked as A8 as of this date so A8 for the record isled rering its original date was February 27th 2024 and it's revised through May 28th 2024 so Mr uh Michelle if you would be so kind as to walk through this site plan what the revisions were made and what the the impact of those revisions are on the application and relief saw tonight excellent so basically the layout you see here is is generally consistent with what we submitted or presented to the board at the last meeting and I'm just going to talk about the highlights of the changes that we made with one to two other um modifications so again um your access on 22 is on the bottom of the plan Morgan Lane is on the left hand side or the Eastern side of the plan um we start off with the entry coming in from Route 22 if you recall this entry I believe was 18t wide originally um and we wind it out now it's 22t wide um this way you have both a dedicated right hand and left hand turn lane when you come into the site so you can split the uh the uh the traffic flow so now we can actually hold I think we set up to six cars in that entryway three on each side if so needed um and then when you come into the site itself um we took the drive-thru lanes and pushed them further back if you remember my testimony I think we originally stacking around um 20 cars on the previous plan this one is now up to 24 24 vehicles in the drive-through Lanes when you measure it from the um service window all the way around the drive-thru and the two double lanes that go out to the um Access Lane um when you come into the site so we have up to 24 cars that could stack in the uh in the drive-through Lanes this necessitated the addition of some additional impervious coverage because we needed to move the lanes further back to do that and lengthen them out um but we also made a slight adjustment to the width of the lanes they originally 12T wide we sh them down to 11 which still meets um standard traffic um circulation purposes um but allows us to make up for a little bit of uh impervious coverage that was added to the uh to the site um we also show on here now we talked about it at the last meeting it wasn't on the prior sketch but we took um three parking spaces and banked them those are those three parking spaces that are in the lighter tan shade on the plan year to the uh top left of the Starbucks building um so now we have what basically is 290 spaces throughout the entire property which counts the Starbucks the restaurant site and the hotel site and 293 if you count the bank parking spaces for for the rec purposes um by banking the spaces and adding the additional perious coverage originally when we submitted the application we were at 6.5% lock coverage by increasing the drive-through Lanes um and Counting the bank spaces we'd be at 60.7% lock coverage but by adding the three Bank parking spaces in um we're actually back down to 60.5 so the the various relief is for 60.7 but we're if we don't build those Bank spaces it's 60 6.5% so they will be what grass landscape no just Grass Grass just grass area yeah and they could be built in the future if they're if they're needed so let me just ask another question then when Bank these would you be putting in like the load bearing Subs sub strata or is it just going to be we're just going to Grass it we're going to grade it out and we're going to Grass it okay and if we need to put in if they have to build them you put in the DGA and everything else later I think I heard the last meeting there was going to be at least one charging station yes so we actually had um two EV charging spaces at two EV charging spaces at the hotel and we added a charging station um next to the Starbucks here we have two EV spaces designated um at the Starbucks building so total four is there going to be any at the restaurant no we are not proposing any at the restaurant right now so you have two and two total four correct for the S anything further on the hotel as far as development I haven't I to I I could I could talk before our next meeting we will definitely have enough to meet by August yes yeah most assuredly thank you so with those changes that's how the coverage gets modified on site we also um identifi the access path from Morgan Lane sidewalk that's out there now we show an access sidewalk coming in across two crosswalks and then coming around the back side of Starbucks um that would connect to a walkway that connects directly to the Starbucks patio area and then we continued that walkway out the back towards the hotel building now there was a comment in Mr finger's letter about trying to eliminate stairs on this walkway here we do have a couple feet actually it's about a 3ft grade change from the Starbucks down to the hotel maybe a little bit more um so Mr fish just suggested possibly rerouting That Sidewalk in a different um location in the back here to try to minimize the need for stairs and properly looking at that and doing that as as addressing the yourie comment I have a question actually I've had it for a while what's the purpose of having such a large outdoor Pao area that just goes back to what Starbucks had put on their model for the for the site yeah I mean again you have almost I think it's 40 um seats out there that's a lot but that's what they had on on their model um layout build is that their standard then for most that they do well for this current building that they gave us that was their standard when when when they when they sign the letter of intent to to develop to come on site they give us a package that says this is the building footprint this the signage package this is what we want around the building and they had 40 outdoor parking spaces with a can I'm sorry outdoor seating spaces with a canopy that covers half of them so that's what they were looking for would you happen to know in Green Brook how many they have I don't know how many in green I've never been in there so I can nether live but I I I know the site but I driven past there like three tables outside yeah like three or four tables maybe can you go back and ask them that that if 40 is actually necessary yes could it's been bothering me since the first meeting um as far as so we have The Pedestrian access that we added to the plan we also I know there was a lot of talk about the Morgan Lane um entry and exit here um and what's out there today I'm sure many have seen this it's a very um slightly raised concrete hump that's in the middle of that drive lane there that's actually right here um which probably is driven over by every car and truck that comes in there now we don't want to prevent emergency vehicles from entering the site so you don't want to make that an impediment but what we're going to do is we're going to change it from just that um concrete to a mountable curve it'll look a little more imposing to a passenger vehicle they're not going to want to drive over it or you know in terms of that nature but a fire truck can still reverse it and come in that way if need be a more of a mountable curve look to it as opposed to just that smooth concrete which is easy which is easy to drive over so we can try to limit those those turns coming in from Morgan Lane and direct everybody to go out um towards um Route 22 we also did update the signage on the plans there was talk about trying to direct everyone that that wants to get to 287 to go back out towards 22 um so we put a sign adjacent adjacent I'm sorry sign directly across from the drive-thru that basically says for Route 287 go this way on the site and we had another exit sign over here for that same thing to direct Vehicles if they want to get to 287 to go back out towards Route 22 how far is it from that exit to the entrance to 287 I I don't know the top of my head I have to I have to go check well because they're coming in on the right lane and 287 they need the left lane have to get across the three lanes of traffic but at least putting them in here saves another 600 or something feet of Frontage I think it was before they get to the Morgan Lane intersection so at least gives them that opportunity to have more room to uh to merge over the three lanes that was one of the issues that we need to address that whole weaving Factor Lane capacity and weaving factor that Mr finger raised that we have to do that analysis so we acknowledge the question we we'll have the answer all of that descriptive well in advance in the meeting thank you the other thing that's shown on the plans is we added the um LED um drive-thru signage that opens and closes the drive-thru based upon the stacking of the drive-thru Lanes um so the idea is to have um Loop detectors uh in the Drive-Thru Lanes here that when the drive-through lanes are full that those signs that are located both at the entrance to the drive-throughs and at the um entry coming off of 22 would change from drive-thru open to drive-thru close depending on the stacking the drivethru lanes and then there's also a sign that says if drivethru is closed please park and visit the cafe that details on the plan refresh my memory again in terms of besides just a sign will there be a gate that comes something that comes down and stops them from trying to get in line we didn't propose a gate we just could have the signage that says it was closed because you'll see the drive we did a red light green light thing right well the signs were ready the signs would say open would be green red would be closed is what we were doing on the sign itself and you said this was in houon in not Mor Madison Madison yes and and there'll probably be again this we have an electrically designed it that's not my my expertise but there'll probably be an override inside the building that would allow them to close it if need from inside as well um from from a a science perspective um so that was that was added to the site plans the details on the detail sheets and um lastly we basically um enhan some of the landscaping and I'll go through the Landscaping numbers when get to the um to the waivers that are being requested I think that covers all of the site plan adjustments that were done on the plans themselves before I get to the um design waivers and variances that that did change I think it probably good if I just show the the architectural yes thank you I was just about to so what was submitted to the planning board was actually two elevations that was part of the resubmission package that just went in and I'm going to um reference I need these if they were submitted yeah yeah do we need to Mark those why don't we mark this one make A9 A9 A9 and and A9 a and a9b because what we like is feedback from this board because there's two different options which one do you guys like that's really kind of what we're here to you know I'll do something so these are the elevations there's two of them here and I'll I'll talk through them briefly um a9a in um Mr Smith's hands and a9b that's on the easel these were prepared by um Ben Horton Berman architecture um and what this is representing is the side of the Starbucks that faces Morgan Lane with the drive-through window and the rear of the Starbucks that faces basically the parking lot and the and the residences off to the South okay and the one on the a9b represents basically the rear and the side all having that wood um treatment on it while a9a basically limits the wood to the drive-thru window and to the service door area Under The Canopy on the rear of the building again both were submitted to the board as as options um we have no issues with doing either one but we want to show to the board and get the feedback one other thing is both elevations we took the roof leaders that were on the outside of the building on the original plan and we put them in the building so there's no more of the roof leaders that you saw coming down we took those they were on the back side over here and they were they were moving out internal we also we also added the a light under the copy and reduced the exterior scones to three instead of four that were on the rear so we now have three back there with a light Under The Canopy by the service door thats number 13 for the Brown versus the black look is there any uh difference in the material for structural strength is it purely cosmetic it's purely cosmetic the brown is wood it's a wood treatment where the black is the correctly noal sorry metal p purely aesthetic do so um you know we're you we think either design works for us and it's a question really now of how the board thinks in terms of whether there's a preference one way or the other that's really the question can we put it to a vote want to put it to a vote well I mean Vote or however you want to why don't we get some input from from our professionals yeah and then the board can kind of give some feedback professionals bill and I were just discussing you had brought this up originally I think it's good to break that up and these were the two facades where previously there was only metal panel proposed as the material and I you know kind of challenged the architect to say those are the two sides that are most sensitive because they do face Morgan Lane and he described them a little bit as utilitarian so this was an effort I think to match some of the facade treatments on the other sides that he had included I'm not thrilled with either um I think it is an improvement um but I think you know option two where there's a bit more of the wood is a bit lazy uh if youp if you it's a bit lazy when you flip between the two like the first option is showing a way that they incorporate the wood in in interesting areas that kind of break up the facade um but does the does a very minimal add of the wood paneling whereas the second is just like let's just do it on the whole you know bottom half so um I know that we'll be seeing this applicant again and I will you know challenge the architect again to um do a little bit more I don't feel mean to be Goldie Locks here I'd like to see a little bit more option option an option C or three or whatever so not now but we're talking in reference to what on the other facade and I'm referring now this is exhibit A1 um because there's that glass treatment on both sides here that I don't we there's no way we could do the glass treatment but maybe make it look like some something along the lines of that or I like I said there's a little I don't mean to be Goldilocks but there's a little there's a little too little in option one and a little too much in option two all right so maybe just spread the wood a few of those metal panels out from the drive-thru window from the other door and I think you're going to have a happy medium there that's kind of what I what we it's not much more that talk like a mixture then Ju Just a little bit less and a little bit more mixture yeah kind of like a so take a b combine them and something not lazy I like that yeah drive through what was that something like the wood panels but a different treatment on the drivethru itself so the drivethru actually has the benefit of the glass so I think that it's and it and the way it's been designed um you know I don't think it like protrudes too much where it kind of matches but there's not enough wood paneling that kind of justifies why it's there again it's just slapped on around the glass so I think if you extend it a little bit wider outside of that you will get the better Fe you'll get the the benefit of that wood panel because you can actually see it and you can actually see it around kind of creating a column around the drive-thru are there any concerns moving the leaders inside the housing does it affect capacity as long as long as they're the same sizing should not have any impact you agree with that actually it's a nice clean yeah I just want to make sure there was no safety concerns concerns uh other board comments let's let's hit them while they're fresh in our minds all right something okay non question so last uh last meeting challenge site engineer to kind of look at the site and see kind of what can we do differently to improve the site so we sort of avoid a little bit of a Crossing traffic as folks are entering from 22 um I guess the the plan presented here is very similar to the previous plan um could you describe some of the other options you looked at and kind of why they didn't work in terms of sort of the layout of the the through where the parking issus East Side versus on the West Side um other Alternatives you looked at not work well when we go back this is going back to the original layout you think the original conceptual PL that we looked down on the property um we always had parking that looped around the outside of the site it was a matter of how best to effectuate the drive-thru Lanes in relation to the building itself and you want your building to front on 22 to look towards 22 where the front of the building needs to be is where the front of the restaurant is so it kind of made the most sense that the drive-thru would come in this way and and loop around the building you have to have it you know for for for vehicles to be able to drive up to the window um so to put it in another orientation didn't really make a lot of sense where if I turn the building this way and put the put the drive-through window back here and had the building the entry kind of facing Morgan I'm I'm losing that stacking distance that I have on on the plan that we have here on this particular site so we looked at the layouts this seemed to make the most layout sense from getting the most stacking and even after we push the the lanes further back to get more stacking um and and located in that same um diagonal across 22 that you have the uh the um the restaurant at so I mean again we we that's kind of the Genesis of how it kind of laid in the way it did and then the adjustments that we made for the concept plan that we presented at the last beam that we codified with this site plan submission um so I really didn't really look at making changes after that last presentation that we made other than just tweaking it like we talk about so pretty much this plan here as proposed design is really what optimizes queing for the drivethru it certainly optimizes the drive-thru queueing gives us the opportunity to have a bypass lane for deliveries that can go right back out towards Morgan in 22 it really fits the best with the site to get that most optimization without putting it in in other locations where okay I'll put the building up front and put the parking behind it that that doesn't that doesn't work either um from from an access standpoint a question how many handicapped parking spaces will you have this plan shows two which meets the ADA requirements for and they're they're both van accessible because of that you know they share that 8 wide strip in the middle that's you also then did an analysis of the lighting plan yes so we looked at the lighting I know at the last meeting we was asked the question can we split the lighting calculation out from the overall site because we did have it tied in with the overall Hotel Site and Starbucks does require um enhanced lighting levels around their building um through the driveth through Lanes at the entry points into the building um and in and and and in the parking lot areas too um so when you we split out the numbers and we looked at just the Starbucks property by itself for lighting that that average came in at 2.4 foot candles for the site where your ordinance requires 1.5 now that that takes into account the lighting levels in and around the front doors Under The Canopy at the drive-thru at the um at the uh menu water board in the back so it is slightly higher than what we would have across the rest of the site um which is actually a little slight slightly less in terms of its lighting levels that does meet the 1.5 back by the hotel because that is closer to the residential so this area here is just a little bit higher in ter 2.4 how do you know what the hotels are going to be I mean was that stipulated under the planning board approval for the hotel how many foot candles for lights are going to be that was there stipulation of that well yeah it was in the uh design plans reviewed by the planning board reviewed by the Consultants so on average then with the restaurant and the hotel what is the the the gross average gross average yeah [Applause] says overall for the site is uh 1.4 so the so just so we're clear the overall if you took everything on the track together it complies but for Starbucks it does not it's greater than the 1.5 you know to the extent that we're looking at just the Starbucks we would be requesting the waiver for the 2.4 uh lighting level for the Starbucks because that's what this Bo you know you want to treat this Starbucks independent and I do think then that's a waiver request yes could you go back to the circulation of cars pulling in from Route 22 so you widen a driveway and allowed for a clear right or left direction that someone might choose if I choose to go right I am going into the drive-thru Lanes um if you choose to go right have yes you could you could go to the drive-through Lanes you could if that's where you're going or if you wanted to you could again let's say you missed his entrance and you wanted to go to the restaurant you could make a right and go to the restaurant there's no there's nothing that stops you from pulling into the restaurant parking Lota let's say for argument say I come in here and I make the right all of a sudden I decide I don't want to go to the drive-thru for whatever reason you've got two options if if someone knows about this they can take the bypass lane around and then come out to the parking lot area or they can drive around the outer parking lot of the of the restaurant and hotel and come back in that way and this part this drive lane does exist up here even though the hotel is not built yet this access out to Morgan up here is constructed in there so it will be functional um when when the Starbucks is completed even if the hotel is still under construction if I choose to go left and that pull in from 22 then I'm going to going to the parking area the main parking area for Access into the store itself correct yes yeah if you change your mind you have to go all the way around right and and then the question really is if if we start to back up because you had testified earlier that the uh Drive in from Route 22 will hold additional cars if we start to back up in that lane the question becomes how do I get out of it and what about the people am I blocking that lane that allows me to go back to the restaurant um through their ultimate exit onto rout 22 I'm just concerned about blocking that access we don't anti I put we'll say to this regard if this if the drive-thru is full with 24 cars in here at that point if someone pulls in here this sign is going to say the drivethru is closed and we would anticipate at that point they're either going to make the right and go around or they're going to make the left and and go through we we don't think that both sides will be stacked at the same time um but they'll be they'll they'll most likely make the right and go around or make the left and go this way they'll see that sign as they're coming in here will they be will somebody be stuck in that no man's land there between I I don't think I don't think so because if this is full they're going to they're going to kept they're going to continue around they're going to see that the drivethru closed um and and I don't think they're going to back up in the drive aisle here where my pointer is um between the drive lanes and the exit Lane um in that regard you've got 24 cars if someone wants to wait 24 cars I think you know they'll have to drive back around at that point this may be kind of a new kid on board question say 24 cars in the estimate are you thinking you know 24 for fusions or 24 yon cells we look at the typical car lens which is 20 uh 20 ft is the length of calculation I mean it's a parking space is 9 by 18 so you figure give yourself a little bit of a buffer you're going to you know not to right against the person who in front of you so you take an aage okay you so that's how we look at it and Rob did you say that there's signs for the the where are the signs that the driveth through will be open or closed is there you said there's one at the entrance to 22 there's one when you come off of 22 right here at the stop bar and then there's one at each of the drive-through Lanes on the other side of the road so you have three of them in total so if one of the drive-thru Lanes backs up to wherever that Cube detector is Loop whatever the sign that one will close but the other one will still be open so you'll still have you have to both of them have to be full for them both to be closed okay so the sign at the St not far coming off the 22 doesn't say closed until both of them are full correct right cuz you're going to have you're going to have room in the other lane so you you would think that if this Lane is full and there's five spaces in the lane on the left that cars would pull into there next you you would think question so at what point then if it happens to close at what point would it reopen then when there's one space available or right correct when when we'll have to determine the final length of the um I'll call it the loop detectors or the um but probably have to at least get two cars into I would say two or three a minimum because otherwise it's just going to fill up again right probably get two cars in each that's something that could be programmed once you determine that that l so you figure give at least two cars in each lane to say okay let's move that along a little bit first before we open up the drivethru again can we as a board decide that to for safety reasons the number of cars at what point it would go from red to Green again sure cuz otherwise it's going to I mean I think I I like the two to three cars you know each there's a difference between two or three the EXP huh help us yeah one of the things I asked for my review memo and I imagine they'll get to when they get to traffic was sort of a standard operating procedure an operations plan that says okay with the car if the Q that that spells out if the car is in the Drive-Thru back up to this point this happens and all that can be spelled out in that manual that way the town the zoning officer if they come out there and they see it's a mess they have something to compare to and say okay this is what the plan is this is what you might you're not doing or doing correctly and they can address it accordingly so I tend to agree with you I think the loops need to be a car length or two into the site so that the sign goes red before the cars are backing up and then the drive byome well it'll be under consideration yeah so so that was part of the Mr chairman why we weren't able to get traffic because of these types of questions that we've got to take a look at so we will be submitting the operating manual for the drive-through signage and the alert system um I will talk with Starbucks and our traffic Consultants about is it to you know where where do we put those Loop detectors that will be shown on the plan we'll have the manual for the board to look at it's not going to be a book it's going to be you know basically a two or three page document that's going to say here's how this is going to operate but it has to be open-ended because Mr widely is a good point you know if we have a Dunkin Donuts on Somerville situation where it's spilling out into 22 the zoning officer has to have discretion to say noas yeah no I understand it Mr chairman I mean and I think that the board could impose the condition okay as a condition of the approval right that the zoning officer is allowed to enforce I mean we have title 39 the property right now are are we going to we're going yeah so yeah so by granting title 39 that provides Municipal enforcement power to private property so between a stipulation to the that allows a zoning officer to enforce and the police would be able to enforce because once you grant title 39 as long as you're using uniform devices uh you know you can actually tiet a person okay so you know I I I think we can protect the public uh safety interest yeah yeah I just want to Define number and then goes I have no problem at that point so I I I know we covered this already but you I don't think you can really account for what people are going to do if the sign is red and said both lanes are closed what's to stop people from just pulling them behind the last car and just sitting there well normally what we would do is like painted don't what is it what is it don't block the Box block the Box yeah we could put it don't block the box there that's actually an enforcable again talking about title 39 they don't block the box it's enforceable would you consider that um if that situation arises where people are just not behaving properly that in the future if that situation arises you would consider putting in a gate in the drivethru yeah I talk to the FKS Starbucks about that I I just don't know I I I don't know if they have a gate in their system they have the lights but I don't know if they've done a gate but I we can ask folks Starbucks one other thing that you may want to consider if not necessarily a formal gate is just having cones or something on site that an employee can come out and physically drag either a crossb or a series of cones or something to physically stop them and when the rush hour is over then employee comes back up and picks them up I mean there's a point where if somebody absolutely has to get into that drive-thru Lane they're just going to go into the byass lane and cut someone off but if we need to just simply putting cones or something out there hopefully should discourage most drivers and that's typical when they close drivethru Lanes they put cones out and a at some places I know they do it for the Chick-fil-A yeah that could be just something you have in that operating procedure that says an employee will bring out con to physically close the lane under C can you have that put into the I have to clear with I have some that should be the operations man yeah yeah but yes as long as they say yes it'll be in man okay thank you we we'll shape them like Cy cups so you know all of this really leads back to the parking so I just want to talk about Bank parking again um came up at the last meeting and you know uh I thought about it after and you know I know that it'll potentially affect this case but I feel strongly that we should talk more about these bag spots so how many total spots are there currently well prop proposed with with the bank without the bank there 290 spaces and then there's three Bank bank part spaces so if we say 290 take out the the electric one take out the handicap one got two what two handicap just two handicap and two EV so you're down to like whatever 28 you know 286 um you got 24 Cars Plus 40 how many seats are inside the 40 seats are outside only right how do we know how many seats are inside um there's there's 30 seats inside so it's 70 uh you know plus 24 so you're you're almost at you're almost at like 100 and I mean you know you get these groups of people that say oh every you know Saturday we're going to go there together and you each bring a separate car you got people that say oh I'm going to meet there let's meet there we all go car pool to the beach you know three cars three spots is three spots but I I think that we should really think about just saying hey let's have those in there um so that way when there's an overflow you know people aren't panicked about what do I do they can just park there walk in um so that's just my feeling we'll leave that to the board's discre y any other comments on parking I I have a question please you know there was a comment from the Hilton there is a walkway that brings this way there were some steps do you still have those steps this well the steps are shown on this on this the steps are shown on this plan right now but we said that we would look to eliminate them and and just have a regular walkway without them as as part of Mr fish's comments so we we can look that want to go back to parking for a moment are you saying that the number of spaces on the Starbucks site itself is 200 no no no no no the the overall site is is 290 spaces thanks John so how many are at the site the Starbucks site itself itself not count the bank is seven plus u one okay so come on this is what I'm saying that's that's 15 that's 30 31 paring obviously all 40 aren't going to be by 40 different people and the 30 inside aren't going to be 30 different people but still that's not enough so then describe what happens if I'm Sor just just back up a second the requirements for the parking are only 21 no understand the code I'm throwing a Lifeline you saying listen I think you should just pave the damn three spots no I no I hear you there why you going to go back later and worry about it you we're not going to reject the case over those SPS right we'll re up the waiver request and we'll stipulate we'll build the parking it's easy for us to build the parking now especially with all the listen listen to all the concern these guys have about overflow you know I mean there's going to be certain days that every's going to go doesn't hurt to happen and you're not long as this board is comfortable with granting the waiver relief we'll do it yeah you can hold me to that one the other thing is you can't keep people out of that like I said if we're going to go golfing you and me and we're going to meet there and we're going to C we're going to park our car there all day you can't stop that I mean think about where we are we're on a thorough fair with 27 right there you got 22 going to be using this I will confest I meet my one of my Trader friends at the Basking Ridge Starbucks and we drive to New York City together we get a cup of coffee so we give Starbucks their money but we leave the car there all day and I cats out of the bag but yeah and I'm not the only one that does that that yeah but people will meet there and I think Mr Fresco is a very solid point it is a rally point it's good for business but that car will stick there for multiple hours it does affect our employee have employee parking come that we're more than happy to build the three spaces it will require the waiver so we haven't gone through the waiv yet have we no I've talked about them a little bit but I Haven gone through I haven't gone through all the changes why don't we why don't we make sure we get all of the changes on the bra make sure we get that done so that being the case we'll get back to that in a moment actually part of the baring so yeah just the kind of touch on things there's five variances that are being requested they've been documented on the latest set of site plans but the really the one that changes is the impervious coverage and that was what I mentioned previously where with the bank parking was 60.5 if we get rid of the bank parking just build it out as per the plan with all the spaces at 60.7% is the lock coverage and that would be the deviation over the 60% I think that's the way you guys should go yeah exactly I was just about to say for the record then we're going to request the .7 be approved now for the purposes of building those three parking spaces and the other deviations are as per that was already that was already noted previously in the hearing that could you just put them on the record for us sure so the first one is the use variance is requested to allow a drive-through coffee shop with drivethru not permitted that was the first variance um the second one was the um deviation for building setback requirements from Route 22 where 200 ft is required and 119.4 ft from the building um to the uh street is what was being proposed um for the Starbucks building to the closest point on Route 22 the coverage I just talked about the um there's a deviation for a minimum front yard setb requirement for 100 ft is required from Morgan Lane and we're at 96.3 when measured to the canopy on the Starbucks building and the last variance this was brought up with the architect at one of the prior meetings about the deviation of the maximum projection above the roof line for the screen around the Starbucks mechanical equipment your ordinance only allows three and we're proposing four and that was showing on this is on 87 it's this screen is a foot higher than it needed to be that's the screen that's the but we think again based on what he presented about screen of the Mechanicals that that makes sense the whole building itself is in compliance with the height requirements even with the screen is below he requirements but that still was pointed out as a deviation in um in the discussions all right and then as far as the design waivers go and again these are all outlined on the cover sheet let me just touch on the ones that changed first and I'll go back and run through the entire list um that we're talking about here so the first one was the parking lot illumination for the Starbucks your ordinance requires a 1.5t hot handle average and we're at 2.4 for the Starbucks parking lot as I pointed out so that was a modification from the previously submitted plans um the next couple have to to do with uh Landscaping so I'm going to go through these in a little bit of detail because it was it was asked that we break out the landscaping for Starbucks from the overall property so I'm going to give you some a lot of numbers here but these numbers are actually on our detail sheet in the charts that are there as well I'm going to go through the numbers um and and and talk about these so the first one is the required number of landscape trees proposed per Disturbed area on the site and the way this works out is the original calculation was based on the overall Disturbed area the entire project required 110 landscape trees when you split that up into Disturbed area for starbu versus the hotel Starbucks required 39 trees and the rest of the site required 71 trees that's how you get to 11 okay and then when we break it down into what's actually proposed we're proposing a total of 40 trees okay and these are the larger large Circle trees you see on here the landscape trees um where 33 are on the Starbucks part and um seven are on the hotel parcel so um in terms of the design waiver then isn't it correct that if you were to look at the Starbucks parcel by itself 39 would be required and 33 are what we're proposed on Starbucks so the waiver would be for Starbucks for six trees or short six trees the next one is for the number of foundation shrub plantings again this is based on the overall property now for both the Starbucks and the hotel your ordinance requires 455 shrubs around the buildings um and that would break down to5 around the Starbucks building and 350 for the rest of the site um clearly you're not going to get 105 shrubs around the Starbucks building since 80% of it is is on patio but the way that breaks down is we have on the plan we have 21 around the Starbucks building and we have 119 around the rest of the site meaning the hotel building um that's that's in the back of the in the back of the site and so what do we do to mitigate that well we end up talking about here let me just talk about the shrub planting long 22 and I'll come back to the overall moment so there's also the requirement for the number of fronted shrub plantings along Route 22 where 167 are required and that's basically for the whole Frontage along 22 and that breaks down to 66 for the Starbucks and 101 for the rest of the site um and we have 96 on the Starbucks and 48 on the rest of the site that runs along 22 now that number doesn't take into account the existing shrub plantings that are out there already along 22 but that was for a total of 144 proposed so what we ended up doing with the overall shrubs because we couldn't meet the foundation planting requirements um we end ended up enhancing around the rest of the site additional shrub plantings on Morgan Lane around the parking lots and and additionally along the rear of the property and on the Morgan Lane by hotel that we ended up with a total of 1,34 shrubs for the overall project where the ordinance only requires 590 total we almost double the total number of shrubs even though we couldn't meet the requirements along the along the foundations of the two buildings we increased it throughout the site so from a design perspective engineering in this Wa Would it be your opinion that the spirit of the ordinance is inhered to although the letter is not correct because of the way the buildings are designed you can't plant up against the found um then we also there was a requirement for providing three rows of planting along rout 22 where two rows of planting was provided and this was something that we had actually worked out with um the the previous planner Miss Doyle uh when we did the layouts where we had two rows of plantings along to but then added the third row along the um parking lot or the drive lane of the parking lot in front of what was the GU school but we continued that through to the Starbucks um site because the detention Basin along the frontage and the way the planting laid out we had three rows they would just split up um by the uh by the Basin and allowed for additional screening along the drive aisles that actually wasn't listed on the previous plan so I want to identify that here for the board um now the last two um the last last two have to do one has to do with this was brought up in Miss Doyle's letter previously and it's an existing non-conforming condition but since she brought it up I'm just going to mention it here that your ordinance allows no more than 20 no more than 20 parking spaces um in a row without having a landscaped Island that breaks up that that row of parking basically all the parking on the site that we had laid out for the hotel and the Starbucks meets that requirement except for the 24 spaces that are existing that run along the front the uh restaurant building so it's an existing non-conforming condition it was mentioned in the review letters and I felt we need to just re-reference it here that we're not changing it but it's existing non-conforming and if the board wanted to document it it should be documented as such that the site that portion of the site right here does not comply with with the ordinance for that but it's an existing non-forming condition um and then lastly um there was a there was a a requirement for for the number of minimum loading spaces um required for a building where one is required for the building Starbucks does not have a dedicated loading space like the um restaurant does but we have a a a bypass lane for deliveries that can be used and and so we're asking for deviation from having a dedicated loading space on the building which Starbucks that you heard from their operational testimony doesn't particularly need for this type of building so that basically so those are the those are the ones that were changed or added and then there were a couple others that were already on the plans previously that still remain I'm just going to touch on those waivers now um first one was um a deviation from the parking setback um from Route 22 where 100t is required and 86.1 ft um is proposed for the Starbucks which is right on the corner um over here of the parking that's there closest to on 22 then we also have a deviation from a parking setback from Morgan Lane where 100 foot is required and we're at 21.3 FT that's the same parking space that runs at the corner at the I'll say the um lower corner of the site adjacent to Morgan Lane um and then there was also a comment in the letter and I'm just going to reference it here this has to do with the parking setback where 100 ft is required from Route 22 and 50 ft is provided for the existing restaurant building and this was brought up in in in Miss Do's previous letter and that's for the parking that runs along the front of the restaurant here and it set it set back 50 ft from um route uh 22 again it's an existing non-conforming condition but it was brought up in our letter and I I'm re referencing it here for for the board um for the board purposes um we also have a deviation for the minimum setback for the freestanding sign that's for the Starbucks building that's here along 22 your ordinance requires 25 ft and we're proposing 8 ft again that was what we presented previously there's no change to that waver and then we also asking for a deviation for the maximum number of freestanding signs your ordinance your ordinance only permits one this site has three there's the main pylon sign coming off of 22 which identifies the restaurant The Hotel Site there's the Morgan Lane sign that's that's coming off the Morgan Lane entrance and then we added the third sign for the Starbucks building coming off of 22 by its entrance and then also we have a deviation for the maximum number of facade signs per building where two are permitted and five are proposed and this was noted this was shown the architect's elevations when they were put up for the front of the uh of of the building that shows the different signs on the building so that's still a deviation that's been requested that hasn't changed and then this one was also brought up in in Scarlet's letter and again this was specific for the hotel but I'm not sure why she brought it up there was a deviation from a maximum fence height along a side property line where 6 ft is permitted and 8T is proposed the only 8T fence is there's an existing 8 fence that runs along the back of the property here already and then we're composing an 8ft fence on top of the um retaining wall by the parking area back here for the hotel so there's no 8ft fence for the Starbucks but it was mentioned in our letter so again we just noted it here again but I think that's already been granted and it doesn't apply but we just noted it again for the record question can you go over about 5 minutes ago you talked about Morgan Lane the set back there was 21 or 21.3 ft yes so if that's the shortest area mhm well so basically the rest looks like a straight line up what's that this it's it's it's parallel to the property line 21.3 the whole the whole thing yeah okay doesn't look is is the Morgan Lane entrance sign is that Lit I don't know I don't know Lane sign I don't know if it's I don't know if it's internally or externally eliminated so you're you're allow one one two existing just you know obviously all the sensitivity on Morgan Lane you know I don't know that we need a lit sign there I don't even know how much really you're going to pick up there I mean what are you really doing you're getting somebody going down Morgan Lane off 22 right because they can't go in from the other direction anyway just throwing that out there what's the size of that size of that not to go all the way back into the sign I on my I don't have think I that just existing to remain we weren't changing it this is this that's the that's that'se 22 that's Route 22 I don't have the details for the Morgan lane or the pylon sign because they weren't being changed I a big not come back next whatever I the same exact question also there is a sign we'll take a look at it should be there so I don't have any further questions my right thank you Mr M I'm sorry excuse me got review letters have you had an opportunity to review the uh board Consultants uh review letters for the plans yes in the context of the engineering comments in the planner letter and the engineers letter and the traffic engineer letter we have no problem addressing those comments as any conditions approval so we're going to assume you accept any comments that they proposed and now time to make that noted if you can yes from an engineering perspective traffic comments will defer to traffic absolutely different all right question supp professionals um sure thank you Mr attorney um rob you described some of the changes to the site layout I think one of your comments was you you extended the drive VI south or to the upper portion to get more stacking right yes and originally I think the fire marshal or Fire official issued a memo with comments related to your original plan did he review the new plan and Hass issu yeah I spoke to Mr scar about it because he when I talked to him um I explained to him what we did with the changes and then when we discussed the the the access Lanes around it he was comfortable and his letter that he issued had no no further comments on and he's satisfied with this layout he satisfied with this layout correct right good um the lot coverage that we had discussed 60.5 now 60.7 with the three Bank spaces now becoming impervious um from a storm water perspective yeah the the site this it complies because the site was originally designed for 60.8% so we have a little bit of little bit of so the stormw design still stands still can manage run off from the 65 okay good so Bill you don't see any change then I don't see an issue with that I just wanted to make sure that it was designed for more than what's currently proposed I couldn't remember the decimal okay so no I I don't have any issues at this point with the St at one of the prior meetings there was a discussion not only about lighting but also landscaping and how this particular lot could stand out on its own on how the phasing um and the constru uing construction unfolded just describe for us landscape wise how this revised plan has been enhanced I don't think you I know you went through it a little bit with your design waiver you know testimony but just give us a flavor for some of the new landscaping that's been incorporated into this plan so there were two things we did with this plan we added some additional um flowering trees or ever everen trees behind the Starbucks building in the in the green area here um but we also added a row of Evergreens um between the drive-through Lane and the parking Lane here in that in that 8 to 10t range your initial planting range um for those evergreen trees as an additional buffer if you will between the Starbucks and the parking lot area keep it in mind that there's also an evergreen buffer proposed on the south side of the site but we added that additional um Evergreen buffer in here and then we sprinkled like I said we added some additional um shrubs where we could separate in the drive-through Lane here and in the back of the uh the building itself um so we had some additional plantings but mostly it was those three areas of of trees that we focused on so is it your opinion that if the rest of the the hotel portion of the property never got developed that this site could stand on its own from a landscape perspective yes with the added buffer we put here and the trees we have here this this piece of property could stand on it can stand on its own if that wasn't developed and there is actually a wooden buffer back there now that that was going to further enhance but more more more to the fact that you're going to have activity back here that really isn't happening there today so from a lighting perspective similarly we heard testimony that the proposed lighting now is over the average foot candle that's allowed by ordinance I think you said 2.4 compared to 1.5 what can or is proposed with the new lighting toate some of the negative impacts of the higher lighting levels are you are you shielding the lights how is that being managed the lights the lights the lights can be shielded the ones that face this way I think we said we would do that um um already um but also too the um time for the Starbucks is going to be different from the time for the hotel restaurant so when Starbucks closes those lights will be turned down or turned off I think it's 10 or 10:30 if get the exact time that we testify to um for the timing of Starbucks closing during the week on the weekend so that would be separate operating schedule than the restaurant and the uh and the hotel so that would help to to minimize that say for example the hotel wasn't built starb would be turned off earlier and then the lighting at Starbucks will all be down shielded cut off correct they're all LED style down shielded lights um modern compared to what was built 20 25 years ago um and and I know there's a relamping in process on the existing parking lot out there now that it would all be consistent once the site is is built out and last question is you had mentioned that at the Morgan laye driveway entrance you were proposing to replace the curved Island I think with mountable curving to give more of a make it more of a deterrent for people to make a left in and make us a right out correct correct is the orientation or the alignment of that curved island or the jet out going to change it all or is it generally going to be because that's one of my concerns it really doesn't stick very far out to deter vehicles I understand why to allow for emergency services but I just want to make sure that that is as good as we can make it to deter folks from going not where we want them to I was hesitant to change the footprint of it more to just make it look different because I think when you see it now I'm sure most people have seen it at this point it's really low concrete I mean it's maybe an inch inch and a half High you could drive over that and passeng your vehicle without any without any issue so I think by putting in the Belgian block that's mountable it'll look more like an island that's there um we might even I think we show it the middle of it being grass um you know how whether or not that maybe that comes Riverstone or something but it just looks different than just concrete that a fire truck is still drive over we don't want to have a fire truck not be able to get in but we want to deter um you know maybe those delivery trucks or somebody that's coming in that right even somebody with a passenger car that should be making that turn it might think twice before they do it and there will be upd signage and striping to the extent necessary to accompany that yes yeah we had a sign over here we going to update the no that turn sign on the also the Northbound side of of Morgan L to cover that thank you thanks thanks I just have one question for you rob um there was a little confusion mentioned in my review letter the what is the largest delivery truck you're anticipating is it a wb40 that's the what the the template the template you used was a wb40 although the plan said it was an su4 yeah it was a and I think earlier testimony was a box trucks so if you can just clarify what is the largest delivery vehicle You're Expecting on the site we designed the site to handle the the five Lan for wb40 so it can handle that so I mean I think Starbucks was actually talking about box trucks and I'll have to just confirm that with Starbucks because I I think the person who testified talked about that but I don't remember exactly what she had said but we have W she said box so we we make sure we get a wb40 through the same that's why I just wanted to clarify because I had the same in my notes the testimony was one thing the plan said something else and then Rob while we're on it I'm assuming you'll make the Minor Adjustments necessary to the drive through Lane so that that truck doesn't hit the uh clearance bark yes yes I noticed I saw that your comment we just have to adjust that it looks like it can be fixed fairly easily yes I thank you for picking that up that was all I had Mr chairman thank you Mr chairman um I have a few questions regarding the sign the discussion on the freestanding sign the sign at the frontage along 22 appears in this in the details on the site plan not be lit in any way um so I don't know intended to be ground mounted or some sort of light to on it but there's no internal lit on we talking about the Starbucks sign the Starbucks sign on 22 the freestanding sign yeah the new Starbucks sign yes yeah yeah freestanding sign and then as far as the sign at the sign at Morgan land that's noted on the sheet on the site plan is sign number two I can't find the detail for that I could find it either I I think you might need to add a detail for sign number two cuz I don't know what that we didn't have either that that one or the pylon sign we didn't have on the plan they existing please add those um I appreciate the overview of the variance requests I think depending on if Mr toia goes tonight or not I think having that in written form having it written out a sheet of all the variants relief being requested would be helpful just for you know moving forward uh procedurally um I I will submit that thank you um again if Mr toia begins his testimony tonight that's kind of a moot point because he'll probably outline those but um I think it would be it would be helpful regardless um for the next meeting I know we've had the board has had some discussion tonight and the last meeting about those the open close indicator signs for the drive-thru um and at the last meeting I had mentioned what happens for traffic coming from Morgan Lane that comes in circulates the site and gets to the drive-thru and goes into the drive through you know maybe sticking out because to them they're not getting any indication from Morgan Lane that the drivethru is closed or full or that there's any you know restriction now I know he discussed potential I think Mr Kent Smith is going to bring back to the client you know the other kind of options for resolution that the board has brought up and I know it's the last last meeting I discussed maybe potential for a sign for one of those indicator signs that Morgan Lane is because someone entering from that portion of the site has no idea which may impact the the traffic from 22 which if there's no blockade or anything restricting them from going into the drive-thru they're going to see other people entering the drive-thru from that Morgan Lane portion and and go in themselves and say you know why can't I do it if they can do it so I think it's not a the signs are not a perfect solution by any means I understand they're going to help you know restrict some traffic and and additional queuing outside of the lanes um but I think that's still something that's unresolved and um what I would recommend is there is some time between this meeting and the next is potentially talk to the Starbucks people they have to have had issues or resolutions and other places that have that have creatively addressed this I'm assuming um queing issues don't become queuing issues until after the site is built which is what everyone remembers and so I'd recommend that you know to address this head on and find the right solution that addresses the board's concerns I comment um we discussed before that a gate was not really feasible but maybe cones I'm suggesting also that maybe somebody inside Starbucks be alerted to the fact that they might be closed yes and this is I my concern really is that the more layers we're trying to add to this the more there's going to be a malfunction because you know I go to Starbucks and every the the one in the prominade over for to Commons and that doesn't have a drive-thru but man that thing's packed on Thursdays when the kids get out of school uh and they have half off or boogo whatever it is and it's you wouldn't believe it people waiting for a drink and so I can only imagine a drivethru how that will be 10 times worse so um because they you don't have to drive and Park which is some people's an impetus to going you know to frequenting any restaurant so I I think we want to think really carefully about this because this is clearly a concern um and I only ask that you know Starbucks corporate has probably dealt with this maybe it's not New Jersey maybe it's in Iowa or something but um you know I think we we need to find a creative solution that addresses this and doesn't take multiple life of relying upon a chain of command at Starbucks to say okay you know employees part of your handbook at this location is you got to put cones out and you got to keep an eye out for the drive-through Lane because really that's not their job responsibility um so I think we got to we got to iron that part out um and like I said I recommend figuring out something that will not require many layers um I think that's all I have for right now thank you thank you may I ask one additional question and I'm going to beat the parking course again until the hotel is built you have a construction fencing around it there's been some it looks like excavation and so on the fact that it hasn't been built is it uh restrict access to the parking that ultimately is meant to be shared by the whole site other words what can't I use in terms of parking until it's built or what will I be able to use once it's built I'll have to go back out and take a look because there's construction fencing up there now I can't remember um where that fence I know that I know the lane you can drive through from 22 to Morgan so I know the parking spaces on this side are available and the spaces of course around the restaurant are all available but I don't not remember how many um on this backside here are actually available about the ones behind the hotel um I I I think for the time being I think these and I'll say this section is probably about 14 30 35 40 spaces back here I think that's fenced off right now for construction purposes um so I think I think that would be you know out out of play for the time being until that until that so in your opinion how does it impact the the shared parking nature of the site in that the restaurant itself and Starbucks might have some overflow and I know their their hours are going to be somewhat different but just looking for your opinion to say that you believe that it's adequate or that it'll be challenging or that you'll find some way to open that additional parking whether or not the hotel is built I think I think a few things are going to happen um let's just say for example Starbucks gets gets approved for the next couple months right we assume that and it's going to take at least another N9 months or whatever to build so you're looking at a year time that comes into play assuming we have an update on the hotel by then by the next meeting um let's say for argument sake the hotel work goes through in a year and a half to two years time it'll all be done and almost becomes a moood point um if for some strange reason the hotel work ultimately becomes stalled to the point where it's not going anywhere for the the the short term um there may be an opportunity where they need may need to reopen this parking as overflow if it's needed um again because you mentioned it in the question is these are really two different kinds that they're going to function the restaurant's going to be the busiest maybe Thursday evenings Friday Saturday Sunday you know throughout the course of the day Starbucks you figure early morning and then as it as and then the day goes on it's going to change and you might have you might have a little bit of a flirt in the evening but you're going to have diff differing um Peaks for both of the sites and again we have almost 40 spaces when you count the uh those couple Bank spaces on the Starbucks site so it does exceed what the minimum parking requirements are for it so again we feel that this parking out here but if something happens where you need to get the those over those spaces reopened because the hotel is so I think that's something that can be looked at you know a year down the road when when the site is is is completed but that's really a very good question that I think we're going to try to have answered in full by the August meeting because this is a condominium there's certain covenants in the master deed that require full free access throughout the condominium so even during construction you can't bar access to other operating uses so it's from my perspective and Comet and Mr M has agreed that we will have a submission that will show the circulation during construction so the construction must always keep these access points and circulation aisles and parking where where's the construction entrance for the hotel H the construction entrance when they start building the hotel probably going to be the main Route 22 entrance I would think I don't know I'm what we've got to figure out I mean but if if I'm a you know a concrete truck or anything else it seems to me like I'm probably going to go Route 22 you know so but we the point being is that we do have to preserve under our Master D full access and that's I think something worthy that we should actually mark because I really think that that's going to be an issue that if it ever becomes a problem everybody needs to enforce us and another question um the restaurant I don't know if you're if you know or this information is available will it be a service bar or will it be an open type bar area in the restaurant I don't know do you there it's a conventional bar on the bar has shifted from the left hand side of the restaurant to the right hand side of the restaurant and I do not believe there's like a kitchen bar or a service bar there I I don't know the guy operation but I've seen the plans and I don't see a kitchen bar or or a service car so the bartender might have a I can't imagine there's not a service bar within the bar complex for the wws to come in there there there there's no there's no dedicated Standalone kitchen bar or service bar it's going to be part of the existing bar okay which has been relocated to the right hand side of the building so all right I'm going to open it up to members of the public like to ask Mr Melle questions on his testimony all right see none it may be a good time for a break yes it's going on what don't we call it 8:25 and let me just have a chat with Mr Toby because if we have the entire Hearing in August yes I want to just double check with him to make sure we can get everything complet we'll have our traffic but I hope that by then all of the traffic issues that have been raised will have been at least analyzed fully and address and then it may be that we can just carry it won't proceed any further so but I let's that's your option let's call it we'll adjourn 840 will come back in second see 8: all right we're going to reconvene Roger we you get a quick roll call please Mr fo here Mr widley here Mr M yeah Mr sweee here Mr Fresco here Mr bonjourno here Mr gesi here Mr Cat here Mr kulac here Mr vesso here Mr Gavin here Mr holler here Mr fur here M sad here and uh Mr Fishinger here right thank you Mr Kent Smith thank you Mr where we at uh Mr chairman we have determined that given the the issues that we still have to address um it would be improvident for us to just start a planning testimony that we're not ready to complete so I request that the board carry this application and I believe we said August 27th AUST August 27th so that's is going to be with notice without notice without notice it'll be without once we confirm that date I'll make the announcement public okay okay so August 27th would be the day so for members of the public this meeting is being adjourned and carried until August 27th at 700 p.m. in this room and there'll be no further notices from the applicant thank you very much for members of the public our next meeting is June 11th 700 p.m. we'll be next door in the courtroom and the cases that evening will be Chimney Rock self storage and time committing we're going to have belly holding so again that's June 11th 7 p.m. in the courtroom next door and with that said could get a motion to adour I move Mr Wiley and Mr bunjo up all right thank you everyone have a good night thank you very much night