all right good evening everyone it's 7:02 we're going to call the meeting to order it's march 25th 2025 bridgewwater township zoning board of adjustment regular meeting adequate notice of this meeting was provided in accordance with the oakland public meetings act njsa
104-6 specifically on january 15 2025 proper notice was sent to the courier news the star ledger and filed with the clerk at the township bridgewater and posted on the municipal bulletin board please be aware of the zoning board of adjustment policy for public hearings no new
applications will be heard after 9:30 and no new testimony will be taken after 10 p.m if you're able please rise for the salute to the flag i aliance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god
indivisible with liberty and justice for all all right good evening nancy if we can get a roll call please here mr wley here mrs mrs amin
mr sweeney here mr fresco yes here mr bonjouro here mr gi here mr ccat here here mr vesio here mr gab here
katherine sarmmed plan present william burr chief engineer aller here you have a quum you can proceed all right thank you very much at this time
i'd like to open up the meeting to members of the public that would like to speak on any land use issue which is not on our agenda this evening you can come up grab the microphone [Music] hello miss franco good evening do you want me to sign in
oh okay c kathy franco 766 weak road um i'm only here tonight to thank you all um i realize that everyone on this deis other than the attorney are volunteers um and i really appreciate your
dedication at your diligence your thorough reviews of every application that comes before this board um zoning variances deal with everything from homeowners wanting to expand their homes or putting a shed that might be
too close to a property line um from the zoning laws to developers um buying properties with intentions to build projects um on land that it's not zoned for um i realize you must go through this
process and i appreciate that i thank you for your patience and thoughtful consideration of the zoning that this township has in place and for your continued listening um of the concerns of residents as they bring forth to you
thank you all very much very much kathy it was very nice of you appreciate it thank you thank you anyone else we're going to close the public portion we have no minutes for approval we have two resolutions and let's do the
easy one first uh the first is the appointment of board professional consultant traffic engineer maurice rashad looking for changes comments from the board no changes and move to approve mr widelli moving do i have a second please second all right mr bonjouro nancy get a
roll call please fouse yes mr widley yes mrs zamin yes mr sweeney yes mr fresco yes mr vanjouro yes mr gi
yes mr ccat yes mr kulak yes mr messio yes mr gabbit yes uh next up we have st bernard the resolution i know mrs amin you had a few changes i have them from her i can run
down those for you sure chairman go for it so paragraph 8 page four the um paragraph 8 again the last line where it says construction should say of the musam edition um page four again paragraph 10 about halfway down says mr
barry testified that as a conditional use i'll take the words as a conditional use out so it'll just say testified that the proposed muslim amition does not satisfy etc and then on the next page at the top
um where very first line says further opine that the only visual impact would be to the say raran valley country club and then at paragraph 13 and page five the f reference should be to conditional
use and d3 that's all i had all right any other comments or changes looking for a motion with changes move with the changes mr widelli and that was mrs amin is the second
second mr chairman sorry um i had mr mr widley as recused from the st b oh that's right i can okay so let's do a min and gi as the second if john you're okay mr gi i'm sorry was not eligible to vote mr okay do i have a
second please second all right that was mr fresco chairman fouse yes mrs zamin yes mr sweeney yes mr fresco yes mr bonjouro yes mr ccat yes and mr kulak yes
all right next up we have our applications for this evening uh the first rich could you take us through mr kley's letter on 1200 route 22 land investors sure on 1200 route 22 um we received a letter from mr kley
indicating that um the planning board has recommended to the town council approval of a redevelopment plan uh which would impact their proposed development um so they have requested that their application be adjourned
until september 9th um so that that redevelopment cl plan can move forward with the council and if it does it would come off of our agenda okay so if anyone's here for that case 1200 route 22 that'll be carried till september 9th 2025 without further notice from the
applicant thank you rich all right so we have two applications tonight we're going to start off with the bridgewater self storage we're going to do 90 minutes on this case and then 90 minutes on germunk oil and as bridgewater comes up i just want to address members of the
public first of all thank you for coming out tonight um i want you to each know that most of the board if not all of the board knows what it's like to sit in those seats it can be frustrating um you're losing the night tonight's my daughter's birthday and i'm still here
so i feel your pain um what i i really want to take you very quickly through it seems complicated but we do stick to a set of rules um the rule book is the municipal land use law of the state of new jersey uh basically the applicant is going to present their case they're
going to present supporting witnesses after each witness testifies you're going to have an opportunity to question and i i underline the word question that when you come up and ask questions of a of a witness please form your comments in the form of a question and make them
be based on the testimony that you heard after all the applicants are done i promise anyone that wants to speak will be able to speak for or against this case as long as you need you can come up and use the microphone that's the time you can make grand statements or give your own testimony um so really that's
what we're going to try and do we're going to do 90 minutes the time is 7:10 now so we'll probably take a break around 8:40 8:45 and with that good evening counselor good evening mr chairman members of the board matthew capzy on behalf of the applicant as the
chairman just noted the applicant is bridgewater storage the property before the board this evening consists of two lots 351 and route 28 and 322 route 22 known as block 400 lots one and two on
the township's tax map mr kapzy before we get too far i don't mean to interrupt but i just want to confirm jurisdiction with the board i did review your notice it was in adequate uh form it was served upon the property owners within 200 feet timely and published timely so the board
has jurisdiction for the thank you sir okay thank you so the property is a through lot with frontage on route 22 to the north and route 28 to the south as i'm sure most of the board members are aware it's utilized presently as a single family dwelling and farm stand on
one parcel and an abandoned commercial building on the other parcel commonly known as the tectonic building that's been dormant for quite some time what we're proposing to do by way of this application is remove all of the existing improvements on the site consolidate the two lots
into one new building lot and on the new building lot develop a three-story self- storage building that would be serviced by 21 parking spaces uh of particular note the site has no access onto route 28 the sole means of ingress and egress
to the site would be off of route 22 and we're trying by way of the application to maintain as much of the existing landscape buffer along route 28 and supplementing that as part of this application uh there are certain variance relief that's required as a
result of what we're proposing uh we are seeking preliminary and final site plan appro approval as well as a use variance the properties in the township's c3 zone which does not permit self- storage facilities so we are proposing a use
that is not permitted so we need a d1 use variance relative to that component uh the building that's proposed exceeds the maximum allowable floor area ratio so we do require a d4 use variance as to the uh exceeding the maximum allowable
f uh and we have some variances as to the building setback along route 22 100 ft is proposed where 200 feet is required a minimum parking space set back to route 22 100 feet required 57.6 feet
proposed we're required to have four loading spaces but given the nature of the use we're only proposing two and the loading spaces are really internal to the building as our architect will discuss uh the loading space stall size is slightly non-conforming and requires
variance relief and we are proposing a single freestanding sign along route 22 that does not comply with the setback requirement 30 ft is required and we're proposing for that sign to be 5 ft from the property line uh there is no signage proposed along route 28 there is no
signage proposed along the southerntherly elevation of the building the signage is limited solely as to the northeast corner of the building that would be as you're facing the property from route 22 it would be on the left portion of the building so we were
mindful to the residential corridor to the south and tried to keep activities there at a minimum with no signage along that portion of the property as well uh given the time that we have this evening mr chairman we're going to start with our engineer matthew kunman and if time
permits our architect bill mcgrevy but we'll we'll see where time permits and uh how we're able to progress through the application uh we do acknowledge receipt also of the township's various review letters namely the board planners letter and township engineers letter uh
a large majority of the comments that were made in those letters we can stipulate to making the necessary modifications but we'll speak to those in detail as we provide testimony okay very good hi so would you raise your right hand please do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth so help you god i do and your full name for the record please uh my name is matthew kunsman can you spell your last name please k u ns m an thank you mr cuzman can you give us your
qualifications please sure i have a bachelor's of science in civil engineering from syracuse university i am currently a senior project manager at bowler located at 30 independence boulevard in warren new jersey um i've worked on numerous commercial and self-s
storage projects across the state of new jersey for the last 10 years as well and i'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of new jersey my license is in good standing and lastly i've been accepted in front of various planning and zoning boards across the state all
right this board accepts you as an expert thank you mr chairman all right thank you so first i'm going to introduce uh an aerial exhibit um it's prepared by bowler dated march 20th 2025 it's it
should be on the screen in front of you so let me know if you can't see that i have a board in my package so we're going to refer to that and mark it please as a1 uh with today's date okay i'll add in the corner okay all
right so this is an uh an aerial exhibit showing existing conditions of the site uh the site is outlined in yellow in the center of the page um and the zone lines are shown in blue bolded so surrounding the site to the
north is route 22 beyond that is um some wooded area to the east uh you can see outdoor storage and a commercial uh yard um waste yard to the south is route 28 and beyond that is a residential zone
with single family dwellings and then to the west is uh the interchange of uh route 22 and 28 as well so the site uh centered in the page in yellow it's a triangular triangular shaped through lot consisting of 5.43
acres uh it's currently two lots and we are proposing a lot consolidation um it has frontages on route 22 and route 28 with 964 feet of frontage on uh route 22 and 900 ft of frontage on route
28 uh the front yard on route 22 um is quite different than what you typically see uh along highways for where it's positioned it's 70 ft from the curb line along route 22 to our property line so
it's it's quite a distance which is unique for this property um and the property is also located within the c3 office and service zone and moving on to the site itself so lot
one this is um the existing lot one on the southern side of the lot that consists of the the melo farm stand and also a single family dwelling as well um access to that uh farm stand there's a
driveway curb cut on route 28 and uh there's a separate curb cut for the the single family dwelling um to the lot two which is the northern side of the property that's the tectonic office building that's uh vacant has
associated parking um and other site improvements as well this property has access both on route 22 there's an 18 foot driveway and then also on route 28 as well um on the southeast corner of
the property there's a 18t curb cut to access the site and circulate it around um the parking for the tectonic building is set back 41 12 ft from the property line which uh would be uh existing
nonconformity to the current parking setback requirements and it also contains a freestanding sign uh that's actually within the rightway um so the id sign for the tectonic building is within the rightway and not in the
property and um some uh environmental uh features we did submit environmental impact study as part of our application um we have also received a freshwater wetlands loi um letter of interpretation
presence absence stating that there's no wetlands on the property um and there's no transition areas that impact the property as well there are you know wetlands and a stream tributary just outside the property right along uh the western side
northwest uh property line for the existing lot one along route 22 uh there is quite a bit of grade change on site so this this uh the high side of the site is the eastern side uh with the
elevation around 150 and then it slopes uh pretty gradually or a consistent grade change throughout um the site to the the western corner of the property to elevation 110 so there's about a 40ft grade change on the property uh with
that there are um steep slopes as defined by the township ordinance um so 3% of the site roughly 3% of the site has uh steep slopes greater than 30 30% grade and then 4% of the site is uh 20
to 30% grade and then the remainder is less than that so a good majority of of the site um 90 93% of the site is less than um 20% slopes matches the the total parcel size once
we consolidate the lot what would that come out to be uh it's 5.43 acres 236,822 ft thank you all right i'm going to move on to what
we're proposing so i'm going to introduce my second exhibit this is uh the site layout plan exhibit prepared by bowler dated march 20th 2025 i'll mark this a2 with the date in the top right corner
okay so uh north is to the top of the page for your reference it's the same orientation as the last a1 exhibit um so this is a uh colorized rendering of our site plan that was submitted as part of our application with the landscaping uh
superimposed um on on the site plan so we are proposing a self storage building which does require a use variance as is nonp permitted um within this zone um the building itself is has
a gross floor area of 120,570 ft um is three stories tall uh it's 40,190 square ft per floor uh we are compliant with building height uh the the allowable building height for
the site is 45 feet which is measured from uh the proposed grades of the site where we are uh providing a building height of 36.54 ft we are also compliant with the lot coverage um requirement
where we're proposing 36.2% 2% uh lot coverage which is uh all the proposed imperous areas on the site um where 51.3% is permitted in the zone when you adjust for uh the steep slopes uh
requirements we are in increasing uh the impervious area for the site by 1.3 acres when you compare it to existing conditions but i'll get more into that when i talk about the storm water for the site um so we are compliant with the building height and the improved lot
coverage but we are requesting a variance for f uh where we're proposing a f ratio of 0.6 where 0.26 is permitted with the slope adjustments for the site
uh the building is set back 101.5 ft from the route 28 frontage on the south the south south side of the property uh which is compliant uh setback from route
28 uh we are requesting a variance for the route 22 setback where um we're providing 100 foot setback from route 22 where 200 ft is required from the property
line uh the reason why we're proposing a variance for this um is we wanted to or from route 22 frontage is we wanted to position the building as far away from the the residents uh from route 20
across from route 28 so we wanted to honor you know and respect that that buffer and the the setback um from that route 28 frontage and with our proposed use we there is no outside storage of any kind including cars boats or construction material it's
part of our project so to access the site uh we are proposing a driveway on uh the route 22 uh frontage the location is uh relatively the same as what there in
existing conditions but we are widening the driveway through in the existing condition it was 18 feet and proposed it's 30 feet and that's allow to allow us to have uh a right in right out driveway and uh adequate width along the driveway
through we're not proposing a driveway uh that allows uh customers um or employees to access the site from route 28 we did receive um a comment from the fire department uh requesting
an emergency access driveway from the route 28 frontage so that's something um we're still working through we did just receive that comment um yeah that's something we've done gates we've done chains and that's something you know maybe you can work with bill burr and
katherine about coming up with something but i i'd like something camouflaged as much as possible and you know i like what you said about trying to respect the the neighborhood at you know on the other side of the blue line to the south here yes yes so we'll probably propose uh some kind of grass paver with the
baller and chain um that can be accessed by the fire department in case an emergency um so can i ask you a question please sorry to interrupt the the width of the driveway from route 22 you have both ingress and egress were they designed
for cars only to accommodate any kind of light trucks or tractor trailers or just the um fire department equipment turning around can you describe how you designed that sure so um as part of our site plan
submission um we did have truck turn diagrams uh sheet c302 303 um uh the site is designed for uh an su30 box truck which is a typical uh box truck that we would expect passengers uh
or customers to use for to the site if that would be the largest customer vehicle we would expect uh the fire truck um the site has been designed for firet truck circulation uh we do need to revise our fire truck template to match
what the township provided um the overall dimensions of the truck are very similar to what we had provided but the template's slightly different i believe the fire truck's 48t long and we had a 47 foot long fire truck so um i don't
anticipate any um impacts to what we're our site layout um from a truck turning perspective but the site is fully designed for the route 22 driveway for uh box trucks trash trucks and a fire truck as well do you anticipate that
most of your clients will be just bringing things in their cars or suvs or pickup trucks or do you anticipate them renting a truck as you were describing i'm kind of not sure as to how you're sure i can get into that i was about to
get into how the site functions and where they can access okay thank you um so entering once you enter the site with the driveway on route 22 um there's a there's a long driveway throughout um
that connects to the top right corner or the northeast corner of the site where there are a few parking spaces the northeast corner of the building that's where the office is so if you're a new customer you would park in the the first few uh parking stalls uh directly across
from the office outside the security gates um and then you can access the the office if you did not have a unit um once you become a customer or renting a unit uh you would access the site uh the
same way but there's two gates um along the one's along the eastern facade and one's along the western facade so the the site does have oneway uh circulation in a clockwise direction um the drive aisles are
um 24 ft wide um so uh there there are a couple different options for a customer to you know uh unload their stuff or load their their car or truck so um starting i guess uh closest to the
office um there's an elevator door um located where my mouse is on the approximately the middle of the eastern facade of the building um so customers can pick you know park their cars in the parking space and access uh access that
door on the eastern facade and use the elevator to get to their unit or they can continue driving in a clockwise direction around the building or there's some additional parking on the the western side of the site and uh there's
an a customer entrance on the western facade where they can use an elevator over there as well and then lastly they could also use um two uh loading uh spaces that are
covered within the building so um located on the the northern facade of the building there's a garage area uh with two garage rollup doors um that a customer could back into with a box truck a truck a car whatever they're
they're driving and um unload their their belongings matt all those doors you mentioned that's all key code access uh correct and as far as the gate operations concerned that gate is closed 247 both gates correct correct you have
to have a an access pin to get through the gates and as far i think there was a comment regarding uh fire department access um in times of emergency um it's my understanding we would be giving the fire department a master code so when they came to the site they would have
access and be able to open those gates and access the building is that correct yes thank you as far as you had talked about door circulation there are drive up units on both the north east and south side of the building uh yes that is correct so there are uh rollup units
um along the exterior of the building um that are available for you know customers on the first floor and there's a five- foot uh striped area outside um those those exterior units um to allow
additional room for customers and then uh you know the the drive aisle is um a minimum 24 ft wide with the you know 5ft striping so there's ample room for a car to sit there outside their rollup door and another car to drive by
as well mr capey so your engineer clearly is very knowledgeable in engineering but i'm curious who is the operator and and where are these things coming from that you know they're going to have key codes is this going to be a national operator is going to be a local we we will have uh
testimony on that mr chairman as far as the nature of the operator okay so so the he's giving information to the board based on someone else that you're going to present to us that we can cross-examine that's correct mr chairman okay do you want to you know give us a spoiler is this a national entity is i don't i don't believe a end user has
been selected yet what we're to this is programming that will be part of the building regardless of who will be the operator so so that makes me nervous so everything that we've said here a national operator could do things differently this board heard a case very recently on bosler in 22 where you know they they had a tenant in mind that had
a track record and you know the track record goes to safety and the safety is absolutely the first thing that i think of i'm only one vote but that's the first thing i think of in every case safety with wastewater safety with management safety with access safety with the neighbors so you know how do we know that this operator to be deemed you
know to be selected is going to you know have the same things that you're testifying here in as pol as part of their policy and procedure it'll be a requirement mr chairman so so everything that we're saying we're just going to have as a stipulation correct it'll be it'll be a condition of approval that the the building will function in the
matter our board attorney is going to be very busy and we're going to you know have a lot of conditions there i don't intend to give him extra work but i certainly can itemize the operational charges by the word so and provide uh that to be attached as an exhibit to the resolution all right you know just so you said there's going to be someone
that's going to testify to this but you don't have anyone selected so you're hoping between that and experts in the self storage industry that are familiar with how self storage u facilities operate what their hours are what their top customer needs are what their
typical traffic demands are those sorts of things mr chairman so is it safe to say right now this is kind of a development project with eventually a tenant in mind or this project would be sold to a a national operator what do you think the ownership structure of the of the ultimate development has not yet
been decided mr chairman all right thank you what what is uh common practice and maybe you know boards don't get involved in looking behind the curtain but a lot of times developers build out a site and they enter into a license agreement with a particular angle well then i guess this board definitely gets behind the curtain because i want to make sure that this neighborhood is safe that there's
not materials that are ever going to get in here that extra the extra space facility you have in the township today could be gone tomorrow there's no guarantee say that again yes the the the banner on which your current extra space is operating is not required to be in
place in perpetuity so the protections provided to the municipality come by way of restrictions placed in your resolution not by way of the branding on the building the police power the board has is being able to enforce conditions in a resolution regardless of the
operator so if extra space decided that this market was not for them who's extra space i'm sorry who's extra space it's a national operator so you just said you didn't have a national operator no i'm familiar with extra space being within the township gotcha they have an
existing facility in your township we we have a lot of storage operators in bridgewater you know that right i'm not debating that sir i'm just making a reference that the the banner in which a facility operates right is not tied to the approval and you understand where my question is coming from we want to make
sure that whoever is operating this not only abides by the testimony of your engineer who's not an expert in running a storage facility but also has certain policies and procedures that make bridgewater safe sir i i think the fact that safety is a concern has already been
incorporated concern it's it's mr chairman here from the applicant's perspective it's a concern and those elements have already been incorporated into the site design you just said your applicant is a developer who's going to sell this project off so i want to make sure mr mr chairman i said the ownership structure has yet
to be determined okay so the reason that i even interrupted your engineer was because he's not an expert in operating storage facilities we can move on we're going to condition all of his answers because he's not an expert we're going to get them into the into the record and
when and if a resolution is passed we're going to make sure that everything that he testifies forced on potentially a national operator so that's something that you should let your developer know that you know whoever takes this project over is going to have to abide by everything that this engineer has just put on the record we're they're aware of
that and they're prepared to be bound by that perfect thank you and again i apologize it was not my intention to have mr ksman talk about operations there was a question about how the facility may function we can certainly move on from that no you can do it's your case you got 90 minutes well you
got a few minutes less now but you use it as you wish i'm not going to tell you how to do your case you're an expert i'm just looking to be courteous to the board mr chairman that's all i appreciate that i may interrupt yes mr chairman you know engineer in his report
mr burr has on uh item number three he wants to know uh the uh description of the current and proposed uses hours of operation and so on so forth like there
are like eight or nine items that he's asking questions and and that really pertains to how you will uh operate the entire facility once it's constructed you will need those answers because
engineer already has those questions in his report mr kunman's testimony is accurate as to the nature in which the facility will operate and the applicant is prepared to be bound by those stipulations yeah like the deliveries types of deliveries and
so on so forth no right and and again this conversation is not new because if i was coming before you with a designated operator the stipulations would have to be part of the record regardless so whether it was a well-known chain or otherwise the manner
in which the facility is going to operate is part and parcel of the discussion with the board and the public so i think the fact that we uh have yet to determine who will wave its banner on the building uh doesn't change the conversation relative to the operational
discussion yeah and you know mr capisy the um the prior storage facility that this board approved somewhat recently has a lot of um operational conditions in the resolution itself which i'm happy to share with you you can see what we
did last time thank you yeah they they also brought their ceo and the board was able to pull up different facilities all around new jersey we i know mr kulak had had done some extensive research on that you know those are things where you know it does make it easier for the board to visualize operations and to get a feel
for their track record and their safety record so understood mr chairman again um i appreciate the input from the board uh and now understanding um the importance of that issue to the board uh perhaps we by the time i come back
before you we will have a designated operator and and a similar person to give testimony thank you very much so um just moving on to the parking uh we are requesting a variance for parking
within the the front yard uh where uh 57.6 six foot setback is provided and 100 feet is required and that is occurring in the the four parking spaces um on the northern side of the building to route
22 um but we wanted to provide you know ample parking around the facility especially across from the uh the two garage loading areas um so in the case that the both these uh garage units were being used there was you know additional
parking outside those uh those garages in in order to determine your ample parking based on as as you're describing it now did you do it as a function of the a ratio between the total number of storage units and what you might
perceive then to be the usage and therefore extrapolate from that the parking and if so could you share with us the rationale that you use or the mathematical formula that you use to derive the parking spaces based on those
criteria that i mentioned so we do have a traffic consultant that can provide testimony um but uh they they base the the parking based off it uh standards um and that's based off square footage of a
building and not the number of units um but they also our traffic we'll get more in detail on this i'm just giving you this little sneak peek they also uh um look at other sites that they um have designed as well to make sure it's
consistent so so if i'm hearing you correctly you're suggesting we wait for the traffic engineer to share that information with us yes okay because you don't know it or it's just not your area of expertise
i i have the information but it's not my area of expertise okay thank you sir the the um township doesn't have a particular parking standard for self- storage facilities uh so the ordinance permits us to utilize another recognized authority which was the institute for
traffic engineers uh manual uh that our traffic engineer referenced in preparing his report and then that parking requirement was uh provided to our civil engineer who put that on his bulk table so i believe the requirement is 18 or so
spaces and we are providing 21 uh and the utilization of the it is as a recognized standard i i understand is a recognized method within the township and that was the material that was reviewed by both your board engineer and planner but we do have u a separate witness to talk about the traffic study
in detail so so i can get the information i'm looking for from the traffic engineer yes sir thank you um so moving on to uh um deliveries of the
site so uh there we we do expect minor uh small deliveries of you know fed fedex trucks ups and that's just for some office supplies uh the office uh typically sells you know boxes tape
stuff like that so um as a convenience to the customer so uh the site is designed as well for um those small deliveries um and then for loading spaces required so the township code
requires uh four loading spaces um for this size building uh but we're only proposing two within the garage um so that does require a variance the uh loading space requirement from the township is is very broad from the types
of uses it covers almost all commercial industrial uses so it it it's not specific to self storage um so that's why we're requesting the variance for that um and also the the size of the loading space uh we are requesting a
variance uh for the length of the loading space required uh since we're proposing a 39.5 foot long loading space um and again that that loading space length is uh large enough for the largest vehicle that we will anticipate
on this site the the su30 box truck and if there's a truck parked in the loading dock won't block the access around the site uh no because the largest truck is a an su30 that's designed for the site
su30 is a a box truck single unit uh 30 foot long um how wide is that street so to speak uh it's 24 ft plus 5 to 10 feet of striping in front of the the garage door so it's uh 34t in that area so it's
34t in that area oh sorry 44 feet sorry 44 feet yep well that's a big difference the truck is going to be 30 something feet the truck matthew the truck would be pulling into the building correct yes and we did submit as part of our uh site
plan application page c303 we show that su30 box truck maneuvering into that garage unit so we we do show that the truck does work comes off the road correct and entirely
within the building thank you um in the in the planner review letter as well it does um state that a variance may be required uh for the location of the the loading space those two loading spaces um since
it's within a front yard of route 22 um and 200 you know route 22 has a 200 foot setback so we would be requesting a variance for that uh if if it's required um and you know those those spaces are
inside the building and uh it's not like a a a large commercial building or where they have a loading birth that's outside so it it's a little bit different how it functions can you expand on that why you just didn't put it in the back
facing 28 so to speak we didn't want the the garage doors facing the resident so we want it as far away as possible to cuz that's where we anticipate most of users going because if it rains they're covered right so
that would limit um you know the potential for that all right thank you on the um delivery or the uh truck that you're using um as part of your turning
analysis it's an su30 um how did you come to that selection of a design vehicle uh it it's it's very typical in this uh for self storage and you know you're not going to see a
tractor trailer coming to the site that's what you're probably concerned about right is a tractor trailer coming to the site um before someone rents a unit they're not they're not going to show up with a a huge tractor trailer before renting a unit so they know how large the unit is and then uh you know
typically it's part of the um you know resolution that you were speaking of before that it would it would limit that so an su30 is what we typically see for this facility and we've designed numerous self-s storage facilities across the state do you know the largest
type vehicle someone can rent and still use a standard driver's license i i'm i'm not sure what i'm sure our traffic engineer can okay by the information but i don't know thank you what's the range of sizes of each of the
uh units from the smallest to the largest our architect is here this evening sir and he'll have that information as far as the it's important to know because she decided that a box truck would be the
largest truck that would go through there but if someone is selling their home and their house isn't ready they may have a moving truck full of furniture they may want to store so that's why i'm asking what's the
largest unit if you're building this thing and you are the architect correct no i'm not he's the civil engineer but yes so you designed this i did not design the interior of the building okay thank you i have a
question the uh property has only one entrance from route 22 uh why is the one that is from route 28 taken out i mean there there was a ent existing
entrance from route 28 into the property why is it taken out we wanted to you know maximize the buffer between the residents and having you know a 24 30 foot curb cut from route 28 would just you know provide less buffer between the
residents so um that that was the main reason why we didn't provide another driveway on route 28 is such a big property uh should have access from to two different
locations that's the way i look at it so from understanding some of the history of the site and some other applications that preceded us uh we understood that maintaining uh a no access off of 28 was
um something to be encouraged which is why the site was laid out this way so as to try to limit uh ex i shouldn't say limit to preclude food vehicle activity entering and exiting the site on 28 and to preserve the the uh the buffer that's
there and to enhance it mr kzi was that the quick check site in 2014 yes application was before the zoning board yes sir there's quite a few people here upset about that rear entrance into 28 if i recall and mr kapzy i think you mentioned
earlier that there would only be an emergency access way to route 28 is that right that's correct by the fire marshall the the fire official had requested that and we're certainly happy to accommodate that so there would be that okay let's move on
um one of the comments i believe was in the engineers review letter was about snow removal and providing additional testimony about that so uh the site does have quite a bit of grade change so we do have uh a retaining wall on the the eastern side of the site so and we have
quite a bit of vegetation so uh around the perimeter of the the parking lot and the drive aisles so it does limit where we can store uh snow snow storage um so wherever it can't be stored that impacts landscaping or something like that uh
what to be hauled off the site um all right all right so moving on to lighting so we are providing uh led light fixtures with 3000 uh k temperature uh which is appearance of a softer light it's not the bright white
that that's like a 5,000 kelvin unit so we're providing 3,000 kelvin temperature um so along route 28 uh we do not have any wall-mounted uh lights facing uh or
along the route 28 uh facade um we're trying to avoid any you know indirect light uh that you can see so that's why we provided some area lights that face the building and not route 28 they also have um houseside shields equipped with
it um and there's zero foot candle spill um at the property line on route 28 as well uh on along the route 22 front we are requesting uh a waiver for the light
intensity of 2.6 ft candles um which is occurring uh where our driveway uh throat intersects a property line um and that's because the like i was saying earlier the the the property line set
back 70 feet approximately from the curb in route 22 so we had to put a light fixture as close to that property line as possible to allow still have um some amount of light at the the curb opening on route 22 so we're requesting a waiver
from that requirement and what was your foot candle reading for the front uh 2.6 foot candles um at that location where one foot candle is allowed and then when you get to the
route 22 curb opening it's at 0.2 foot candles max max maximum which is uh also meets the nj dot requirement for lighting um and then as far as uh reducing intensities during off hours um
we can we can come up with a plan to show what the um what lights have to remain on or off for security reasons and things like that to minimize the amount of light at night um moving on to uh the the dumpster uh or trash enclosure that
we're providing can i ask you a question about the lighting before we go to the dumpsters um all right you're not going to pull on 20 you went over all that the residents on 28 after let's say 10 11:00 at night will they have lights visible
to them that will disrupt them there there's houseside shields on the the area lights so they will not be able to to see the the actual light fixture um it it the light fixture is physically blocked with a the shield um from those
area lights along the 28 um property line and then the the foot candle um values at the property line are are zero along route 28 um and it's really behind
uh 10 feet or so behind the the curb line that's where the zero foot handle line is approximately so they're not really the the residents on um across route 28 shouldn't see those lights shouldn't see or will not see
it's a big difference uh those lights they will not see you know you know i think this is a point at which you can kind of tell us how many trees are you cutting down off this property and and what's your plan to replace them because i'm not going to let you clear cut this piece of property
in a residential zone in a transition zone without replacing the vast majority of what you take out so why don't you tell us what you're removing and what you're planning to put in and you can speak in in in numbers for us okay um sure so the total trees
to be removed from the property there are 209 trees 200 209 209 206 onsite and then three um offsite um what does that mean offsite within
where the driveway is so we had to get dot um to sign off on that so the 209 is everything that's the that's everything all right so with that the township code has replacement values um so it's not
necessarily just you cut down 209 trees you provide 209 trees right that's not the requirement so the requirement is we would need to provide 302 trees for this project which is good so what's your plan so we
are proposing um currently 171 trees um which is less than 302 that that is correct so that's 131 trees deficit currently i do see room for improvement on that number i i don't believe i'll be
able to have a zero tree deficit but there there are areas on the site like on the the western side of the site there's a grass area you couldn't have possibly researched this board and heard any of what we did in the last storage case and think i was going to you know
be happy about a deficit i don't want any deficit i in fact i want a surplus you should do 402 trees this is a freaking farm stand so what can you do here you know you got a room full of people clearly you haven't met with them have you met
with them we have not sir so you come in here you're taking out 209 trees bridgewater's making you put 302 and you're 50% deficient come on let's why can't we do 400 let's start
there let's start our negotiation do i hear 400 well we we'll take a look at the plan mr chairman and see what we can do to supplement the landscaping plan mr fouse yes one thing that i wanted to clarify or ask actually the tree replacement plan um told part of the
story but i'm not i'm not sure how many trees were surveyed on the site in total i didn't see a tree inventory in in the submission no and part and i will say i'll take part of the blame for that when we're doing completeness there was a request to do a tree inventory by um
sample sizes i don't remember what we ended up getting from them like as part of completeness but i know that it didn't end up the tree inventory didn't end up on this sheet in set so if they have that number it may give also a little bit more of the story of how many
trees exist versus how many are being removed because i i don't think it's 209 is not the full amount of trees there's more i don't know the way i look at it as a resident and i'm sure a lot of the people in this room look at it is that they're losing a farm stand you know this is you know it's it's part of the
charm of why you move to a neighborhood and i think applicants need to be good neighbors and i think you know they certainly have a right to do whatever they want they own the property but we would certainly like to see 400 plus trees to at least keep the aesthetic you
know it was a farm stand now is not the time for question i'm sorry we got to keep to a format or you know this does become a record if this does go to court so i you know to let you ask questions now would disrupt that so i i'll make sure that you get to ask your questions in a little while so this is sounds like
something you guys want to work on and come back to us on this on this particular item yes sounds good to me and only reason i bring it up is because mr w had questions on the lighting and you know the what your plantings are going to dictate what ends up with foot candles that spill out potentially into route 28 so i'm glad you're going to
work on it understood thank you yeah i do understand the importance of the farm i actually grew up on huntley way which is threequarters of a mile from awesome area so i i do know the site very well all right that's good to hear so i i understand your concern so um i we'll
look into the the tree plan i do have a conservation plan but um i would like to verify it meets all the requirements from the town um okay touching on the dumpster area sure so yes we do have a trash enclosure
enclosure located on the eastern uh side of the site uh it's relatively close to the office as well that that dumpster area is to be used by the operator only and the employees it's not meant for uh
the you know uh renters of units to you utilize that trash enclosure um and it can be locked if if necessary it sounds like a stipulation right operator while you're discussing the enclosure can we talk about the fence and the retaining
walls sort of in that sort of same area um just go through the height of the retaining wall in that back uh the southern side and then i see a six foot brown fence just just give us an overview on that i don't want to ask you
50 questions about it rather you just can talk to it maybe yes so i have to pull i'm pulling up my grading plan to get those exact numbers for you but the eastern side of the site um is we're cutting into that area um and then the
western side of the site we are you know filling that area and uh that's because of the existing soil on site there's a lot of you know bedrock ripable shale things of that nature so uh it's very difficult to construct and cut the site
and very expensive as well i understand i understand but but so just to answer my question on the eastern side then how tall how far how how high is that retaining wall is that an architect question or i i have it i'm just verifying that's fine
no no no pressure i just want it's approximately 5t tall and there's a sixoot fence on top of it right okay so that's the eastern side and then as we go clockwise coming around the southern where are we at there because obviously
that's like a neighborhood i mean you know we don't want there is no retaining wall like uh there's a retaining wall on the the southeast portion of the property and then where there's a bend in the building yeah that's where the retaining wall essentially ends on the other side
how so is it 5t there with the sixoot fence there too correct okay where's the visible face wall matthew uh the the wall will face into the property uh facing the building right so the c the residential corridor on 28 only sees the fence they don't see any wall element
correct correct is that hold true also for the wall along the east yes yes you picked the brown fence i assume to blend in with the landscape and all that um what about we we talked about lighting what about light wall-mounted lighting in that i mean
there must be some wall-mounted lighting back there right just flip into my lighting plan to review it's not very easily seen on the exhibit on the screen so the lights on the the eastern facade they're they're wall mounted lights on
the building so there's no area lights on on the eastern facade so is it safe to say because the fence is six feet tall and then there's a five foot drop that perhaps they could be below the ey line of the fence or
because it's three stories i mean i can't imagine you have lighting up now the the lighting the the wall-mounted lights in that area are 20 ft high 20 feet high okay so they probably would you say then they would be above the fence because if it's five
plus six is yes more than okay um my last question on the image that you have on the screen that we can all see you've got um landscaping shown in green and then a layer beneath that is obviously
the existing landscaping the layer that's beneath that that is all remaining correct correct along the route 28 frontage right uh between between the building there's one row of evergreen trees proposed and
then beyond that it's mostly existing vegetation okay so where your cursor is right now that is remaining correct as you move westward that's all remaining yes okay thank you does 6 foot fence on top of a 5ft retaining wall trigger a
variance yes rich caught that i can't take credit all right like the other one too the other self storage had something similar i just note that i have some relevant questions are you
going to have any testimony on the grading and any earth work that you're doing with the site or should i ask my questions on that now you can ask sure um how how much fill are you bringing in on this site
i don't have an exact quantity i did not provide that or perform that calculation but i can tell you um some grade so we are increasing grade and the building footprint by an average of approximately 5.7 ft that because there the site does
slope quite a bit so on one side you might be cutting but on the western side you're filling okay how much are you cutting on the eastern side versus how much are you filling on the western side believe we're cutting anywhere from 1 to
2 feet on the eastern side because that's once you get below that that's where you're hanging rock so we want to limit that okay and then on the western side we're filling 10 to 13 feet
okay and then on the western side how much higher would kind of your building grade level be relative to route 28 kind of in that vicinity so where bogart drive is it's approximately
elevation 127 in the intersection mhm and our finished floor is 145 so 18 ft okay so the top of the building would be about i think what it's almost 40t i think right so
it' be about almost 50 feet height then if you're measuring from that point yes is there any way that this building could have been arranged such that it contoured closer to the natural grade
out there if if we lowered the the grade of the building then we're into the shale and bedrock and it's very difficult to construct in those conditions so we want to minimize the amount that we're going
into that um so that's why we proposed the finish floor elevation we did because you're you're you're ripping shale and hammering rock so right if you kept it one level as much as possible to
so it's not you know a nuisance to the neighbors and stuff like that okay can you talk about the i'm assuming this is a retention basin sure so we did receive comments from the
board engineer about our uh design we um currently we have a an infiltration basin um so it would be a sand bottom basin um it would hold up to 2 feet of water that infiltrates into the ground
and then anything above that would um uh go through the outlet structure uh we we did have a lot of geotechnical testing um from you know historical throughout the site and then what the applicant has done that uh did indicate
that the infiltration uh could be feasible in this location but we would need additional uh storm water testing to verify that um in the past there've been discussions about 50year 100redyear floods what would this accommodate
this site's designed for the future 100-year flood condition thank you if if i may can we go back to the trash uh area for just a second uh you mentioned it's only for the employees of the facility if a tenant or a renter
rather you know a mouse gets in and chews through an umbrella are they expected then they take their trash with them and bring it wherever else generally yes you were supposed to take whoever is in your locker with you it would be up to the the operator
of the facility and the you know the manager on staff or the employee that's there um okay so that's an operational decision then yes okay there is no ability for an a renter of a unit to
dispose of their refu site are you going to be speaking to the overall storm water management plan for this site or has that come later i can i can speak to that more um just have a quick question though earlier in your testimony you described that there were
no wetlands or streams on site but there was one that was close by was that in the right ofway between route 22 and the property that we're discussing or where was that um stream located
sure to the the northwest corner of the property um where my mouse is on the screen uh it's not on site so it's between our property line and the the route 22 uh frontage um there is
uh stream that that that traverses in that area um so it doesn't 90 degree turn around the property line essentially so it actually goes around the property line so it doesn't disperse any water onto the property itself so it's still in the i can't
really see from the diagram the right of way the stream itself correct there there is no flood plane mapped on this site right and you don't in any way affect that stream with your retention basin or your ability to manage storm
water uh no so we we are required um to design the site to the njd standards we we are a major development we do disturb an acre more than an acre of uh of the site so that does trigger the njp
regulations um which requires us to treat storms as um as small as the water quality storm which is 1.25 in um or as large as the the future adjusted 100-year storm i don't i don't have that number in front of me but it's generally
50% larger than what's today which is approximately 12 inches of rain so the site is designed for that to detain and release at a controlled rate which meets the njp standards so what i'm just concerned about though that it does not
affect you won't be draining into that stream based on your design we we are um our discharge does go there but in existing conditions it goes to the same spot everything ultimately drains to that stream on the property and that's
what we're proposing we cannot so it's not on the property or it is on the property it is not on the property but we have a an outlet on our site that ultimately gets to that stream okay and where does that stream terminate or where does it to where does it travel
does it go across the road yes it it it goes underneath route 22 um and then also under route 28 and does it pop out anywhere i i don't know exactly i didn't study the stream beyond but water from your
site is going into that stream yes is water from the eastern side of your property where there's some sort of um i don't know how to describe the the businesses operating there i see some vacant i see some trucks and some
equipment and so on they're higher than you are are they does water drain from their property onto yours yes a portion and we have designed our site to accommodate that we have swelles that go around the top of the retaining wall and then it's piped um to the um ultimately
to where we're discharging on the site was there any way to determine the quality of the water because that's kind of an industriall-like site there are a lot of fuels and um things like that does that somehow drain onto your
property and then end up in that stream i i don't have that information but i'm i'm sure the seller or the buyer had a phase one performed for the projects well we can only speak to our own site but he's asking about off-site conditions
well i'm asking how that would impact your site though in other words if something is coming off site onto your property and then continues to follow your drainage and storm water management plan then ultimately ends up in that stream i'm not sure uh who i'm supposed
to be pointing fingers at or how to provide a level of safety to that stream but i wondered if there was any testing done to testing the water that's coming off that site onto yours then ultimately into the stream and we've we've done groundwater testing on our own site yes
but nothing off site as as far as the drainage area matt are you redirecting any of the drainage area under the proposed condition the proposed condition would match what's there existing so explain that for me so as water is sheet flowing today it'll continue in that pattern tomorrow
correct as far as the rate of runoff into the stream offsite on existing versus proposed can you explain the change in condition sure we are um reducing flows by a minimum of 50% for a
two-year storm event um 70 or 25% for a uh 10-year storm event or sorry yeah 10-year storm event and then uh reducing by 20% for a 100red-year storm event the the amount of the rate at which water flows off the site under
the proposed condition despite all the additional impurities coverage surfaces excuse me is less under the proposed condition than existing yes so as far as the cons concern potentially of overburdening that downhill
stream your drainage design actually reduces the burden on that stream is that fair yes thank you i appreciate that and i'm just still have an open question in my mind about any contaminated materials being drained under your site and how you would
determine that so you may not have that information now but it's something i would like to hear about it would be uh i i don't see listen we can i'm certainly happy to be the creative to see how we can capture that data uh perhaps an alternative is to explore
with your engineer about how to keep that naturally occurring runoff from coming onto our site and perhaps directing it elsewhere uh may be a means of trying to address that concern but we'll see what we can do to address that
okay thank you mr capisy did the phase one raise that as a concern my recollection is that it did not maybe you can just check that too before the next meeting we'll do on your detention basin you have there
on the west side um what level storm would you expect um water to come over the over overflow area it's designed for um you know sedd or
soil conservation district standards but that's that's there as an emergency spillway yeah so that's if everything fails on site right but on the average storm it you for a 100red-year storm you would not see water going over that
spillway unless the basin fails so it's a safety mechanism in the event that it did not work which we have to model that there's no infiltration in the ground orphices are turned off and things like that so um we have designed that
spillway for compliance okay and then in emergency case where there is water coming over that spillway where is the water going it would go into the the stream uh along the property frontage similar to where a
normal storm would go and would there be any residents kind of in that path no okay thank you i think the only the only other thing i wanted to touch upon was utilities um
so we are um providing a gas service to the project um that was a comment in the the review letter as well from uh your board engineer um and we can we can come up
with another solution to avoid cutting into the tree line as in the comment we we can probably relocate it uh closer to where the water services on the eastern facade so we would maintain a very similar uh uh disturbance in that
area and then we are pro providing a sanitary sewer connection for the proposed building um which we did receive comments for you can uh accommodate for as well and um we do have electric service and a water connection oh well just circling back on
the landscaping had to go back to that um so i know we're we're going to be changing our proposed trees for the site but just um covering some additional requirements so uh we currently do not have any uh
foundation plantings around the perimeter of the building um that's because there are you know roll up doors in that area so it it's not feasible for this building um but we are providing you know pretty significant amount of buffer around the perimeter of the
project along with the the fence as well but less than what's required by bridgewater zoning ordinance correct yes and then the other requirement um we'll
we'll come back and adjust for for the uh the type of trees that are planted the buffer so we'll revise that and we'll have more information at the next uh hearing and i believe that's everything i had is there any matt as far as mr burr's
letter of march 20th this year have you had an opportunity to review that uh yes i have i believe your testimony addressed a majority of the comments but if there are any open technical comments your office can address them by way of any necessary plan revision yes thank you and we're going to assume anything
that wasn't touched on you're going to be in acceptance of in terms of the march 20th 25 engineer report that's correct mr chairman open it up to the board for questions please i have i have one question um southern portion of the property the wall of the building can you just tell
me the distance from the wall to the closest residential home i guess on the opposite side of route 28 see that that's the wall of the building sir wall of the building yes i'm just pulling out the the actual
plan measure that i i don't have the the home on the on aerial that i can measure from that's the same aerial we had previously
marked as a1 yes it is so this is this would be exhibit a1 so uh the closest resident would likely be uh lot 34 which is at the corner of bogart drive um
from our property line to that resident it's approximately 100 feet and then our building is set back 100 ft from our property line so approximately 200 feet so two um 200 feet total from building to building correct
okay thank you anyone else all right professionals thank you mr chairman um i have a few questions in a few different topic areas so i'll try and keep the questions grouped together um first with the the landscaping plan i know you're going to
be updating it um based on the the what you mentioned about the fire department comments about emergency access if that is to route 28 there some of your proposed likely your landscaping will likely have to be moved so just keep that in mind um and try and keep that tree replacement up and and continuing
to go up based on the chairman's feedback i will also mention that if any additional landscaping is proposed in the existing tree buffer that's not being disturbed um to have your landscape architect or arborist make sure that um those trees
are not disturbed or um it's carefully chosen what species are grouped together if they're going to supplement the the existing tree buffer back there um as far as the the loading space inside the building um you'd mentioned that there are parking spaces right
behind it i did look at the turning template i know that there was some conversation about the um the truck that was used for that turning template and what may or may not enter the site depending on who's moving in or or who's driving that truck um but i will say that if there
is someone who's not experienced in driving a truck and trying to back it up into the building based on how the truck turning template showed i think that those parking spaces there are probably not a great idea it presents another obstacle for maybe an inexperienced driver um so i don't know if having them
right in front of the loading space is a great idea just if someone actually is parked there you might it may make it more difficult to back into the building or just maneuver the truck in general for someone who's trying to to pull into that building spot [Music]
um the the doors at grade i know there's no operator designated right now we don't know you know what the branding is but um you know that's not very typical of modern self- storage buildings i understand the purpose a lot of older self- storage buildings have
rollup doors um and and something you know that i've seen from experience in some of those those older self- storage facilities is that you have um not only people that are storing their things but maybe contractors or small businesses
that are storing materials there um or appliances or things like that h how are those generally regulated again not knowing the operator how is it regulated to that someone will not be storing some hazardous material or something that might be you know seen as a hazard to the to the fire department that's police
by way of their lease and the on-site security camera system okay so something will be enforced correct there'll be a manner to enforce it yes thank you um as far as those rollup doors i think i put it in my review memo um but how and
where will those cars park as they pull up to their individual doors yes they would park parallel to the doors along the perimeter um there is a you know a five five foot striped area along all
the sides of the building allow for extra uh extra space additionally there's a 24 foot uh one-way drive aisle so um if they did block a portion of the drive another car or truck could would be able to uh maneuver around them
additionally a person that's parked their car or truck um that's using those exterior units would be in their unit so if there was a conflict uh the the manager of the facility or the person that can't get around that
car would um you know can approach that person okay thank you [Music] um and then one last thing about the the loading spaces again no operator but what's the prop how is it proposed that those loading doors to access the
loading spaces would be operated and by by a normal user there there is a keypad um outside the building or outside the just doors um which a customer would have to be able to access and then uh they they would
also automatically shut if in the event that the customer left that door open so over a certain amount of time there's a sensor and it would shut the a garage door and obviously it would have a sensor that would if something was blocking it it would not continue closing right yes um and that that code
that you mentioned is that a one-time code that they'd have to get from the office or is that something that every single tenant that would have access to all the time everyone's assigned their own specific code but they'd have they wouldn't have to get it every time that they wanted to use the loading dock correct okay thank
you um i i don't have anything else for this witness right now thank you bill thank you mr chairman um few questions so a as far as easements or restrictions or any other encumbrances on the
property is is there anything that the board there's nothing that's impacting our our project nothing that would impact this development correct okay the environmental constraint for constraints the the wetlands that you
spoke about i think you mentioned that you have a presence absence loi for lot one correct correct that is still valid yes but lot one is only the westerly
portion of this property so have you guys taken a look at lot two which i do think includes i know it's the upland area but it still includes part of the developed area have you taken a look at that area as well we haven't submitted
uh an loi for that piece of property because like you're you're stating it is the upland um we have reviewed you know topography um we also had um our environmental consultant equal sciences prepare environmental impact statement which touches upon some of those uh
items but no we we haven't pursued the nj for that did did do you know if ecoiences actually physically looked at that area and if they didn't will they perhaps in advance of the next meeting just to make sure that it's clear we we
can we can do a sitewalk um to um make sure we uh dot our eyes okay so we heard a little bit of testimony about steep slopes on the property i'm trying to get to the sheet
and you have sheet c304 which shows a number of different slope areas ranging from i think 10 to 30% there are some 30% plus slopes on the
property will they be impacted by the development yes and has a a variance been requested for that do you know it hasn't we we will request the variance
um to verify and i guess my followup to that in lie of a variance request is there any way to avoid some of those disturbances and the answer may be no we we can look into that uh it's a
very minimal area it's of the the whole total of the sites 7 almost 7,000 square feet where you know the site's 236,000 square feet so it's a very small percentage and uh we
can fine-tune some the the way we calculate the those slopes um to make sure we're not impacting them and do you do you know if those are natural slopes or were they created
potentially they look like they're around the the existing um tectonic building i would to verify that but that that's where it looks like it's happening and there might be walls or you know small features that are
creating that in our surface that calculates that uh those slope percentages okay um we heard a number of questions about the overhead doors the access to the doors the interior loading zones or
loading spaces and i think the testimony was an su30 vehicle can access those interior spaces correct yes if if somebody in any of the other exterior
rollup door units wanted to access their unit with a box truck was your testimony that they would park parallel with the building they would not back into one of the other exterior units i know they're not going to back into it but back up to
it yes how would that function that they they would they would park parallel to the building so they wouldn't be pulling into the units okay and in in the event that somebody did
back up and they blocked the drive aisle i guess your testimony was the onsite manager would be alerted yes somebody couldn't get around that truck yes okay
the the signage that's proposed i don't i don't know if you got into specific testimony or if that's going to be the architect but did i hear that the signage proposal other than the location of the route 22 sign complies with the
ordinance requirements from a sizing perspective yes uh i i actually did not testify to that so thank i thought i heard you say very briefly the existing sign is within the rightway for a tectonic building but we are requesting a sign setback
variance of i believe it's 5 ft from the property line um again that's due to the the site property line being set back 70 ft from the curb line route 22 so uh that's why we're proposing in that location but there is no sign along the
route 28 corridor correct yes that's correct okay but bill your question is as to the size of the sign too is that my initial question was do the proposed signs comply with the ordinance right and followup was to confirm that there
was no sign along 28 right so is that confirmed yes size okay the um the emergency access off of route 28 that the fire official
uh requested that location would i know you still have to engineer it but that location by and large would coincide with where the existing driveway is is that fair we're going to have to look into it a little bit more the current site plan i
i envision going where the the bend in the building is on the along that rear facade that's where the grading um works a little bit better um because we do have the you know a 5ft approximately retaining wall in that corner where the
existing driveway is so to get those grades to work we might be able to but um i i would to look into it more okay that was my question is have you looked at it and can you accommodate it with the current design without removing more trees and it sounds like you're going to
have to take a look at that in advance of the next meeting yes okay the the next question kind of a little bit drainage related mostly grading related i think it was board member of vesio that brought up um the
question about the grading along the route 28 frontage of the property you know and i'm taking a look and the way this site has been graded out we have about a 15 foot grade differential up to the
driveway and then you're going to have a 40 foot a little less than a 40 foot tall building on top of that plateau so from somebody on route 28 heading i guess it would be eastbound um towards somerville circle you're going to
see quite a large building and i know in the architectural plans there are some crosssections that i don't really think fairly represent what you're going to see heading south on 28 and i know there was a question of can you lower the
building at all and your testimony was well you had bedrock out there but i would suggest you take a look at the geotechnical report because it looks like you have you don't have bedrock in some locations until 10 or 11 ft deep
and i think if you could lower the building and smooth out some of the grading perhaps take a look at the detention basin orientation and shape you might have an opportunity to save some of the trees that you're proposing to take down so it it would be a
worthwhile exercise to see if there's any flexibility with how this has been situated and graded out if if that makes sense yes and it's something we can we can work together on as well okay and same
thing from a from a drainage perspective if that basin can be turned or realigned perhaps this you know instead of being so wide cutting across the width of the property with the with
the burm um you know maybe there's a way to save on some of the tree removal and still allow for an enhancement of the buffer yeah that's definitely a great suggestion because that the northwest portion of the property is grass so we
can definitely save some trees by rotating basin okay and just just to be clear the basin that's currently proposed will capture perhaps with the exception of a
small area of the driveway leading to 22 the basin will capture all runoff from the improved portions of this property right the driveways the building everything will drain to that basin is that fair yes okay
trying to think mr chairman if i had anything else oh you're going to get another crack at them at the next meeting so if anything else comes up i i i do want to get if it's okay with you i want to get some questions from the members of the public we may not be able to get them all in but at least we can start uh if anyone would like to come forward and ask questions on the
engineering testimony you heard now is the time yep you just come up give us your name and address and then ask your question my name is kristen kovatch i live at 465 route 28 about4 miles from the site could you
spell your last name please a o v a t c h thank you lower the microphone and speak um my question is about the sound generated at this facility and the reason i'm bringing this up is because
where i live there is a gargantuan building that was built behind my house and you would think that it doesn't make any noise but mayor mench will tell you after having many conversations with me it makes a lot of noise uh and part of that is the trees we had a lot of trees
cut down behind our house for that building it was great at first and then they died they were never replaced and i still hear them dumping their dumpster every morning at 4:00 a.m if you are going to have roll up garage doors i'm assuming that the residents are going to hear
that snow plowing you're going to hear that because i hear all of those things so if you're going to take 300 trees or whatever the number was and not replace them what are you going to do 209 thank you what are you going to do to eliminate the noise that all these
people are going to hear every morning and every night when people are rolling up their doors or getting the driveway plowed or you know and are you planning on maintaining all those trees that you're going to plant because it's great to plant trees but they're going to die
things are going to happen to them and my trees were never replaced and mayor mench did a lot of work to get that building to maintain my property but they don't so what is your intention to maintain the peace and quiet that we
somewhat still have and to you know not disturb the what little piece we have left i'm not sure that would be best for our operator okay it's not something that uh matthew had testified to right uh but
we'll have testimony relative to uh how the site's going to function on a typical day well i assume it's a 24-hour facility so it is not it'll be it'll be open from 6:00 a.m to 10:00 p.m and after 10:00 in the evening none of the drive up units none of the internal
units are accessible and before 6:00 a.m none of the internal or external units are accessible and like with some of the other facilities i've seen when you're looking at them from the road the internal structures where the hallways are located they're all lit so will
those be lit all night or only till 10:00 when the facility closes for access they really when we have an architecture testimony we'll talk about the building layout itself but there isn't a view shed into the building okay so from the road you can't actually see
in like those lit aisles like some of the other places there's a small glass element along the left side of the building as you're facing it from route 22 okay but other than that element relative to the office the balance of the building is not translucent okay
thank you thank you thank you so mr capizzy on on the point of um maintaining the landscape buffer would the applicant agree uh to a deed restriction to not only maintain but replace the buffer should
it die we would thank you any other questions hi there just need your name and address please um edie hogan i live at 319 hannah it's probably about a half mile around from route 28 great
i'll be as quick as i can um are you aware that a number of trees have already been down during the survey process and the soil trenching that has occurred on the northeast corner of the property we are aware that we about two or so years ago when we were doing a soils
analysis uh there was an excavator on site and maybe some trees were lost as a result of that excavation yeah backho have already been present they've cut a swath through the wooded area and this would change the mentioned tree camp that was designed to remedy an
underground oil tank that was left in place that had to be decommissioned so are you speaking about the petroleum runoff that was happening from the adjacent truck repair and storage business no that's not okay
because that's been happening for many years um miss hogan yes you'll have time to come and give statements about things but right now it's really just questions as to whatever the engineer testified to i have a question about snow and and mr capisy i think i'd rather the engineer
answer the questions please okay um i was just trying to i understand yeah and i didn't know who was going to answer the question yeah so it's really that's why you know the engineer can answer what he testified to okay okay um before i get to the snow question so you mentioned earlier there's no developer
there's who's going to benefit from this as a resident i want to know who's he didn't who wants this site he he didn't testify to any of those things those are things that maybe you could ask the planner coming forward do you have a planner that's going to testify yeah that sounds like something that's going to be at the next meeting okay and
they may have an operator testify yeah it sounded like okay yeah i want to know who's benefiting from all this and i'm sure all the other residents want to know as well um if as stated the excess snow will have to be hauled off site wouldn't that entail a backhoe and a
dump truck which is much larger than the su30 box truck that you referenced it's not larger pardon it would not be larger okay all right those are my questions for now thank you thank you very much all right folks let's do one more set of questions and then we're going to call
it a night on this case anyone else hello there my name's uh chris bowden live at 18 bogart drive can we just get that in the microphone because people are watching at home chris bowden i live at 18 bogart drive so this is clearly tell your last name please the oda n this is very clearly very close to
where i live just a couple homes away from from route 28 my question is i haven't been able to see what i would call an accurate like a 3d rendering of how this building is going to sit because you've talked about i think 13 feet of fill give or take is what you're
going to take to level it out and you know as you walk down the street are we are we looking at this big monolith up here that's going to be now raised up 13 feet and built on top of that and also how is that going to affect the existing trees if there's that much fill going in
there as well so our architect will have those perspectives that that give you that representation you're asking for um from a tree disturbance uh we do look at uh the drip zones and things like that to
make sure grading activities aren't happening in those areas that would you know kill those trees um so we have looked into that into our limited disturbance um and provide that calculation now we are going to be revising that plan and we can take a
closer look right at you know and it sounds like we're going to be revising some of our grading as well so it might limit that okay thank you all right all right thank you everyone we're going to wrap this case up tonight nancy maybe you can help us get a date to continue
this hearing excuse me mr chair yes mr sweeney um there's we obviously have concern about the size of this building sure i want to know what it's going to look like and i can't tell that by looking at a draftman's drawing of it why don't you come back with an artist's
rendering of what that building is going to look like especially to the people on the other side of route 28 we did provide an exhibit sir on monday and we have we were if we were going is it an artist's rendering of what it's going to look like yes sir
okay good thank you so just dovetailing that one nancy is getting us a date we did do another storage case and um that was an existing office building on route 22 in vosler and it was an old office building and through the the course of the hearing we had a number of objectors
and you know not only did they improve storm water improve the layout but they provided the board with very clear renderings how this would look from different perspectives from a from a southernly perspective from a a 22 eastern and western perspective again this is your case to present i'm just
going to throw this out there as a suggestion review that case i'll have rich send you the resolution we had a room full of people that were stomping their feet they were upset about it and ultimately at the end we had no objectors no one came to the meetings at the end because i felt like they were
satisfied that it was improvement on the existing office building now i don't know how we're going to improve the aesthetic from a farm stand to a storage facility but please take a look at that case it was very recent this board heard it last year we're going to send you the resolution in that case that has the
stipulations and the conditions um and and and please take that to heart and what mr sweeny's asking is we're volunteers we're not experts we're not draftsmen when you show us a picture of how it's going to look from the neighbors that gives us a better view of of what's going to be the impact on this neighborhood and i think it's very
important and i know it's important to the people that took time to be here tonight thank you very much so sorry nancy so we have may 13th we can move to one residential application that would be
first okay um just a thought though for mr capey since there's extensive storm water changes yes we would the statutory requirement aside of 10 days we would need a little bit more time on the resubmission in order to get it through
so just consider that before committing to 513 that gives you about five weeks what would be the next date after six sorry i'm sorry can't see 624 would
be the starbucks continuation um we'd have to you you don't want to do that to them so we would be in july 78 78 yeah i think that's more practical all
right yeah the the starbucks case is going to take the whole night you're not going to to get in there and you you don't want us cranky after the starbucks case all right okay so for uh members of the public this meeting is being adjourned and we'll continue on july 8th
at 7 p.m in this room there'll be no further notices from the applicant all right and thank you everyone for coming out we're going to take a fiveminute break we're going to come back at 8:55 we're going to do garmunk oil and uh again thank you everyone for coming out tonight and participating thank you nance she's the boss we can't
start without her please i know that she she runs this place yes for sure all right well the time is 8:57 we're going to reconvene and as soon as nancy is ready she's going to give us a roll call fouse here
mr widley here mrs zamin here mr sweeney here mr fresco here mr bonjouro here mr geski here mr ccat here mr kulak here mr vesio here mr gabbit here all right thank you mr simon good evening members
of the board good evening always good to be before you uh rob simon from herald law here on behalf of the applicant u we've made an application this evening for amended preliminary final site plan approval concerning property located at block 319 lot 8 on the tax map uh also
known as 24 finder avenue um within the r40 zone um the applicant this evening is before you not only for the amended preliminary final say plan approval but also certain variance relief incident to this application including uh use
variance relief to expand a pre-existing non-conforming gas station and food mark convenience store located in the r40 zone um there's a little bit of history um with regard to this application and i will go into it just a little bit and
then um i'll have our engineer who's going to uh bat first this evening kind of get into it in a little bit more detail mr simon could we have mr allard just check jurisdiction yeah of course quick and notice yes i did review the uh notice it's in proper form uh covers all
the necessary language and uh was published timely served timely so the board has jurisdiction thank you mr sorry about that um so with regard to this property there a resolution uh was adopted actually by this board back in
2017 whereby uh the applicant at the time was granted uh preliminary and final minor site plan approval with variance relief with regard to the expansion and modification of an existing at the time gas station with
food mart at at the property um based on some plans that were before the board back in i think 20 2016 early 2017 the board approved the application adopted a resolution in 2017 and germunk oil llc
our client um acquired title to the property in december of of 2019 and the reason why that is relevant is that as part of that approval and that resolution uh granting the approval was
memorialized there was relief granted by this board uh back in in 2017 including uh the expansion of the pre-existing non-conforming use including the uh the convenience store um permission to have
a canopy over the the gas pumps um there were various uh uh variances granted in terms of expansion of pre-existing non-conforming structure at the time this board approved the increase in the
floor area of uh the essentially the convenience store from 593 square ft to 1,097 square ft there were also variances granted for front yard setback sideyard setback combined sideyard
setback there were some design waiverss or exceptions as we know that were granted by the board um addressing issues such as uh signage location of signage um parking spaces
um located in the front yard lighting including lighting levels uh landscaping as proposed by the applicant at that time and so all those approvals were granted back in i said 2017 and then in
about 2019 a building uh permit is issued for for this project i think in early 2019 um and what happened here was that because this was a pre-existing
nonconforming structure that was being expanded that one of the requirements was that at least one of the four walls needed to remain on that building and lo and behold and the engineer will get into the testimony but just wanted to
give a little bit of a a profer here that the contractor at the time erroneously removed the fourth wall don't know how don't know why but it definitely happened and so what
happened after that was apparently a stop work order was issued um regarding the demolition of that fourth wall uh that was to contain the accessory convenience store so this was after most
of the site had been improved canopy was up certain improvements were made to the site incident into the resolution so what are we doing here we are trying to thoroughly and
comprehensively correct what needs to be corrected bring before the board by way of amended site plan approval what was built on the property what still needs to take place pursuant to that resolution with regard to that property
so that this board in 2025 can take a full and fair look at what's happened since the 2017 resolution and ensure that full compliance is made to the many conditions uh with regard to the
resolution of approval back in 2017 and as our engineer will testify this amended application does not seek to modify any of the conditions of approval
imposed by that may 16th 2017 resolution with the exception that and we'll get into this through the testimony that as i just stated a moment ago the size of the convenience store at the time as approved was
97 square ft and there was a notch at the front right hand side of that convenience store building at the time and what we're intending to do in essence is to square off that notch and as a result of that the square footage
of the convenience store is going to go from 1,097 square ft as approved to,250 square ft we're talking aboutund 153 square feet generally um as
essentially an addition and ironically as you hear through the testimony of the engineer and the architect that addition is actually or um additional square footage is actually taking place in a compliant area of the lot that that
notch area actually happens to be compliant in terms of setbacks and we'll get into that through through the testimony uh presented as well as uh requesting again the the d2 uh expansion of pre-existing non-conforming use
structure regarding going from the 1097 square ft to the 1250 ft in addition to which during the course of construction particularly of um some of the improvements including the canopy the
improvements as it turns out were not constructed exactly within the locations that were on the approved plan and we're talking in some cases just about you know less than a foot or or what it may be in terms of uh impervious coverage
but we're trying to clean that up and correct it and present it to the board so the board understands you know what's there right now whether that necessitates you know slightly different relief than what was you know ultimately approved but we want to get into it and the bottom line is that we want the
board to understand what is happening today so that that it can fully and fairly consider the application and hopefully um approve it uh as minimally amended here so we will be asking again for some of that variance
relief that we originally or that the prior owner originally approved and sort of um renewed amended uh application so and obviously as as part of any application that we present we also ask
for any additional uh variances exceptions waiverss or interpretations that may arise during the course of this evening um we were aware uh that we had limited time tonight so what we uh are intending to do is start with our engineer to go through like i stated
some of the history of the site and also go through um bill and katherine's review letter and try to hit as many of those points as possible and if we have time we also have our architect that we brought tonight mr simon you know you do
have a a zoning violation um the date is 12725 and and and the zoning officer also wrote a letter to this board um and it starts the area under construction has created a dangerous situation so we have to address this violation i'm surprised you haven't brought it up well
the reason why i i didn't bring it up because it was frankly admittedly brought to my attention literally when i received uh the the latest review memo with regard to this and what i did do is i immediately and we we can get into
this a little bit but immediately contacted the the owner of the property and from what i'm i'm told and i don't want to say hearsay is that my understanding is that one township official may have said
"we want you to to do this whatever this is." and so the owner said "okay i'll do that i'll do whatever you want me to." then another township official separately said "no you're not allowed to touch anything until you
seek the proper relief from from the board." so i'm being very honest i don't know between the two sort of where it stands i asked my client literally to get some clarity on that particular issue and i wanted to have the clarity
before this evening okay well the the zoning officer has jurisdiction and the jur and he's saying that there's a a dangerous sight condition and you know you have to be very gentle with this neighborhood they've had tremendous tragedy in the last few years a little girl was lost she was hit by a truck so
whenever i hear dangerous situation i don't want to create another dangerous situation you know and god forbid anything as terrible happens again i i certainly don't want any any hand in that so we have to address this violation um you're welcome to my copy if you'd like it i i i would i would love that and then
and frankly i i promise you that before we come back to any future meeting which we're going to have to that's not good enough this is a dangerous situation so it's created a dangerous situation the area must have a safety fence so tomorrow you must have a safety fence i
saw a safety fence there today i also saw a piece that was down okay tomorrow the answer is yes 100% here here is my copy and let the record reflect that i've given you my copy and that you're going to comply with the fence and rectify any dangerous situations that
exist tomorrow the the answer is yes okay and the zoning officer's name is there please call and let him know what you have done i think there's seven items and let him know your plan
the the only caveat to that is that when we do that which we will that we will provide notice to the other official who may have for no i don't know why given maybe some contrary information just so the record is clear that we will
absolutely comply okay we have no problem doing that but just want to make sure that we're not doing anything wrong visav anyone else who may have jurisdiction that's all yeah the zoning officer is the only guy i know right now so yes please rectify the answer is yes
yes yes of course i appreciate that mr simon not when i see dangerous situation again that neighborhood i'm very sensitive to dangerous situations and we want to make sure everyone's more than safe over there so thank you for your help we absolutely will all right yes
unequivocally so um and thank you for bringing that up appreciate that so with that all being said um so tonight what i'd like to do uh is start with our engineer tyler vanderval have him sworn get him qualified and then walk through
the amended site plan and address the comments from the board professionals there's one piece of information you might share with us when you spoke earlier of some of the things on site not having been constructed exactly the way they were purported to be have done
to have been done off a foot here what have you was that under current ownership or prior ownership prior ownership thank you all prior ownership thank you for clarifying that tyler would you raise your right hand and our board professionals raise your right hands please i didn't get you last
time do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this uh board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god yes i do and for the record your full name please tyler vanderval van der val
k thank you and our board professionals thank you thank you mr uh mr vanderval can you please provide the board um with your qualifications and credentials including occupation affiliation areas of expertise and licenses and experience in
the field of professional engineering absolutely i am a licensed professional engineer in the state of new jersey my license is current and in good standing i am the owner of civilized engineering out of butler new jersey i have uh been accepted as an expert in civil
engineering before many boards throughout the state uh over the last 15 years okay your license remains in good standing yes it does all right the board accepts you as an expert in engineering thank you thank you mr chairman uh mr vandervok um did you prepare the amended uh site plan with regard to this
application i did and for the record the board that i have here tonight is last revised october 11 of 24 which should be the same set uh that the board has mr chair we're not going to mark that unless otherwise no it's what we have it's part of the record thank you um and
mr mr vanderval you're familiar with the with the property in the surrounding neighborhood yes okay and you're also familiar you you were here and present when i gave a brief introduction with regard to this application i mentioned the prior approval um incident to this
property for the gas station and convenience store from 2017 you're familiar with the resolution and the uh plans that accompanied that approval yes i have reviewed those okay so um with that i would ask you to uh describe generally the proposed plan from an
engineering perspective addressing your site plan um improvements concerning the property and as i stated to the board just a moment ago i think it would be very very helpful if you uh clearly explained what was originally approved
what was constructed what was potentially constructed in the wrong location even slightly and the relief that the applicant uh requires at this time given
the the current circumstances absolutely so as was indicated this um property had previous site plan approval under which uh construction had uh begun and a certain percentage of it was completed uh over the last handful of years uh
when my client or the current owner took ownership of the property in 2019 the canopy had already been constructed the tanks had been installed the dispensers installed um the signage was installed all these things that had approval they were all permits were pulled and
installed um the dumpster enclosure etc at that time the building had been left it wasn't the addition wasn't done that was approved uh it was still in the same state as from prior to the 2017 approval uh
at believe it was around 2022 or 2023 the applicant um decided to move forward on the permit for the building itself as far as constructing the addition uh and the renovation to the existing structure as was mentioned at that time the
contractor again for whatever reason i don't know the specifics the entire building came down uh when it was not supposed it was supposed to be renovation and addition instead everything was taken down to the footings uh as a result the stop work order was issued and that permit was now
no longer valid uh and furthermore the approval under the site plan to have that size structure was no longer valid because it was just supposed to be an addition and now it would be a whole new building so really this the start of all of this
um was that the need to come in front of the board for an amended approval because now this was going to be a new structure in analyzing the building that was approved for the site under that prior approval the current owner um saw that there was a small portion of the
building that could be squared off to have a more economical use of the structure more efficient use of the interior space etc um so we thought it made sense as coming in for an application regardless to go ahead and square that off again approximately 150
155 square ft or so in additional uh space for the store so now we would have a 25 ftx 50 foot rectangular structure um if you look at the site plan which was prepared uh by my office as part of this new application you could see a
faint red line uh in the body of that building this is in the southerntherly corner uh closest to the gas pumps that is the deviation uh of the building footprint so all exterior walls around the northwest uh east side those
are all matching the the prior footprint uh based on the prior surveyed location and the uh deviation from that is the rectangular space to the uh to the south so so when you say the deviation from the building footprint what you mean is
that the uh proposed addition that is essentially the the 150 additional square feet that's the location that addition that's correct the deviation from the prior approval our new approval our new application seeks this
additional square footage uh one thing i want to highlight as part of that is if we look at the allowable building envelope which is these dashed lines uh in that area on the site plan we have the 75 foot front yard setbacks uh on both front edges and 25 on the side and
you can see the envelope that it creates that that red rectangular fits entirely in that space so this is the one area on the property where a building should be located and that's what we're doing as part of this application is infilling um that area now this is over top prior uh
approved imperous coverage so again it's not not only are we not expanding uh into unpermitted setbacks uh but we're also not creating additional impervious coverage as part of the application so that's the main change uh as part of the amended
application now in preparing these plans um we also identified changes that are not by nature of our choice uh in other words the prior contractor under the prior ownership who had constructed the improvements as far as um the canopy the
parking etc the landscaping lighting they did all of that uh the canopy was located slightly different from what was approved on the original approval of variance was granted to have a 10.9 ft setback to findern avenue and you can
see on the asbuilt survey that was conducted in 2013 that setback is at 10.0 0 feet so we have a not 2013 2023 i apologize 2023 uh so we have about an 11 in difference from what was approved
versus what was constructed uh so as part of our application tonight in order to clean that up we would seek a variance relief and we will have a planner testifying at a later hearing uh regarding um the proofs for that variance in addition the canopy in addition to
being shifted the 11 inches to the west the canopy was also shifted to the north by about three feet or so um closer to 4t i apologize the approval was for 35.6 ft from third street to the south and it actually was constructed at
39.3 ft so a greater separation yet because this is different from what was approved a variance is required despite it being a better condition than what was approved these are the deviations regarding the canopy um another
deviation that we seek approval for is signage so the signage was all constructed variances were granted for the pylon sign um and the signage on the canopy since we're building a new building we're having new building signage put on
that building the original approval was granted for 36 square ft of text area on that structure uh what we're proposing is only 15 square ft so uh we're seeking uh actually a reduction in that um the
signage ordinance would indicate that 5% of the building facade uh can be used for a facade or building sign which would be at around 31 square ft uh in our new proposed structure and in this case uh again we're going to have 15 ft
uh so less than half of what would be permitted 15 square feet 15 correct and and an image of that sign would be on will be on the architect's rendering so you'll be able to see what that looks like uh another variation from what was approved versus what was constructed uh
and certainly we could look at those approved plans if the board wants me to present them as an exhibit essentially the dumpster enclosure was proposed further north in the parking lot essentially adjacent to the ada parking stall again for whatever reason they
have shifted it south uh by a couple stalls when i look at the plan i imagine it's because access to that dumpster is probably somewhat difficult with the canopy directly behind it with a with a garbage truck certainly easier access in this location uh but because of that shift we have a reduction in parking
stalls because it wasn't put in an exact location where we could have a 9ft stall on one side or a 9 and a half uh in this town 9 and 1/2t stall on one side and then the rest of the stalls on the other side it was somewhere in between so we ended up losing a stall in the process um that being said parking requirements
for this size building um we have 1,250 square foot at four stalls per thousand square feet uh so essentially one stall per 250 gives us five required stalls and that's what we're still providing here one handicap and then four
traditional stalls for a total of five so despite that loss we we still meet the requirement uh as indicated in the ordinance and tyler with regard to the revised you know how it came about we're not sure right the revised uh dumpster location from an engineering perspective
you believe that because of the the accessibility to it that's that's a superior location than actually what was approved i i think from a circulation standpoint it will function uh better than the original approval yes a handful of items then of course as
mentioned were already installed um i inspected the site landscaping was already installed lighting was new lighting was already installed the pole lighting the canopy lighting etc there was no lighting proposed uh to be mounted on the building so where was the
landscaping installed i saw a bunch of dead bushes on the third avenue side when was it installed no where i i see dead bushes well i'm not testifying to the condition of those plants certainly found to be in
poor condition or damaged than you're presenting a asbuilt survey so you just testified that landscaping was put in and i'm telling you there's dead bushes there the landscaping that was put in it it sounds like you're suggesting it
didn't survive does do dead bushes constitute landscaping i i guess a good lawyer could make that argument what i'm trying to say is that under this approval that landscape plan from the original approval what we're suggesting is still valid so in other
words if that landscaping didn't survive under this approval they'd be forced to replace that with living landscaping and a smart lawyer would say that certainly anything that is currently dead that is or anticipated to die in short order
will absolutely be replaced correct so why don't you take between now and the next hearing because we're not going to finish tonight why don't you take a look at the landscaping and why don't you improve it a shocking concept right
so the answer is yes okay so these are not hard things no no no the answer is yes um mr mr venov with regard to just we're going to go do that but um are you in a position right now
to maybe point out to the board maybe o additional opportunities for additional landscaping be beyond the replacement of anything that is dead diseased or dying frankly mr simon i mean you're living proof of measure twice cut once you know it's you know how do we know anything
that we agree to tonight's going to get done or will get done correctly in the right spot well the errors that happen happened happen under prior ownership and prior
representation by our professionals and certainly with regard to any resolution of approval would the should the board be inclined to grant that there be certainly conditions which presumably would include and they should include
all the conditions of the of the prior approval ownership changed in 2019 2019 yeah so you have a violation notice with a letter sent to you on march 7th 2025 that's two weeks ago so it's not like things have changed with the new
ownership you you still have issues you have you have zoning complaints so i'm curious you know why this board should give you deference on all these things you talk about and you're kicking the can back to the old owner but how do we know that you're going to comply with anything we say tonight we're we're
certainly with all due respect we're not kicking the can to the old owner we're just stating facts and certainly as an officer of the court which uh applies also to any land use board um that certainly anything that at least under
my watch that any applicant um uh has as a condition of approval or any representation that they make as part of an application that i'm involved with um will happen mr simon i'm just going to read it a summon was issued on 3725
that's march 7th 2025 for blight in violation of 146-1 local ordinance that's two weeks ago a as i as i explained and as an officer of the court found out about it for the first time when i got just just being honest and as
we stated at the very beginning in terms of the zoning violation tomorrow morning 12 hours okay so you know you talk about landscaping i'm telling you the landscaping is dead so how about we have testimony on you know hey you got dead
bushes there be a good neighbor oh that that's exactly what we wanted it didn't look like you're being a good neighbor i was there today it looked terrible so mr vanderval in response to the chairman's comments and concerns can you even though we will take a look at that between now and the next meeting
absolutely um is there any as you look at the plan right now um could you have any thoughts as to the ability to improve the look of the site particularly with landscaping yeah i i see potential gaps certainly in
the original uh approved landscape plan where we could infill with additional landscaping i also noticed that with the fuel area being set high above third street some of that landscaping just wasn't to the height that it could shield anything on the
site so maybe it's a different selection of uh plantings that would grow higher grow faster grow thicker um than what was there certainly living would help um and then as far as the rear i know in the original resolution that i read it
seemed to be that the the privacy fence was a a preference or at least it was granted as um something that they could do instead of additional landscaping in the rear that being said we can certainly supplement planting all along that fence line and we will additionally i will tell you
take a look at if there's other opportunities to uh provide enhancements of landscaping and mr steiner a quick question is the applicant in the room the applicant is in the room yes could we ask why it took two weeks before they
would address a dangerous situation you don't have to answer it but you can ask it i mean yeah i i don't i mean i'm the applicant's here or the applicant representative i should say it's here um
certainly if the board would like him to answer that question i'm happy to have him come in get you know come up excuse me get sworn and answer a question um certainly i did anticipate that he was going to be presenting testimony at the
following meeting uh with regard to the operation just so the board's aware at the same time that the professional planner is providing testimony but if you'd prefer that he come up and answer that question now i don't i'm i'm don't object i always hesitate to have you move your witnesses around this is your case and i want to keep you kind of with
your game plans i i just want to be courteous to the board if you don't mind maybe we'll ask him at the next meeting sure thank you mr chairman i have it please mrs amin see um i was there to look at the side and there's a lot of debris in the back and uh when i looked
at that i'm saying why is this here so i would make a suggestion that there will be no construction permit allowed up until they clean up the whole thing i mean we can approve the application but
as a part of the condition we can say that uh the township will not issue a construction permit to add the new building until you clean up all the junk that is on the property
but that's certainly a fair condition you know mr aller knows i'm a board attorney you know in the area i'd have the same condition i think that's fair i would like to put that as a big condition that and and in addition i'm going to do you one better which is that with regard
to this whatever this is which i i will will read certainly um some of that may be addressed in a response to this but i'm not sure okay we will be we'll be responsive in a timely manner whether it's resolution
compliance conditions or or beforehand all right so we got about 40 minutes let's power through here power through go ahead all right so uh with all that being said i want to cover essentially what our new variances are here um again we have the canopy the
variances two variances related to the canopy in that the setback to third street has increased the setback defender and has decreased by 11 in um we also require variance for imperous coverage the reason being we're actually reducing it by a tenth of a percent but
again because a variance was granted for a different number uh we have to update that variance request again that's an improvement over what was previously approved um we do have one new design waiver request uh we have a setback from
the uh we have a i'm sorry a drive aisle behind the parking specifically at the ada stall of 23 feet instead of 24 that's because of the shift of the canopy uh again as i mentioned it had moved further northeast uh which is exactly um bringing us bringing that one
foot deviation that's the less than 4 foot shift you're the about four foot shift yes correct um certainly all the conditions from the prior approval uh we would agree to have that continue as part of this uh approval one thing i would note is we're
actually going to have a change in the time of operation previously approved was from 6:00 a.m to 10:00 p.m and the new owner is looking to have 6:00 a.m to 900 p.m so 1 hour less uh than the prior approval can you give me those again yes
6 a.m to 900 p.m would be the hours of operation both of the fuel and of the convenience store is that seven days a week or correct right i actually think on on on the weekends start a little later potentially but
we'll we can i'll have him testify weekends may potentially be a little bit less if starting later in the morning um that's really all i had as far as direct i was going to answer some of the questions in the professional review letters sure so why don't we um
turn to uh this is the uh march 19th 2025 comments um from the board planner and the board engineer okay if i may interrupt you for just a moment we talked earlier about the zoning violation that was issued and that's
being addressed what i'm looking at is this memo from john tillitson which is the other township official i think you might have been referencing maybe that's what i'm referring and i don't know if you had a copy of that as well but that was dated march 19th and that speaks to an
existing structure um and that was torn down and that's left a um an unsafe condition as well in the sense that says that it may without permanent sanitary facilities without additional approval this may have to cease operations so i
don't know if you had a copy of that memo as well i don't know if that was part of the the board cool and then it makes sense just to go yeah yeah absolutely and i thank you for bringing to our attention and in fact like i said earlier had the operator
call today and we're going to follow up tomorrow as to both of these items and get everything squared away immediately so um with that mr vanderval with regard to what i think might be um appropriate if you can start with um subsection e the summary of the project review
comments and recommendations starting with the bulk standards and site layout absolutely um so the first comment here is regarding the rear yard setback uh i had shown a requirement of 80 ft when in fact the requirement was supposed to be 85 so we'll certainly correct that typo um it
does not affect any relief needed the building is approximately 87 feet from that rear line uh again on the same corner where the prior approval had the building uh but we'll be compliant there uh as far as the front yard setback from
find um that is measured to the corner we just pulled the leader a little bit away so that we wouldn't be overlapping with some of the other line work so just for legibility but that is perpendicular from the corner to find at 52.8 eight um
the front yard setback dimension is not shown to third street again just to avoid um too much overlap of text but it is in fact the 80.2 uh which is shown on the plan uh letter d this is the question regarding the
canopy what is the accessory setback supposed to be i'm calling for 52.7 to find um that really should read 52.8 so an apology there 52.8 change that by a tenth the reason that i set that number
is so that it's behind the furthermost part of the principal structure which i think is the requirement for the primary street on the secondary street the requirement would be 75 ft uh as labeled uh there's some discussion about variances which we talked about sorry go
ahead no no that's what i just wanted so the so your testimony earlier uh went over the conditions that were constructed differently than what was approved correct yeah specifically the variance for the canopy yep and the and
the reduced impervious coverage um there is a comment about the building height uh the height is increasing from the original approval by about 11 in on the building uh certainly we're still more than conforming at 19.7 ft where 35
ft is permitted for the zone uh but again the original approval is for 18.8 so there's about an 11 in increase there and you'll see in the renderings from the architect this is all about uh the roof lines and the different uh products that we're using that are going to really clean up this
building signage and landscaping so as mentioned no change signage except for the one that's on the building which is actually going to be reduced uh the landscaping we're certainly going to take a second look at the original improved plan and try to uh supplement that and improve that while also
cleaning up any uh plants that are not surviving currently uh yes we agree to all the conditions of the prior resolution so now you're on the engineering comments yep so c1 we would agree to all conditions of the prior
resolution c2 we discussed what has been constructed already essentially everything but the building uh and now certainly we're going to redo that landscaping hours of operation we talked about as far as uh deliveries and loading um anything that's a regular
size vehicle a lot of these things like chips or soda come in a in a smaller box truck uh they would be able to fit in the loading spot for the refu area if it's something slightly larger i know some of the soda trucks come in something a little bit the larger box
truck there's area to pull on along the side here on the south side and still remain out of the way of circulation um deliveries typically happen you know each product has its its own delivery right so you have your sodas and your energy drinks come in one truck chips come in another truck and usually have
about one of those a day um for this type and size of operation and per the resolution from 2017 there's not going to be any um deliveries um during the overnight hours we comply with that that's correct correct and certainly no
tractor trailers or anything of that size talks about the hours of operation architect will give their testimony so going over to page eight the perimeter fencing was installed there's um you just identify for the board where that fence sure so this is shown on the asbell survey it's
about 2 feet one to two feet onto the subject property off the property line and it's a new six-foot privacy vinyl fence uh which wraps from finern down the sideline towards the rear and then comes uh forward towards third
approximately 50% there's two pieces of fencing on the eastern property that are knocked over that are that need to be fixed absolutely okay thank you we'll take care of them i think we're up to uh the condition of the 6-in pvc uh roof leader to the inlet
yeah we'll have to review the condition of that and and how far they installed it because the intent of that was to also collect the roof leaders which we're still proposing on our plan but how much of that was installed with the building work not hadn't been done yet um we're going to have to inspect the how much of that was built and the
condition of it and we'll verify that it's all all functioning and installed as part of the approval mr bur had a comment about the uh about the grading on the site yeah i noticed along third street there's a sort of a low area before it
comes back up to the sidewalk um it's it's part of the subject property it was it was dry today i would imagine during heavier rains maybe it ponds a little bit the only solution would maybe to bring in some fill to get some better slope but it would drive it across the sidewalk i'm almost thinking it's better
to leave it the way it is um but certainly we can discuss that with the engineer um question about um confirmation of ada compliance on the curb ramp sidewalk and accessible parking spaces yeah we'll be sure to add
the additional details to uh confirm compliance uh what is the current condition of sidewalk along findern so as part of the prior approval in 2017 they had to put in new sidewalk along findern that was done if that is damaged in some way now because of the work that
was being done on the building or just maybe time uh certainly we'll bring that back up to uh standard and repair if needed and we we'll look at that when we look at the landscaping uh any new utilities uh no so the utilities were
um to the building site already we're not going to be cutting into the street for new utilities installation of approved lighting so i was out there today um the new light poles and fixtures are all installed to the same count and um
location as proposed on the prior approval so we're not looking to make any changes in that regard the only lighting that's going to be on the proposed store we're going to have gooseeneck fixtures that light the sign back towards the building so it's not going to be sight lighting it's it's just going to be to light the signage
itself and you'll get a picture of those and the details on that are on the architectural plans uh certainly in 13 if there are if there is any uh light that's spilling into unwanted areas i think there was in the prior resolution a condition that uh
we would have to readress that and that continues to be the case so if there's a complaint that there's a glare on third street or onto the neighbor's property and we need to add additional shielding certainly we'll do that and and and the applicant would not be opposed to having uh mr burr come out and and take a look
um at at the lighting upon an approval in its condition and if he has any modifications that he recommends that we would comply with them absolutely i think that according to my notes we covered um oh let's talk about uh maybe let's
see we talked about landscaping i think we covered all the comments all right and anything that you didn't address specifically we're going to assume that you're going to agree to yes all right all right why don't we open it up to board comments if you're i i have
a question since you testified on a incorrectly built canopy on the history of that i i'm not clear how did that eventually get approved for use if it was incorrectly built is is that is that known anywhere
i i don't know if an asb built submitt was required prior to i don't know do they have a tco or co right now i'm assuming they have a co it's been five years but right they they they have i mean we don't have any information as to
how it came about for example with the canopy why it was you know 10 ft away instead of 10.9 ft away no idea how it was approved the circumstances why it was built in that location at least i
don't anyway or do i okay thank do have one question you were telling me earlier about those things which had taken place prior to the new ownership and we're trying to rectify all those things or at least acknowledge them memorialize them and get the appropriate
variances where needed there's something which is a little more i think qualitative which has to do with being a good neighbor if you've owned it for six years and here we are today with two violations which came in late i guess in
the process um why weren't some of these things done u to the benefit of the neighborhood why not clean up the site if there's debris there if those plants died i'm sure they didn't die yesterday they've been dead
for some time um fencing that was not put up could have been put up so when you're asking the board for approval the board is looking to not only keep the neighborhood safe but keep neighbors happy with their neighbors and having
people pay attention to their needs as well as the needs of the business owner and yet after six years there's no evidence of that so i don't know how we address that first of all that's well said and i think that you know certainly um we can
at the next meeting have the operator come up and and give some explanation to that in the interim and i just was told that the the first summons was in march and when there was no response to the first summons the uh citation was issued and that was in march so you know this
has been happening since earlier in the year so i i i understand yeah well and also you know you have a number of board members that were on this board in 2017 that that sat through the three hearings and you know it it's
again they're volunteers and people like me are missing birthdays and you know time with their newborn kids to be here and it's unfortunate and i know you run a land use board as well and you know it's it's it's something that you know i think when you have upset board members you shouldn't be surprised by that and
you don't seem to be not anyway any other board questions yeah i have some questions about the parking area so one thing you because of the change to the building you're asking for relief on
um the drive by behind the 88 parking spot so did you look at the site kind of with a large vehicle parked at that pump island and to see because when i think drive by i think of traffic moving and
in this case you actually have traffic parked right to fuel so you know is there is there more clearance required then because you actually have cars parked at the at the pump island yeah i hear your question i
had a similar thought um is the drive aisle maybe should be measured to that parked car getting fuel rather than all the way to the dispenser right because you have a condition where a car could be there i i don't disagree i was mirroring the approval that was previously granted which measured the 24 ft to the dispenser not to a car being
there if we want to button that up you know we're talking about bumping the parking lot another 10 feet or so further east um into the steep slope area additional impervious etc uh so given that the operation here
is really about speed you know people come they fill up it it doesn't take that long a few minutes um same thing with the parking typically people are in and out these spots rarely see park cards i i actually worked for many years across the street from one of this
applicant's uh stores and um people typically leave their car at the pump and they run in the store um these spots don't see a lot of use and when they do it's someone grabbing a soda and they're in and out so quick so i think with the amount of turnover if they have to wait an extra two minutes to get out of their spot i don't think it would be um
detrimental to the operation the other thing is that those dispensers and the queuing areas those are angled away from that parking area so as long as we're backing out to the west rather than to the uh north i think that gives us additional flexibility certainly for the next hearing i could prepare some
exhibits that show vehicles getting in and out um right i mean i i'd like to see an ada van being able to pull out in one move sure with cars parked at the fuel pump okay we we'll put something together for that y all right that's all thank you
board professionals um just i guess just just a couple mr chairman um heard a lot of testimony about the history of the site how it got to where it is today and i'm just i
guess i'm just i just want to close the loop on what work actually still remains if this amendment is approved so the new building gets constructed the sidewalk and accessible entrance in
front of the building gets constructed correct and then is it is it just a matter of restriping the parking spaces is is that all that's left setting aside what was discussed earlier as far as landscaping
enhancements etc is is that's all that's left to kind of perfect the prior approval is it the striping the new building and then the sidewalk in front of the new building is there anything else that remains other than a few things we talked about tonight with the landscaping and the drainage pipe yes
yep okay um on on the prior approved plans i think from 2017 i think i heard or 2018 on the on the prior approved plans from looks like they were signed in 2018
looks like the the proposal was for a shell gas station and the signage was based on the shell emblem is it now a delta is that what the current is that what it's going to remain as a delta yes
when the owner purchased it he rebranded to the delta correct do you know if the delta signage that was installed from a sizing and quantity perspective matches the shell that was previously approved have you looked at
that i i don't but i i understand from the applicant that permits were pulled for that rebranding okay permits were pulled but i guess we're finding out that loop wasn't necessarily closed
at the time of a co and i don't know if i don't know i don't know if it was no i i think i think mr raises a fair question and certainly we can go back and check in terms of the size of the signage that was approved
just to confirm right okay yeah and just for the board's benefit i think what is becoming apparent is that there were no site inspections being performed on the gas station renovation previously
with any development that this board approves there are inspections by either the engineering office or the planning office of the site improvements outside of the the envelope of the building itself i'm not sure if inspections were
were performed so i've driven by the site but i'd like to take the applicant's offer up on visiting the site taking a look at what the prior approval entailed and making sure that all the improvements are in good repair the sidewalk the landscaping
we spoke about the lighting um if the board's in agreement the applicant's in agreement i think that's a a good use of time before the next meeting yeah you're the expert we trust you very good that's the applicant's in agreement great thank you katherine my my only comment was
just to um to agree or to agree with the um the landscaping comment i know the board had made that before the applicant agreed to do it um and and addressed it in the review memo but i do think there's an opportunity to kind of dress up the site a little bit and and really improve it with a little bit of landscaping and i had nothing else thank
you u members of the public questions on the engineering testimony you've heard tonight now is the time to come up and ask questions on engineering hi there we just need your name and address please i'm anthony salvatore
cortiz i live at 598 bridgewater avenue thank you and uh i'm concerned for safety that's my main concern um i've seen two people killed right
opposite the gas station uh one was a woman whose body was thrown up in the air from a car coming out of manville and she was thrown into the right into the gas station and i saw an 11year-old boy riding a bicycle who was also killed
there i formerly would take my gas can and walk across find durn avenue from my home to get gas for my lawn mower i no longer do that because finder avenue is now a
raceway it's not a a a well it's a county road but it's not what it used to be you know it's a raceway now the light turns if i mr cortez it's time for questions of what
the engineers i'd like to know what you're going to do about safety a car heading south on findern avenue towards manville turning into this facility is a dangerous situation how do you propose to alleviate some of
this that's my question thank you sir okay thank you yeah and at the end of the hearing there'll be a time where you could make any comments for or against i'll give you as much time as you need at the end you're welcome yes uh certainly i i feel for that situation
um in this case here we're not looking at modifications to the driveways if if it was felt that the separation for example from the southerntherly driveway to this intersection is causing an issue we have the opportunity to shift that maybe 15t away from the intersection
reconstruct that driveway if if the board felt like it would make a significant difference but really we're not looking to change anything as far as i know we're increasing the square footage by 150 square ft but it we're we're not talking a traffic change because of that um and
again these driveways i think have been this way for many years and and maybe that's the wrong way to have it the only other solution i would say is to bring those driveways away from the intersection potentially if that's the uh if that's the concern
any other questions for the engineer hi we just need your name and address please janette jardine 614 second street so i have a few questions first of all relating to traffic um there is just use
the microphone there thank you one of my first questions is regarding um traffic and the traffic patterns on find avenue uh find is one of the most heavily trafficked roads it's a two-way street across four lanes
um with the egress and um the entrance and the exit on finder avenue uh what are the proposed uh safety measures for spillover onto backed up traffic into fendern currently the cars that are
trying to circumvent the light go through the side streets uh at increased speeds uh what safety measures can be put in place and also has there been a traffic study for this project at 150 square feet um there wasn't a traffic study performed
um just due to the the nature and size of the application as far as uh issues on the public streets and people circumventing traffic lights we can't control that on our property in light of that i would like to ask the
board um to put a traffic study in place um i live on second street between fender and fulton avenue um i have four children one of which uh is the same age as the young girl that was killed on fulton um it is these type of
situations that back up traffic causing cars that are already going too fast with no lights to cut through these streets at high speeds putting our children at risk next question um how many proposed workers do you use
are you going to have to pump gas and to run this uh mart there would be two employees in total one running the store and one running the fuel that being said if we have five spaces and we have two employees that means we only have three spaces left if we have a
tractor trailer that comes from uh adessa who's taking up two bays uh how will you sufficiently address the three minutes that you're saying it's going to take many people to go in and out to grab a soda where will these people park employees
on these sites and again knowing the operation of uh the applicant here as i've done many projects for him they typically carpool uh i've seen him running much larger stores with three or four employees that typically all come in one car it's just the nature of the operation so we we don't foresee having
two stalls used by employees uh currently there is a large advertisement on the fence uh is that something that is going to continue to be uh marketed is was that approved by the town any illegal signage should be removed and and we'll look into that
thanks for bringing it up uh in terms of being a good neighbor we came to bridgewater for the charm uh for the suburbs for the safety for our children um we have been both to the meetings
previously and the applicant has not been a good neighbor i would like to know for the future and for really right now what do you have in place to keep the site clean i have yet to see anyone
actually responsible for doing that um we're coming upon the summer in which they usually let the grass go two three feet before we have to call a town uh which brings uh rodents animals impose uh other situations for children
especially my children and their friends who come over um how do we know that there's there's going to be a difference in how it is our neighbors been treating us that that sounds like a question for the operator and you're going to get that opportunity to ask the operator those specific
questions [Music] all right the there there to be mention of a previous ordinance of uh convenience store are you aware what was sold in this convenience store or prior
uh before the 2017 approval the original original building i i'm not aware of their operation i'm sorry i'm concerned about the wording in this previously uh what this gas station sold was they had one singular refrigerator with soda cans
and water bottles their convenience items were uh windshield wiper fluid and occasional bottle of oil motor oil that is um when we're talking about being grandfathered in or or opening a new
convenience store um we're talking about uh deliveries we're talking about more debris debris flies into my yard all the time not only is there noise we have gas deliveries all hours of the day and night um with these deliveries and only
these three sites two sites for the workers as he had indicated we have box trucks that will come deliver coke pepsi fredo's uh coffee snacks candy food so ma'am that's really good questions for the operator
at the next meeting because he's the person who'll have that information the operator will testify as to the subject how would we be guaranteed that these deliveries will in fact so happen between operating we're asking questions
on the engineering testimony so things that he talked about we can ask questions on okay what are the safety precautions that are put in place in the event there's a car uh this has happened before there's a uh an auction not far
up there's a car that comes in there's some gas spillage and you have gridlock so to speak because you have other cars blocking what are the safety precautions that are going to keep the uh neighbors safe enough to accept this type of gridlock
and and uh lack of parking spaces and egress that's going to go on to fender avenue well i think we need to hear from the owner about the number of parking spaces that are needed how many employees he's
going to have i know we heard from the engineer a little but that's really stuff for the owner the next meeting and my last question is is there any way i know you had mentioned before going back into the previous um approved plans to
make sure that um what is put in place does actually happen um that is specifically including the the signage um the amount of trees that are actually going to get put up i have found and we have been there since day
one even making suggestions even calling the owner at at a certain point there has been no uh good neighbor behavior in terms of doing the bare minimum um and i would really like to see that change and
once the landscaping is approved how do we make them accountable for keeping it safe keeping it clear keeping it looking vibrant so that it doesn't look like the very dangerous trash pile that it is right now so there'll be a assuming there's an approval there'll be a
condition that the owner has to maintain the landscaping and the buffers and if they don't there's a mechanism in town to issue violation notices to him and bring them to municipal court if he doesn't and and just my last um two cents here i
i watched the actual building being taken down and by no means was that an accident that the entire building was completely demolished thank you thank you all right mr simon i think we're going to take this opportunity to wrap up for the evening um nancy if you could
help us out with another date to continue this case uh we have 513 after the residential variance application if mr simon does that work for you and your team
wait is it i'm sorry may may 13th um it's good bill may 13th okay uh the answer is yes okay that'd be great thank you okay so for members of the public this meeting is being adjourned right now and we'll continue at the may 13th
meeting at 7 p.m without further notice from the applicant i can't hear you you'll still have your turn i'm sorry we we have a policy 10 o'clock i've already gotten behind it if your question is mission critical by all means let's get it on the record but if
sure it's important to me too but you know as as volunteers i i can't keep the board here all night we heard two cases tonight world nation for a hand and we're not taking statements now it's really just it was questions for the for the
engineer and we'll continue with the engineer at the next meeting but we're not taking statements right now okay it's just out of order it's later and and you can still make the comments at the next meeting
[Music] yes that's the that's what we've heard the the owner operator is going to testify at some point in this he will testify at some point the the at least the current plan and i'll talk to uh my development team was to have the
architect go next in terms of describing the um the convenience store um but i'll talk to them about the it sounds like the members of the public have a lot of questions on the operations so okay you you heard that all right we're going to wrap up we're going to adjourn the meeting
this case is done for tonight you're out of order thank you for coming i promise you you will have an opportunity to ask questions and to make a statement but right now we're going to finish up our evening we're going to adjourn this meeting our next meeting is 7 p.m in this room april 8th we're going
to hear the paul miller group and the visions and pathways case so with that if there's no other business i move all right mr welli mr bonjuo thank you everyone pretty much