there we we'll get that in the end thank you all right um would I ask please before you start just as a reminder that everybody will use the microphone so I don't have now we have a good one there that we can use for the public this doesn't seem to work I think so when we do public talk we'll use the one that's on the um applicant table thank you for the reminder all right everyone and for the meeting of clington Tuesday March 26 this meeting is called Pur to the provisions of the open public meetings act both adequate and electronic notice of this meeting has been provided by way of publication in the hunteran county Democrat and Korea news newspapers onor about February 1st 2024 and January 30th 2024 in addition notice of the meeting was posted at the B of cleton Municipal bill located at 38 Par Avenue and any handicapped accessible entrance entrances there too hosted on the municipal website provided to the municipal clerk and distributed to all persons if any requesting copies of the same this meeting is being recorded with both audio and video and may be rebroadcast this meeting is a Judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to the issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and decorum appropriate to a judicial hearing must be maintained at all times thank you um Ian can we take the roll call please ah yes uh mayor Carol here councilwoman fararo here Mr Campion here miss giin Mr Hill Mr dashna Mr cook here miss whitesman here Mr simino here miss swingle here miss Demario is excused Mr eeko Mr show here miss kazinski here no Mr clerico here miss mcmanis uh here Mr trapman here I'm sorry I can't I can't see the professional table right thank you um first item on the agenda as always is a period for public comment um reminder this is for items not currently on the agenda if anybody has anything that they would like to say please either raise your hand online or raise your hand in the room anybody have anything I want to say on hands okay we'll move on to item two May comments please uh yes so uh budget was introduced last night um we want to report a little bit on living Village um we could hopefully if our financial person is available uh the council is hoping to hold a public session on April 8 where our professional goes through the pilot and the pilot payments for the LI Village site plan we hoping that that's going to be posted ahead of time uh but the goll is April 18 to be introduced a full Public Presentation and um and then uh the public would have a couple of weeks to be able to look at the document carefully um at prior to a public hearing uh most lik all of the Liberty Village ordinances and contract plan Amendment with the redeveloper will be a special meeting uh either sometime in April or very very early may but most likely in April um so that would be the public hearing on the plan Amendment which the planning board will be discussing tonight a public hearing on the pilot of payment of taxes the public hearing on resending the old plan the contract Redevelopment agreement I think that's all of them so there would be a big night of public hearings and um adoptions at some point in the future um potential adoptions I should say so that's where that's at but right now I'm just waiting for confirmation that the financial our our financial person is available to do the presentation on the 8th of April uh for the public um on the pilot okay thank you um item three Council comments no comment thank you item four HBC comments I had three items uh we had our meeting on the 20th and the HPC approved 171 Main Street for new side entrance and the storage unit uh it would be fully screened from church and Main Street um with shrubs uh also the HPC approved 20 Main Street Renovations Eileen sent both of those out to the planning board on March 21st and just a reminder we're having our historic House tours planned for Saturday June 1st from 11 to5 if anyone's interested in volunteering the day of let me know thanks thank you reports anything sorry so I'm sure as all of you are aware uh the state passed uh an amendment to the fair housing act uh more is to come from our office uh with more detailed information but uh big picture Co has abolished and there's a new for yeah another discussion for thank you report per me okay okay and just before I go into the minutes I'm just going to we're going to address this later but just in case there's anybody in public or online in public awaiting item 10 on our agenda the hearing for workville road is carried to the May 14th meeting h no further notice will be required or given that for that item I just didn't want anybody sitting here too long not realizing that was not happening tonight um but let's move on to item six approval of the minutes for the March 12th 2024 regular Meeting those were distributed um some comments were made online I they were adjusted right is any anybody motion to approve the minutes please second I can't quite hear can can people use their who made the motion um one remote um the mayor made the Mr Hill second thank you very much mayor Carol yes Mr Hill yes councilwoman fararo yes Mr Campion yes Miss giin yes Mr dashna Mr cook yes Miss whitesman yes Mr simino yes thank you item 7 resolution 20245 bless Wellness LLC application 20236 block 44 lot7 um the resolution was distributed we discussed this at the last meeting does anybody have any other comments before we F or can I get a motion to approve that resolution do we need that now I no I definitely do I just want to make one clerical error I had the date of adoption of this resolution is March 25th it's obviously Mar 2 when I do the voting page I'll make that change okay thank you second did you get that hold the role um from those eligible to vote uh Mr Dasha yes Mr cook yes mayor Carrol Mr Campion yes Miss Giffin yes Miss whitesman yes Mr Hill yes thank you um item 8 resolution 20246 D heart homes LLC application 20238 B 288 47 April Avenue um anybody have any questions actually I need one more C we need another that's right I'm Council and I have spoken and trying my all right so we table that to the next meeting and that will be ready for then um all right item nine ordinance 20241 review Liberty Village phase one Redevelopment plan the board of all receed confir we all got that straight after the last if anybody um in the room I need to leave a couple of SP offies if any I guess we have a big discussion do we need do we need something are you planning to say something again today because I know Beth said something last meeting but do you want to bring us into this please thanks can I suggest that before you start Brett that you explain why we're doing this the public it is not a public Hearing in case there's any conclusion so um just a brief overview for where we're at in the in the process um the Redevelopment Plan was introduced to council earlier in the month uh as the mayor was alluding to right now it's uh being referred to the planning board for master plan consistency and again as the mayor mentioned uh it will go back to Council in which a full public hearing will be uh will take place um again as the mayor mentioned this Redevelopment plan uh replaces the previously adopted one in 2021 um and I can go over quickly uh an overview I know Beth uh went through but if the board likes I can give a quick summary of the plan um public explain the difference between the Redevelopment plan and there will be then a site plan still has to is that right yeah so this the Redevelopment plan as uh uh as was mentioned there will be a site plan further uh in the process where again it'll uh the concept will come before the board and um there'll be another opportunity to uh review what's being being proposed uh again the purpose of this right now is just master plan consistency uh with the Redevelopment plan um so just a quick summary of the Redevelopment plan uh 123 residential units are being proposed they're in the form of town homes and multif family units um of these seven of the Town Homes will be affordable units and 12 uh multifam units will be affordable uh the affordable town homes are for sale and then the multif family uh units will be rental uh specifically for disabled military vets uh and the max Building height uh permitted is three stories or 43 um so now I'll move into the master plan consistency uh so there's a few portions of the master plan that are relevant to the Redevelopment plan uh specifically under the general goals of the buau uh goal one which is to protect and enhance the Integrity of the existing residential districts within the buau uh this goal is relevant uh because there in the Redevelopment plan there's specific both Provisions uh for example there's a perimeter buffer uh that requires a double stagered row for evergreens to uh and and that aligns with with the goal because uh it that limits visual impacts and um protects and enhances the Integrity of the existing residential areas that are adjacent to uh the Liberty Village Redevelopment area uh moving on goal three uh is to employ strategies to encourage community and economic development within the buau um this one's pretty straightforward uh again new development Economic Development uh those are pretty closely aligned moving on goal four is to integrate the residential and Commercial segments of Flemington burough to benefit the entire Community uh part of the uh a key part of the Redevelopment plan is uh several Community benefits um including a new park along BR Street and uh this sort of facilitates that goal as that integration uh with that Park along BR Street helps with the uh the helps integrate the residential and Commercial segments of the bur um and then I have a final goal or objective that's uh relevant uh under the green buildings and environmentally sustainable goals and objectives um objective three under goal two is to locate community amenities such as schools and recreation centers um in areas within one4 mile of residential neighborhoods um again that that Park along Brown Street is located in adjacent to an existing uh residential neighborhood so that aligns with that goal uh because it it's directly adjacent and within one4 mile of uh a residential neighborhood and then further more uh page 47 of the master plan discusses that the 2021 Redevelopment plan uh would be a new it envisioned the area as a new residential neighborhood with varying housing typologies that would diversify the housing stock provide affordable housing provide connections to the existing neighborhood and provide open space and Recreation uses these components remain in the uh new Redevelopment plan and then additionally on that same page 47 of the master plan um it states that additional residents will Infuse additional discretionary spending in the buroughs downtown and provide additional economic support to shops services and restaurants and this set this this theme also remains present in the uh 2023 or 2024 Redevelopment plan okay thank you right yeah I think should be a motion in a second so can I have a motion to accept to a mo I'll make a motion that ordinance 20241 Li bill is phase one Redevelopment plan is consistent with our existing and I do have a resolution so we can amend it with any recomendations that the board may have take a v the resol to transfer perfect our second um to's motion now the motion should also include any recommendations so that's why I was thinking it we have discussion and then motion to we can do two motions that's fine or you can consistent with the master plan inclusive of right so we to discussion so look like Jeff is CH at the I just have a seven or 12 questions um and and I'm just gonna ask just easier this way so the um the concept plan which if I'm understanding correctly must be adhered to as the condition here um there's a storm water basin um right along Route 12 there um big one the big one yeah pretty large Basin yeah so there's a Bas in there right by 12 where the extension U um so there's a there's a St water Bas that's called for on the con plan um our master plan calls for active uses along major Corridor we've got language around active uses on Carters this is Route 12 and it's also noted in other places about as a Gateway into the burrow from from the west from RAR Township and other parts of the county so can you give us some discussion as to why an inactive use like that Basin is sitting right there along rdge well um for sure so the concept plan and again thank you Jeff for uh bringing that up that the concept plan must the concept plan included in the Redevelopment plan uh is there's a provision in the Redevelopment plan that any proposed development must be substantially consistent with that concept plan that's at the back of the Redevelopment plan um and then to go to your point to go to your question about the storm water basin um there was a lot of negotiation it's my understanding there was a lot of negotiation between the burrow and the developer and um I need to stop you on that this has nothing to do with the buau this is the developer in the D okay this this is part of his his storm War permitting it is what he applied for it has absolutely nothing to do with the burough driving act okay thank you mayor um what I was going to say was was um that what is seen on the concept plan is a a result of uh I don't want to speak for the developer but as a planner reviewing this concept plan or being part of the process um a big concern was to keep all the storm water on site um so again I'm not uh I'm not the developer but um I believe that the concern of keeping all the storm water management uh on site sort of trumped the active uses along Route 12 and again I'm not saying we don't need the storm water management I mean very clear this is a part of town that has regular flooding issues I live not too far from here I'm not I absolutely know that we need B was more of a what I was asking from the consistency question was the location on the concept plan on Route 12 over there seems to not necessarily be aligned with other goals and objectives in our planning documents are having active uses on retail Carters and you're saying that that that's what I was kind of you could maybe speak to that a little bit if there's anything I just wanted to add um no there wouldn't be any yeah thank you the second question I had was about the location if I'm looking on stangle road towards the there is a cluster of five um Town HS that are on the west side of the railroad tracks right um just above where the two groups of veterans apartments are shown those are in what right now is a parking lot and there's an adjacent use um immediately to the north there of the alone Eagle brewery there is a um which has operations both in the building immediately to the North and then half of the building north of that has Lone Eagle operations in there there's also a Distillery across the way in uh the great Freight station whatever um is over there scun is there a concern about the proximity of those residences to those uses um so again uh I'm not on not here for the developer so I don't want to get into the details about um sort of like exactly like why those uh residential units are there um that is a valid concern given that they are close uh again there is that track buffer which will hopefully mitigate any potential impacts of commercial and residential uses adjacent to each other um and again uh the site is designed in a way that uh allow the developer to uh maximize on not maximize but allowed the developer to incorporate uh Community benefits um again which include all the storm water on site um the new park along Brown Street um and let me just pull up my notes on the other uh Community benefits uh so that allies building donation there's also a a historic building that's proposed to be preserved um so yes so again back to your point again I'm just because again looking at the concept plan that does not appear to be vegetative buffer between the North End of that growing unit and the existing Lal Brewery uh site we had fair amount of um discussion before the board when those uses were had we allowed for the brewery distri reuse long Sangle Road in that District we had substantial conversation when the building to the north of the building that's half occupied by the legal that's half not yet tenanted um along reg Lane over there was built there was substantial concern about bumper between J and residential uses this concept plan doesn't seem to have any bumper between between those two uses and I'm a little concerned that we've got a thriving business in town and it's been for a very long time and someone's going to move in there and they're going to complain about the brewery and The Distillery and that's like seems ridiculous that we're putting the house that CL can I address that yeah um the developer is UN noed Beth and I discussed this when this was being designed that through the planning board process um we want a note in every single D that um this development is along a thriving commercial District as well as an after rail one and so everybody's deed will say that um to protect the existing businesses as well as the rail and the developer has been informed of that's that's fair again I'm just these are things I just noticed yeah um two two other two one little thing the plan says Central Avenue it's Central Station it's been updated a couple years ago in town I think you're using an old GIS file so that needs to get fixed um for that um the the last question I had about the affordable housing piece I understand that the ownership units are consistent with our housing element where they're dispersed amongst the other townhouse units I I have no concern there is there any problem with the fact that we've clustered in the multif family all 12 of those rental units into two buildings I I remember somewhere that you're not supposed to have all of the affordable housing in one spot they're supposed to be mixed throughout is there a concern about consistency not just with state law but also with our own housing element right um that is a good point Thank you so ideally yes we would want to have uh everything completely uh dispersed and uh but I do believe or not I believe I know that the developer will comply with all affordable housing uh regulations um so that is a valid concern but uh again uh can I just add these are going to be apartments that are going to be managed for these disabled Debs and the money is coming in from uh Federal housing so it has to comply with all federal housing laws so um I don't think it's inform the state because they are for disabl yeah um last question then I'll shut up um part of the concept plan is uh there's a note of well treatment expansion area um in the looking in the the West corner of what is this new road over there um again just for consisteny State uh we have we have an active existing well over there one of the better wells in town right um and there is there's no concern about well protection areas there's no D or water concern everything we checked all those boxes to make sure that those flowing units are approaching on what need to make sure we're protect in terms of water now they're actually giving us a larger East okay and um giving us protections on it with a large re that's what why that's not okay thanks question thank I'm fine um Karen question for you since this is is not a site we not reviewing we're Rie for consistency master plan is it within our um our right to be able to make recommendations like the buffer along loag because that has nothing really nothing to do with our master plan consistency so can we can we have a both way we make find it consistent with the master plan and make recommendations that don't necessarily I mean as our ordinance but nowhere in our master plan for example nowhere in our master plan do we say that you can't have um you know thriving businesses next to the residential I mean I I love the fact it's going to be de it but it from a master plan consistency perspective we've always taken the position that if we have recommendations do want to bring to council we put that on paper send it to council and Council can make determination at first of all as to whether or not they want to entertain it and then second of all whether they have to meet that burden of making a determination as to why they can still adopt the Redevelopment plan despite whether or not that recommendation isn't inconsistency now what you're saying is redeem a consistent but here's some other thoughts we had that you might want to look at correct I have no problem with that I was actually looking at one of the sections just trying to kind of understand what it meant because we were talking about the buffering that Jeff just talked about and the page nine under site design and bulk regulations does talk about a perimeter buffer um it talks about not less than 10 ft in width solid fence and it says where the perimeter of the Redevelopment area of but residentially zoned or occupied property or the railroad I mean a recommendation you could make is that that is also applied to commercial uses where it'sing things like that if you want to spell out what that is um but we've we've always made recommendations and let to the council to to sort out so I think that's that's our job in addition with I just want to make sure we overstepping at this point so we're out and uh Brett a question for you uh based on the master plan recommendation to have businesses along that quor 12 at the same time we have an A flooding issue with new storm water management regulations that really render at this point in time those areas very difficult to develop so is there um again can we have it both ways to say that while it's inconsistent to not have businesses along an artery such as root 12 we also understand there's new storm water management regulations that are also part of our master plan that really call for those areas over there specifically to be mitigated from flooding I don't know howse my question there I just want to say one thing too let's remember this we always say is it substantially not substantially inconsistent were substantially consistent but there is that substantial component so it's not that every single piece of this has a correlation to the master plan it's overall substantially they comport with each other and they're not inconsistent so just ohy that because I mean I read your recommendations or your consistency check um and I just want you know again it's sort of I don't want to you know say oh well our M plan calls for businesses our Mas also calls for enhanced storm water manager so you really can't have both so I want to make sure that our recommendations don't get misre back at the council if we say and by the way our master plan calls for you know businesses along major parts however or do we not even have to say it since there really isn't a recommendation what I would recommend is if we want to make sure that there is no confusion and you want to make comments to the council we do have time um I could instead of doing a general like I said I had a resolution prepared tonight that we could have adopted and said it's substantially consistent and the recommendation if you want to really take a look at how the recommendations are worded and make sure that they're exactly what it is that you want to St the council and there's no confusion I could do that for the next meeting you can look at it and have it right in front of you to be able to do ad do and and as I said I don't think mayor you're not going to have this on for second reading till April definitely definitely not April 9th okay again if you're making that recommendation thanks car on myal it's not there is no recommendation there I mean I think what Jeff is doing what I'm doing too is trying to compare a master plan and look at this site in its entirety and say is it substantially consistent right which is a great area from theal landage law sub that word substantial consistent um at least we're not saying it's not inconsistent or we doing the double negative say I motion that it's consistent it's not inconsistent notan no there was more procedural okay I'm going to ask my other ones lat I'm just going to ask this into to's question here it's Jeff is about the act the active use idea that Jeff mentioned is there a is there a distance back from rout 12 that you would we would consider that would be an active that you know what I'm saying like a Zone almost like an eement from Route 12 that like if this so if this Basin is further back than that it doesn't then become inconsistent with that use I mean our so let's not talk about Highway retail because this bridge ball is not right um I think if I'm remembering correctly the the the setback in the Village shopping district is it's not meant to be like zero setback it's it's there is a setback that's in there because it recognizes the the nature of what's there so I mean it's my look the SC bation got to go someplace right right and this is where it has to go right you know my only concern was like sticking it right out on 12 in my in my my looking at it seemed to be a sore thumb it wasn't like didn't make sense to like the best place to put the thing but like it may not belong in the middle of a new residential neighborhood either this might be where it has to go to go on theide right and it might have to be that quite honestly because there is a buo retention at church at the north of this thing and there is a bio retention system at the back end of the Brown Street Park and there's this huge blood storage area that's over in the local still call the commuter lot um this might be from an engineering and perspective where it has to go and that's fine I was just asking like for is this not substantially inconsistent right is does it raise a concern that would at least want for the record to documents and just have it out there I mean I personally think that the thing works as substantially consistent I'm not objecting I was just these are just a couple little things that that I happen to notice when I was looking at I think especially considering of the new roadway is Adent to that and could that not be considered an active use that's the roadway into ret I'm online so get ready with your uh de Dem muting yourself um Hannah do you have anything you want to raise at this point um no I think Jeff you covered a lot uh just because I was kind of concerned about how close that was to Lone Eagle um I guess my only question and I don't know if this is something that was brought up before or not but um just like with that existing car park that we're we're leaving is that are we is the transit Clinic bus line I mean is that something that the developer I remember us talking about that when we were going over the development plan is is that something that the developer then has to try and make a connection with is and do we know if that's going to happen is the developer going to continue to leas that lot um to uh the bus um future um as he tries to figure out how to mitigate that entire flood plane um right so remember the original Redevelopment agreement had two phases in it only has one phase which is even pH because it's it's just the site which is what right presented two weeks ago because of the owner as requirements of the new storm water rules uh and the fact that he has to maintain all of that now on his own property right whether he's ever able to develop it or not his question as so for now he's going to continue running it he's going to continue I assume letting um uh vessals from stangle Road park there whatever I mean I assume that right yeah but um he does have to contain that water on his own property and right how he applied to have it permitted so you know we really don't know um happen with the rest of the property thank you that was it um Hanah was right we had a lot of discussion last time we were a lot of concerned that there was no provision for the trans bridge to stay it was almost like the previous I'm pleased to hear that he's open to that well yeah he's very open to it because it's income for him on otherwise empty lot so he's very open okay all right um can I just ask a question yeah um i' see phase one that's you know obviously outlined in the color it is line one is phas two the line that's around that existing parking ride and the the flood the Basin area is that what we're considering phase two we're not considering anything the redeveloper continues fantasizing that he's going to be able to fill in fill in the water basin and build on that but the permitter from the P um told me personally that that storm waterer Basin the big one on the corner of rout 12 is part of his permit for this subdivision and it is permanent but that is what that's all that's left I guess what I'm asking of the Redevelopment area yes all that's left is everything right everything west of this of the um the veterans homes and east of the detention and it's all yeah um okay back to our online members Dennis you have any um comments or questions I just wanted to make one comment that uh if in the future there were any planned exterior changes to the two Church Street buildings they're in the historic district they just need to go before the HPC at that time you I believe that for you still [Music] um brand boundary office building um the Allies building is part of the deal to come to the burrow um as an asset but the frean foundary building I think U there's some correspondents that I got from the chair of HPC that he saw has a requirement at some point to go to go there um but it's a huge I mean that was SL the it's great yes no development agreement does not exclud the HC or the environmental commission thank you anything else Dennis no nothing here okay anything [Music] else no I'm good thank you um Brian you have any queries or questions first for anybody uh no questions right now thank you okay um Mike I'm good thank you okay thank you Melissa no further questions thank you thank you right well we only seem to come up with a few things right I was just want to say since I made the motion Cara if if I try to summarize what the board was saying as recommendation and um there are recommendations the je call out I just want to recognize that I think we can I don't need any time to I have um while our master plan calls for active uses along highways and arteries we recognize that new storm water management rules and regulations require this type of retention detction r i just reported somewhere I may have that works just so it recognizes that we looked at that and and and I also have um uh consider appropriate buffers uh to commercial property specifically loone Eagle I don't know if we have to say lole I think we can say specifically commercial and that um uh Central AB becomes Central Station just from as always said so yeah I don't think we need to go 16 rounds Visions yeah no like say this is the first stage we just want to get those first thoughts in there um to go to council there lots of opportuni public hear discussions B details um so with those what Mr cook said would we um would we be saying we considering it substantially complete with those items what is the specific we going subst inconsistent from the master make the following recomendations substanti consistent so I believe that's not exactly what I had said I said it was not exactly so yes that's why saying you know it was trips me up so if I if I could change my motion to say that it be find it not not substantially inconsistent with our master plan with the following recommendations and suest following recommendations and the basis on recommendation com comments and recomend second sorry can the chair a second should no no anybody else any else is free to do I don't need 16 years from now um this is for us so we can just vote on this wait okay procedurally Todd you just amended your motion so because you seconded his original motion so I have to he didn't is that a new motion he didn't he can amend his original motion and we could second do am and then the second has to agree to Res second the amended I again I been doing this too long sorry I love however in used the G more than I have in my entire life the first night G more than I not on fingers anyway anyway um that said let's recall the role on that motion please I think amended amended motion thank you amended and seconded amended motion all right so what is the the official motion is made by cook seconded by no no it's okay are you ready for the roll call yes oh yes Mr cook yes Miss giin mayor Carol not not vote no councilwoman fararo yes Mr Campion yes Mr Hill Mr dashna I can hardly hear you um Miss whitesman yes Mr simino yes okay very good um are we going to go to um the resolution sayote on the resolution right now to go or that motion Motion in a second to adopt the resolution in that was very good I will just get from you the number of the resolution insert that when I voting in it's uh 06 2406 all right so we're all with item nine um item 10 um work for Road properties public hearing um as mentioned earlier this is table carried to the May 14th 20124 meeting no further notice um is required or will be given thank you item 11 public hearing Chick-fil-A incorporate Inc application 2023 74 continued from 21324 and final just for the record I did um watch the tap and certifi I mean our chair that I have and I can't sign off on that certification that's okay we'll just make sure we have theop we appreciate that to you all again Stephen ha representing the applicant sh uh little better night than it was on February 13th stormy night but we appreciate the board giving us the opportunity to review your board professional reports uh based upon the reports that were submitted we did submit revised plans and your board professionals were kind enough uh within the last few days to response reports which I generally accept our revisions and just again briefly by way background this existing chickfila poal changes in the operation hours of operation number of employees and like the purpose of the application is generally add a full second lane uh to provide better site circulation better experience for the people that uh go there by this clientele and for the uh people that work there and also to provide canopies and to provide shelter during in climate weather or hot weather and the like uh we did receive uh the comments like I said from your your three professionals traffic planning and Engineering uh at the last hearing was disc regarding the storm water so our team uh went back to the drawing board and made some changes probably most significantly eliminating six parking spaces very close to the building making that green space bringing it we actually reducing now fcing uh and that those were the substantial part of the the changes that we have made and also there signage requested by both your professional engineer and planner I'm sorry and your traffic engineer which have been directional sence so uh what we think that we've addressed all of those coms and again we appreciate the board giving us time and I know I I got Bob's report on Saturday so is working hard to get everything in before the meeting uh we did when we resubmitted the plans uh Matt to my right did a detailed letter which was I think helpful in addressing what the changes what are the plans and as I mentioned uh and chair when I came that was fantastic about making sure that we get all these reports on a timely basis so with that being said uh what I'd like to do is to reformat the whip who seated to my right to just take the board through the changes and I think we had a general description of what we're doing the changes that were made to the plan and I know that we got some additional comments uh regarding landscaping and I know now we've made some changes that again very helpful out some Tre work gone and one was hit by a truck one down a storm and we'll address replacing those and or some that might interfere with both security and signage that we have a a good way to address those so that's that's an overview and mrit uh from before we start with car do you want them you want them to re um we don't have to re experiment what I would like to do is I'll just put on the record that we're going to Mark as part of exhibit a which is the application and corresponding documents um the March 8th letter uh from Bowman with the revised plans as well as the March 13th letter from Mr kale and revised plans with that as well that'll all be part of theud a and then um I'm sorry that will all be part of A1 and now we're going to add as part of the planning board exhibits pb4 which is Miss mcan's revised planning letter revised as of March 20 2024 and pb5 which is Bob's technical report number two did in March 22 2020 okay thank you is that that A1 now covers their their latest submission okay great so thank you very much so it you you previously sworn qualified as an engineer and in the past month and a half you lies are still in full for all right so uh and again thanks for much for writing that letter of March 8 so if you could take the board through the changes that were made to the plan in response to the comments both from the board and board professionals at the last hearing sry uh first question I have this exhibit up to share it I don't know if everyone else seeed that is it you click on share on Zoom it says share is disabled for so can fix that no yeah so a little button next to share screen on your side while we're doing that was the coloriz no that's it's gonna be a new to share you should be able to share going out it'll go out oh there we go right so this is part of the video record and it's going to the public thank you so um from our last hearing as well as the engineering review letters um what we did was obviously went back with the applicant and and rethought everything on how to tackle some of the major things that were storm water um the Landscaping right and some of the circulation um items as well so we prepared this exhibit which is will be our revised landscape plan but we wanted to put some um add some graphics to show what these plants will look like in the future um but just to note the major changes from the last meeting um we did add the lease line which is up here going around where those nine parking stalls were um so that was a discussion point last time and it came up in the review letters we've now added it to the actual plans which were in the revised set that were submitted um and then another another substantial change was to in order to comply with the storm water regs that were raised obviously this was built back in um 2015 before the 2022 green infrastructure Reg ations came out um so in effort to meet those RS we've now um added more green space You took we took away existing motor vehicle Imperia surface and we've replaced it with green space that'll be vegetated landscaped um mainly the two parking stalls one on each end of the diagonal um diagonal row row of parking on the uh south side of the property um and we also in the previous proposed plan we were converting the nine perpendicular stalls to four parallel stalls so we converted those parallel stalls into Green Space as well and proposing to landscape those um and then in response to the planning comment of the canopy was previously covering some some um landscape we're proposing just to have some River Rock um underneath first few feet where the canopy goes into Island so there's no plant underneath the being moved everything out um we've also added I believe another eight trees from our previous proposal uh four trees in the back of the property on the parking Island that currently has nothing on it so we're ping four more there uh three over by the dumpster area and then we will be planting um the third tree along 202 that has been missing for a while right is that mul spot in between the two existing trees so we're planning to put that back you're adding eight trees more yes and you were in a deficit of 15 that right so we were only adding two before so now we're adding no they thought that there were original3 from morning okay know what you had in 2015 approval correct how many were there and how many are you proposing to have now right so in the in the both letters that we received there were four trees that were requested to be replaced four trees that are not there today that were approved back in 2015 so we are planning to add those back in if we look at page seven of M M's revised report she talks about prevan approv we plan that a couple has been removed um and she actually refers to where the removed pleas Circle so don't know if we can Dil those with proposing correct so is your testimony that you're doing eight new ones plus the four that were deficit from before is that correct yes the intent is to meet the the deficit so youing about 12 Trees correct yeah that mean time is to meet the deficit what kind of trees talking about and then just to bring up the comment from the planning letter that identified the four spots real quick um there were two trees on this island in the back zoom in one of them actually does exist so it was really just the three there was one next to it and then this this one in front that we are proposing that was the third one and then there was a tree right by the the pylon sign um that was the fourth one in the planning letter and since that's right by the pylon sign um in talking with the applicant we're proposing to make like a lower lower level landscaped area by the sign instead of a new tree doesn't do the same thing for uh for the planet for Clemington burough is a tree right but I mean in talking with the applicant that's what they're currently proposing um I think it's a fairly large area too um that that landscape all the more reason to put in a tree in well the tree landscaping and a little level shr going to cool down your parking lot you're talking about a better experience for your customers a cooler parking lot is a better experience for your customers I mean unfortunately you know there is a deficit of trees in that area and that stretch of gr 202 and unfortunately for you your neighbors on either side haven't had to come in before us for a site PL but you have so there needs to be more trees over there I mean it's a very hot area you want us the applicant address it now and move on to C the rest of this and come back okay um then another comment was the lighting which we did we did reduce the photonics under the canopies to a um suitable level as stated in in the last letter from the planner apologies but before we move on to lighting could we just uh tighten up the the tree issue yep um so to Marsha's point I believe uh that refers to comment uh 4.8 in our review and uh I believe the 2015 approval identified a deficiency of 13 trees and then um so I think that's that's the point that Marshall is trying to make I believe on is exactly my point yeah um so then on top of that 13 tree deficiency uh that was part of 2015 approval which I believe the applicant uh made a payment for there were the four trees that were identified on the landscape plan for the circle correct in between comments 4.7 and 4.8 correct so it's not the short 13 trees from what we got approved for because there was a payment there's in 4.7 there's four trees that were identified that apparently well one we say is there but I'll let Matt expand the of the four one we've identified yeah so then that goes so there's a net loss of three on the site it's no we're proposing to put them back okay from your letter we added more treats okay okay that's what I correct but didn't your testimony to say you were going to put two of them back because you you have the one that was and then you're going add two more and you going to add low level correct so in the end we're we're just discussing this this would be if we added this tree that would be it that would meet everything that would get you back correct you're putting three new ones on the back of the angs uh four on the angle y you not fit the extra one in there there's an overhead power line that there we didn't want to mess with that I mean you know I can ask the app about that one tree here is that you said you were deficient three put you propos put two back and we say we want all three back as well as the eight you say that right it's really the one tree again the one is there it's three trees were four one's already there correct you're currently proposing showing where two are but we're missing one we're missing one and that's where we want do the lower Landscaping so it's not I have a problem lower Landscaping a real hardre that's fish totally clear because more we talk about this more I'm getting a little confused um so let's look at 47 and 48 of the plan ofor let's just go through and make sure we're perfectly clear on the rec so 47 we know we talked about there was the 2015 approved Landscaping plan and there were four that have since been removed so of those four they are all going to be replaced back to where they were previously approved one is there okay REM one is there okay um I can let the AC but I heard one was hit by a truck one Dam never never survived and think one was damaged in storm right so out of the four one one exists so now we're left with three we are putting two back okay now we're left with one yep and that is discussion about the one by the sign and that's the one they correct okay so then when we get to 4.8 we're saying 14 new trees are proposed so there's still another 14 that are that's all well 14 plus um that's where I'm getting confused yeah so we so now we're at I that was your testimony originally eight you adding eight new ones right now perhaps it would be K spells it out that's what I'm looking at but I think it's 4.7 that's the focus for the trees the four trees that were not there well we got through 47 now I'm on 48 I think the 14 was the original the original original approval not what we're doing not what what not what we were doing in February because that screenshot is the old original site plan yeah because if you read on it then says there were 13 that we covered by by way of um pay yeah that's the old approval so we need toile yeah and what I'm what I'm wondering is if the board is still inclined to make a decision tonight if the applicant would be amenable to saying that the applicant will work with the board planner to determine locations for trees but there will be no net loss every single tree that was previously approved and not paid for in removed but have to Beed that's no problem something and I think that's these four circles are the one that were deficient which we are we are now going to be yeah adding back real trees well you get the bonus you get that landscape area thanks it it would be helpful to State absolute number of trees just so that everyone's clear this is the total number of trees that will be on the site we know we're clear we're adding yeah because this picture I'm looking at now the the plan we're looking at now it would have been helpful I think to add those previously deficient ones where you putting them right now I am it would been good for them to put those three additional locations on here as well in is that am I right is that so we're just trying to be in addition to that type of condition we could also have the applicant put on the plans a chart showing what was previously approved number-wise in 2015 and what they're doing now to what was paid for what was planted and what they're now deficient of and what they're putting back something along those lines so that's that'sit yeah so right now we're have we're proposing nine brand new trees actual real trees and then six six um you know like six foot tall skinny Arbor type over by the canopy correct Y and that additional one is going to go yeah total number of new trees from where it currently right this minute in situ today you've got the nine on here and then there'll be three additional locations no that the nine includes that oh see that's what right so I think we're only deficient four so we're actually we're actually planting five extra from one nine trees yep thank you okay and that summarizes the changes and I think there were just you want to touch on some of the comments from letter I think you did a great job with the overview but um just touching on some of the items braing sure from the um just just to finish up the k letter um cany plantings Le area rate photometrics and the trees believe the last outstanding comment on our report is 4.6 uh about the proposed hours the exterior lights will operate yes and we can um do operational testimony from chick representative I can represent that it's yeah 6:30 10 Monday through Saturday and then the down to security lighting a half hour after Clos just so we get that on the record to 10 Monday through Saturday and finishing the other condition 60 6:30 till 10 o' Monday through Saturday and then lights go to security mode half hour after Clos until 10:30 close some full full light is for 1039 security level 10:30 that correct from what I'm yeah and I'll I'll just have testimony just to confirm that so it's on the record but yeah thanks for bringing that point and then for the um the engineering letter first Common 2A that's the least line so I believe little more explanation was requested which um I represented from chickf can provide information represent has been you you provide cop I may have to do like a a memorandum I'll get something to you record and then comment 2D regarding the crosswalk herbrand so Bob I think you were referring to the northern area where we have our this area I believe that's where it was yeah yeah so this does not serve any Ada connectivity or Ada stalls so that's why we didn't propose an ADA compliance ramp there I mean you're opposed but I think a comment there was more that you the grade the grade didn't work out if you look at the elevations and you say you have a certain grade you didn't have that grade I think that was on the other one on the southern one which we did check and you're right 7.4 well that was the common under D1 that's what you're talking about right but there's a second part re mentioned a sec another [Music] Parra and you're indicating that's not an ADA rout correct and I was listening the response letter believe so if not we'll we'll add that I think the response letter earlier right than this okay so do you have additional testimony for um and just to finish up the engineering comments storm water obviously we're now compliant as we said um con conveyance Cals our response to that is there's really no change in the existing the proposed conveyance now that we're decreasing impervious um and Bob we did model the roof trins of the 100-year flow for capacity so we can we can give you those CS um onm manual obviously will provide rised one and then you had a comment on a turning movement from 20 too MH we did prepare an exhibit to present that movement which will be another exhibit your passenger card entrance maneuver date today's date 326 and the intent here is to demonstrate a car from 202 um turning in right I think this was your comment to make sure there's enough clearance that also be a truck TR moving or just that limited to just v card right now I mean this path shows a zoom in here 19 foot long car with still a couple feet on each side so still have a bid through three feet nor J on that was you know that was the observation yeah and for for the record the trash the trash entry comes from the other other side okay so we're really only dealing with customers for the most part will come from the other side right only entrance there it does look like a great spot for a truck getting pretty tight just now do not your fault now this this Jo still shows the base as opposed to the in right oh this this exhibit yeah this exhibit yeah that's Old Line work this is the intent was just to show yeah the um this [Music] area as for the previous dra m this this drawing shows doesn't show the impervious surface removal that you're proposing just the records this um right this doesn't show that thank you and that concludes my yeah yeah absolutely yeah so we'll do Bo questions and then we'll do public questions for this um witness please yeah you you kind of glossed over the storm water thing um I don't think you actually put testimony on the record if you could please talk through the details of the amount of reduction of impervious coverage that is in the application to be talked through then how you are competing the storm water requirements I read I read the review letter it just I don't think actually set it on the record that's fine yeah so previously we were increasing impervious which technically is an increase of Motor Vehicle Sur surface from 2004 with of more than a quarter acre and that's accumulative right so even though we were only adding about 2,000 square feet it still kicked us into um complying with the full state stormw regulations um since this site already has an underground St storm storm water basin um it has some water quality devices in the inlets and it's a very tight site obviously with room for more more structures and stuff we didn't want to we didn't feel we really it was really necessary to go through that and modify what was there this is functioning it wasn't built that long ago um so we we went back and reviewed the RS and reviewed our options and the easiest and I think could since the burrow also wanted more green space more trees um a good balance was just to give it back and we were already overp parked as a site pretty substantially um so we gave back I think overall 11 11 parking spaces um to Green Space and in doing that um our our impervious surface as a lot um is 83.6 six existing and we're going down to 83.5 2% um and in our Rev storm water report that was submitted we we ran the hydrographs and determined that with that reduction um our rates our volumes are all you know a hair less than existing and by doing that we are we're not adding any new motor vehicle surface which then exempts us or or by default we now meet the um STM water quantity quality and groundwater recharge requirements from the state RS um by doing that thank you I just wanted to make sure that everyone heard that I know something we talked about last time yes absolutely now appreciate the hard work that our engineering addressing having gone to you Jeff I think actually should go toob his questions clarification on I did the report in fashion where I noted the changes and we highlighted the items that were be partially addressed or not addressed and we heard responses back those will all become conditions of any action are you satisfied with what he said tonight ton cover your report yeah essentially that's what I said in my report okay what they were doing so so what items are left that we will set as conditions mention just the ones that are highlighted in yellow on the on the report identify them there report okay we have no objection thank you um is that all Bob then oh yes thank you um Mr trapman you satisfied with the testimon do you have questions I don't have questions they picked up all the the signage items that I had identified in my original memo I also uh independently reviewed that that c turn with my own template and I can affirm the exhibit 4 thank you any comments M of I'm okay okay I'm good good I'm good oh Ling right um Hannah do you have anything online nope I'm seeing a big head shake of no um Dennis oh I'm good thank you um who else is online Melissa Melissa sorry um I just wanted to say thank you for working with the landscape uh recommendations I would definitely love to see if you guys can squeeze more Greenery in everywhere you can because every little bit helps but it's definitely a great start thank she's our environmental commiss thank you I'm good thank you and then Brian good oh good thank you thought we lost you for a second okay well that I do have are you um proposing additional Witnesses I do have oh pardon me sorry for this witness are there any members of the public that have any questions for this witness and his testimony can you see anybody online I can't see it right now okay anybody in the public here have a question raise your hand no okay then thank you yes I we do have the representatives in Chick-fil-A but I I I offered my proper as far as the hours and the uh the lights and the lease but if you do want testimony they're here but I think we could take it as proper can I interrupt can you stop sharing your screen so we can see um more of the board members thank you sorry so we didn't get on the mic then the um so I think the only operational questions I think that were raised in the report for one and confirmed the hours of operation are the 6:30 10 p.m uh Monday through Saturday with the um post on Sundays and then the lights going to security level at 10:30 and then also confirming and will supply a memorandum that the lease has been amended so and then uh think we also did conf from think briefly at the last hearing the purpose of the of this these changes and that again there's no operational changes as far as employees hours of operation the L so that concludes yeah well we do have uh because there's there is some Reas that we're seeking we do have our professional planner who's with us here to briefly address the cling testimony so I'd like to call upon I was just looking I need to that so under no no not shair screen so under um on the the panel [Music] the I don't know that we need that one well no the one in front the one in front of I just wanted to seen on camer is he caught on the other one okay thanks for checking want to make sure we're good with the so this I do so John T is in Thomas a i k is and Kelly i n is in Nancy a I'm principal of B planning and development in South BR New Jersey I've been licensed for the last 32 years since I completed my studies at rers University and it's nice to be back before the board I was here last month I I think'll be here on the next case Mr if you could really please provide board we know the accepting oh I'm sorry accept as a been yes we know that the use is permitted very little by way of relief being saw of existing conditions but uh please provide the planning justification for any release s in connection with this application certainly so all of our our relief that we're seeking uh it solely relates to the existing conditions on the site um there was identified uh potentially new variances for the canopies themselves uh we have subsequently detered determined that they are not located in the front yard uh they are in the side yards or in the rear yard uh they're behind the front setback of the principal building um both from Route 12 from the circle itself and from 20231 so we have no new variances all of our variances are solely uh related to the existing condition on the site um that relate to the existing uh impervious coverage that is being being improved uh slightly um we have an existing uh lock depth that's slightly deficient and we have some signage uh some existing signage that received variance approval with with our approval in 2015 that we are seeking to continue but other than that we require no other relief and no new relief so these would all be C1 variances that that would relate specifically to this site um they are will be a hardship frankly to overturn uh the previous approval from 2015 certain things we can't fix like our lot depth where our lot is only as deep as it is um so these would all be granted under the C1 criteria um we do uh so it is a specific site here to7 202 um the benefits um excuse me we meet some positive criteria uh specifically a purpose G to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations and according to the respective environmental requirements to meet the needs ining citizens we heard testimony from our engineer that we are actually uh providing additional Green Space additional Landscaping uh and we reduced our impervious coverage to make sure that we can buy with our new um our new storm water and the new canopies themselves actually take area out of the uh motor vehicle services so again improving uh the Str Water Management conditions um so the uh the highway retail district is certainly an appropriate location uh for the uh proposed Chick-fil-A the new installations are done in a t tasteful way uh we're installing these canopies to increase the operational efficiency and minimize impacts uh for the proposed use finally the negative criteria do the substantially impair the purpose in t to the master plan they going to have a substantial detriment to the public good in terms of the public good for two canopies and some Landscaping prooving U certainly there's not enough Truse will be well landscape through reduction in parking is minimal and appropriate and embraced by the burrow uh and allows the site to reduce imperious surfaces and then finally from a landu standpoint uh implements the purpos of your master plan and your Zone plan the purpose of the HR district is Encompass the existing Highway Orient of retail development and the district contrasts with the board pedestrian uh and destination oriented stuff that's downtown um and it's slightly more intensive than would be in the professional office District chickf is exactly what you call for in your Highway retail District it is what you do not want to see downtown it's not appropriate there um and in terms of the master plan again those strategies that you talked about with your Redevelopment plan previously or some here employment strategies to encourage the community Economic Development strengthen and enhance the commercial sector uh with an emphasis on attracting specialty retail and restaurants um and encouraging sustainable practice and use of green building techniques um which again uh incling the strong waterice coverage uh we're embracing that uh we uh do not expect any site issues uh all the the site works very well as it is it's well parked we have appropriate trash lighting uh Landscaping Etc and we're happy to work with the professional on making sure that we get the uh landscaping and account the ACT absolutely the right way so for those reasons I believe the board is ability to Grant the approval I help thank you Mr no further questions CH okay we'll go to our professionals uh questions for this witness please you have one I have one question I just want to understand so I'm looking at section 3.2 of the planner report and I understand um so there was a question I guess a change in the way the can being viewed so it's no longer part of that's I'm trying to reconcile I'm trying to understand so it I see accessory building minimum front yard I don't know if not permitted should be not applicable is that basically what this is so it's not applicable here so therefore the existing a proposed doesn't really even apply that it's not in a front yard so that entire uh that entire piece would be not applicable it's not located so just for the board's clarification that was an oversight on uh our side uh Beth and I discussed um and yeah we we looked at the front yard definition in the bur's ordinance and the canopies are not in the front yard so therefore that uh is not appliable now I so so they have a front yard setback but they're not located in the front yard all of the setbacks front side and rearer are there is no new Val required thank you and again we appreciate your planers working our plan okay any other um no questions I'll check J have any question no question thank yeah I just want to clarify that the Varian that you're seeking are all pre-existing nonconforming and they deal with lot dep in cious coverage the access building and and a lot of things about no longer to deal with the accessory building the accessory building is fully compliant in terms of its location all right so um so then Brett your your letter or Beth's letter still CES that that you say you over yeah that was I something had change and it was the um thank you for than and the answer to your question is yes any other questions no questions no questions no questions all right alline let's go through our suspects online we got Hannah Brian nothing Dennis questions M Michael sorry I'm good thank you thank you and Melissa I'm good thank you okay we go let's what about the public anybody um from the public online or in person have any questions for this witness seeing none we will move ahead Witnesses we have no further Witnesses at this time certainly we have so if anybody any member of the public has any comments this is where you can make comments um Asos questions if anybody has anything uh for this applicant raise your hand if you want to speak it's recorded then Lo come to this m yeah you got no Stewart 32 em after I just wanted to express my appreciation to the client and the board for getting us more in trees thank you thank you welcome any other comments see online then if you want I could just briefly Su up again I I'd like to again thank the board and board Professionals for giving us the opportunity since the last hearing come back additional trees address the the comments from your board professionals again I know I've said this several times really appreciate uh them getting us the reports in advance of the hearing I obviously um make sure that we receive everything on a timely basis and I think these improvements so it's it's a great project that is existed even better uh now and certainly with the board's feedback and the board professionals so we look forward to the board approving this application having the improvements implemented okay thank you um just a check I close the public at this point yes so Mr and motion second P the roll please you to I I missed the the motion in a second I cannot and I was the second and um Cara did you go over the conditions or oh this is just close I'm I'm I'm sorry it's very difficult to um it is very difficult to hear online yeah so we can call the r on closing the public hear pleas thank you uh Mr cook yes mayor Carol yes councilwoman fararo yes Mr Campion yes Miss Giffin yes Mr Hill yes Mr dasna yes Miss whitesman yes and Mr s yes thank you all right so for discussion or do you want a motion first do we want a motion discuss so so we can discuss so I I'll I'll make the motion the affirmative that we approve the preliminary final s plan approval with the B bearings be outlined in 's letter easier um is that all right we have to add in that is fine we'll have we'll have a discussion I'm going to have conditions AR this would be the the motion to approve because we need those variance so I just want the Vari so that was Todd and Mr H thank you Mr cook not we're gonna sorry okay all right discussion anybody um I really appreciate these guys coming back I mean I think it was you know a lot of difficult things in the beginning from storm water management through and um I mean it's it's it seems very ticked and TI app everybody no I'm surprised we didn't make a condition of approval having them open on Sundays but really thank you from the consitency not I appreciate the additional information they gave tonight cleared some of the questions I so nothing to add anybody online have anything add Dennis I'm supportive I'm still unclear on the number of trees you know I'm all for it but I I don't know what we're approving with number of trees that's all I'm concerned with but uh I'm supportive we're gon have to comp right no I just lost e do you still have are you still co-host because the computer here just lost me you still good I'm sorry what was the I are you still because I don't know what happed here it just dropped me yeah we're still recording okay good all right oh I got it the button anyway sorry um so Dennis um Hannah you have anything for us on this no Brian I'm good here thank you Melissa excuse me I'm good I'm ready to vote okay yeah the only thing I'll say I willly applicate for a much better application and I appreciate all the work that you've done to get us to this point we want see happen with all these new rules and I think the solution you proposed is a really good prop solution to the problem that you dealt with um so conditions so um in addition to the relief that's been requested which are all pre-existing non-conforming conditions um the applicant shall comply with all St all conditions within each of our three professionals reports um the applican shall provide a copy of a revised lease or a memorandum confirming that the additional lease areas encompassing that landscape island is included in the lease um applicant shall comply with all of the changes to the development of the site as outlined in the latest version of the revised plans um the applicant as represented they are adding an additional nine trees to the property the will look at the board planner um as to the type location and to prepare a chart showing what was provided by way of the approval in 2009 what was paid for what was lost and what is new so we can determine that there is a net zero loss to the site uh from what was approved in 2015 um the hours of operation shall be as testified to 6:30 a.m. to 10 p.m. Monday through Saturday the lights to turn to security mode at 10:30 there are no Sunday hours compli com have our standard conditions and that's the they'll have to comp with everything with all three all right the motion all right so we're changing not changing but we're being a little more specific now so the motion was made by are uh Mr cook are you amending the motion to incorporate the condition sure okay um second was Mr Hill are you seconding the amended now we need a vot okay and then can we take the RO on that on that motion Please Mr cook yes Mr Hill yes um mayor Carol I'm not hearing anybody um okay uh councilwoman fararo Mr Campion Miss Giffin yes what did m m you might will Michael you won I I said yes yep thank you uh Mr dashna yes Miss whitesman yes Mr seum yes very good okay thank you very much apprciate it um before we move on to the next item we break for break at take break all right let's restart our meeting can we take the make sure everybody's back us oh she's not back yet wait a minut started and I didn't notice that back which is not IDE oh all is need to research I we started recording and got back can you take the roll um so we can just sure everyone's back please un yourself mayor Carol here councilwoman fararo Mr Campion here miss Giffin yeah Mr Hill here Mr dashna here Mr yeah here miss whitesman here Mr Sino here miss swingo here Mr EO here Mr sh here miss kazinski here clero here Mr Harris here Mr chman here thank you okay thank you so we're moving on to item 12 public hearing h Tea House LLC application 20241 37 10 appeal of denial of Zone and final with VAR application evening Madam chairperson members of the board stepen gr and Zerg on behalf of the applicant umun te House LLC doing business as T berries and we're very excited that tarries is going to be moving and reopening into the Watts TI uh old law up office building and we had filed for an application for a change of use which was granted and then they filed an application for a zoning permit to allow for a walk-in freezer cooler and that was denied and the reason why the zoning officer denied it on the basis that said it wasn't a permitted use in the zone so I think for this evening for the first thing that we should do is uh address the appeal of that zoning officer's denial and if the that is granted then the mayor and the buau member can actually participate in the remainder of the hearing and if it's denied then I'm going to have to ask for a use variant and they're going to have to step down so but I don't think you have to step down because respectfully I think the zoning officer was wrong in the interpretation of the ordinance because he didn't consider what the definition of an accessory building structure or use was and um the board planners report identif I that in page three paragraph 3.3 e page five of the mcmanis report and they actually went through the criteria of what an accessory building structure or use is and I believe without me going through each one of the four criteria I can agreed with our position that we met each one of those four criteria so unless the board has anything else they want to hear from either your planner Mr Harrison myself I think you can grant that appeal of the zoning officer Denial on that basis that it's a permitted accessory use then we get into the preliminary and final site plan and any variants relief that might be required talking fast but I want to kind of move it along so I'm going too fast slow me down so we don't do these very often what we need to do at this point terment Department well first of all if you have any questions uh of Mr Harris with regard to the report you could certainly ask him that um but if the board understands what Mr gromberg is saying and the board wishes to move on to the next step we would need a motion and a second um to Grant the applicants appeal and essentially overturn the determination of the zoning officer that this was not a permitted use um we vote on that and then we move on to the second part of Mr greenber just to say I think Beth an extraordinarily good job in Breaking this down uh and explaining um the interpretation of the accessory use I me I was really very impressed by by what she put on Dat rep can I make that motion I can I'll make the motion second does anybody on the board have any queries for plan I may just again we don't do these very often but technically this is a public hearing on the appeal so we probably should at least open it up to the public and see if anybody has questions and I should just ask you to put on the record but I provided the appropriate proof of service and publication of the notice appearing and that the board has jurisdiction to proceed and that yes we will put that on and just to get all the housekeeping out of the way A1 application and supporting documentation A2 notice and uh proofs of mailing and publication uh pb1 will be the letter from Mr clerico dated March 24 2024 pb2 will be the letter from miss mcmanis that Mr gromberg referred to dated March 22nd 2024 pb3 is Jay's engineering review letter dated March 25th and pb4 will be the um historic preservation commission letter dated March 21st 2024 right we need to so we need to decide on this motion is that public it istion to open up the public I make a motion to open up to the public favor thank you any members of the public have any questions or queries about this process and what we're going back to do I to close the public hearing second all in favor I then can we discuss car whether we feel Comfort which I think we have just to put it on the record I have no idea why the zoning officer denied this this makes no sense why the denial was done this is a Walkin freeer for a restaurant on the site it is definitionally about an accessory use I have no idea why they made that mistake right and then that's something um we can discuss forward um within our processes um anybody else have any queries for our plan on that report any concerns or are we happy to move ahead see nbody saying all right well then we can we roll call that vote please I of the appeal yeah to Grant the applicants appeal to overturn the decision of the zoning officer yes um and that was Caro and dashna as the second right yes yes thank you uh mayor Carol yes Mr dashna councilwoman fararo those Sol um Mr Campion yes Miss Giffin Mr Hill yes Mr cook yes Miss whitesman yes Mr simino yes thank you now we can continue now we can continue with the full compliment of the board and thank you very much and I do thank Miss mcmanis and Mr Harris for their report and that's why I pointed to it because it was a good report and it spelled it really did break it all down and they even broke down the relief that we required here which is preliminary and final site plan approval um we technically have a minimum rear yard variance of 50 ft but that's the preexist in condition and there's a maximum impervious service ratio but they pointed out in the report that previously granted by this board um and the offet parking variant that I actually noticed for they indicated that I didn't need and Mr clerico indicated that I didn't need um a variance for which is probably the first time I ever noticed for a variance and they told me I didn't need a variant no V SE yeah so um tonight I would just like to present Miss Peterson and U Mr tatina in support of our application just to let you know what we're what going to do with t faes the nice thing is we went before the HPC last week they did without me and they did a great job because the HPC is supportive of this application and you have their report indicating that they're supportive of it with the Landscaping that we're going to make so if I you want to swear both in at the same time let's do tonight you testimony about to give this the truth truth yeah I do thank you m Peterson can you just briefly tell the board the history of T berries in the burough where you were and where you're going speaking to the right okay well we've been in town about uh 20 years and this will be our third location and uh we now own a property so that's a real big deal to us um previously we were at 134 Main we left there and went to 2 Main and um that property went on the market and it was out of our price range but we knew we wanted to stay in the burrow and luckily we found this wonderful large law office so we are in the process of converting it to another two berries and I understand the exterior site improvements that are part of our plan right now are really just improving the parking lot and doing um a replacing an existing window on the south side west side of the building with the six panel door adding a small stering Landing leading to the doorway and um doing the walk-in freezer correct correct and um um can you talk about why you need a walk-in freezer outside of the building rather than inside because you don't want to mess up the historic nature of the inside of the building correct there there simply isn't room for it in the kitchen that we have now I mean because it's a huge unit and large unit and uh we need it for the operation of the business and that's something that restaurants often require and you've had to have in the past correct yes we had it at the last okay and you presented your application and um with all the architectural improvements um The Limited architectural improvements to the HPC and they were supportive of the application correct yes and your hours of operation are going to be 11:00 a.m. to 3 p.m. for serving and what are the number of employees we have about 25 employees most of those are part-time so they rotate on ships it's about 25 people working working at correct um so we're not proposing any additional lighting because you're only in operation during the daylight correct and the Landscaping was recommended by the board planner and I think Mr clero as well to screen the uh walking freezer we're willing to do and Mr taen is going to show us the plan on that yes um now there's 10 parking spaces that are actually shown on the plan and one of the comments was that one of the parking spaces was in the right of way and our plan that Mr Mr tyina is going to talk to about it's going to be to merge that parking spot into one parking spot relocated out of the right way and that gives us more room to do the Landscaping correct yes um we're gonna what color are we going to paint the cooler it's going to match the stco of the building yes and and um Landscaping um the board planner asked for one street tree on Church Street that we thinks that we can provide that and we're willing to do that yes and um where will the primary entrance be the front door okay on Main Street there's been a a suggestion that we provide a sign for the existing APA elevator we have PA a a little sign for have and their storage pods are presently at the back of the building that's because you're working in putting stuff in there but they're going to be removed certainly yeah and there was a suggestion about the possibility of doing a shared access in the future and respectfully that's not something that we want to do at this point or have a discussion with the board because it's so difficult to plan that for the future so we appreciate the idea but it's really not something that we can even imagine to do and coordinate so we're going to push back a little bit on that one um Mr clerico asked for the sidewalk along Church Street to be um improved um as well as that driveway opening which we're willing to do correct yes and he also made reference to the Belgian block curb that we should be using Belgian block curb to match what's existing and we're willing to do that well I love that and there's a question about the existing sign and what we're going to do use the existing sign in the same size yes to advertise T correct exactly that's whipping through M Peterson's testimony very quickly I don't have anything okay so um any of our professionals have any questions for this could you just clear up the issue about the parking space you're eliminating I didn't quite follow that I'll show it with that's okay it's it's the one that's in the right of way J anything right now no okay anybody on the board uh I have a sorry no you're um I just want to clarify uh what Steve said the in reference to the shared access easement uh that's comment uh 5.10 in our report and uh if you look at that last sentence in our report we state that while the idea is not right for implementation with this application the board may wish to discuss the concept um and consider the idea for future implementation so that's really just we saw an opportunity for shared parking um so we just wanted to bring that up that maybe it's it's for future discussion with the board if that's something that you guys want to pursue in like General right to discuss that in a discussion session so I'm going to go to board members I'll go to the online board members first this time so um Hannah you have anything any questions no Brian any questions in full support of it okay thank you um Dennis no questions thanks you've seen all right um Melissa no questions than thank you and Mike Michael I I do not thank you than you I'll start with Mr cook again uh so you you uh mentioned that you would just reuse the existing sign umst so um are you aware that being on corner without a variance you could have addition sign um I wasn't aware of that but we'll keep that in mind and if we can go on the corner left shate that I my own question no no questions happy to have you back thank uh just U one there will be an application for Steeler water for additional for that building syst law office now going to restaurant the there was a a application made and a for for yeah already done letter back from Remington and yeah thank you much for do that okay can that be uh did the board get a copy of it I got it we can I just got it today I think yeah I was going to say I hadn't seen it yet but I think that's good to have with the approval so that nobody can question yes Su uh not for Miss be okay no no yeah glad to see you we're open up I have to write in my glasses um anybody in the public have any questions for this witness I'm checking on seeing them wa Mr tyina come on down thank you I'm still John ta I'm still development I do get to add to my experience Stu I was pleased to spend um five years from 1998 until 2003 as the planner of record for the national register historic communities of Ocean Grove New Jersey and the City of planfield New Jersey I also had the opportunity at that time to write the land of alces for both of those communities that are still in use today um and it was interesting when I specifically did the one for Ocean Grove I had about 25 planner friends that called them and they all have the same advice don't screw it up um so I I I fully understand um uh dealing with the national register historic district historic properties and what the challenges are there so I appreciate the work of the HBC here and I'm glad that you have their endorsement uh coming here I know Mr ta was just qualified as an expert he's been qualified at least one at time when I presented them before this board your licenses are still in good standing still in good standing I offer them as expert in the field of planning anybody um Mr TAA I'm going to try and share the screen you've reviewed the plan that been prepared by someone else but you just describe um the landscaping area and the parking lot the parking that we uh were talking about correct so and this I'm so sorry seconds this was previously Prov to the bo this is the plan that was submitted prepared by TR engineering yeah it was submitted on Monday it wasn't part of the original application it was submitted in advance y That's fine so make it part right and if you could just describe certainly so um let me let take down here uh so this is 171 Main Street or Main and then church is the the street at the bottom of the page um we have the existing uh two and a half story building and existing is a 12 space Park um to describe uh some of the existing things that matter um I'm indicating in the uh northwest corner of the building um this is where the ada8 lift is um so according we placed the compliant handicap space Ada space immediately adjacent to it as close as we could doing that with the r loading area we lose a parking space um just to the right of that uh Ada space is the existing trash facility um and then as we said we're going to repair and restripe the black top as needed um black top top do not be that bad a shape um but the striping does need to be new um we'll have a new striping area um at the edge of the property clearly delineate that this space go into the RightWay and then coming over to the center of the property we have our new landing and stairs that will go into the kitchen area um this is the on story white stucco area that's the kitchen um so I'll have a new new entry there and new stairs that will come down ACC say the proposed walking cooler the walking cooler is um it's about it's just under 8T wide and it's just under 14 feet long and it is just under 10 and 1 12 ft hot um so that is the size of the uh structure um so in working and looking at the site there really wasn't a logical location behind the building because of the need to locate the adaa space in proximity to the lift and really the need to locate the um cooler near the building so that employees didn't need to cross traffic or do anything that we really don't need to do so we kind of get forced into what is this front yard location um so train engineering provided uh a landscape plan that match HPC recommendations um these are nine uh green giant barbering to be planted 3 feet on Center there will be four the four to 5 foot high version at planting uh they will grow between 18 Ines and 2 feet a year um and in Fairly short order they are going to need to be maintained to keep them within the confines of the uh planting area that we placed um immediately adjacent to the um I'm actually doing a little experiment in my house I PL I planted a dozen of these myself of the 4 foot high variety and I got 18 inches of growth last year in the first year so I'll be very interested to see what happens in the second year and I'm not doing anything to them other than they got their annual fertilizing and just rcking the water so I'll be really interested to see how they grow but so they they grow great um and they're also the ones the deer don't eat so um there will be you know they'll go away the ground St um so adjacent to that is is what is indicated as two parking spaces um but the second parking space is the space that intrudes into the RightWay and we think it's appropriate with the reconstructed um driveway apron that all the spaces be relocated outside of the um outside of the right away and to give us an appropriate planting area for this um for the trees this two spaces are going to become one so that we'll be able to have an appropriate planting area for the trees appropriate um landscape area on the edge of the parking lot on the edge of the street so that we get the right um the right look in compliance with the k letter um so that's how we we're going that's the parking space where we'll go from two to one and that takes us down to tot of nine so we lose one for Moler one for the loading area and one for the encos to allow landscaping around the proposed cor it doesn't trigger a parking varant though because the ordinance actually allows us to it doesn't require that off street parking requirement correct correct for a existing building that is not an office uh additional parking is not required so can you go over to what extent we need any variants for certainly so um we do appropriately need a variance to locate an accessory structure in a front yard um so this is actually in a front yard uh so we do require the relief uh this would be a a bulk variant I'd submit to you that it is a combination of a C1 variance where we have a hard ship where we uh literally don't have another place to put it um but I'd like to argue it really under the uh the benefits out weighing any detriments um so in terms of those findings first it relates to AIC specific piece of property secondly that we advance the purposes of zoning third that we show that the benefits of granting the variance out weigh any possible detriment and then finally as with all variances are negative criteria so uh the variance solely relates to 171 Main Street and T berries no other property there's no precedent to carry it anywhere else uh we do promote the following purposes uh G to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses both public and private according to the respective mment requirements in order to meet the new needs of New Jersey citizens uh e I'm exuse me I to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design Arrangement and M to encourage coordination of various public and private procedures and activities shaping Land Development with a view towards lessening the cost of such development into the more efficient use of land so first the downtown business district is certainly an appropriate location for T berries the new installation will be Tastefully done appropriately painted and screened um to support the permitted and desired restaurant use with quality materials and sufficient screening in accordance with the HBC recommendation um and the applicant is uh M really relates to efficient use of land also the balancing the VAR various requirements so we have a county requirement for the road we have HBC requirements ands and need to all those and I think they're doing a nice job implementing the HPC recommendation um and utilizing existing parking spaces and efficient use or the safest location uh for the um for the employees the operative Cas on point here is called po res South plan field it provides that the benefits of the entire application are really what should be uh considered not just the benefit of the deviation so it's that the entire application of providing for taries it's what to be considered a comparison to this uh variance for this accessory structure in a front yard in accordance with the HBC recommendations and again a combination of factors that leads to the front n location the nature of the historic structure the existing conditions and lay out of the parking and the Ada facilities and the safety of the employees so on balance we believe this front year location is the best planning alternative and then finally the negative criteria is it going to have any substantial dment to neighbors um and is it going to have any substantial impact impairment to your uh Zone plan and master plan the proposal is for a refrigerating Pooler at a restaurant it is not an obious use it will be suitably screened will meet applicable noise regulations the reduction in parking is minimal and within ordance requirements and most importantly will be appropriately painted and screened to be as unintrusive as possible considering we are in the in the DB District but we do have residential neighbors immediately across the street we res across the street of church we have a residential Zone across the street on Maine but that is the Baptist Church so um we don't have a residence across stre we don't residen Zone but we are providing appropriate screening at this edge of the DB district and in terms of uh so the DB the purpose of the DB district is to provide for mix of uses in traditional business in governmental Center in burrow this is certainly contributing once again to desire mix of uses in DV and the master Strate IES uh to encourage community and economic development has strengthened and enhanced the commercial sector in the B with emphasis on attracting specialty retail and restaurants and there is nothing as special as restaurant as T berries um and to concentrate retail service uses uh to contribute to a vibrant downtown that with draw residents and visitors alike to the retail portion of Main Street and again I think T Bar is uh continuing its 20e history of the tomorrow will be a destination with downtown so the The Proposal is certainly implementing these brwi goals and certainly not impairing them again I think we uh can address all the site issues happy to work with the professionals on the details of the information of the site uh and making sure that we get it exactly correct and for those reasons I believe the war is done Grant the approval and avable your question one question for you is that from a hardship standpoint it's this kind of a unique property because it's on the corner lock so we have two front yards as a result which makes it all the more difficult for us to be able to locate the uh cool walk-in cooler and any other place on the property right right the existing configuration uh makes any of the location very difficult we're on a corner and the building is located very close to the northern property line which would have been the other logical location for it um but again there's just no room there any questions okay just just a really really little question I know that um as part of the um the burough is planning on improvements to this end of Main Street um in the coming hopefully soon because the DPW guys would always fit some pudles in front of my house but um hopefully sooner in the later I know that there was some conversation around um uh reconfiguration of this intersection at some point is there anything here in I know we're talking about rights of way and is there anything here that would have any potential conflict with anything about uh any known or discussed uh roadway or or intersection improvements no we are uh substantially back from uh from from the right away and and we are uh certainly far enough back that any intersection Improvement that is going to be considered um and would be appropriate to get through the HPC is certainly going to take place well and far away from the proposed welcome thank you no questions no question no questions all [Music] right stoping good thank Dennis is ready Dennis are you ready you have anything go you said no okay thank you Brian I'm good thank you Mike I'm good thank youa I'm good thank you um I only one question maybe I should have ask Mr P about it but the um the main access into the building is going to be on the front door is that right or you is it going to be an access into the restaurant from next to the ab left yeah there will be access from the Ada the primary entrance is uh the front porch on Main Street right just and that front porch has access from both church and me and it's delightful it's been a love 20 minutes there this I not thinking about changing the landscape I was just thinking if people are parking in that lock I want to use the front door rather than the back door is it with the change in the um parking next to the box I know exactly you're talking there is a pedestrian pathway there and I think by making the change that we talked about going two spaces to one that's going to us to to make sure that that linkage is clear I was just like rather an appropriate walkway there think just for that safety pedestrians because I know some of the customers may use the back entrance but like to use the front just access for them that was the only question I had um for you and seeing no questions for and I'll open it up to members of the public have any questions for this witness any hand raised online I don't see any in person so so would you like to conclude I would like to conclude by saying I was really excited when T asked me to represent them because T Bar's has been here forever it's like a Flemington staple so um this is a really good application it's a great thing for the buau the the variance relief is minimal and we appreciate working with the board's Professionals in their review and will'll meet their conditions as I just went through with Miss Peterson's testimony we would ask that you grant our application okay um got one one question that came up about the shared access do they show that on their plans now or you want to even though it's not needed no that um that comment was meant more to like uh sort of gauge board interest that this is something that uh will be want to explored like in the future not necessarily with this application but just generally shared parking uh in the future because I believe it would have to be like a master plan Road there would definitely need to be some other action taken um other than this board but my my understanding is that it is an opportunity to connect the properties along in this area and there's an opportunity to do that um I don't know if it's ever been done um I have seen it done in other Master plans um where it's it is um shown as a possibility and a consideration but obviously it can only really be effectuated if it was able to be um if it was able to connect all these other properties from the can making an arrangement with the neighbor the owner of the neighbor property to say can our people parking a lot on off our that would be something completely that they're entitled correct that correct this would be something totally SE that would be more of an eement related issue to you know provide a portion of their parking to an adjacent use which brings up a whole another set of issues that's now what we're looking to do here and that's the can of worms that we didn't want to go to we understand where the board on its own may want to start looking at master plan review of linking up parking lots but in terms of this applicant trying to figure out where an easement would be to which adjoining property um what those maintenance obligations would be parking shared parking analysis we're putting in a cooler you can't get into that right I appreciate I just want to make sure it wasn't tied into the plan if it was yeah and it's not then that's the one thing to the extent that we were asking to do that you know we we're not uh respectfully going so procedurally and we just did this I don't thank you so now we have a perod for public comment on this application is anybody in the public please raise your [Music] hand would you like to come to the um my 32 mry Avenue I just asked that you would hurry up I'm tired waiting for tber we can do is consider this application vote on this after that we can't all right I'll I'll make a motion we close public hearing as long can we call the r on that please in favor to close speak motion so in order to get our discussion going I'll make the motion that we approve theary finary and final uh with the C1 variances I believe it was Ard Max yard and it's impervious and it's the uh accessory structure in the front yard that's the only one yes it in so and from from a discussion standpoint I only brought up the signage um because the fact that the planning board doesn't have a sign to approve means it we still need to go to the sign Review Committee and just like the attorney has said that it's a complicated lock because they on the corner and there's some hardships but with that also comes some ordinance signage regulations like they're allowed two facade signs they're allowed two freestanding signs and because it is a gateway into lemington um when they come in when when they submit their application I would highly suggest that they you maximize your your signage because it is a gateway and you are allowed to to thank you if you need if you want because if you remember they had two their other Lots they had two a mon on two two faes so have my okay thanks for that it's very useful comments all I know we're all waiting I just want to make sure we've got every ey Lo to make sure as everybody anybody online on our board have anything you can just indicate we're indicating those Mike and Melissa do you have anything see you I do Karen okay with the success of T berries in the prior location their parking lot and the Overflow lot and the burrow lot were packed with cars around the holiday now I'm all in support of this application but we are having a parking committee meeting April 5th and we're going to have to discuss parking around that area there's going to be overflow on Church Street for TDS that's all I have yeah that's a good point and um that can be discussed that I would imagine um something to consider but isn't it also C correct from that statement we we our ordinances would change to not require as much Park to support our businesses so there's nothing we can require although I see my appointment got a lot less parking than we used to site um I I would just suggest it's a very successful business and they really cater to their customers and I'm sure they thought this out and I'm sure I would be shocked if they haven't started thinking about approaching some of their Neighbors about for FL parking so they're going to take care of it because yeah nothing is a bigger detriment um especially for their clientele which is like me you know old and spoiled um so yeah no I think it's just I made that point for Mike's Point that can't insist on anything like say to the applicants that benefit for their own business pleas to consider that um so we have a motion on the floor is everybody ready to vote on that I do we have to go through conditions we have some conditions sorry and can who seconded that original motion thank you Jim all right so uh pretty minimal uh our standard conditions um compliance with the comments outlined and the professionals reports with the exception of the issue with PR cross access say easement recommended uh in F report um the applicant will provide us with a copy of the uh form a response letter um the plans will be revised to include all representations this evening I think we may be missing that one final tree yeah um that we're going be incorporating um and just the right there's going to be nine new uh or provid as for the plans uh the parking spaces will be reduced to nine but that's sufficient because because there is no additional parking that's required that's just a comment um and I'm not sure if this is on the plan so I do just want to put that the freezer will be painted screened and comply with all state noise and the side front will beeve one par I think that's in Bob's report but I'll put that in there yeah actually it wasn't okay great thank you you mentioned the professionals report can you also reference the HPC yes I can the HPC hold on hold [Music] that see okay the sidewalk realigned along the Church Street side to the extent leaving we're really um we're gonna be just outside the trees for the uh cool yeah we got to look at that because we're merging that those two parking spaces so it may not be needed depending from where we with that is there if it was if they were put fence around the cooler there be a height restriction do we have a height restriction place where we do we have living on the height of trees proper no height on push I was just making sure we needed to put it in the condition no so no I don't think no I I no I don't think there isn't I think that our our I think the testimony applicant was that they were planting these specifically to provide adequate screening quickly yeah um so right I just felt that they those trees can tend to overrun that as well wanted to restrict the but we don't have that requirement okay so those are the conditions all right so I can we pull the rooll for that vote please on that motion on the floor sure Mr cook motion inate second by and yes to that Mr Hill um mayor Carol yes I'm available for ribbon cting I'm making reservations so uh Council woman fararo yes Mr Campion yes Miss Giffin yes Mr dashna yes Miss whitesman yes Mr simino yes very good this is a major walking distance for me too so this is a and thank you all very much thank all right let's move Central Station is station next me [Music] um I know I'm I was quite a while ago now um can I is the meeting after that the 16th is that correct I I'm sorry what was that the meeting after the 9th is it it's not it's not the fourth Tuesday we moved it to the 16th right or do we is that am I remembering that correctly [Music] that's correct we're on the the 23rd no we're on the 23rd we're on the 23rd didn't we have it on the 23d no May is the one that was a little I thought we I thought we so so in the original notice I thought we when you and I worked on this back in November I thought we had talked about the second meeting in April being on the 16th but I don't remember what we adopted in January I have meeting the on the website I just want to make sure what's in the O notice so that we before we well we can always fix it yeah it's on the website as the 16th also which means it's probably what sent yeah I think it you're right it's the April 9th and then the 16th and I'm just putting on the record uh that I am unable to be here on the 16th just just just so you know that okay I I mean just just as we're thinking about Forum I don't know what is coming up the 30th is a fifth Tuesday yeah we could move it to that and not have it on the 16th or the 20th we go to the 9th to thir our next one would be in this room so I know it's free so we just have notice for that notice what would we do then we would cancel the 16 we canel the 16 can anybody think of any reason why we didn't do think of doing that in the first place on the 30th yeah technically speaking it is the last day of Passover the holiday itself ends at 8:37 for those who care about such things but is that going to cause a problem for anyone in town other than me no um you wouldn't be able to make the 16th I think I make the 16th because I have another obligation to work and I can't make this I can't make the 30th I have another work obligation anyway all right so it doesn't matter to me I'm just saying like it's not a I think the board should decide what is best for the board to do don't worry about me well I can't make the 23d but I can't make I got do the 30 person then the only thing really to check I is who's at Central Station who's eligible do we have a full slight know I'm just wondering INE it goes over like if I don't want you to have seen Taken part the ninth and then not be able to be there for the vote if the vote second I'm not assuming it no no that's that's fair and if we do it on the 30th I could I could well no no no would be the vote he would be the vote I I I'm I'm looking at my own stuff and I could probably remote participate on the 30th that's what it if that's that's what I'm but then we if we have a whole compl not need that but for so that's it's a big one and it's a comment because of the D I don't want to talk about it too much but you know just because of that um the applicant may want to maximize the number of people that and they may want to carry the V any so we can't everything it sounds to me like that would be the most accomodating for whatever right okay so um we make that happen anything else to make that we the day dep we could vote so the record shows because we did vote originally on what the meeting were going to so now we could vote to I mean I I didn't have you're saying that the 16th is on the webs so I guess what what the what the motion and second would be is to amend the meeting dates as necessary for April to indicate that the meeting dates will be April 9th and April so if she has to change it to remove one add another ition second all in favor that change ibody against hearing none then that is moved excellent um can I get a motion to order the bills the bills were issu and then could we call the role that was Mr cook and Mr dner a second for the bills y um Mr cook yes Mr dashna yes mayor Carol Council woman fararo Mr Campion yes Miss giin yes Mr Hill yes Miss whitesman yes Mr Sino yes thank you thank you um item 15 I we have we don't excellent uh can I get a motion to adjourn the Mee all in favor thank you