##VIDEO ID:MdxxTbbGKxg## uh good evening uh we're going to I'm playing the chairman tonight VI chairman of Vice uh basically this meeting is called pursuant to Provisions to the open open public meetings act both adequate and electronic notice this meeting has been provided by way ofation the Hun County Democrat news newspaper about February on January 30th 2024 in addition notice of the meeting was posted at the bur of Clemington Municipal Building located at 38 Park app and any handicapped accessible entrance is there too posted on the municipal website provided to this cler and distributed to all persons if any requesting copies inan the meetings being recorded with both audio and video and may be rebroadcast this meeting is a Judicial proceeding any question their comments must be limited to the issues that are relevant to what court May leg consider in reaching a decision and deform appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at all times yeah the r call Body some technical difficulties over there the whole screen is blocked on that um public view we let's do the flag salute please mayor Carol uh mayor Carol here Council pasaro here Mr campan here miss GI is excused Mr Hill here Mr dashna here Mr cook is excused miss whitesman here Mr simino is excused miss swingle here Mr eeko here Mr show M kazinski here Mr clo M mcmanis Mr is it screen blank is the laptop working yeah the laptop is working connection the TV's on obviously the TV I don't think is on it was on and we're also not seeing the public view on Zoom right now too I don't know if that means anything as well yeah that's what she's trying to figure out so yeah out right all right so public coms uh comments can not be on the agenda matters yeah yeah anyone on Zoom no the only attendee is the council view okay well introduce myself as I sit where on to the left Jim Hill and I'm the assistant and vice chair for the planning board and uh I watched that last meeting interesting and uh I guess what we'd like to do now is to Mayor comments yeah I'm going a tag team with the councilwoman um regarding um a change uh well first of all last night the um governing body did approve um three always stops um one at Park Avenue in mine Street and one at C uh Sangle Avenue in M Street dle Road and L Street uh help with um traffic hming and pedestrians safety because we've had a number of near misses um because of the excessive speeding and the sheer volume on wi Street um our police report our police are reporting that we have about 20 uh 800 2100 2,800 fibers a day on M Street and um that there is speeding on that road in excess of double speed limit on a daily basis all day long especially during meting hours so um had our uh traffic engine take a look at that we're also looking for uh funding right now to put in a number of the articulating flashing um lights for pedestrians to be able to cross several other streets safely by pressing a button and let warning drivers to slowed down the third uh freeway always stop that was approved was on Broad Street at bfield Avenue that will basically put an all doop at every single intersection all the way down broad again uh for traffic cming um and itation more traffic coming out of the hotel project when it opens up later this year so um that one is because the neighbors asked for it um and Jay blessed it that it was it would help uh and again it's also preemptive so those were for bless night those signs will probably be going up I would predict probably by the end of the year um and then the police will be out even wagging fingers for a little while before they get tickets that is their St so people won't get tickets right away until they into that those always are up for up there um and know we watching to see where the the push me pull you is you know where people try to find ways around the street where if it puts more traffic possibly on the now we're hoping people who don't like stop signs are going to start using room 12 more to we use our streets as throughways and I will tell you that the chief the police have written hundreds of tickets on M Street in the last few months not one to Flemington B Resident was pulled over it was all people out to bro so a lot of Pennsylvania commuters a lot of Township and a lot of West huning County not one fling person was being on that road so um and it's just a matter of you know and and and I should also say that the ticket polies did not help traffic off at all nobody seemed care it'll be slowed down um and then the other the other big issue that's come up is the title and the wording of will serve letters from our water and sewer departments um the implication in that name has led us to have a number of issues with people wanting to develop in the buau thinking that we'll Ser need they're guarantee the water and um as opposed to as opposed to a a temporary reservation so we are officially changing the name the form has already been changed so we're going to need the um completion document change to Temporary reservation form uh because they don't you know make a commitment within 90 days they lose that allocation under our ordinance um and we will be changing the ordinance to match the new name of the form because the form is actually in the ordinance because that's the way old to this stuff so you can never check anything unless you did it by ordinance 30 days I think 9090 um I think that's what it is and um you say commitment commitment meaning it's not all it means is that we have the capacity they're asking for the capacity we have the capacity but people we for 90 days that's correct that's correct and and what's happening is that you know we've had stral lawsuits we've had you know screaming Mimis you know you told me I had the water well no we never did so um so you know this is preemptive of other applications that are I don't know if they're in the planning board pipeline but requests fourwh serve letters and again there's a concern that it's just a misnomer it's just a bad name and so we're CH we're we're going to legally change it but officially um arose By Any Other Name right so we're calling it going forward as of tonight we're calling it the temporary reservation form so please add to that I think that that pretty much Nails it other than the concern about um longterm approved and um provided both will forms and the impact of the you know if you're not building it is or it's extended I mean our water I mean we run well I mean a lot of the public doesn't know this but we are on our private we system we have our own utility don't use American Water it's a limited commodity you know we have we have um you know 10 active Wells we're trying to put in two more then we're done we have no place else to put in more Wells so you know we want to make sure that the people that are here the business that are here now have always quable drinking water which is more important than you know anything else um so you know we have a couple Wells that go down for pollution spill or something like that we're in trouble in this town and um you know so that's one of the reasons is like about being more environmentally conscious about the fact that water is a commodity a real commodity in this St way more than it is I think for American Water you know because we are small utility so thank you meeting's over great okay U historic preservation any comments I have not thing uh we haven't had a meeting since the last meeting okay professional reports can I can I go back for a sec sure because that just triggered this professional report thing um I don't know if this is appropriate and one of you can tell me whether it is or not but I really think that under professional reports we should have a resolution compliance report whoever's responsible for doing that so what you're saying status um resolution compliance for improved projects they construction yes so resolution compliance means that they resolution compliance is required prior to pulling building permits for construction so what you want is have they satisfied all the compliance conditions of the resolution to pull the permits or are you looking for status of projects under construction or both well so I'll give an example I had a resident complaint about trees coming off of a an approved project that is currently under construction okay I asked Bob about it Bob said it's Beth's responsibility I sent an email to Beth maybe you didn't get it I'm still waiting for an answer as to whether these trees I mean I know we approved cutting D some trees because of the 88 needs but I'm not sure if they were those trees so you know it's like like that we have another application up here for review asking for you know some temporary whatever release a wa release um that project I mean last year I was asking Beth about visibility of certain things and we're not getting like like this I'm not going to use an adjective that stupid sign on the circle like like where's that and it certainly isn't resolved so why don't we do this why don't we talk offline about how we can do that and should it be attachment that's handed out to everybody and then if they see it and have a question at that point in time on the agenda question I'm flexible I just think that yeah we'll talk about that I think that the planing Board needs to be getting some kind of like updates about where all of these projects are actively and obviously anytime anybody has a question they can ask us but sometimes we lose track of what even is still out there so if we have an ongoing list we could certainly do that and any other questions yeah just this is for for b e had sent us um last week just noted the state's uh preliminary development Redevelopment plan cross accept process is that we're going to have to do something about that what is what does that look like so yeah okay I'm sorry I should have brought that up in the reports yeah they've released their preliminary state plan and if you click the just very quickly it's the the state guidance document that's supposed to help direct State resources for infrastructure funding Etc and it provides a list of goals objectives and policies for development Redevelopment state including open space preservation the other thing it does is it provides a map of the entire State and it puts every parcel in a planning area one uh Metropolitan all the way down to five which is environmentally uh sensitive plans um they so they've released a preliminary state plan map with the or the preliminary state plan with all the texts goals and objectives uh they haven't actually released the map yet because that's part of a a process that we're supposed to be working through municipalities that's the background but so answer the question yes that is something that we should talk about um I think the B needs to decide how it wants to participate in what who it wants to leave the process whether this inform from playing board or whether it's from from the council but it's got to go through well you don't have to but you should go through what the cost acceptance process for uh providing comments on the plan as yeah we should just just a note for perpetuals so on um I listen to the last meeting in order to be ready for tonight and I would ask everybody to make sure they speak up because there were there were times when you had to go back and listen to it twice in order to hear what it is so everybody make sure that don't yell just make a good love if you're close to the microphones that helps right that helps yes um approval of the minut move second all in favor minutes Mr Dasa yes Miss swingle yes mayor Carol yes Miss visaro yes Mr Campion abstained Mr Hill abstain Miss whitesman yes Mr Apple yes okay have the resolutions resolution for 110 Main Street that's done Council has approved it uh he's here tonight but unfortunately that clean version did not make it over to e so we'll have it on next week's agenda okay U resolution for the national pools that W me that and the people that are available to make a motion are um Mr Hill mrar Campion Mr Whitman motion a second motion swing right uh Miss swingle yes Miss Whitman yes Mr Hill yes Miss faar no Mr Camp yes uh councilman so you're not voting on The Resolution okay even though you voted for and uh is that everybody yes and Brian was yes uh Brian is sorry Mr cook is not here all right okay resolution for chickfila was I for that no um Amendment the amendment you were not no the uh people eligible uh to vote for this would um that are present is Mr Hill Mr cion and Miss Whitman Mr uh Miss giin and Mr s so it was only the people that voted on the original uh resolution and then also present at the last meeting when we um discuss the amendment correct and there's just one change to the resolution itself on the bottom of page one the last paragraph that letter should be the date of the letter um from Mr hail should be November 11 2024 not 2023 okay all motion motion Whitman um you want to second I'll second it okay uh Miss whitesman yes Mr Hill yes Mr C yes thank you okay uh compliance for the bstd Flemington Apartments okay so I thought I would uh try to read the board through this a bit I submitted a memo from uh December uh n just the other day that outlined the issue and so BSD is is also the spice Factory development with the existing building has the uh uh Cy approval includes a new building this issue is about the existing building for which there's an additional story and improvements going on the project was approved uh as part of an amended site plan approval and in the approval or during the process it was thought that a screen to screen the top equipment would be unnecessary because they would be not visible from the surrounding area for now the project is going up for construction one of the things I noticed is that the equipment is visible and I reached out to the applicant by way of their attorney Mr grinberg raised the issue and what they had indicated was and you can correct me if I'm misspeaking but what they had indicated was that if the planning board would like to have a screen applied to the RO the M the roof of the building to streen the equipment which would actually be consistent with the original sight plan approval they can add that and they've actually provided a detail which is included in the memo that provides uh a roof plan it shows you where the equipment is it also provides a sample AC unit screen image and it's essentially a brown screen it's not solid but it would it would largely obstruct the view of the uh of the equipment 365 yes it would go around the it would go around Church you say that and we have I'm sorry just to interrupt that it was a d variant um for consideration so so do that mean we can't participate even though it's been approved yes yes oh okay sorry I just I thought we could no because essentially you're just Sil ating in the application same way that you couldn't participate in completeness prior to it's once once you're out you're out okay so um I'll ask the question because like so if I'm driving on Church Street towards Route 31 and I've been looking at these things and wondering if didn't we want a screen there I won't be able to see it this the yeah so instead of seeing these little equipment uh Pieces Pop Up Above the roof you'll see the you'll see a continuous screen around the build not around the building but around along the roof that will it's yeah the discussion the meeting was that could see it if you couldn't the testimony was you wouldn't be able to see it but if they would see if you could see it that they would come back and ask that they would provide some sort of screening and that's I think what we're is that so and I think uh coincidentally this is similar to the Chick-fil-A issue that we just dealt with where um they got in the field realized that there was an issue there it was you know the canopy was too large they pulled it back we did the resolution that was just adopted 60 seconds ago um finding that the canopy change could be considered a field change I think that this is very much an analogous situation in that the project is under constructions something unanticipated has occurred with the unanticipated issue being visibility of the rooftop equipment and so if the board is inclined I think that you can uh make a motion in favor of the rooftop screening uh and that be included as part of their site plan approval of course if the board finds that you're comfortable with the rooftop equipment um you can allow the project to proceed as as uh his as well can I ask a couple questions please is the is the color that's on I guess the second the first page four of your memo Beth the color that's sort of represented there in that sample AC unit screen image is that is that the color it's going to be or is the color going to be how is the color going to be relative to the rest of the building itself so my understanding is that that color is representative of what's being proposed and if you so what I would say is the building is red brick with the upper Stories being this Rish taupe uh color as well and so I you I think obviously the the brown screen I think is going to be darker in color than what you see there but I think it's going to be part of a general natural palette of Browns and and Grays if the board would rather see different color I would I don't know what the options are but I would suggest that Pi up and have that they have to submit a sample no not a sample just the just the um the detail picture yeah know I I what no I was I was the color that's represented on that uh that's on I guess page four of your memo is I I have no problems with because I think it does meet the Power of the rest of the existing building the existing kind of the the stuff that's been added on to it I just want to make sure that that's the color where get the representation I would you know they've submitted this detail if the board is going to pass a resolution uh supporting this field change I would imagine that it would reference this detail so that if the blue we can find it some consistent this is what I'm saying and and we could say consistent with what's represented on the memo or the change will'll work with the board planner find something yeah it's basically the exact same thing that we did with the field change Ona but we just need a motion in a second to approve this as a field change I'll put a resolution together similar to what we just did and we can add that condition along with the other conditions that all the other condition the PRI Remain the next meeting yeah I will try yes well asking I'll put it on the agenda well let me the board members that um voted on the resolution for this application were U Mr cook dashna Hill Miss whitesman and S and actually can't L it but obviously Mr Goen Mr s so just Jeff Jim and Hannah so I will move jha yes Mr Hill yes Miss whitesman yes thank you a lot of action next is public hearing evening Mr Vice chairman members of the board Stephen gruberg gruberg law office on behalf of the applicant H he House LLC we're here tonight for a request for an amended site plan approval with variance relief and then you need to promote him as some panel did and then you have to accept it so then turn the camera on so the folks can see you I miss to join as panelist the notification you need it am I good I think I'm good okay I keep Ming right yes turn your on and you can share who move that back um so we're here tonight for our amended application to relocate essentially the walk-in freezer um and towards the rear of the property we'll explain the reasons why um we previously granted our relief to allow that walk-in freezer and indicated that it was a permitted accessory use in the zone and um we had to complete this report from Mr clerico who recommended certain waivers and permanent waivers and temporary waivers uh he indicated that we need to provide a written request for the waivers which I supplied and we would ask that you grant those wavers and then the application complete and we appreciate you giving us the opportunity to provide a notice of hearing this evening with Advance with the hopes of being able to proceed forward with the public hearing tonight Bob you good yeah the letter basically outlines the labors they had part of their application I pointed out several others that had not asked for and I made some suggestions as to what I would recommend it should they ask for them and Steve did send a followup letter asking for them with that premise so if you follow the um the format of the letter outlines what waivers in what categories you be gr want be them all but yeah I read the report so I'm good I'll make the motion to the application complete subject to the waivers outlined in compl rep of December she said and is amended in the have a second yes I'm sorry for second second thank you very much um mayor Carol yes Miss swingle yes councilwoman pasaro yes Mr Campion yes Mr Hill yes Mr dasna yes Miss whitesman yes Mr eeko yes yes um so we provideed group of service and publication of the notice of hearing and ask that jurisdiction being found uh everything was in order all of the emailings yes matched up with jurisdiction we hear this application tonight based upon the completely determination the notice and publication provided great I have one witness Sarah if you could please come forward just really quickly before we get there we'll mark us exhibit A1 the application all supporting documentation uh we'll mark it pb1 uh the memorandum dated December 6 of the board planner the memorandum dated December 6th of the board engineer and the memorandum dated December 9th of the board traffic engineer pb1 and thank you we'll throw you in as well as our winess thr a testimony about to get this Bo I do my wedding you the board witnesses to or yeah Sarah you were a principal of uh T berries yes and um we were here before the board previously in order to Grant relief to allow for a walk-in freezer and um is it fair to say that U an issue arose that prevented you from being able to have the freezer in the location that you originally was approved and what was that reason Steve could you swing it a little bit I think her voice is very soft maybe make sure she's a little closer to it thank sure we needed to move the walking because we were no longer having seating upstairs due to an indoor sprinkler system that we want to avoid putting in so in other words the uh the kitchen area is going to be on the second floor instead of the first floor and the seating area will be limited to the first floor correct and uh in doing that we're going to relocate the walk-in freezer to the rear corner of the correct and why don't I share my screen just to show that real quick make a figure so the original location of the walkin freezer was on this side of the building correct yes and we decided that the better place to locate it would be in this rear corner correct and we're still proposing the Landscaping the shielded correct um but it does require U rear yard setbacks because we're on a corner lot in those two areas correct yes um the other improvements that we're requesting as part of this application was actually something that Mr cook had suggested that we do uh at the time was to show the references to the signage that we wanted correct yes and um we're proposing three mounted signs that are located on one on the front on Main Street one on the side on church and one on the back um of the building correct yes and one question that um M mcmanis asked is what are the signs going to look like and I provided to the board in advance of the meeting um what I would probably ask the exibit whatever X12 I will share my screen I thought a was the notice of hearing ah you're absolutely right no and I got to share it in a different way hold see skip two c that's the pretty T berries t- logo that's going to be the sign yes and what will the three signs consist of they're wooden and the background is neutral tan with the teal and the crer okay and they're going to be in the sizes oval signs just like this cor yes and they'll be um the size uh as depicted on the plant on both all the sides um the board professionals had some comments no let me go back actually go back to the plan when we talked about the original location of the walk-in freezer we were going to um remove some pavement here and remove a parking space we're not going to do that now correct we're not we're not going to we would like to not right so we would like to keep three parking spaces over here where they're located and the Seven parking spaces uh on this side correct and the board professionals had some comments in their reports and I'll address Mr clerico first is December 6 202 for correspondence um he suggested eliminating the parking space in the Southeast corner and restoring the surface as landscaped area and restore the unused paved um surface and then southwest corner of the lot as a landscaped area we prefer not to do that correct we want to leave the parking lot the way it is and be able to just ritee it you order to be able to maximize the number of parking spaces that as much parking we can possibly we don't need relief for the parking because there's an ordinance that allows for off street parking but we want to keep those 10 spaces as much as possible right um and discuss we go wait you so basically what's happening is he's going through the comments of each of the board professionals reports we're on the engineer and typically what we would do is conditions of approval is say the applicant has agreed to comply with all the conditions but for if there are certain ones that they have issues with so this is the first one we've identified that they do not want to comply with the question is the board want to discuss them as they go or you want to wait till the end it's probably easier to keep practically discussing as you go and then we can have a dialogue unless you'd like to present it visit no that's fine I think we do it as we go yeah the only thing I just going to add to that from my notes of the original meeing the elimination of that space was I believe a requirement of the board and I for who raised the issue somebody raised the issue about the accessibility of that particular space and also pointed out that part of that space is actually the public RightWay I was just bringing back up that that's what's an issue that we decid decided as part of the original plan obviously they only have one space there virally the other space can be occupied by the freezer you that's not there anymore they would like to preserve with three spaces I'm just bringing up the fact that the one closest to the street was a recommendation with be eliminated prior approval you won't still do that or you do not was the issue that it was in the public RightWay or was the issue I'm not sure the issue of the public RightWay came up that issue it came up it did okay is that a real issue I mean like a issue it's it's an existing parking is a scaman in town and I see you give up Parky but if I recall correctly the issue the question that was raised and maybe was to I'm not sure who raised the question about the ability of vehicles to really maneuver in and out of kind of question the viability of the states I mean it's obviously there can I suggest maybe we ask the applicant to sign it as compact cars only or employees spes or employees space one or the other compact yeah I think they're having all the employ or motorcycles so that that would solve the problem somebody you know I I only raised it because it came up yeah I mean that space and that parking layout's been there for for years um and um I think the reason why we were able to eliminate it last time is because that's where put in a cooler and we needed to do landscaping and and screening in that area so it's like okay we'll we'll get rid of that space But if we don't have to get rid of the space we'd like to keep the the set the 10 seven and three the waiver and having sign in compact cards and motorcycles I mean it's not even a wave or anything right they just're just going through comments in the profession yes this is a little atypical because they were just here they got the op so we're just making some minor changes yes so we we could have a sign there to contact CS or something okay um the next is um C1 is addressed C2 is all of all of the existing sidewalks along Church Street Frontage be reconstructed however we put a note that it say will be repaired as needed um I'm not sure whether the whole Frontage of Church Street sidewalk needs to be repaired we're agreeing to do it as needed for Mr cleric's recommendation but to to you know we're to do the whole sidewalk uh seems excessive along Church Street when we're not really doing any improvements there yeah but again it wasn't Reinventing the wheel I was just repeating hos from the original when they here before that was the condition that was imposed originally um I'm raising that note some some of the items we had raised originally have been have I noted on you have been addressed some were not just poting the on yeah so we would like to just keep it as repair as needed and we'll work with Mr clerico as to what portions of the sidewalk need to be repaired and what portions um kinder made is that that's the that's Victorian Bo lab that is Bo orig side it's been a while I it's been AED C do you know thatone viori Church what's that mayor I'm sorry is the sidewalk over by3 on church is that stone you're breaking up do you do you know is that better do you know what composition is is it is it blue stone or regular concrete it's concrete now okay yes the whole work with Mr clerico is to replacing whatever portions need to be replaced but we don't just want a blanket notes saying that we're going to replace the whole con the whole sidewalk my recollection was there was a lot of crack slabs and whatnot that was my question Bob is it really that was my recollection it was a lot of crack crack sidewalk and it just the sidewalk along um Main Street looked in relatively good shape there any root buckling or any safety issues with it I'm saying they the original note said they would do some repairs I looked at it it looked like was a lot of it would have to be repaired and might just be just as easy to replace it but again however you want to handle this this is really the distinction here is whether you make us do the entire sidewalk as a condition right now or whether we agree to work with Mr clerico to replace Those portions that need to be replaced which may be the whole thing he may tell us you know it's Steve the whole thing needs to be replaced but let's have that flexibility in the in the condition you might also find out that just doing peace meal repair might be more expensive than just taking it out of the place it's true too and then we might want to but I I just don't want that mandate you have to replace a whole street side full of sidewalk do anybody on the court had an issue which just take care of it no okay the next 2B is um the parking issue so I think we've addressed that uh the next is curbing detail and you're correct we will do that the Belgium Block curving we will do um number three Landscaping lighting was deferred to M mcmanis um I can indicate to her that she um suggested that the weeping Cherry be replaced with either a flowering dog wood or an Eastern red bud which we will do and I don't know if there's other landscape we'll get to your report but I remembered that um the front yard comment was addressed we will again add the number five the Belgium Block and um I provided the water and sewer approval that I've received this afternoon I can give that to um Mr clerico um but we we already paid our connection fees water and so I emailed the um Hunter County planning board it's not on the county road and it doesn't it isn't required so we don't have to submit the Hun County planning board on this application and that's it for Mr Claro's report M's MC Van's report I pulled up the wrong one uh in terms of signage the the signage will be exterior limited uh lighted by an exterior lighting correct it won't be backl signed no can we uh for should there be an approval can we have an update to the plans that depicts the proposed lighting just so we can confirm it's down facing and the type of the lightf itself has been we we can do that right give a detail for the lighting is it going to be mounted on the building or on the ground light light on the building or on the ground we our last locasion we had it on the they call it sort of a goose neck where it shines down on the light or on the sign kind of like coming from the sides I think what's most important is that the uh the light fixture looks nice consistent with the style of the building and also that it's not creating glare what we don't want is folks to walk by the building on church or M or for any of the neighbors to be staring at the the light bulb itself we just want them to see the eliminated sign yeah right you'll that in a detail we'll provide a light for the signs to M mcm's satisfaction we already talked about the flowering dogs with easing Red Bud um painting the walk-in cooler I don't think that's necessary anymore since as M mcmanis pointed out it's already in the rear of the the uh lot that's screened by the landscaping and it's already a tan color correct and I and I think that's it and in terms of the variances we're requesting it based upon a hardship analysis because um the the only place really to functionally put this in relationship to the the existing building and its location of the lot is in that rear corner where it makes sense and it's really at the minim type of Varian under these type of circumstances for this accessory structure and the sign variances can be granted because it gives um more appropriate aesthetic signage for this corner lot and having the number of signs in the area the sign is appropriate for this type of use on a cornered lot it's not it identifies the site as a type of reil instead of office you where people can actually go I think for your signs none of the signs exceed uh 50 square feet which is the maximum requirement the relief necessary is for the third the side sign they've got one on me one on church and one facing the the parking lot um and so I think the board can consider the the need for sign and consider the fact that there are really three fa on this building in the sense that people are parking at the rear uh as opposed to on the street or or necessarily always coming in from Main Street or theary to the site can I ask you a question just because we're talking about a cooler and this I don't know if this came up the prior approv or not um there's you know you no you have no concerns about granting relief for the setback because of any issue of noise from the unit thej property I don't I don't think that these are particularly low equipment um it is it is closer to the property line but it's closer to the rear property line as opposed to um one of the parking spaces still along Church Street but adjacent to the neighboring building instead it's at the back corner where it's got some distances surrounding buildings in addition to the fact that I don't think it's a particularly loud feature but also I would note that the applicant is proposing uh on two sides the side facing then the side facing the rear and that will provide some it'll provide some noise mitigation as well just to further cut it down cut down the noise that's what I thought I just wanted to thank you yeah is there any auxiliary generation during power outage for it or is generator yes we will have onat yeah don't much refrigerator not there is a proposed generator showed on theil that's all the testimony that we have okay do Lord have any more questions for compar no let's make sure we open the questions and then we'll comment okay uh we'll now open it up for any comments from the public about could you stop sharing Steve sorry folks online are there anybody online no no no other attendees AR on not hearing any comments coms public app you want summation is this is a great existing business in the buau of Flemington that is excited to reopen in a new location and we're really hoping that you move us along so we can get them open close the public hearing so typically we'll make a motion um to either approve application so that we can have a discussion uh the application would be for amended site plan and C2 variant relief for the third sign as well as the variances outlined in this Van's report um I would suggest that if there is a motion to approve that there be conditions attached to it in addition to our standard conditions um the general condition would be that all prior conditions of approval would remain accepts as amended by disapproval um the applicant agrees to comply with all comments with in the board Engineers report except for the comments with regard to the parking space removal the applicant does agree however to sign that parking space in the front uh for compact cars or motorcycles only um and also uh with the exception of item 2A in the report um however the advocate will agree to work with the board engineer to address whatever portions of the sidewalks that need to be reconstructed um and as opposed to uh the recommendation which was to replace the entirety of the sidewalk the appli also know that no h County planal was required in addition alls within the board planners appr comp with except for the pay because that's no longer necessary B B on the location uh and the applicant agreed to update the plans depicting the proposed lighting detail the sign to the satisfaction of the temporary waivers temp uh we did that during complet no they temporary waivers have to be memorialized not oh yes I make the motion to approve second no discussion a little discuss motion okay any discuss got back vacation I I'll just so so it's on the record so that so that Cara is Happy uh uh the the this is actually an improvement over the prior approval because the location of the walkin is actually in the rear of the property which I think is better than being stuck on Church Street um uh the the setback relief is is understandable given the nature of where it is and what we're talking about and it's not really a burden the signage the third sign as Beth had said is you of a third facade of where folks are entering the building it really won't be impactful for the rescape of main or Church Street and so I see and I just want to add to that that um should the next applicant get approved for a major subdivision there's going to be new accesss on Church Street for um a lot of more a lot more traffic so having that rear sign I think is important for people to see it and they you know and as well as just the the retail nature of that side of the building going down to Central Avenue I think having that rear side is um a really good idea to maximize their visibility because it is creating an anchor to the business district at that traffic light online no comments from online she all know that motion was mayor second mayor Carol yes Miss swingle yes Council woman basara yes Mr Kian yes Mr Hill yes Mr D yes M whiton yes Mr E yes Mr show thank you all very much thank you happy holiday happy holiday Merry Christmas thank you next public hearing yes Mr is setting up good evening everyone my name is Donald happy with lawy holl on beh of the applicant I believe we did conclude with completeness but we did have a jurisdictional issue that came up there was what I'll characterize as essentially grading work that implicated Lots 29 32 and 72.0 as shown on the plans 29 had already been part of our original notice which we actually found out when we went back and double checked we did provide new notice for Lots 32 and 72.0 the affidavits were provided i' submit that the board does have jurisdiction now with respect to the notices that had previously been given prior to the last hearing those uh it was announced at that meeting that that uh this application would be carried to this meeting so that notice was preserved as to the balance of the Lots the newspaper notice was also preserved have copies of the yes I do so the applicant before you this evening is HBC Liberty Village urban renewal LLC we're here for preliminary and final site plan approval and subdivision approval with some variances uh the project is subject to the Liberty Village phase one Redevelopment plan which was rather recently adopted by the city council by the bur Council the project proposes a number of town homes and preservation of some existing structures Mr BCI will go into far greater detail with respect to that the project will be providing under the Redevelopment agreement with the municip with the burrow land for expansion of the water treatment facility an infrastructure donation remediation of contamination at the existing site there is a comprehensive redeveloper agreement that was negotiated between the borrow and the redeveloper part of that process was a consistency review where we had previously submitted the proposals the proposed development for this project to the council and to some of this board's Professionals for review and were ultimately designated to be consistent with the Redevelopment plan there are a number of variances that are required but most of which are associated with pre-existing structures that are going to be maintained other than a variance for parking which in one small instance where 10 foot separation from building is required we're only providing seven and that's in that's in one location I believe or perhaps two we are compliant with respect to the principal plan with respect to the one Church Street Building and the Allies building the Allies building is a building that's going to be dedicated to the B there are a number of variances required because although those buildings are now part of the new new plan they don't comply with the various bulk and setback requirements I'll list them out very briefly just so that they're on the record in the one Church Street lot is a minimum lot area of 65,000 Square ft that lot is 489 Square ft of Varan is required lot width required is 150 50 is existing black depth is 200 108 is existing front yard is 35 required 19.4 existing sidey yard is 15 required 9 existing rear yard is 15 required nine existing with respect to the Allies lot again 65,000 is the minimum lot area the Allies building is 10,633 Ft as it sits today lot width again is 150 existing lot is 100 lot depth is 200 existing lot is 108 front yard requirement is 35 existing is 22.9 sidey yard required is 15 existing is nine rear yard required is 50 existing is 10.1 that's the entire list of the variances that are required so again only one with respect to parking a separation from buildings on the principal development otherwise it's in my opinion 100% compliant with the Redevelopment plan Mr poochie will go into more detail I have five witnesses some of whom are here to answer questions from the boards may not be necessary but we have our civil engineer we have our landscape architect we have two architects with the two different proposed uh residential products and um and we have our traffic consult so we further Ado I'm just gonna go through a couple of housekeeping items first um well Mark is we do as A1 the applicationing documentation admitted to uh A2 was noticed in publication including that most recently submitted for tonight's hearing we will Mark as pb1 the lington historic preservation commission memo dated April 23 2024 pb2 will be the clington bur fire safety letter dated September 177 2024 pb3 will be uh Mr trout Traffic Engineers memo dated November 22nd 2024 pb4 will be Miss MC's memo dated November 24 2024 sorry a little out of order there pb5 will be Mr clarico report dated November 23rd 2024 and then the last one if I didn't miss any is an undated M from the environmental commission uh it's a three page memo consisting of four items that will be pv6 I'm sorry just kinsky what did you have the um borrow fire safety that fire safety is pb2 and that's the September 17th thank you oh you know what and let's do pb7 there was an updated HPC letter updated HPC memo dated October 6 2024 you got the en yes sorry um yeah sure tesy about to give this the truth the whole truth nothing truth yes professional M pie do you share your creds to the board I'm a licensed professional engineer and a licensed planner in New Jersey I've been licensed since the late 80s or so so my 35 years or so I have appeared before planning boards zoning boards board um combined plan boards Superior Court excuse me can you please speak up okay so backing up I'm a licensed professional engineer and professional planner in New Jersey I've been licensed for about 30 5 years I've appeared before planning boards zoning boards combined land use boards a superior court throughout the state been qualified before many boards including this board just for a completely issue about a month ago I prepared literally probably hundreds of site plans and subdivisions for residential commercial Industrial Development over the last 45 years where I've been employed at what is now known as CPL partnership where I am the senior managing member of that firm and which what your license is his C yes it is vice chair I'd ask you to accept him as a professional uh civil engineer and plan yes anybody have any questions any questions about that you believe it so just from a perspective I mean the review letters in this instance were fairly extensive I I don't intend to go through them Point by Point what I do intend to do is try and point out as with the last application those areas where we aren't likly agreeing to May War some discussion leaving the letters for us all right so again leaving the letters for later just uh sharing my screen now okay so here's the project um this has been before uh the advisory committee and it's been shown to the administration over the last couple of years as we've evolved to what is now the Liberty Village Redevelopment which consists of town homes and two veterans buildings those two veterans buildings are located west of stangle road so off to the left of stangle Road and for orientation purposes you can see the Route 12 on the bottom stangle road you can see labeled it kind of Curves up and we are showing it being realigned to go straight through what was once the polo building and in front of what was once the uh this Timberland building and we'll continue on to its current alignment between the Lone Eagle brewery here to the left the distiller to the right and then up towards the top people church is off to the right and up top at me which prior application just discussed um the two veter buildings are affordable housing units six units per building and of the 111 town homes that I proposed the seven will be affordable so the total is 19 affordable housing units or 15% of the total number of units in the project for this phase the project will basically eliminate everything that exists like the right hand side of this all the red on the right side of the screen between ground Street to the right you have church up topout 12 to the bottom and the Sangle Road right away uh as well as the railroad right away to the left that's where the current Mall sits it's all vacant you've seen it's um basically emptied out I believe demolition is IM imminent but uh waiting for certain procedural things such as tonight uh entire site's fenced in right now so you cannot get in there but the former um mall that was there is obviously um going to be completely demolished including all the infrastructure within that area and by infrastructure I'm talking about all the pavment all the buildings all the utilities all sewer all water any gas or electric everything is gone in there and it's in total rebuild of that side the left side right now where you see this yellow extension of Forge Road connecting down to the parking lot that is where we intend to fill some of the parking lot as you may know Walnut Brook which traverses through R to your West um and comes down Clips the corner of our property and goes underneath Route 12 uh that has a flood plane associated with it and Thea has designated basically the entire parking lot all the way up to just about the train tracks in a flood Hazard area we have met with d over the last several years prar the entire set of plans site plans that you see here Depp has approved these site plans and as part of the blood Hazard granted the fill that is associated with the Forge Road Extension here and the little bit of stangle Road up towards the top that fill to raise that area which is currently the plug plane up to and out of a flood plane is being compensated for by what we're calling this compensatory flood storage excavation out to the West End D has reviewed all the calculations prepared by myself and partner firms and issued a flood hous area individual permit for this work including the Phill and for all the residential project including review of the St manager regulations and that was an issue that was covered last hearing about two weeks ago when talking about certain elements of St mot rules right um while you because of the public it's like this make sure that you make use of the plan to show some of the areas you're talking about so that people out there understand where it is on the plan okay so at the very Left End where I'm circling now you see a red line around this light green that is what we're calling the compensatory flood storage excavation what it is is there's currently a parking lot there right now and we are removing that part of the parking lot digging down and just putting vegetation grass and some vegetation on the perimeter that will be area where the flood waters of Walnut Brook can fill instead of filling all the way up to Forge Road in fact D has approved that a balance of fill you fill someplace else you excavate and the two balance one another out as for the storm waterer management of the project we have a number of Bio retention systems located on the east side and the east side is where the the current mall is they are some small scale vention systems two large scale ones one of those being what we're calling the Brown Street Bio retention system which is right here the project has a little bit of Frontage on Brown Street that portion of the frontage on BR Street will not be developed for the project but what will actually happen is there's a 7500 square foot park being donated to the burrow and the landscape architect can show you the details of that particular part and many of these there in behind that we're creating the BR Brown Street Bio retention system that happens to be what the E will call a large scale bio attention system that's simply because the area contributing flow to that Bas is too large to be considered a small one the area going to that Basin has nothing to do with the project it is all the existing residential development along Brown brand and to the East and that all contributes to a low point in Brown Street that currently floods just north of where Grant Avenue is there's a low point in the road and as you probably all very well know and I'm sure Mr Campion knows very well uh when there's a rainfall event even a minor one that area floods and he gets the phone calls so we are constructing this Basin to help alleviate that flooding problem there is one other large scale Basin which is down at Route 12 and that is shown here at the bottom the existing driveway will be maintained and just to the right of that we're going to create this large scale bio retention Basin that happens to take some flow from the project site as well as the backyards of a number of homes along Brown Street so those two particular basins not only handle in the case of the r 12 one some on-site flow but also off-site flow to help alleviate floating problems in the Barrow the rest of the bio retention systems on the east side are all small scale and they're used to not only treat the impervious surface that is going to be proposed impervious surface simply being the pavement of where Vehicles can either drive or part but then they will all be treated and be cleaned in those bio retention systems and then they will also function in larger storms to attenuate Peak flow everything east of ground Street right now contributes flow underneath stangle Road there's a pipe that goes underneath actually goes right underneath the um booth for Cane's railroad there and that particular pipe that goes under there is grotesquely undersized like it can handle maybe one seventh or eighth of the actual flow that gets there so we are proposing to upgrade that pipe and therefore another alleviate another bottleneck inlow and get that water down to the existing there's an onsite basically it's offsite to us for now um tributary behind the properties that front on Route 12 and it flows down and through some of our property as you get closer to I think it's Mary Jane or Jane Smith Lane which is the driver that comes from Route 12 up to your existing well building so that flow to that particular low point in Route 12 you're taking all the flow from the East side will be alleviated through our basins on the east side so that we reduce the peak flow coming off of the project on the west side we have one bof retention system along the north side of Forge Road that is there to treat our new again proposed motor vehicle surface and we are actually fortunate in that most of the site today as you've seen it's either parking lot on the west or the mall on the right so it's virtually all impervious and there's going to be quite a bit of green space as you can see on this map scattered throughout the residential community that we're proposing so the reduction in impervious surface help Us in that we do meet all of the required d uh reductions in Peak flow we also meet all the requirements for water quality treatment and green infrastructure by the use of these particular devices and groundwater recharge we actually don't have to meet any recharge deficit because we're proposing actually an increase of about 40% I believe of the current recharge that exists our proposed post-development recharge is about 40% higher than what happens again since it's all impervious today from a sanitary sewer perspective the burrow currently has a main up in Church Street that flows to the East and there is a main down along Route 12 some in the right away Route 12 that basically starts pretty much at our Southeast corner and flows Westward along Route 12 and and I had a meeting actually at this table right here a week ago eight five days ago with your Shard water departments to discuss their initial reviews of our project and they accomplish some very good suggestions that we will incorporate one being um there's a piece of pipe that exists our tie in point is at our southwest corner along Route 12 on the East track there's their existing pipe that continues Eastward it's not needed so they can eliminate that from one of their Capital Improvement projects and save some funding there um there was a request for us to look at rerouting the proposed sewer on the west side right now there's an existing line that flows from the back of I guess it's a region Road flows that drives between the brewery and the lower end of the retail building above the brewery and it serves what was three I believe it was now two homes along Region Road that sewer flows Southward through this off-site lot and through power lot and continues on to the southwest and that flow would be underneath one of our proposed uh bio retention systems and flow between two of our proposed buildings and we've been asked to reroute that around the bio retention we have no problem with that we will take that pipe and move it around and make the body modifications our on-site collection system to accommodate that request from a water perspective there are four connections that we propos to the burrow system right here to the left of our Forge Road production of homes and you have this yellow extension of Forge Road there is a little Gap triangular lock that we don't know that's actually a burrow well building and part of our application is this Orange area where we're donating I believe 3600 or something like at the First with the borrow for the expansion of their well building in the future they ACC their future needs that they have a water main that traverses east to west just above the property line of the the well our property and then runs northward along the property line between our property and the park you know parking lot prop here and the offsite lot that is behind the brewery we are going to tap into the borrow line there we are also going to tap into the B line up at Church Street and down at 12 what we're doing with the extension of Central Station and then there's a fourth connection point that we are showing right now at the north end of our property along stangle Road and I learned from Josh Parks your Water supervisor that that particular line exists a little bit further north the mapping is not correct so we will just extend our C within the stangle road right away and connect to the existing line they'll just require a little bit of offsite trenching within the right one of the features of what we're doing is we're going to put on this Jack or or run a pipe underneath the rail road so right in this location here where Forage Road crosses we're going to have a connection of a water man between the left side and the right side sort of looping and providing additional um support to the existing infrastructure that you have out here now when I talk about Central Station I just mentioned we're going to tie in um the water at the top and the bottom one of the things that we are doing is extending Central Station which now exists north of church and the original plan that we started with with the advisory committee a year or two ago easily kind of went straight up and connected opposite the existing connection right up here at church however during that review and the evolvement of the project what Mr Pepe just described as the one Church stre funding we call one church and I've seen ref to is three church but it is the existing white building that that is right here opposite Central Station on church on the south side it was asked that that building be preserved so we have an offset intersection uh whereby Central Station now comes North rout and deviates to the left a little bit and then comes up and it does not tie in directly opposite the existing Central Station on north of church that's simply to accommodate the request of the burrow to maintain and and preserve the one Church Street Building just to the right of that on this uh exhibit I'm looking at the concept plan here you see another Brown building that's called the existing structure to be donated to the borrow that is the Allies building that Mr Pepe also described now these two lots or these two buildings are going to have lots around them and as he mentioned they are grossly undersized for the ordinance requirments of the project because they are little offshoots of donation to The borrow they're not part of our proposed development but by creating a small lot around them to be able to effectuate a donation they are undersized lots and I'll go through the specifics in Greater detail with a better picture if the board would like but the numbers that Mr Pepe just read to you five 10 minutes ago are in fact correct there are bulk violations required for front side your setback areas widths Etc the one variance that does come out as a result of this conet plan deals with an ordinance requirement in the Redevelopment plan that says you cannot have any parking within 10 feet of a residential building with the exception of obviously a driveway there are five locations actually in this plan and I will just blow it up to kind easier to see where those um violations of less than 10t a car and they are entirely 100% consistent with the concept plan that was ultimately approved by the Liberty Village advisory committee allowing us to proceed to these hearings so they occur right here there are three parking spaces along the north side of pulman way and two on the South Side this little G in here that's just an indication that's where we have a violation because the corner of the parking spot in the back is about seven feet or so there seven is the smallest there some is largest eight and a half but they are less than 10 feet from the residential units there are two more down here at Forge Road Again where you have some parking between the units basically visitor overflow parking and there is a fifth location along the east side of Central Station right here just opposite where Forge Road and hman P into Central Station on the east side we have two more parking spaces again overflow visitor parking but they are within 10 feet of the residential unit it's not inconsistent with what you see when the car parked in front of the driveway but it is actually out here um less than 10 feet so that is in fact bar just for the record really quickly this plan I know it's the concept plan um is there just give us the title is there a sheet number there is no sheet number this is the color exhibit that's been used with the um just the word concept works colori this is consistent with the site plan set that you submitted yes we we have developed our site plan based upon this plan uh they are in fact one of the same the site plan of course is black and white and I don't know whether they're not here yeah was the colored one submitt to the board other just mark it yeah I don't believe it has been the market is exhibit A3 color item version of the CPL plan label concept plan the 83 now I guess Zoom does not transfer my screens quickly so I just went to stop sharing um the color concept plan and what I'm showing now is the actual full sight plan set which was submitted as part of this application yeah and and just as you go through when you're talking about each page so we know for the record just let us know you're on yes I'm just kind of going through now um this right now is sheet four of the site plan set this is the first of the demolition existing conditions demolition plan views of the project and you can see that we have crosshatched all of the mall property here all of the buildings all the pavement Etc that crosshatch is shown in key down at the bottom of the plan um and a note that indicates it's all going however there is a blow up that we had discussed with Mr Paro showing that in fact the two buildings that I ref referen to before the one Church Street building right here and the Allies building right here those are existing buildings that are going to be preserved so that is why there's this blow up showing that they are not being demolished moving further into this is now just a dimension plan this is known as sheet seven it's the first of the dimension plans in the site plan set and it represents the upper right piece of the project this shows you how our extension of central away actually curves to the left and right again and will attouch Church Street not directly opposite Central a where it exists today but we couldn't do that because then we would be taking out the building that we were asked to preserve one thing that we are doing I will just blow up this particular Dimension plan of um what are you doing that vui that was actually one of the questions that was raised in the burrow traffic review report well explain why those roads why the roads are not offset because there is a standard that requires that you have an offset I believe it's a minimum of 100 feet between intersections on opposite sides of the street and um we do not have that here however our belief is that this could be considered the safe because we don't have a heavy through traffic cross movement anyone going West on Church Street is not going to keep going because the road ends it stops right there so you're either going to turn right on Central Station and go northward or you're going to turn left onto our new Central Station and go south so although the standard is there for a good reason you don't want to have people pulling out of one side of the other making cross movements and conflicting traffic it's not truly um the situation here because of the fact that it's a dead end terus immediately west of our extension you know we're providing graphically picking three parking spaces for this one U retail building that is just North of church but the road ends right there one of the things I was going to point out as well was in the dedication of for example the one Church sheet building which currently has no parking spaces and the allies building which currently has a total of 12 parking spaces we're actually providing parking to be dedicated to those uses we have straddling the common property line between our two nle closed Lots one handicap space for each of those buildings they don't have any currently and then we are proposing that we have seven parking spaces on the west side of Central Station and a total of nine on the east side eight of those on the East side this eight here and the seven on the west side are 15 total plus the one that we're proposing Up on Church those will all be for the Allies building so Church which currently I'm sorry allies which currently has uh tall parking spaces will wind up with a total of 16 including one handicap and the out the one Church Street Building here is going to have the one space behind us right behind it and the one handicap space so where it currently has zero it will have two one handicapped and one regular prop space just put you one of the other questions that came up in the various review letters I believe it came up in about three different places how is that going to be preserved to the benefit of burrow corong be done by oh yes how will the spaces be yes we can do an easement over these spaces to the benefit of the burrow so and of course whatever physical signing striping Etc the burrow on your profession they want we will of course provide in fact while while we're touching on it just to be clear there was a couple of other instances where it we raised there's going to be a cross easement regime set up through this entire Community correct well that's correct because these are not traditional rights of way but we did provide a subdivision pled proposed plant for each of the individual Town Homes now they're all going to be on individual lots and the Redevelopment ordinance does provide for exactly that the bulk standards for the overall track do not apply to those individual Lots they have a minimum requirement of 2,000 square feet which we meet and some certain minimum B criteria which are all me for those lots but other than that the plat which depicts the road partway um alignment those will be private lots for a private road and there will be cross access easements and blanket easements over them because we have within those Haven areas a number of utilities such as some limited storm sewer all the uh sanitary sewer the water mains um the gas and other cable type utilities such as Electric telephone Telecom will all be within the payment area so there'll be blank eement to allow that to occur and give rights for of course access for the motoring public to just go through them and similarly there'll be rights granted to the burrow as well in order to have access to the extent the B needs I'm sorry my okay sir sir sir I I I know the applicant they're presenting their application there will be a time for you to ask questions English him let him do his presentation question later thank you okay um that's pretty much the overall intent of the utility infrastructure the fill the location of the units Etc there are a number of um comments in the review letters as Mr P said the agre basically a large chunk of them there are some that do require some discussion there is the issue of the parking variants that I did describe to you um for the locations as I'm looking right on this particular um sheet here you can see again the three parking spaces that are north of pman way I have less than 10 feet you know as I said they're generally around 8 feet there is one we're at seven um there are a number of bulk criteria within the Redevelopment plan for things such as a perimeter buffer a setback for any ground floor amenities that um exist or excuse me our proposed ground lonies being something like in the back of a townhouse here looking at now sheet eight and that shows for example I'm going to blow it up to make it little clear people don't understand but where I have the Brown Street Bio retention syst that I described before to continue a little bit south of that area and move over see people can see Brown Street is over here and we're proposing tow houses that have their back against the common property line of the rear of Homes at front on Brown Street so there is this 10 foot wide backyard uh perimeter buffer that we have and that says that we cannot have any ground floor things such as what's shown on here this light gray area that I'm circling is a patio but the dash line up above represents a second floor deck if you will of the townhouse at the upper level and the ordinance says okay I can have a 10- foot setback at the ground level but I have a 25 foot setback for aity space on the second floor of the residential use so for example this is a 10x10 deck on the second floor it complies it's outside of that setback there are locations here where we specifically call out a 10 by8 deck it's still 10 ft wide only 8 ft deep off the unit to make sure it complies with that bulk requirement of no second floor am many space within 25 ft of the property boundary just a couple questions while you're going on so there's a requirement that could be landscape offer separating all of the new construction from the existing residential lots residential lots with better zoned or used residenti and there are some comments in the report we go into greater detail with our landscape necessary we're fully complying with that plan well we are complying and or will comply because that Tempa buffer is shown however there's requirement for a staggered row of um evergreen trees and the current plan does not fully show that sometimes there are larger trees sometimes there are shrubs so we will amend the plan landscape architect and speak to that uh to conform to the letter of the ordinance and I'd suggest to the board i' just to offer I mean what our landscape architect did he'll talk about this in Greater detail was interspersed recovery to give it some contrast and some and some interest as opposed to just two rows of offset trees board May well want to consider maintaining some differentiation but we'll address that later Mr poie you have mentioned about the well expansion donation rate I think you said it was 3250 in 4250 it right I just move over to sheet 10 of the just so I can see and the area is not on it so I will go back to the concept I know it's actually showing the concept 4250 so senior moment I I said the word 3500 it's 4,250 and I do remember describing it as the orange area shown on here and that is for this existing well building that is in this triangular trapeo lot that is off site not part of our project uh to allow for the expansion of that facility if it when necessary desired and they'll also be Associated eers for Access of course you want to think it's a good time to start going through some of the review comments that's unless the board has questions before that um so you testified about the access to the roads and I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly that these are the roads will not be dedicated to the burrow correct they are going to be private roads and there's going to be access for public traversing or no yes absolutely blanket eement as I said for all not just traversing but also the utilities underneath and uh snow removal is that burrow responsibility or the or the developer responsibility you the answer that question it's going to be homeowners association not not technically the developer sorry HOA will take responsibility for snow removal correct for uh maintenance of those roads right okay thank you yeah you know as you know or maybe you don't know there are legal Provisions for the homeowners association to seek reimbursement for the municipality for certain of those costs and they may well do that they may not do that I don't know we're not the reason why I'm asking is because that has been an ongoing issue with a particular HOA in the burrow and I'm asking that's why I want it on the record and it will be part of the easements which I'm sure the Burrow's attorney will ultimately review and approve including Mr kazinski would would likely have a hand in reviewing and approving to make sure that atast as well I'm sorry we are doing prate okay um so as we noted you know except for as we're about to discuss on the record we are willing to comply with all of the review comments and all of the review letter but we'll start with the uh planning comments that are related to the Civil plans all right so let's corre so Mr pooie and some of these are are requests for clarification which will provide but also conflicts in some instances very few actually section uh comment number 5.2 asked us to comment on our compliance with EV requirements speak about that okay so the EV requirements are going to be met um try find 5.2 for the public put is easy electric vehicle charging stations there's a state statute which Everybody Must comply with any new development and in some cases retrofix andal developments and that basically states that you have to provide either well electrical vehicle charging capabilities for 15% of your required parking spaces and that 15% is broken out as 5% of the required parking spaces at the approval but another 5% within three years of the issuance of the First Co and the remaining 5% within six years of the issuance of the First Co and CER occupany and nothing provides you or prohibits you from exceeding that either in number or in time frame but the project does require and I believe I sumarized this in our General on the site plan set the second sheet has a massive amount of notes and since the required parking uh for the residential component is um going to require that we have 261 spaces inclusive of the 56 spaces for visitors we have to kind of look at these differently because the visitor spaces way they rsis read you have a certain number of spaces for tow houses or in the case of as I'm showing over here the apartment buildings that are the veterans homes um those number of spaces whatever it happens to be depending on the size of of the unit maybe two bedroom unit requires 2.1 spaces whatever it happens to be that number that requirement is inclusive of one half space for visitor Pary that's built into the parking requirements so for the total project of the 111 town homes and the 12 veterans homes uh we do need 266 total parking spaces that that's not the number that's on the plans Mr tropin caught a math error and we're going to fix that but the number is correct at 266 and of that 56 are on Street visitor space spes of which 15% would have to be EV spaces so that means of the visitor spaces I have to provide a total of uh 40 which third third and third winds up being 14 13 and 13 so we have designated on the plan on the site plan set a number of EV spaces including two that are handicapped accessible because you have to have at least 5% of your EV spaces to be handicap accessible so we meet all those numbers that's for the visitor parking as far as the town homes go those uh would require the um an additional number of parking spaces um I believe another 26 um but that that's to get the total 15% of the whole big number and the attemp of the developer we going to be building the project is to offer for each of the Town Ro fers the ability to have a charging station in your garage that's not a mandate that's an office that developer has also said if I'm getting anywhere near any thresholds where I'm not going to meet it then it's no longer an offer it's a mandate and it will be provided so at a minimum you'll have the minimum number of garages provided with EV charging stations Plus in excess of the 15% the 40 for the visitor spaces just to recap that because I don't know that that wasn't was as clear as it could be you know the requirement is 15% and the first 15 town home buyers ask for the option of the EV charger that would satisfy it we're done and it doesn't stop us nobody asks for it then it will be installed automatically in the last 50 all right and what is the total number of EV spaces for the 20 66 space parking spes required just so we've got that number on 15% of 266 you're law school graduate I'm just gonna steal a phone because it's I just make sure 40 okay I had 40 just for visitors that's 39.9 all right 40 y um in the planning report U 5.3 we were asked to explain why there are seven locations where sidewalks are not on both sides of the street well there are five locations the last two common steal with crosswalks and so and they this is I'm just coming from the beginning Miss's report to see if that's the first place where I have so um this concept plan that I'm going to now blow up and this is something that as I said was part of the whole evolution of the project and the changes to preserving when reload the road Etc so there are some locations for example I'm going to just go right here to the top where it's describing the parking before that will be dedicated for the Allies building and then one chch she at the edge of the Westerly parking spaces the seven that we have that are on the west side of Central Station they have right behind them a um bio retention system and we are not putting a sidewalk behind those because the design of the bio retention system does require that the water go over a flush curve not a fight 6inch curb but it's a flush mount curb and then over the water no instead of up six in yeah like like a driveway apron but much longer okay um and the water will flow over that flush curb and then over a five foot wide area of what would be River Rock sometimes people want rip wrap it depends on the preference of the board in your planner um but generally we would use River Rock and the purpose of that is to dissipate the energy of water because you have water flowing across pavement and then it's going to flow AC to the edge of the pavement and keep going you don't want to erode the vegetation you want to dissipate the energy over the Rock and then right behind that it flows into the vegetation which is the bio retention system and that occurs for example right here on the West side of Central Station at this uh Church Street Bio retention base if I slide down a little further um I have at the bottom I have down by Route 12 the South by retention system on the West Side the same thing occurs where the water is going to be ired off of the pavement over the flush curb over the river rock into the bio retention system where five Bridges way in Central Station intersect 5 b way being the western western extension of our little road to service these Town Homes there's another Southwest fire retention system that's going to have flow coming off of both five Bridges way those parking spaces there and the ones along Central Station we have a similar instance I'm still moving over to the West Side now where at Forge Road Extension to the west of the veterans Apartments I have parking there and at the head of those parking spaces again same thing flush curb River Rock and bio retention system the river rock is generally at a gentle slope of 2% or 3% something like that and then the bio retention system is like an excavated or instructed above ground depending upon where you're at on the site a side slope that's a little steeper so that's where the vegetation is that will then treat the water but you can't have a curb there and then a sidewalk behind it because the water will never do what the stone water manic green infrastructure uh measures intended to do so which one is that so under 5.3 all right so 5.3a the sidewalk not provided on the western side of Central Station at rout 12 that's the one I was just describing down here looking at Route 12 we're coming in the existing entrances there today curving around our bio retention systems the one on the left the Southwest or South um that will not have sidewalk there we do have sidewalk coming down the road there is a crosswalk and we continue the sidewalk on the east side down to meet the existing sidewalk that runs along the shoulder of pit far away from the right line but right at the edge of the havit there's an existing sidewalk that we're going to connect to B talk about the west side of Central Station at the church C where I was talking about the parking spaces that are being dedicated to the allies and one Church stre structures but that one you're not correct none of these locations we are proposing to follow the green infrastructure requirements of storm water and allow the FLH curve River Rock flow into the fire retention system the C talks about connecting the existing and proposed sidewalk at Route 12 to the site um so what I just described is we're actually connecting the the PO sidewalk on the east side of Central Station we're not proposing on the west side because of what I just described with the green infrastructure bio retention but we are providing the crosswalk to allow anyone who's walking on the sidewalk on the west side of Central Station to cross over to the east side and down to 12 so hold on I I don't think that you're addressing what I say Okay um and maybe I'm sorry if it wasn't clear but what I'm asking for is is the existing sidewalk along the Route well to continue and connect to the sidewalk on your property I essentially want a connection between the existing sidewalk at the cartway just simply through the right of ways to connect to your sidewalk I'm I'm talking about right here this right you You' mentioned the C maybe I misunderstood you but You' mention the crosswalk which is isn't relevant I'm asking for a connection for people walking along group 12 that want to go to the property you know up the this main fine road that they simply have a sidewalk W and there is it's right here yeah the comment we thought this MC was why is there not sidewalk on both sides it's on one side I yeah I that's and I had not asked for a comment on the on the west side or a sidewalk on the west side but if there's a sidewalk there and I had overlooked it as an existing condition hides it but yes the existing sidewalk that runs along Route 12 I'm follow running across here on the east side of Central Station we are extending our sidewalk all the way out to connect to right here connect all the way down thank you and the reason I said crosswalk is because anyone on the West Side would come down and reach a point where there's no more sidewalk on the west side of Central Station because of the biofiltration and they would therefore across and then continue on the east side and have the ability to go down to Route 12 sidewalk so I think just for the record A and B I had not requested a change C Jay has actually showed me the highlighted plan to confirm that the sidewalk is there and I missed it so that connection is existing already and so C okay but A and B you are indicating something's not and they're indicating that they do not plan to provide it that's correct so so I identified Rel that the Board needs to consider I specifically you know the board is happy I'm always happy to have the board request additional sidewalks but I had not suggested that that was particularly necessary as you'll see in some of these other comments um I provide some about what the benefit would be with it it should be provided y excuse me general question should the board feels strongly about having a sidewalk along the west side of Central Station you're you're offering testimony as to why you can't do it based on how you designed the Basin is there a different way for you have to have designed these so that you don't have the sheet flow into the Basin or is that you're saying that's your only option for Designing this kind of the Basin I'm saying that's the the yes the only option I don't know of another way to get water to flow into those basins off of the pavement without creating a point source discharge which is an erosive thing that's not allowed under green infrastructure they do ask that the water flow over the um that's for the small scale bi over the dissipated energy RI or in this case River scenario uh comment D in um 5.3 D his M's letter concerns stangle Road here on the West side of the project and what we are proposing right now is no sidewalk going down because we um don't really have full control of that property that was part of the whole notice thing and the the hearing last week two weeks ago and we've since changed our plan and well we haven't submitted it but we can change the plan however I believe u Mr Pepe can speak to the interaction between our property and that property which may facilitate some additional so um just be to be clear I'd love to have a sidewalk along well I'm specifically just simply asking for sidewalks along the property that is under your control and is shown on the you want just done yeah I think at a minimum is so for any future Road improvements we right I and you can see we have future Road planning in here um that we are going to of course take into account and sidewalk we will put it on both sides and there there was actually a comment I believe both in Mr cl's letter and Mr Chapman's letter about Mr CL talking about side triangles at this intersection ear here and Mr that what we are showing right now is stop condition on stangle and a through condition on Forge and we're just going to make them before we stop all four legs of this intersection being stopped that will just change that I add two more s um comment e sidewalks along the road rather than being behind Pur get a parking yeah and this this interacts directly with what you had started out with talking about how the sidewalk goes um I I think you know around you were unable to provide sidewalk in certain locations um was by the Veterans building PR but what I'm you know if you scroll up on the for example right here yeah so so there are a couple so what we've done is couple good examples where you've got the sidewalk that goes behind the parking spaces and I it's just at the top of where it's labeled Central Station and I think that the likelihood of folks walking around the cars to continue is pretty and so i' recommend that you do sidewalk and parkes back the parking spaces are back and what what is now here it's a I mean on Central Station by the label of Cal you want all these move into here put the park back yes that's fine um these we were kind of viewing as Municipal parking um and since there's nothing behind here to worry about you know like you don't want to have for example a sidewalk wrapped around these three spaces here on pman way because then you have people walking within a foot or two of a private residents and the reality is if they're walking across the sidewalk here they're going to keep going on the crosswalk they're not going to walk out of their way ex around his space here it was more like well the car you know you're going to get out of your car you're going to go to the sidewalk and go into one of the two buildings but there's you would prefer that we push these forward and put the sidewalk as an extension as we've done other places no problem and then are there other locations aside from uh the northern portion of Central Station shown here the southern portion of Central Station down at rout 12 which is missing two sides of sidewalk right here right there but you're continuing the sidewalk across there correct here I'm continuing the sidewalk as a crosswalk at the pavement level because the water is going to flow across the the the road is not crown and Mr CL did not that um it's all sheeting to in this case to the West so that all the water would flow across the crosswalk parking spaces R river rock into the biofiltration are to be treated I think that's fine um I just want to make sure that folks any pedestrians have a clear path to follow yes I mean and I think that that would have Comm this is a crosswalk we can stripe it as however we like um and then I wanted to look on I think Ro further west yeah I I think I had not included that comment but I'd like to see sidewalks along both sides of Board Road well we have the sidewalk on the south side that runs all the way out right are you asking us to continue out to the okay that's easy enough can I Al can I also add that my understanding is that parking lot is gonna continue to be used for um transfers I believe yeah if you have residents you think that clet will be really Tru to have a sidewalk going right to them people are still going to come in off of the entrance down here on 12 and then driveing instead of going to the left where the compensatory storage is where they currently Park we're going to park here on the East and however many of them park the bus comes in the resid place to walk to get the bus just just to clarify it on the right angle parking spaces where you you're going to have best suggestion you're going to make them deeper and strike a a walkway behind the spaces is that what I wasn't behind the spes like you were looking for a walkway in here yes yes so so you're going to put your spaces yes yeah same as along Central in all those locations where you don't have sidewalk on both sides of the street you have the angled spaces the testimony is they can't do a sidewalk along front because they have the Sheep the Basin they're indicating that's the onlye of way they can design this kind the alternate suggestion to make the spaces deeper and have a crosswalk stripe you know delineated somehow would that be just normal striping or would that be some like F Concrete or something like something that be did more distinguishable I think for me personally I think crosswalk striping would be more than adequate it would certainly be visible enough I don't feel the need to have uh Concrete in that location Al J we disagree in this particular location Jo up at church where we were discussing before the um parking spaces for the allies and church building I believe what you asked is to push these parking spaces the 8 plus1 on the right side or the East Side further away and continue the sidewalk uh as a crosswalk behind the spaces at the edge of the cway similar to what we have here for example on pulman way where the spaces are pushed behind the extension of the sidewalk as a crosswalk correct yeah uh I I'm just trying to make sure sure that we're on the same page Mr as well for the seven spaces on the West Side there's no reason to push those further into the Basin and have a continuation of the sidewalk there because basically when you're on the sidewalk on the right side which is now going to be continuation up here and these three will also get the same treatment push back that's going to connect you to church which then all the existing Church Street is to the east there's really nothing to the west to connect to so the suggestion of pushing these spaces further into and shrinking that fire attention that was not what you were asking is that Mr car well no and let's focus on those particular seven spaces right now you have seven spaces there if I park in one of those spaces I don't have access to a sidewalk anywhere I have to basically have to walk across uh Central Station roads either between cars to get to a sidewalk and the off and Central Station is a as far as this project concerned it's a pretty major thoroughfare for moving traffic you know between 12 and and and Church Street in and out of out of the project those are seven in this particular case those are seven stations being dedicated in some fashion need to the world for use on the public for the use of the public buildings how where they end up getting used uh and we don't have there's no defined pedestrian path for those particular space that's that's really what I'm pointing out here and you're indicating you can't put the sidewalk on the Basin side because of the way the storm water system is designed and I'll accept your testimony that's the only way this Basin will be designed and I would agree with you if this is the only way that Basin could be designed and yeah you can't put a sidewalk on what would normally be the the front end of the car right um and what we're discussing here is making the spces deeper and distinguishing something along the back this as long as it's clearly distinguished right now we doing that on the east side I was just trying to clarify are you trying to do that on theast side on the east side you actually have a sidewalk and we're going to switch that as MC just ask then I didn't follow that you're G to switch that to we're gonna push the spes behind the parking no they're gonna switch that they're gonna put can I wait I don't know if I like pedestrians walking behind the park cars you don't no no same I agree so I Like That Sidewalk system as he as it designed is they can get out par the park car the pedestrians can get out and get right to the sidewalk and as for the seven spaces I think those people would find their way to the sidewalk system on the east side so you think the seven on the east side on um excuse me the west side don't need a sidewalk correct correct I think those people would find their way to the sidewalk system that that leads them to the building they're going to the church and the Allies you in that area so that right be would see that sight line on Central Station yeah yeah I think you have you have good sight line through there to view any pedestrian see pedestrian cross yes somebody somebody parks there they're walking to the Forge office this building they side about there right they're going to be walking in the street the whole time yet there are seven spaces I think those seven parked cars would need to immediately Cross Central Station and pick up the sidewalk system that's on the east side right but if they want to go to the one one Church the forge building you know I mean which is still on the east east of those right can can I just make sure that I got this right Jay is okay with the plan is on the screen Beth was raising a question about switching it so what are we hearing probably a difference of opinion I had I had to say it because I just don't like pedestrians walking behind parked cars I'd rather have them you know navigate around listen talking says the applicant should revise the sidewalk plan to provide sidewalks along the road rather than behind perpendicular parking so you don't like it behind I don't think you like it behind either I think they're I think they have a difference in of what word behind that's yeah that's really meant yeah the I want behind the spot yeah my recommendation is the sidewalk is along the cartway let me let's let's it that way Jay's recommendation I think is that the sidewalk be on the other side of the cars it avoids back versus front yeah it's along the cart way but then when you encounter some of these poring indentations it would then the sidewalk would go so you not putting pedestrians behind but the existing condition on stangle north of here has I know that's where it's complicated because like the half of the right away is the parking spot you got the so contiguous and the parking spots there and people have no problems navigating that and that's what's on this plan here to the similar in the similar District right yeah the only I not I wouldn't make a complaint about the existing Sangle Road the concern here is that I'm raising is I'm not sure folks people I'm not sure people will follow the sidewalk and so let's put the sidewalk where I suspect people will walk Jay's point is that I think you don't want them potentially in the way of a backing up car which I don't think is is an illegitimate comment it's just too different how about yeah as a compromise yes to both of you um leave the the parking as it shown right now along Central Station right here with the sidewalk at the head of that is not at the cartway Edge but at the head of the spaces for the reason that Mr Chin said the people in there are going to find their way to the sidewalk and then go there's a sidew provided up between the two buildings however for the little minor spaces that we're talking about like you know between the residential units like on pman way or on Forge Road or out on the west on Forge Road um you leave it the way you were describing M nanis which is the likely path as they're going to continue across there and we're not talking about here a high volume high traffic high speed situation so hopefully Mr CH can be comfortable that someone walking behind a park car you're not looking at someone who's flying down Central Station trying to beat a light or something um you're just walking someone leaving a residential visitor parking space at the end of all that it's just leave the plan alone just to point yeah just to point out something again unless I'm misreading the plan those minor spaces sorry those minor spaces that you have like for example along pulling they are extra deep you do have the sidewalk that approach on either side you do have like a a strike walkway behind the 18 foot space is clear you do have that on the minor uh scenarios I was suggesting that for the seven spaces on the on the west side of central that are going to be dedicated to the public something similar I just questioned whether that was necessary because what you're then doing is having people walk northward from the sidewalk the Central Station and then they get to a dead end where they can't go any further because we have or or they can walk south to where the crosswalking you're giving them an option okay right the way this is I'm again just pointing out the word it if you park in one of those seven spaces your only option is to walk across Central Avenue in some fashion find your way to start walking behind the Cars on the other side along Central Station to a sidewalk or continue to walk straight across between cars you know to get to a sidewalk all right so your suggestion is to change them Mr Chapman's suggestion was that those um spaces the people would find their way to the sidewalk the side so that's disc you guys theone you know for the board I'm comfortable deferring to Mr Troutman this I'm sorry thank you um I said for the board uh I wanted to make clear I'm comfortable I'm going to defer to Jay on anything regarding parking circulation and things like that so um so we're leaving it as wow fin I think this probably would be a good time for short break well well you know what we're not gonna you know as said we're agreeing to be fair I only have two more have we finish our letter yeah yeah let's try to finish planing letter if we can I think we're closed okay good keep going uh item 5.5 we were asked to comment on the rest 5.3 was okay 5.5 we asked to comment on the need before a DAT the um whatever people want they will get that cring and any Associated safety gates or signage is actually governed by Department of Transportation right so and it's a private ra but it's still got the doo you need the diagnostic team meeting out on the site see what you can do and whatever they say happens this is kind of a combination landscape question which I would defer our landscape architect but it also has to do with our concept plan we had on the on plan originally shown a wet Basin at the front uh entrance to the development in item 4.3 of the planning review memo this you're going backwards 4.3 well I'm it was in it's under landscape not oh well okay so as part of the review of the project by D one of the things that um was noticed by D is is that okay this was originally intended to be what we call a wet Pond um which or a retention base not a detention base which has a dry B but a retention base green infrastructure requirements tell you no more detention bases whatsoever you can have a retention base in the wet Pond provided you meet a number of threshold criteria such as what length width ratios depth a bunch of little technical things that are easy to do however the one killer here is that the drainage area to a wet Pond must be at least 20 acres and the drainage area to this Pond is maybe three acres three and a half acres there's no way it can be a wet pond because it does not support having water in it and D doesn't let you do what we used to do 10 years ago the one on 12 yes yeah this is the one that the town wanted have fountain in and get all pretty as an entrance we we did we did too on the rules just changed well we used to be allowed to put a well in to fill up the Basin to make sure it always had water in it not allowed anymore and you have to have a 20 acre um drainage area to allow it to occur and we're not even a seventh of that your testimony though is that that this is not just the site that this is serving uh drainage needs on ground and areas to the east this particular one serves yes the back of some of these homes here on Brown as well as our side I think it's like 6040 a so even accounting for that you're not getting close not getting close 3.8 is the number thinking my head but we're well below the 2 AC profession that we could never support we can't put in a makeup well to allow it to fill up so what is the proposal to make it a beautiful entrance way if we can't have a fountain it is going to be a b retention system the landscape architect can describe the type of plants and the options that are available there are DP CR criteria that have to be adhered to for the type of plant you put in there but we can make it as pretty as possible that's what the town enion the council envisions something magnificent for people driving past it and people going in it well now that you have bi retention on both sides lands big landscap are on both Sid D the last thing if I could um we did receive some review comments from the hold on before we move on does this mean that you agree to everything else in my report well everything site plan related I do are arit you give me I just want to be really clear if we're not going to address some of these items I just want to know the the numbers that you agree to you could just tell me you agree to section 4.0 for example section 3.0 I mean section 3.0 is zing compliance there's only one item in there where for the heights buildings can be confirmed um but section 4.0 is General subdivision site plan miscellaneous comments uh uh part section five is parking well 4.3a is what we just talk um but everything else cannot comply uh I pretty much have everything in my margin said yes but I do have 4.5 with something to be clarified with the landscape architect regarding defense materials colors Etc okay so 4.5 will be covered by the landscape architect all 4357 62 and 63 are landscape AR I mean I I I can share this with Linsky I've written down the ones that we need to discuss or I think I'm H we go okay it might be useful for the board members because you're plan giving planning testimony right the so 41 yes is fine 42 is fine I just want to make sure like as we it just so that we know what's been agreed to this if somebody else's testimony that's fine but like the stuff that's planed planning so yes 41 yes 4 two yes 43 we just described cannot be done 44 yes 4 five will be the landscape architect 46 yes we agre to 47 the architect can testify to it but my understand we're not providing privacy fencing at this time now and if that changed we'd have to come back for eight yes for nine um that's something that the landscape architect can work out with you know the satisfaction of that and we'll indicate whatever we have to on our plans to yes then 410 yes 51 yes 52 we justed ear spes 53 we went through adium a through e and we agreed to f and g okay so I Had A and B I had a and and C and D to C I think went away didn't it C we said thought we said was okay C is not exactly so A B and E are issues everything else is okay or goes away yeah we agree A and E are not provide the sidewalks in A and B no no you weren't asking for one a and I'm marking the no so I've got a and e i thinkig there L and were to 54 yes um 5 five we just discarded 56 is a rhetorical comment for informational purposes doesn't require response um six is all Landscaping related issues well I was going to ask you about 6.2 though just for the record we are going to comply with all of the uh comments that were taken from the envirment missions review with the exception of one there's no water available this site so we you know we'll do the shading we'll do you know the benches We'll add add the trash cans We'll add the signage but we can't we can't provide water public station that's 62d 63 um I'm going to say um I love the the words to the extent possible because we absolutely will do that there as you understand in your comments places where utilities Andor um driveways just give us a problem but we will I'll represent the landscape architect will also agree to revisit this and add as much as we can while still respecting the needs for the utility cautions and driv and so that would be to the approval of the board planner Yes actually I just like to State for the record to the extent that we're you know if it needs to be tweaked we hope that if if it's required come ation with the board of professionals and everybody's in agreement but that would be accepted 64 we kind of touched on but I'm going to say 64 through 611 really um would be um better served we agree toide the landscape arit same the landscape architect be lighting plan we think they're all fine well there Architects to that um we did fix the sign location it is actually right here on the concept l in our property the existing one is actually out here but we're going to put the new one right here it's on the S L okay okay Mr gu is that going to beum not internally illuminated there may be an external light shining on it that can be discussed with the board but nothing is going it's not internal sign and you'll provide a detail for that there is a detail in the plans and we also have an exhibit that the architect can show what the sign will look like she the third to the left sheet bottom right corner I don't think we're proposing any pad signage for the veter than the address nor are we proposing any signage for the commercial building that we're maintaining we really don't know who the tenant or what its ultimate use is going to be yet we'll come back in with a sign application if it's conforming signage or you know an application for a various if not affortable housing requirements we're going toly so I just want to clear on the location for hous resolution resolution submit a plan that shows the locations of the town houses right yes yeah uh uh got that great thank you yeah they they've identified them and U we actually I don't know that we have that one uh I think what we got was recently we got the key plan that shows how we're going to address the variation requirement between the various here's the got this is an exhibit yeah we do have and this shows that okay in this plan these red Market is a I think you're right concept plan with low mod downhouse locations there's nothing the verbiage is first closing 59 Town Homes s affordable Town Homes thank you so this indicates where those seven affordable town homes are proposed to be located just get the it's all in phase one so you know it's all in the first batch at first pass I have no uh comments or concerns yes it's good for break yeah 10 minutes thank youor Qui sorry we're going to uh do the public hearing till about 10:30 at break point because we J can you move the microphone closer please sorry complain about that I say we will U continue the meeting till about 10:30 uh because we have more business to do tonight anyway for the for the board uh and then we'll get the meeting rescheduled so uh thank you for back on the record I think that I saw hold on just let's just do another rooll call so don't yes uh mayor Carol here m s here Mr campan here Mr Hill here Mr Das here M Whitman here M here Mr eek here Mr show here and our poor professionals are here all right uh so I saw the barrows Fire Marshal here and I thought that would be a good place to pick up we have a review letter dated September 17th 2024 Mark as pb2 uh we're going to comply with all of the conditions in there one of them was to demonstrate that the new Fire that's been obtained by the burrow would be operable in the streets Mr Bo you want to speak about that yes I did submit a a circulation plan as part of the resubmission about a month ago Mon and a half ago and that showed the truck that we had used at that time could adequately maneuver around all the streets that truck happened to be 105 foot aerial L of truck I learned from Mr mccormic that you have on order delivery hopefully in February um appear Pierce 100 foot aerial truck and I received the Turning templates from Pierce verified that what we had shown apply is actually the turning radius of your truck is a little bit better than what we had already signed so the new truck that you're getting will work on the streets and be able to safely maneuver thank you but um if the fire marshal does not have any additional questions we will comply with all the comments in we you good yes mayor okay yes I just like to note that there was another email from um Mr McCormack on October 31st that he had no additional comments after review of the revised um plans that were submitted by the ACT thank you do we know when the next hearing would be our next meeting is the 17th yeah I thought as much I just want see any I've been I've been slam thank you even I roll this it's all good um we did just for the uh I don't think I here we received a we received a letter today I'm not suggesting that it should be admitted in evidence but one of the neighbors of the property has asked for certain improvements uh changes to the plan which I'm trying to stick with the board professional first I thought we were done with we haven't covered Mr letter will that take about an hour or over an hour I hope not I'm gonna say I'm good with everything in his letter up to page nine so far because some of the things that are in his letter have already been discussed because they also appeared in missis's letter such as the dec the fountain at the Bas down L 12 the 2.1.3 I'm looking at 1.11 the that was covered last year 2.1.3 is the the 12 2.1.5 those are the sidewalk issues we just described 2.3.2 is also the sidewalk issue so 2.3.2 yes thing I've highlighted is 3.2 and 3.3 which is the same issue again the sidewalks 3.5 is uh a traffic engineering comment which I will defer to the traffic engineer 3.6 we will add the side triangles as it discussed with comply with Mr um trapman recommendation of this posttop forway stop condition 4.5.5 I believe is not applicable anymore since it relates to the stone water management issues and the sidewalk that we've discussed 4.5.6 this relates to the request for a swell and this I actually call the time just to everybody aware of what we're speaking of okay so the concern is that the area at the top side of the western part of the track where we're putting the veterans homes and parking for them which is above this is an area of fill and the tail The Fill drains down towards the lot behind us in reality the lot behind us sort of drains inward on the east side anyway to a low spot in this area and then in the west side of that lot up against us it's relatively flat but we are providing a one relief point for water that may collect in that area an inlet to collect water at the toe of our slope and bring it into our stor system the request was to regrade the area and put a sell in which would then severely impact the back of the veterans home and big problem with the um bio retention system there so what I would offer as an alternative solution I can work out with Mr CL is to put a couple of yard drains at key locations across there wherever he felt that there might be concern for a low spot those yard range would be nothing more than a little PL boxes connected with maybe 6 in PVC to the inlet that we already have in that area so sort of a wicking system to make sure any area that might be wet doesn't stay wet it is the fact the east side a little bit of a wetland that does drain away from us so we can't help that I would just like to work that out to his satisfaction with him instead of regrading and causing the problem for the fire retention Bas in there well the the this is very similar culation you had on a project that the board was reviewing on the other side of Route 12 and essentially which The Fill you're putting in you you have a large piece of your property basically Upstream from you that's relatively flat has isolated wetlands in and whatnot but does drain down into the part of your property where you're putting the filth and you're effectively creating I'll call it a dam for lack of better purposes water that would be normally going in a a souly direction now is going to hit a fill area and be sort of impounded along that it would be relatively simple it's your property on your joint property you don't have to necessarily change anything on your side just to create a Swale that has some slope and conveys it to where that collection point is whether you need one or more collection points is something you'd have to decide but um I would think you can almost accomplish it what we don't want creating any additional Wetlands or stagnant water you know behind your property that's all we're trying to avoid oh I agree you you have a you have a collection point I'm just questioning whether water would get to that collection Point well I've just now started sharing a sheet 19 which is the grading plan from my side plan set that's the same sheet I'm looking at okay so what I have really is this is all the same Contour in here and this Contour at our property on the in the existing condition it actually drains inward a little bit towards a wet area offsite so you're saying from your property line drains to the north only on the east side to the west it does drain down into this area and that's why I I'll be very honest I think you and I have to have an offline conversation and the minutia of detail what going on here well rather than trying to regrade swes in here on someone else's property and I have a 3 to1 slope from the property light up to the fill behind the residential units or to the Basin I'm suggesting I'll put in additional in at whatever point along here you think is necessary and appropriate we'll make sure it stays dry because we also agree we don't want to have a wet area back there that's have to work out something yeah I'd just like to know put on the record that I'll work it out to his satisfaction yeah so I think we're not you guys are going to discuss that we're going to work out some sort of a detail they agree issue and you guys are going to work out exactly how to deal with that but we're not sure exactly what that is yet this aspect okay 5.5.1 deals with the testing that we handled at the completeness aspect of the hearing 5.7.3 is the same comment about the Basin down go excuse me go back to 5.1 we handled that now my my recollection is that we said that we're going to eventually do the required testing and satisfaction that the Bas works as designed and if not have to come back my recollection in the minutes of the meeting say that you're going to have your um lsrp offer testimony as to why you can't do the testing now that was the discussion at the last meeting the board waved it as a completeness item um and we had a rather lengthy discussion about it um it's G to be one in my view it's be one of the from an engineering perspective one of the critical the board's going to have to deal with here being yes that is absolutely correct I was going to ask for because you said you could not testify on behalf of the Ls I'm not LS that's why you said that's what you told us and I said I asked can we get him here okay you all said yeah I think we have to understand why you can't comply that's that was um 5.7.3 is the same de um with wet B um 9.4 I do not understand so I'd like to just work that out with um which one was that I'm sorry 9.4 and that's it anything else is good let me ask one basic question based on what you're saying you're agreeing with it SLE Road as it comes to this property it's currently a public RightWay we talked about a little bit on the adjoining property where the RightWay is over and you're going to have to vacate it and what you're going to it's sometimes private sometimes public sometimes he's the bur takes and we can ask Mr campy to confirm this but the bur takes care of the whole Road it is a public road um through the through the whole property your um your survey indicates some elements are are quote private some are public but the reality is the burrow maintains the whole Road right so I think it's it's kind of a critical component to understand what elements that are are are public that are you're going to convert to a private scenario what entities of government or levels of government have to approve that and in in the long run if whatever conversion occurs just what's going to be the jurisdictional limits of the burrow they're going to take care of stangle road down to the brewery and then nothing beyond that point is the homeowners going to take it's kind of a critical kind of a critical threshold issue municipality wants to have total control over maintaining stangle even on the homeowners association property that's something that'll be worked out in the agreement between the HOA and the borrow well I think this is the time to work out these details I don't know that we should leave that for some some an I don't know speak for the no but we have to Define what the issue is we have to Define what the existing condition is Define what the issue is and if it's if it's a matter that has to go back to the council for decision then that would have to be a condition of agreement states that they are creating HOA to maintain the roads that's what the agreement stat and and if there's a representation to the board and there's a condition based on that representation and for some reason it does not not come to fruition with the mayor and counsel then they need to Le the commission that's that's it's actually it's already in our devel yes yes that says that they'll you guys will work with the buau we're going to provide we're going to provide easements to the F satisfaction and with respect to maintaining the property we're going to maintain all of our property just to be very clear for the record though the HOA cannot maintain anything off of the hoa's property so the borrow would have to continue to be liable for the maintenance of anything outside of this development so so I guess that's Bob's question which is where the limits of what was is there when you put a plan together to show what's like if that's the representation HOA takes care of its portion Burl continues takes care of its purum to the Redevelopment agreement and each men that are going to be submitted can we have a plan that chose what and what those I cly need a plan there's a lot of issues like that in in our report about clarifying certain things U but if if again if the burrow owns clearly owns and takes care owns right away down to the um down to the um the Lone Eagle uh and they they take care of the rest of the road all the way out to Route 12 if the homeowners here are only going to take care of the segment of stangle Road in the middle that kind of raises the I mean it's it's kind of a very practical issue that has how and and if there are and we determin that there are public rights deted there are right go they're going to need from the title standpoint they're going need to have those vacated if the bur agrees to vacate the option talk to our attorneys and to uh for superintendent of public works for the best recomendation offline I mean I guess what we again if that's going to be the the understanding the applicant can always then work with the B to come to an understanding as per the Redevelopment agreement and if they're unable to reach one you know they can come back and I mean really it's not this board's issue really at the de it's not I mean I understand Bob's point and I think he's right it has to be addressed and the applicant has to make sure that there is some clear demarcation and understanding as to how it's going to happen but that's that part really isn't for the board we just need to make sure that the issue is addressed at some point in time and that the issues resolved my lsrp on the phone but I put him on speaker and the testimony how about if you came on here as long yeah he's got be onestim what's what's the win you have his right Tom I'm going to send you a link right now you have to come in on the on the can you take a call outside all right I got email yeah I'll send it to your email right you understand that you go okay let me write it down hold yeah you okay that's let steps outside your client a little bit please we're trying to have a public heing we have a letter from Mr 22nd there are some corrections that he noted that I need to make on par tabulation and there are a number of comments can you a question microphone Sor comments 6 through 11 request um additional um changes to the plans comment sidewalk or signage Etc labels we agree all so I will leave comment one two three to um the traffic engineer to speak to comments four and five are rhetorical information for the board and as I said comments 6 through 11 we agree to and then comment 12 uh will be discussed by the tra traffic engineer ask a traffic engineer one question before he before he starts on his list um with the passage of the always stuff is stangle last night by the council do you have to look at anything over is it is that okay like with the traffic that'll be coming in from the site to M Street does that change anything for you it it does not this stangle in mine is still good um and I did request the four-way stop in this site okay at Forge and stangle okay which I think they've agreed to okay yes and then uh Mike just in item five the last bullet point can you comply with that oh that's the one we discussed Way Way Back in the beginning oh wait I was the last in the first page the last in the second page on page three oh some curve R of course okay 11 that was five last V actually I should say 11 which deals with the DOT permit uh I'm going to leave that along with 12 to the traffic engineer okay hold on one second just um please the board we did receive a letter from one of our neighbors asking for certain changes we've had some discussions some of the changes will require relocating one of the Town Homes we'd like to show you what's proposed there we're more than willing to do it to accommodate the neighbor couple other things that they asked where it will put on the record just to mify their concerns hopefully but because it does require us moving one town home we we' like to share with you what that proposal is one town home or one town home group one town one home so what I'm going to share now is an exhibit that we prepared just to show the neighbor for the brewery property they did re approach us after hearing two weeks ago with a concern about storm water flowing towards their property now so I don't get yelled up by Cara this could just be called a grading exhibit for the brewery okay that'll be A5 so we show on the right side here is what the current plan depicts and that shows that the last townhouse um just south of the brewery has a yard area of approximately 20 ft wide by about 50 ft long th000 Square F feet or 02 Acres that lawn area does pitch towards the bench that we are proposing because the brewery people and Brewery property had secured a 10- foot easement from the owner of this property and expanded that area with a patio so there's a slight angle to the cter that we have here that showed that the water that would head towards them would sort of Hit the edge of this sidewalk of their um patio and flow to the back or to the east um to the front towards SLE Road what we are proposing our offer to them was okay I'll regrade the area tighten up the Contours poster to the house propos and put in a swell that definitively directs the water backwards and forward again we're talking about a piece of grass that is only 20 by um 50 however um the adjacent people did ask and they sent a letter to um the I believe the mayor and the professionals today asking for us to do something different so if I go back now to the concept plan and share the concept plan so it's this same five long unit building that we're showing that is just south of the loning brewery right here and there is the fence that we're showing it is green I believe there is now a patio constructed on that area but what we would do is take this last townhouse off of here and therefore instead of having 20 feet 19.87% just enough room to push the top up a little bit push the bottom down a little bit and fit in one extra unit so there will be the same exact number of units it won't affect anything other than we will be providing an extra 20 feet of buffer between the property line and of course the 10ft easement where the fence is proposed for their patio and our closest residential dwelling so two other items that that property owner requested that we're willing to comply with if the board so seees fit is uh a specific type of fence more than willing to accommodate and they've asked for additional landscape buffering on their side of the fence their letter actually requested landscape buffering on both but our point was we're happy with the fence on our side so we would be willing to provide additional buffering and work with the Township's professionals on a future plan uh iteration to show them Beth does that change mean this is no longer consistent with the concept plan that was approved in the Redevelopment plan so it is a change from the concept plan from a consistency perspective I think what the Board needs to consider is whether or not it Still Remains substantially consistent or you think that this deviation triggers that type of relief from the Redevelopment plan and there are some other deviations you know one of the other changes that they hadn knowled is the uh the lack of a web Basin or retention Basin at that rout 12 area and so I would put this in the same category I think it's a pretty minor Amendment um I don't think that this townhouse location change alone would trigger a finding of inconsistency with the Redevelopment plan but I do think that's part of what the board's uh charges as it reviews the site plan application it you know based on what we talked about tonight and everything that will come um whether or not the site plan remains is and and whether it remains consistent with the concept plan given the Chang the other question is the fence that there's still going to be a fence I heard that correctly yeah just the sty the style of fence because because ABC regulations require fence off areas for consumption and things like that this is your your testimonies that this will be consistent with what the property owner needs to make that work yes requested a specific type of fence okay okay thank you that's it well while we're talking about these units that are so close to the commercial district one of the things I'd like to see you put in to this is that the Deeds to these all these units acknowledges that they a but an active vibrant commercial District so there is what they're buying into nobody calls Le at 11:00 at night people are screaming you know I don't think it's a big deal to no it's not at all in fact that's kind of things that have to be disclosed in the offering memorandum that all the buyers and I think that they also need to be aware that it's a long active CH you rail to also put that in the so everybody knows what they're buying into y just a very clear point of clarification it would not be in the deed mayor we have to uh the ultimate developer DR Horton who's going to be selling these homes will have to provide a public offering statement list the ho public offering statement I don't have a problem with that as long as it's disclosed and people know what they're you know up to them to read it and sign it and have their attorney say to them did you read it you understand what's in it 100% because when they call here saying I didn't know there was a cold burning engine blowing smoke in my can my windows open close your windows so so I I do apologize again for the confusion a little earlier and the interruption while we were conducting the meeting but I do have our lsrp is on Zoom Tom Myers he's in the waiting room point of order Mr chairman don't we usually ask for questions each witness as they go we should have allow for public questions of the the engineer and planner before we start bringing another wit are you done uh well I will be done with Mr poochie for questions and and to your Point uh I I agree that that's the appropriate measure but we are trying to get past the completeness issue that Mr B techically relies upon so I don't know I I'll yield to whatever the board wants to do in the question that was raised by Mr clo reiterating the point that was discussed two weeks ago so we're kind of tying that all together but whatever the board's wishes are for protocol will follow I just want to make sure that before your engineer is done that that the public has the opportunity to ask questions of this witness on the testimony given 100% And I think the LSR P's testimon is going to be very limited to a narrow issue where is he you want me to promote him as a panelist then or is that or we taking public comments or questions yeah he's in two differentes where is do we have time for a public comment while we're waiting I think he's coming in now there he is Thomas we need you to have your camera on yeah take youred as a panelist that's under his authority please we need you on camera as well Tom can you hear us volum all right thank thank you for the effort we'll see if that works out later but I think it probably makes sense open comment questions questions excuse me anybody else on Zoom board members on Zoom have questions I had a quick question uh just about the bio retention um Basin on the west side of stangle just is is it would it be of a benefit to the property and residents of Court would that help with any flooding that occurs there just a just a curious question has no bearing on Village Court because they are to the west of this uh considering well they're above that parking structure so the um that street above sorry like their backyards area your is not showing wait not sharing oops now we're back so the stangle road bio retention system is over here above forg by the veter sorry yeah I'm sorry I meant the one far that's the the compens sorry thank you that one yes storage area um it should have if anything a slight benefit and the reason I say that is because we were required by D to just ify whatever fill that was placed as I said over here for these residential homes in the extension of Ford Road we have to compensate with an equivalent area of storage so that the floodwaters of Walnut Brook have the same area to go to We believe We exceeded it by a little bit so there any effect on the Village Court homes would be a slight benefit there would be no detri okay yeah there would be no detriment though right it would be if anything in to benefit that's correct okay thank you that was my question can I just speak on this lsrp for a second we're open to the board com yeah we're gonna do questions the anybody else on Zoom of questions okay it's open for any public comments question this witness question sorry yes you do need to come up and use this microphone between um attorney the Eng or the one over there EXC so the remote folks probably microphones no you use that one because they're going to need that one to talk hello everybody I'm Robert morara uh usually I'm on that side of the of the uh the case now I'm a a lot owner uh George has made a proposal address what address please okay uh L Eagle brewery uh think it's thank you guys somewhere over there and uh I just want to say that uh we worked at an agreement with George and moving that unit and us and our me and my our partners are okay with what he did so I just want to say we uh we're in agreement with it and we withdraw our objection to what he was doing you have any questions any other questions to the engineer down so you can see our members anyone else the public have questions for the engineer Mark papers 35 Brown Street mark p a b e RS thank you um all right so I I don't know if they're exactly for the engineer so I'm not gonna let you tell me um so the first question is for the waterline tieing I just want to understand might a basic question how do you ensure that the water going to the other residences around that area is not impacted while you're doing the you're not shutting off water to the other so when we do the tie-ins they're actually done in conjunction with the water utility the B water utility and they're not all going to be at the same time and the Bor utility will ensure that when we do the connections they are staggered so that existing service is maintained and as I said we're going to Loop the system from east and west of the track so that's sort of a redundant help as opposed to a v okay cool thank you uh the other question that I had was around the the height of the buildings I don't know if that's a question for you or not um so in speaking with one of my neighbors I didn't look at the drawings myself but in speaking with one of them the elevation on some of the drawings and this might have been alluded to in one of the H stated um I think 38 ft on the elevation but the ordinance was for 30 so there was a difference there between or the agreement had a 30 qu so I believe the minimum height or maximum height rather in the Redevelopment plan for the town or the residential units is 40 and we comply that that so he's correct he is correct the maximum height being 40 ft one of the uh one of the items I have in my report is that I'm asking them to confirm the building Heights of their uh the two existing buildings the the white Foundry or the white building on Church Street that was described as well as the Alli building in reality I do expect those items to or those buildings to be compliant but I also understand that the town houses that they're proposing as well as the multif family units all of those are uh compliant with a 40 requirements but their architect when they testify will be able to put a fire point on that for their test I'll speak to the neighbor and see if they can come for that and then the last question that I had was about the offsets and my understanding originally and I haven't you know been involved in all the conversations or part all the meetings is that there was the 25 foot offset from the property line which I see you comply with for the most part but the patio area is only 10 foot so I just want to try to understand what so for me it's 25 feet I Envision 25 feet from the property line is the first time you're impacted by anything to do with the property the building patio what have you and now it's stating 10 feet to the patio so I just want to try to get a little bit better understanding of why the change or the difference that's the way the Redevelopment plan is written um it used to have different language in it but the way it's written right now and the way it was adopted by council is that the ground floor setback is a 10 foot L landscape buffer requirement and the second floor amenity setback is 25 feet and I will try and share again the site plans that I used before I'm looking at sheet eight which is one of the dimension planes and I'm not sure where your property is along ground street but I had shown before the area just south of the Brown Street Basin and I showed how some of the upper story decks um you know the space would be shortened to 8 feet to comply with that 25 in the case of that like for example on this one town not blow up even water for clarification there's an 8 foot up upper story and on the ground floor the 10ft patio extends about one foot into that 25 so there would be a basically a 24t set back to that round floor patio it's not like they're going to be at the 10 foot line which is the buffer although the the 10 foot perimeter buffer is 10 the perimeter buffer is 10 feet the actual physical location proposed is closer to 24t okay all right that that make it more clear that makes yeah yeah that makes more clear um and then I think this is a question for the lsrp but I'm going to ask it because I don't know and you can tell me uh mainly around as you're doing the cleanup of the site um so my house backs up to the site we have a small child I know other people have small children as well so the concern is really about the contamination and containment of the contamination I don't know how Brown sites work I don't know any of that information but my concern would be more about contaminants getting into the air migrating onto our property kids are outside playing how do we ensure that that is not a health risk um and what steps or measures are going to be taken to ensure that that's not a problem and then what is the verification that those things are actually happening to ensure that we don't have I don't know I love the first few words about this not being and I'm glad that the lsrp is listening so he can now hear that and hopefully uh respond to that after providing the clarification to Mr cleric he ask um just proced I don't know whether you want to do the lrp or finish finish questions finish with you make sure we've got everybody um so it does sound like it's an lsrp question hopefully we'll have him here um let's finish with I didn't have anything else thank uh Bob King loing Brewing 44 stangle Road uh can you give us an understanding of what we can expect from Impact we get traffic to our business from rout 12 as well as through off of M Street uh when that is going to get all torn up those buildings torn down a new road constructed how long do we expect that development to take place that's going to have a serious impact I think on customers Route 12 is a major third fair and that will impact our business I'm now going back to sharing the phasing plan that we used as the exhibit I think was I don't know what Don called it but it it was the showing where the uh loneb units were scattered throughout the project and it's just a good way to show you what's going on so right now as one of the yeah I believe so right now as you Traverse up from Route 12 um the road does curve to the left around um I guess at that point that's the uh building or sh whatever it comes up and kind of tees to the right and then turns left again around the front of the polo building and then continues up to your Brewery so phase one would just be the green area the bottom part so at that time the upper piece of Stanger Road will remain intact and while the lower piece does this curve to the left we will be able to construct this piece which is off of where we're proposing where s today so that we can then have a connection go straight through and they'll phase the construction of course we'll have to work with your police department and make sure that whatever traffic control measures are done uh comply with whatever the re requirments are but it's not as if we're just going to close the road and walk away for a month we're going to have this done during construction of you know operating hours for whatever you're allowing people to do construction in town typically 75 um and then we'll try and make sure that there is an open pathway over overnight if the construction is going to take more than one day once that realignment is done such that the road no comes up goes over and turns up but this is now a straight through movement then when phase two comes in again that'll just be construction through one area and demolition work for pavement nothing to do with the lsrp clean up stuff on the east side simply just demolition of existing pavement and that's the kind of work that can be done within one day even if they have to do half one side and half the other just to make sure that there's always maneuverability through here than you um and I have to ask just one more quick I'm really curious can you bring up the concept plan real quick so where you are going to raise the parking lot for the veterans housing in the housing across the street right now that's good VI right there so during major storms I've seen that entire parking lot flooded several inches to well over foot in fact cars couldn't even travel down on stle to get to rout2 but it was so heavily flooded my observation there's these little manholes I guess that are part of the storm water system when it backs up water actually shoots up through those manholes so I'm curious I know you said it's a like like for like swap it backs up it's going to back up further two different issues ahead the the question of the like for like that deals with the flooding of the the flood elevation of Walnut Brook what you're describing is the fact that the storm s system over there is inadequate um and I actually did an exhibit earlier today just for my own purposes um so I'm going to stop sharing the concer plan and now share T this is not this is just a a Design worksheet I'll call it um Road drainage yes okay and this is just it's an easier way to look at going back and forth between the existing conditions mapping my plans and the site plan and I kind of have both things on the same plan so what we're speaking about is the Brewer is right here right now there are two existing inlets that drain through existing pipes these pipes are 15 and 18 inch pipes so they don't have the capacity to handle all the flow going through them our proposal is to take the inlet that's at the southeast corner of your property when we rebuild it as a know be with a B in across the street on either side of the newly improved stangle road we have a 30-inch pipe draining the water down so a much bigger pipe much more capacity how where does that how far up does that go because I think part of the problem when it hits to a certain level when what is that Walnut Brook Well w the creek fills up it seems it's going that way right and when it fills up it has nowhere else to go there are two more problems that are associated with the whole Regional drainage and I'm sure Mr campign has Heard lots of complaints about them um going back to the concept plan as I described earlier on um right now the flow to the east comes through and it actually drains into the back of a ditch that runs along the South edge of this parking lot just below where we're doing the fill it then Curves in and then drives through the property or flows through the property and underneath Route 12 in a small 36 inch pipe or some of it might overflow and get down into the big over most of this flow goes through that 36 inch pipe two problems the existing ditch is clogged it's just it's a mess so that needs to be cleaned out and 36 inch pipe is also partially Clogg so then it needs to be cleaned up those are I guess existing utility infrastructure projects that can be U worked on with the burrow and or in conjunction with future development should there be any of this area but there's an existing backup problem thanks for bringing that up so is that going to be address as part of this project we are not proposing no no it's not your I'm asking this tiet this will continue to contribute to the flooding if it's not mitigated right our project will not have any negative the regional existing stuff is what's going on thank you there one over here are there any more questions from public they okay I have uh when you brought the phasing plan for one the when you brought the phasing plan for one of the's questions I I noticed for the first time that the two veterans homes the multi family buildings are not in one of the phases that's just a that's a or dting ER they are in phase one thank you oh that's embarrassing in terms of the testimony you gave about the maintaining the to the response to the resident's question about maintaining the access of what is now stangle Road according to your plan there there's more than just grading work going on I mean you're putting sanitary store in are you're putting storm drainage in there yes I think and to some exent expansion on what that said I think this need to be a phasing irrespective of whether that segment your building stays with the public or doesn't stay with the public it's currently a public thoroughfare unless there's going to be some official closing of the thare to allow for the construction of a unit it's going to have to be some sort of more detail facing element there's going to definitely be traffic control associated with that said not more traffic control just how how are you going to install whatever you're going to install what are you going to maintain irrespec of the issue who's going to own what whatever it is your you know the GC would work that out I mean I'm sure we're going to have a preconstruction meeting and you you're going to have all the players involved that's person I'm not going to tell the GC how to do his work just for the benefit normally on something like this you would have a phasing plan with some specificity as to what's getting built when and how and what not um it you you you could leave it to construction stage you could leave it to work out decals um but um you know as of right now the plan we have here just shows what the finished product is uh and it is you know what happens with the finished project on their part of the property where they're building new infrastructure the mlu speaks to that certain infrastructure has to be in before cl's can be issued elements whatever but we are dealing with a component of infrastructure here that currently exists that's in the I believe it's in the public domain uh again back to what we said for whatever rights are there that if they're going to be extinguished by the burrow going to have to be extinguished by the burrow but if this is going to be maintained if the segment south of this uh Al the 12 is owned and maintained by the burrow and the segment north of this uh from the brewery up um is owned and maintained by the burrow we're going to have this Missing Link element in here with this no man's land in here that we're going to have to decide again irrespective of what the ultimate outcome of whether whatever they build is going to be owned by the the public whether the homeowners are going to take care of it whether BRS going to take care of it we do have a a a um a contigous or continuous public thare through here that at some point during the development of this property is going to be a lack of a better word unless it's a very detailed plan of how that's going to happen um it's going to be cut off from from public circulation make a request to I'm not sure who either be or but there's been a number of things that have been brought up that the burough needs to consider tonight if one of you could send me an email outlining them U that I can share with either our development attorney um or with the president of BR counsel whoever I need to share with to get some um traction on you know what to do what to do uh how to respond to you know some of these issues off to the one king just brought up um that would be helpful because I'm just it's getting late in it's p minute time and I uh will never like I just help getting it getting the focus on it so I can follow follow if I may if it helps assage some of the concern I mean we can stipulate that traffic will never be cut off will always be root bear maintained one way or another we just don't know the G that's generally up up the G general contract was a great idea especially for emergency vehicles um you know if or whatever they you can't get access on M Street you know to be able to get access a different way in but you know again I don't know that I can stipulate right now how that would be done but we we can still ulate that we will never foreclose traffic well well one of the things I and I were just talking Bob and J get have input as well we're learning a lot from hotel project as what we might want construction wise and everything else so I think that that's something we want to put in really hard lessons there but I mean it's a good thing because it'll certainly help this project move along in a more organized I'm delighted there's like 20 people in this audience and we didn't have to move to the uh to the historic courthouse for a hearing on a Redevelopment think it such a lot of a work went into this plan so so yeah so we'll certainly keep that in mind sorry I I had a followup question but I didn't know that was still AV sure the public hearing is open um the followup question was actually about the storm water drainage so as I said before I'm on BR street so the question was um and maybe you could help me understand is for storm water drainage going away from Brown Street so anything that would currently be coming into Brown Street we get a lot of water in backyards and stuff comes up through the basement Etc so my hope would be that the work that you're doing would help to alleviate that but what I'm hearing is guess two questions one can you confirm that and then maybe show me this drawing briefly that shows the elevations work but the second thing is if it's going to be into that Basin then what the comment was around the clog piping that exist today would that also impact any kind of drainage work that you're doing that would improve around you so that the board let me know if there's anything I think I got it but I'll try and explain and if I deviate from what you're asking let me know so now going back to sharing my screen and looking at the site PL set that I compared I'm going to find the right sheet to show you and then I'll tell kazinski what she so I get okay now where where is your home is it below the park closer to 12 so I just know where to look y so I'm looking now at sheet 12 which is one of the Premier and final uh site plans and was blowing this up a little bit so we have the bi retention system shown in this area here and then what we're doing is we're proposing inlets along the backyards of to and the open space property between where we previously described 24 to the ground floor a series of inls down here that to the South and that flow will continue on to the next sheet which is now sheet 13 of that same set and those inlets collect the flow from the backyard areas especially from your backyard areas as you can see these lines here they all sort of curve and there elevation lines and that means that this line here is higher than that line there is higher than that line there everything sort of flows down towards these inlets that's why I said the Route 12 bio retention system will accept flow from a lot of the backyard areas here and these inlets will convey that water into this bio retention system and then hold it and release it through a piping Network that then continues and going back to sheet uh 12 that piping network will then cross underneath the train tracks and as I said before the existing pipe under the train tracks is grotesquely undersized and we're replacing with adequate side piping to convey the water off of the Brown Street area separate from that and now Sho um go over to cyan sheet 14 on the West Side what happens now is as I described um in an earlier question from the gentleman from the brewery the piping in this area that takes flow today in the south is also undersized and we're putting in adequate Siz piping to convey that to the ditch that is now at the bottom of this parking lot and that ditch is the one that will be under need to be cleaned at some point as well as what I had shown in the concept plan which is the 36 inch Crossing pipe underneath through 12 so does the drainage for the Brown Street side all eventually land in that same clog pip there yes that's just the Beast so then that's kind of I had the same question as you from a Township perspective when does that get cleared out because otherwise it sounds like we'll still have a a problem we'll add that thanks um the only other just as you mentioned one other thing the the park the the retention area behind the park is that primarily serving the properties that are north of the park or is that also serving part of the properties that are south of the park it's only serving properties well mostly North but Mo and really to the east north and east yeah there's a low point just above um the park or in the upper end of the park in Brown Street and that's where the the water coming down I think it's Grant maybe um as well as the homes between Grant and up to church and east of brown they all come to that low point and flood none of the site goes there it's all lands east of us and that is being taken into that Basin that we're building behind the bar okay all right thank you is there anybody else in the public questions professional um I just reiterated what I kind of said in our report there's a lot of open detail here that at some point have to get worked out um we're obviously not going to work them out at a public hearing but um there's a lot of undotted eyes and uncross tees and some some questions we heard some stuff tonight that might require some other revisions to the plan um so uh I outlined in our report what we felt the issues were some of the issues you dispense with tonight like the issue of the sidewalk you know behind the Cars and things of that HK um but this so a lot of other issues here at some point probably presuming the next meeting we he from the lsrp that's one of the big open questions about the board's ability as I outlined in the report to approve plan that's compliant with storm water regulations without having the benefit of the data that let you reach that conclusion it's a little bit beyond probably like to stop for tonight go go to work just like everybody else I we came close um I I I would love the opportunity to complete but I understand that's Bo permission and we're going be on next week they going to be on the agenda uh yeah they could be on the agenda I mean it's um what's on the agenda right now right now is just resolutions and we have the continuation of the democratic um head head have they confirmed that yeah yes well we carried it we carried it um I did they waiting for result of an open request corre that's why I wanted to make sure that they had that I I I did did send something to their attorney today and that's what they were still waiting for the return of that Oprah request but that was I don't know but um yeah that's the only other item on the agenda so they you know certainly would be room for imag would we be on first then because we they were also carrying so they're they're GNA conclude and more than effort they're to conclude we don't know for sure especially if your lrp can't give us a picture of himself he's he's driving to his office now so I do he didn't have a camera said it minute drive that was he does seem to be Ann 17 won't furce are you you're okay all right so the application of HBC Liberty vill renal LLC will be carried to the December 17 2024 regular meeting same time professionals our professional maybe we can I think we're pretty I mean I do think next time Mr Myers make his office basically we agreed not on the record someone was saying more it'll be easier now Thomas they're breaking sorry said on next me's 17th and as we know uh we're going to be having SP and also have resolutions for 11 Main Street 100t and the spice Factory I got I got four public hearings on the other side of the table next week but you only have one municipality right just to to maintain the record exactly I just don't like things to lost I will try I will do my very I mean to be fair 11 is done that just never made it here right spice Factory could follow Chick-fil-A so that should be fairly simple andt get done I will certainly do my absolute very best there were two bills that very move to a of the bills thank you do we sorry I think Mr Myers is still is here do we need do we should we say bye to him I don't know I don't think he needs to be here anymore does he or him and thank him foring you can remove him yeah that's been continued Mr Myers she want me to to leave then yes bills Mr yes Miss swingle yes mayor Carol Laro yes yes e yes Mr yes executive session no to by