flag of the United States of America and to the rep for it stands one nation God indivisible with liy and justice for all okay pursu of the own public meeting act the Sentinel and the South Jersey Times were notifi this meeting was also posted in the municipal building and on the township Please Mr pum here Mr glaus here Mr Des Mr ham here and chairman Gman here okay in the absence of Mr Gano will seat alterate all right the uh the prev gentlemen motion I make a motion we approve second motion By Dana second by Richard glacius all in favor I I oppose any exensions okay first on our agenda tonight is this RLS one this extension yes that's by request by letter ZB 23-11 in the name of orls state of Newfield they're requesting I think extension by letter uh yes you approved a minor subdivision they have 190 days to report a deed they didn't report a deed within that time um so they're engineer sent a letter requesting an extension so they could go ahead and report the de there's been no other changes just they missed the deadline anything um does not say but I assume they're ready to go so we gave it doesn't move finge okay a motion by C to extend it is there a second I'll secondary Richard gles I guess uh fation to Mr Ketchum yes Mr glaus yes Mr desar yes Mr Hamill yes and chairman Gman yes okay next on the agenda ZB 23-12 and oh no I'm sorry ZB 23-13 the name of Kate two Properties LLC Mike uh everything in order with their noes noce yes Mr chairman members of the board uh my name is Seth broer I'm here tonight on behalf of K2 K2 Properties LLC uh K2 Properties LLC owns the uh property located at 2141 Sheridan Avenue which is in the uh r r a Zone um the property is behind lot 32 which is also owned by the applicant tonight you'll hear the applicant explain that he is seeking to construct a single family house on the lot 33 which is a permitted use in the uh R ra Zone in order to do so the applicant is going to uh ask this board for a few variances namely relief from the uh requirement that there be lot Frontage uh as that lot is landlocked uh and has no Frontage as well as relief from a uh 75 ft front yard setback as 50 ft is being proposed in support of the application tonight you'll hear testimony from uh Jim lanetti who's the authorized member of the applicant as well as professional planner Nancy jamino and and architect Quinn uh dman so after the hearing tonight uh hearing the testimony the uh viewing the exhibits we respectfully uh request this board to approve my client's application and Grant the necessary uh variances um and waivers if if uh applicable thank you with that uh Mr BR would you like to swear in our uh Witnesses you bring all three up on chairman actually take care of okay raise your right hand please to Nancy jamino j m a n o w professional engineer professional planner 192 country Farms Road in Marlton New Jersey uh Quinn DEA architect that's d e m nna 576 Benson Street Camden New Jersey uh Jim lupinetti l u p i n TTI um owner of K2 bity with a K2 properties with uh and um I'm also a builder as well okay thank you thank you uh if it pleases the board I'd like to call uh Mr lupinetti as my first Witness I don't know the easiest way want I guess we can share the money yep okay Mr lupinetti uh you're a member of K2 Properties LLC is that correct yes okay and uh K2 properties does in fact own the property located at 2141 Sheran Avenue yes okay how long's the applicant owned that property um I think roughly what 8 months or or so okay and the property was purchased in one entity then switched to another entity the2 is that correct correct okay and um are you seeking the necessary approvals from this board to uh be able to construct a home on that lot yes okay was there an existing dwelling on that lot yes on the yes there was okay and what condition was it in very poor eyes sore you couldn't see any of it from the street it was all overgrown and the house was there was trees just kind of growing in and around it and it was it it was a nice I sort of to say the least and that was demolished yes and that was uh the applicant demolished had it demolished is that correct yeah we did okay okay um and K2 properties Aly owns lot 32 as well yes okay and lot 32 is in front of lot 33 yes okay and both were purchased together is that correct at the same time yes as as SE L yeah but at one deed correct okay uh okay so lot 33 being behind lot 32 that would make it land locked is that correct correct and I note from the uh plan which will be uh shown as an exhibit um in a few minutes that there's there's going to be an easement is that correct correct okay 28t easement yes for Access for Access yep okay all right and uh I'm showing you which I believe the board has uh some pictures board has okay um and I'd like to have these marked as P1 is that okay you do as A1 oh I'm sorry you're right I was I was in court this morning on something different okay um showing you what's been marked as A1 um some pictures there are seven pictures do you recognize these yes did you take these pictures I did okay do you want to just uh kind of hold up each picture and kind of walk the board through what you were uh shooting at the day you took the these pictures what what you saw what you could explain yes so this this picture here is the front basically standing towards the where you see the edge of the truck here that's where the easement would be to the left side of the property for the for the front lot just straight back okay and how about this picture that is this is standing from the left side kind of picture in towards the the property where the where the easement would be okay and this picture I noticed there's a road is that Sheridan yes that is Sheridan so this is just standing back on the opposite side of the street just showing the the front of the the property I have a question you're saying there was a home on 33 or 32 it was 32 it was the the front lock correct this and this is again across the street just on the kind of like the right edge of the property sh in the front this is all all the way off to the side to the right to show on an angle looking in and which that's 32 this is 32 yes and this is this is standing in lot 32 to show where the brake would start to be with the trees between each property and this is the edge of the easement on the side to get back to the back lot as well Mr L if you're granted approval tonight uh will the applicant abide by all all conditions imposed by this board yes absolutely okay uh I have nothing further for Mr lupetti at this time if the board uh so pleases has some questions so you bought both these Lots at the same time correct knowing that the back lot is is landlock they were they were separate Lots when we bought them with the same deed and from what I understood that they were already going for an eesan that the back lot was basically buildable when I first bought it I mean I'm sure it's a buildable a lot but there's no access to it and did you try to buy any property any surrounding property around it no they they they did mention coming through the back where the the power lines were and I didn't even remotely entertain that to see it and I spoke with the architect and we thought it would be a better much more appealing to just take a side just having access to the back from Sheridan which is just a normal street and they come from the other side front lot what do you mean front lot you're using the middle lot or the second lot what are you going to do with the front lot well the front lot there's going to be a house on there as well just kind of offset to the side within your setbacks the setback requirements so then that it would just be a driveway along the left side of the there's a tree line that separates what's the front I don't I don't recall it's 165 ft and and where are you going to build the second house pretty much right behind it why wouldn't you build it behind the the the uh pscg dies yeah there's a lot of property back there why would you want to put it way up right on behind the other one I mean I was that's got to be a small piece it's I have to look at the chart and see what it is that's from the the property line the rear property line at lot 32 that's beginning of the EAS for p that's actually n's yeah M Mr chairman if it pleases the board U Miss jamoo was going to discuss this very issue yeah thank you okay um just a quick question about your photos uh I believe it's the second one there's a yellow Houser structure visible is that the neighboring lot or is that the existing building that's a neighboring lot just hold this up oops M joh was just a few questions first before we uh dive into the your testimony um how long how long have you been a professional planner and engineer um a lot of years uh 35 plus years sorry okay and you hold licenses I hold a Professional Engineers license in New Jersey and Pennsylvania professional planers license in New Jersey and a certificate of mun Municipal engineering certificate in New Jersey and uh through your throughout your career have you worked as a professional planner uh for townships I have I um for 19 years I worked well actually for longer than that I worked for a uh Consulting engineering firm similar to to your engineer and represented I myself did five municipalities as their Municipal engineer their planning board engineer zoning board engineer joint Lan use engineer whatever the engineer was at that time and also as the planner for two of the five and then since then I was director of community development in eam Township and director of community development in moristown Township and I'm familiar with Municipal land use law and uh L use applications and you've been qualified before board such as this board as an expert yes okay and and you're familiar with the proposed application I am okay and did you walk the dirt you saw the property I did so to speak I did okay great so I respectfully request that this board recognize Miss jamino as an expert okay thank you and I just as an aside in 1988 I was the board engineer for Franklin Township for one year that was a long time ago was that 1988 Paul Fel was the chairman and edth Cheesman I think ran yes at that time I don't think they had joint use sports available yes and I was a freshman in college oh stop it all right uh before you go uh before you go into your presentation I know I've already said that but just one more question uh have you had the opportunity to review both the initial and revised letter from the township professional okay great wonderful um okay so if you can and I'm going to ask that um our easel stand up and uh I would like to have this marked as uh A2 you want be here wherever is easier for the board to see and still have access to where I think over this side's easier side okay so this will be yeah okay thank you if you could just walk us through I'll just so I'll give you a little bit of orientation which I know you're all very familiar with the property and um do we do you mind if we move back a little bit because I know these residents are interested as well so um can you see so the bottom here is Sheridan Avenue this is the property the front property here is lot 32 lot 32 is 165 ft wide by 300 ft deep lot 33 which is a lot we're in to discuss is 165 ft wide by 1,20 ft deep it's 3.8 so uh Acres the question that was asked is I have to look at my notes so um I had the the distances here if cuz I analyze this too if the house was to be built back here it'd be over 700 ft back on this lot puts the additional 300 so it be 1,000 ft off the road um no matter what kind of lot it is if it's an with an access easement um that's a long way to go back under a power line and that's why I believe it was located up front here doesn't have to be a th000 well it has to be outside of the PSG right away it can't be within the PSG right away so that's why it would be 1,000 ft back you have 300 plus um I guess another 300 plus 350 the property out front you're including that yes yes because that's the distance off for an access so yes I am you're right yep um so the proposal on this is to have a 28 foot access easement on the western side of the lot that would access this lot it would provide the driveway and any uh utilities that would be needed to service the property it is an on-site well and septic but if it would be any nobody has phone anymore but cable or anything else it would go through that easily okay um the the set there are two variances being requested the access plus front yard the front yard is proposed to be 50 ft 1 75 ft is required by your ordinance the 50 ft really is to keep it a little bit away from the power Lin so again I'm going out of order on my notes trying to address your um and I'll have to go back to this so so um you know what let me go back to my presentation if you would I think I answered those questions first but let's do this okay um so that's a general not right this second okay thanks J okay so block 802 lot 33 which is proposed uh 2141 Sheron Avenue is a parcel that is 165 ft wide by 1,20 fet deep it's 3.86 Acres it is located 300 ft from cheran Avenue Lot 32 is located in front lot 33 is a vacant property that includes a 350 ft pscg R of we that bisects the property from the East to the West the applicant proposes to provide a 28t wide access easement along the western property line of lot 32 the applicant proposes to construct a single family home on lot 33 the single family home is a permitted use in the ra zoning District a variance is required from ordinance section 2 53-17 B3 for lot Frontage since the lot was previously created as a landlocked lot and has no Frontage on an approved Street the 28t access easement will provide the required access between an approved Street of the municipality and the lot as required by the municipal land use law section 40 55 d-35 this access provides adequate access for firefighting and emergency vehicles necessary for the protection of the health and safety of the residents in the area the driveway will be constructed of materials able to withstand the weight of a vehicle needed to serve the property as required by the Fire official this addresses item number five of the board Engineers letter a frontage variance is requested since when the lot was created it was created without Frontage which creates a situation uniquely affecting this property this configuration has existed for many years there are several Lots along Sheron Avenue that are deep however these lots have Frontage on Sheron Avenue Lot 33 does not the access easement ex essentially provides Frontage for the lot a question may arise as to why a subdivision is not proposed as a flag lot the required 150 ft Frontage cannot be provided since the overall lot width is 165 ft if a flag lot is proposed variances are created for both Lots 32 and 33 The Proposal before the board today will only require a variance for for lot 33 I believe the hardship was created by the prior owner and the proposal before the board addresses the relief requested a variance is required from ordinance section 23-17 b4a for front yard stepb back the ordinance requires a front yard of 75 ft a front yard of 50 ft is proposed l 33 is located 300 ft from the street so essentially the setback for the right from the RightWay is proposed to be 350 ft lot 33 is encumbered with a 350 ft wide psng RightWay located on the property the applicant desires to construct the house away from the RightWay and believes the 50ft front yard proposed allows for this by a proposing approximately 60 ft behind behind the proposed structure until the psng right away Begins the psng RightWay is located about 160 ft from the front light of lot line of 33 the tree buffer shown on the grading plan is approximately 60 ft deep this addresses item six of the board Engineers letter the tree buffer as well as the storm water management that is proposed for lot 33 will help to infiltrate the storm water while keeping a natural buffer this addresses item seven of the board Engineers letter the grant of this variance is related specifically to block 802 lot 33 the purpose of the land use law will be Advanced by the deviations of the zoning ordinance the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good the benefits of the deviation will substantially outweigh any detriment and the variance will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and zoning ordinance of Franklin Township the construction of a new home in this area will be a benefit to the neighborhood and to the township some of the goals of the master plan focused on the following retaining the Royal character of the township which this does not change the rural character rural character preserve the quality of life this can help to enhance the life of the family who benefits and moves to this community maintain a safe and attractive residential environment this goal is met with the proposal to add and update the housing of the um front lot and the area which is a beautiful area large lots that can support a septic system this lot is 3.86 acres and can support a septic system for the proposed residential use I represent that the application presented addresses the goals of the the master plan and has not a negative impact how big is that little square between the rear of lot 32 and the beginning of the easement okay that's a small P 32 and the PSC line 32 your okay and the beginning of the easement of d i I have about someone I I have it in my other notes so I'm going to wa on here just give me one second uh 98 ft so it's 98 ft by 165 and the property is 12200 ft deep 1,20 ft yeah and there's an identical lot on charity that has a flag line and I'm still confused why you wouldn't have gone for a subdivision for a Ply cuz you you need variances as well for this and all you would have done is need a variance for the front for Frontage on both Lots on both points um I would say that's something if the board would think that would be a better solution we could probably go with we thought the access easement essentially provides the flag of the flag elect to begin with talk e create problems with homeowners I totally understand where you're coming from you know it's fine for the TRU when they start but if someone sells then it sometimes has neighbors have problems I being director of Community Development for 13 years I understand 100% what you're saying with that um and it was just and again you you bought a piece of property that you knew was landlock I I well I don't want to speak for Mr I I think he had U well it was created that way why was it created as a landlock lot and not a flag lot back at that time then then this owners come back um I think that if the board would be more inclined to approve a flag lot we could we would consider that we I don't think it would be here it would be and you know the other thing excuse me I think a flag lot would be lot better option because of the fact I have friends going through problems with in easement right now I appreciate that and I I just say that too because I've been in other municipalities that don't like flag clots so it's really we we viewed both options flag I don't not saying they're like right we just chose the one option we thought would be would would cause less uh less variances I think it's the obvious question nobody's asked yet I guess they're going to but you own both wats so why wouldn't they be combined and you have one house just like everybody else has on that street that seems like the sort of like the neighborh well I think Mr lupinetti just all alluded to it when he was testifying that he believed that there was an access so I and again I shouldn't say much more because I'm not that's but um and and you know buyer beware maybe you should have looked into that more I can't you know so hindsight's always 2020 right so um Dave do you have any comments why don't we go your your report I don't have a whole lot left in my report Jam you don't kind of touch on all the items but but the thing the thing about is that lot 32 that's in front that's already an undersized parcel we need 1.5 Acres in the zone that's about 1 acre um May I comment on that please I'm sorry to interrupt your zoning officer I specifically spoke to him about that and he said since it was created prior to a certain date that was acceptable because that size was the acceptable lot size I wasn't trying to say it wasn't it oh I apologize can I finish I apologize so it's an undersized lot of the Zone while been pointed out it's maybe a grandfathered lot um it's already an undersized lot for the Zone I understand why they try to do the easement CU When you put the 28t wide easement on the western side then you then you're down you don't have a lot of Frontage anymore cuz you only have 65 ft withd now you take 28 ft off you can be under the 150 ft standard um it'll also dictate side setback relief um because the house has proposed now is 15.9 ft from that proposed easement line or what would be a subdivision line so doing that flag L subdivision creates a whole host of other issues also I agree with the board members that a subdivision on a flag L is much better than an e you we always try to stay away from that as to the extent possible um and then unfortunately this lot 33 this landlock parcel has such a small amount of distance between the PS and G easement and and the back a lot 32 we are testim it's only 98 ft of width and that effectively is going to be the lot size that we're talking about you can't build in that PSC EAS there's just a host of issues here that you know about that um it's just it's a difficult it's a difficult ask um for this particular and and if you look at the neighborhood if you look at the tax map you know every lot you know by and large is that 1300 ft deep you know 160 5 ft wide 1300 ft deep all the way down the neighborhood they don't have one house generally I mean there are there are two lots you know a couple Lots next to this particular one um but by and large the whole neighborhood um is that 165 by 1300 there are two lots I'm looking at right now on Grand Avenue flag Lots yeah at some point in time somebody did flag Lots back then you know our ordinance doesn't really have a flag lot isn't so bad right I hear what you're saying a lot a lot of lots are that way in Frankl to even less yeah you know often we see when you have these deep lots that maybe most people would commit with the flying lot on yeah in this in this instance there's just a couple in that whole block I I frankly don't know how the plan would would act or react to it I got may I correct something I said on that distance please I apologize just quickly looking at my notes 97 98 ft is to the rear of the lot there let me show 98 was to here the end of the house then I calculate another 60 ft so this area would essentially be 165 by 160 158 but still I mean it's 165 by I thought he just said 98 that's what I said and I'm correcting myself I apologize I quickly looked at my notes incorrectly because I'm adding it up again so 97 was to the rear of the house and then it's about 60 ft from there so I apologize I in my quickness to look at my notes I should have checked myself it it's still to your same point but it's a smaller line um are you you thre a date you fin your comments yeah how about we uh we spent some time talking about the subjects let's open up to the public motion by D second by glus favor iOS did anyone hear from the public like to be heard regarding this application please come forward raise your right hand please to tell the truth about t you're going to get yes name and address John grmi g r a s SM i c k 2140 Grant I built my home in 1990 and oh I built my home in 1990 I have flag shape there are front yard their backyard noise is my front yard noise where are you again what lot are you 2140 no but Grant 802 I think it is 802 off of Grant right off of Grant we we be right behind we don't have uh addresses like that we have lot block numbers oh okay I don't know lot pardon excuse me directly behind this property is that you're saying yes sir sure this is a lot question this yellow one yes where are you I'm on here this flag L right that's that's not a flag L that's L well because prop was then you're talking about this lot here this little narrow hold on this little narrow piece here that opens up so your lot is 5.01 lot 5.01 okay thank you I just want to clarify and there uh I go my front porch and I hear my neighbors up front I hear the conversations I see the barue I hear all that flag laes flag shape properties when we went there they said this is the last Township is going to put in flag shaped properties there's not going to be anymore I mean it's it's a pain in the neck but that's a buffer zone it's landlocked leave it alone it ain't hurting nothing I mean you got nature back there animals got to go somewhere you can walk back there it's perfect now he wants one home when we got the letter now he wants two homes I mean you can't build on a first one so you object to his yes I am home on that line yes I am I I just don't see the the need for it to put two homes down instead of one I mean he's got that buffer zone leave it buffer zone I mean you got all those properties from M all the way down to Sheridan they can't subdivide they can't it's all dead ground you go back there for quite a few hundred feet and walk and there's nothing but Woods I I object to it because you go back there you see there you're going to see homes if I want to see homes I'd move the Washington Township which is ugly actually you know I I worked there I lived there it's horrible so just I would object to it just leave it alone there's no need for it okay thank you anyone else like to be heard your right hand please about to you're going to get yes I do name and address Bill Morris 585 Oak Avenue Malik I think it should be denied because they're behind on 2023 taxes that it shouldn't even be heard being delinquent in taxes Mike if you need this for back up it was was printed at 6:00 tonight no normally they check it when the application comes in as far as the checklist um so I'm not sure about that I don't do that part of it okay yes taxes should be paid but if you guys want this I can should be covered give it to you I mean they have to get covered so but it's two quarters of 2023 that are not paid it's not the taxes for this quarter that's the respectfully all taxes have been paid we wouldn't be here tonight this is off the township website I'm just telling you taxes are paid it's your word against the official Township website well technically that's hearsay but yes how's it here say because when when did he purchase the property sorry when did he purchase the property eight months ago seven months ago so the tax is what it has yeah everything according I said according to the tax records it is not paid okay we'll look into it but everything then it should be delayed until the issu is resolved okay thank you anyone else like to be heard raise your right hand please sure to tell the gr about test you're going to get I do name and address please Paul a Ross milso R oos m i LS o get front of the mic please Paul a Ross milso r m i lso 2163 Sheridan Avenue I own the property directly adjacent to these lots that are um in question I believe from the pictures that you were seeing you mentioned the yellow house is probably mine that you're seeing in the house um essentially this is building a second house behind the house that was there when I bought the Lots my lot 20 years ago uh my neighbor bought next to me I assumed that the lot next to me was one single lot all the way to the back I guess that was a mistake knowing that but my lot runs all the way back to the power lines my house sits back about 130 ft off of the road so essentially putting the second house behind the other house is essentially in my backyard where I'll be looking at their front yard I'll have them looking at my back deck constantly I feel like I'm right on top of somebody I'm concerned about what the value of that Pro of two houses next to mine is Du to my value of my house and my property um roughly when I built my house was $350,000 including property and the house um I'm not sure what size houses they're planning to put on that lot I have a four-bedroom three garage house um you know I'm concerned that there's not enough room for putting houses there that are comparable in size to what I have and will detract from my value it will also impact the nature as this gentleman said I have deer to come right up back to my back deck having another house there that close will impact the amount of nature that can come back into the backyard as well right thank you thank you for your coming also if I may I know that the you know I think he assumed that he could do this and cut all the trees down in a back lot 6 months ago so all right thank you anyone else like to be heard please one forward in please sure tell the truth about Tes you're going get yes name and address please Monique Moore 2175 Sheridan Avenue okay okay so I am two properties over I um Mr Paul's neighbor and so I just came up to kind of replicate his uh feelings about the property so when we purchased the property we that property has been there and it's been vacant for as long as I could remember um but we did just think it was one property so building one property on that lot no problem with but the two properties we do feel like there's a ey sore and um will impede a little bit on our priv privacy um just from where we are we can see over to the back Paul does have some privacy you can't see directly in his lot but adding that other house that second house in the back we just don't feel comfortable with and we don't we wouldn't um be comfortable and we're against it as well so yeah that's it all right thank you anyone else like raise your right hand please you to I do and address Ralph travone 802 Marshal Road um after hearing the testimony this evening I really don't believe there's a hardship this evening because the applicant purchased these two lots as is so if you strike out the word hardship I don't know what grounds you have to Grant a C1 variance and should you deny the C1 Grant uh variance this evening I could presume the applicant will come back again in front of the township to the planning board and if that's the case I'm going to speak for myself I sit on the planning board I'm the vice chair and in hearing the application and the testimony that evening I would assume they would be asking for a flag lot and typically flag lots are not granted unless there's hardship well we just ruled out hardship so that takes the The Lion Share speaking I'm speaking on behalf of myself my own personal vote okay I would vote against the application for a flag lot because I don't believe there's a hardship the other reason I would vote against it is because typically when I vote for a flag lot it's typically a parent to a child or a brother to a brother some family relationship I believe in this particular application there would be two separate owners with no family tie and for those reasons I would vote again against the flag lot subdivision thank you anyone else like to I make motion motion by Dan second by Richard GLA all in favor I oppose sorry okay you want to make any further comments uh just if we can have one minute sure any other comments Dave you have no I think the the hardship is really focus on it no I don't that's where the car that burden since they do blocks and they could combine them thank you Mr chairman uh board uh after consideration and listening to the testimony tonight um the questions proposed uh we're we're going to withdraw the application without prejudice just means they bring bring it back again CH thank you and it wouldn't preclude you from going to planning a new application we need a motion I make motion by second by D Mr K Mr Le yes Mr desar yes Mr ham yes chairman green yes okay the application was withdrawn and no house no okay that's it for J tonight have resol RLS New Field and we [Music] had so regarding the ocean food and fuel I just wanted to make sure the board was aware that Dave and I both received a call from Ed the armano from CME the township engineers and they have some issues with the Landscaping um around the septic they're saying that landscaping around the septic should not be or cannot be permitted so there may be some changes to the Landscaping uh I want to make sure the board is okay okay with if they' works with them and with CMA and they come up with a solution on a landscaping um you'll accept that if not they'll have to come back are you're are you okay we fine with it I don't know how the rest of what happened was the septic system was designed by somebody else it was larger than shown on the Eda plans and um since Ed from CME also sits on the as the consultant to the county for septics or something he wants to make sure they en Force the f um regulation that there's no se no Landscaping within 10 ft of a s so that forces some of the Landscaping to be moved around on site that's what we're talking about that's any objections that hand working with CM on that Landscaping issue I trust we don't have any issues okay that's uh no solution right Mike yes there's two resolutions ocean food and fuel or the RLS any issues with RLS no make a motion we approve both resolution 313 second by Richard all in favor I oppose any exensions okay secretary's report um I don't have it on here but I just wanted to give you guys a heads up I there's I added some things on the website for the zoning board application um it was actually missing the application part of it it was just the um what was it they the notice of publication yeah notice of hearing and publication for I don't know I took over this position in April and that's what they had been using um it wasn't an actual application so I've added the actual application um we've added the um checklist that engineer uses and then also we added a um statement for applicants to sign because I've had some issues with denials paying their escrow after they were denied so um we added a statement where they signed as part of the application stating that they know that they no matter what the outcome is of their hearing that they were still responsible for paying the out that's I think they probably do that well they probably they're not going to pay they're not going to pay right but we the township does have an ordinance that um they we can summon to them if they do not pay so and it states that in the statement that they now have to sign good job Mr anything else Mike anything motion to I make motion motion by second by Jim all in favor I oppose meeting adjourned