##VIDEO ID:31XI_MFfdx0## the planning board of the township of Franklin has been provided uh if everyone could please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all all right okay um Robert Lort Sammy sioban and Mark dcy to be excused this evening councilman andaron here Theodore Chase here Jennifer ragau here M Rafi here Charles Brown here Robert Thomas here Rebecca hbert here chairman Orsini here right we got no minutes uh we resolution for the meeting calendar um anybody has have any issues with the um dates in 2025 yes um Vince wrote it out Vince came over today and and said that the attorneys are not able to come on October 8th so he had me change it to October 15th and October 22nd okay so he just did that this afternoon and and so that's is does anybody else have any problem with it being the 15th and the 22nd of October everybody's okay okay I I wouldn't know at this point whether I was or wasn't but we'll we'll cross that bridge when we get to it okay I don't look out past next week um okay so do we need a vote Yes sir all right uh make a motion to approve 2025 meeting calendar second um Jim can they just do it is fine yes so you can just say all in favor all in favor opposed Mo thank you here we go um discussion item uh I guess we'll go for you Howard and um so this is not on the agenda this is just a little um one minute um we have to deal with the wolf um campus on off the good evening my name is Howard dco I represent the foundation of the wolf campus uh I'm appearing with respect to uh planning uh pln 22-16 that was the subject of a planning board approval on May 17 2023 memorialized on August 4 2023 the approval was for a major subdivision to create 11 lots and a site plan approval to install a solar array at this time we are not intending to install the solar array but we want to perfect the major subdivision uh condition of approval included the payment of tree removal fees for both the subdivision and the solar array site plan uh we are asking the board to allow us to pay only the tree removal fee for the presidential subdivision at this time and to pay the solar array site plan uh uh tree removal fee prior to receiving building permits for the solar which will be memorialized in an appropriate developers agreement it's a non-material condition and I would respectfully request the uh board's approval and so just to clarify I'm sorry Mr chair think just to fill out the record in terms of the CME calculations that apply to this particular request yes that's great the solar component is 47% of the site which Aggregates uh to $ 44,1 33 for tree replacement uh the residential subdivision component is 53% of the site uh which um uh is 49,7 67 uh and that is the nature of our application thank you thank you Howard and just just for the record um you are not at this moment abandoning the approval for the solar you're just not going to do it at the present that is correct so at the time that they do do it they would then pay the appropriate tree replacement fee if they do clear that lot otherwise it will remain uncleared so um how do we want to handle this in terms of a vote or all right uh the only point I want to make is I would agree with the counselor that this is a non-material condition and therefore notice and publication were not required uh the form of the motion would be to modify the condition of the approval with regard to the the payment of the tree replacement fee in the manner that has been represented by counselor uh this evening subject to the execution and delivery of a developers agreement in formed satisfactory uh to this board and Mr chairman I just want to clarify too just so the board and if anybody's paying attention this does not change in any way the applicability uh of the tree ordinance what this is doing is basically the portion of the development that they're moving forward on at this time they're paying the tree removal fee at this time if and when they move forward with the the other phase they would have to pay that fee at that time pretty clear so um I'll I'll make a motion probably not as eloquent as what Jim just said but um to be memorialized in developers agreement um basically what Mark just said that the um the applicant will will pay the the portion of the tree removal fee uh for the subdivision uh and and defer uh payment of the um solar array U portion of that um replacement to if and when um that that area is cleared for the solar array what second it councilman and Barson yes Theodor Chase yes Jennifer ragau Yes Mah Rafi yes Charles Brown yes Robert Thomas yes Rebecca Hilbert yes chairman orini yes thank you very much no problem all right so before we go any further um agenda notice so carried uh Hamilton Street Management LLC pln 242 is going to be carried to January 8th uh the deadline for Action is um January 31st so um they don't need to extend us and no further notification is needed so that will be heard on January 8th um now we go to the public comment so make a motion to open the meeting for any general plan comments if you are here for any comments regarding um Rucker's prep that there will be a separate opening of to the public for that hearing second it all in favor any members of the public have any general planning comment seeing no takers move to close second all in favor okay um Peter that means you're up so this will be for ruers prep uh pln 2410 minor subdivision which applicant is proposing toide the property to two lots um lot 42 and lot 43 and an R20 on and and Peter will uh well that's what it says on the thing uh but anyway maybe there's an overlay I don't even care yeah that you clarify that that is that is not accurate this is I didn't think so but this is an application for site plan approval to construct at approximately a 14,500 ft building on the current Campus of Rutter's prep uh it also involves actually merging a lot that we have acquired into the campus so that's the application for the record oh yeah and I'm pretty sure it's not at 41 Street either no so I'm sure just confirm was the notice correct and everything actually Mr Clark and and I because we had an issue with the notice issue with notice the first time but it's actually in perfect form at this Junction all right we're good to go and appearance for the record to disregard all that for the record Peter Lanford appearing on behalf of the applicant um as I indicated this is an application for the construction of a 14529 square foot building uh which is going to be used by the school uh for uh assembly and for Performing Arts I do have four potential Witnesses but I think I will only call three of because the traffic report that we submitted actually was a parking report I think is self-explanatory and I don't think the board should have any issues with that report but if they do I will be glad to call my traffic consultant uh my first witness this evening will be Mr rar soic way to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you got little louder I do name an address for the record please Robert abar what is your position with the applicant I am um the chief operating officer at ruer prepared jury school have a seat all right Mr abgar as Chief Operating Officer you have been involved with this project yes okay and ruer prep is located on as everybody knows on eastn Avenue yes how long has ruer prep been in existence it's been in existence over it's been in existence over 250 years um yes and how long has it been at its present location uh since the early 19 since the early 1950s I believe okay and how many students are there currently in the school the current enrollment is 700 two students and the school covers what grade levels uh prek ages three through grade 12 all right and this application is to construct a new building correct correct which I indicated was for assembly and Performing Arts yes will this building result in any additional students or increase in the operation of the school there's no intent to increase enrollment with the new building okay thank you I have no further questions any question from the board for this witness okay Mr Turner Scott raise your right hand please somly swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you got I do name and address please Scott Turner U menow Engineering Associates 261 Cleveland Avenue in Highland Park New Jersey 08904 Mr Turner you're a licensed engineer in the state of New Jersey yes I am and it is in good standing okay please accepting go and you than you Mr chairman and you have appeared uh before this board on numerous other occasions for ruter prep yes I have okay and so you're obviously familiar with the property and also with the project I am all right can you first of all just yeah have a seat and can you first of all just do a quick overview of the campus and then we can focus on the building sure I can do that is there a way we can get the exhibit onto the screen I do yes I have it plugged into this court here thank you all right and as you're going through this if these are not if any of the photographs or drawings are not part of the plan set can you please identify them as not being part of the plan set so we can have them marked yes and this is uh was an exhibit that was not part of the plan Set uh as you can see on the exhibit it is uh entitled Rucker's Preparatory School overall plan exhibit and it has a uh date of November 6th 2024 uh there are three separate views on this exhibit A1 Mr Clarkin A1 prepared under your direction and control yes sir thank you A1 A1 uh the top view is an overall view of the uh basically the entire campus East Avenue is sitting parallel with the bottom of the sheet North is sort of pointing to the left the lower left exhibit is a an exhibit uh where the uh of the existing condition where this new building is proposed to be constructed uh this building here I I know it as the dining Commons building um and then there's the music building CED uh just to the south of that and then in this large open uh space area that is the area where the construction will occur and that is the final uh lower right exhibit which has the uh new building footprint superimposed into that area where it will be constructed okay and in addition addition to the construction of the building and we'll go through the building a little bit more carefully with our architect are there any other site improvements that are being proposed in conjunction with this application no uh but uh well yes there there are some minor other site improvements that are part of the application uh which I can go through um as as Mr Lanford pointed out we are uh seeking an approval for uh a 14,520 ft what we call a multi-purpose building uh in place of the previously approved 14,520 ft Performing Art Center building so it's it's for the most part antical in size just different in shape uh that the new building will consist of two floors uh with uses that will consist of a multi-purpose Assembly Hall which will really be the the Performing Arts component uh a school store an administrative space that will be located on the first floor and then classroom space on the second floor uh building Heights will vary from anywhere around 39 ft where it connects into the dining Commons building and 29 ft along the main access driveway where it's uh sitting uh closest to that access roadway itself and that's due to the Topography of that open space area and the uh surrounding uh uh driveways and Service Roads um there's also another component uh if you if you know when you go past you'll notice that's located down in the South uh West corner of the dining comments building there is a existing uh exterior stair well uh that stairwell is uh slated to be uh screened with a a wooden screen and if there's questions with that the architect can certainly uh comment on that um other site improvements uh relative to the new building is a an outdoor Courtyard area that's uh situated sort of sandwiched in between the dining comments building uh the new uh multi-purpose building and the existing music building and I'll point to it in here it's sort of within that open area uh it will not be visible from service driveways or really anywhere else on campus it's sort of a nice space for that to be in uh that will be uh inclusive of some open space area some Landscaping some uh seating some P pavers of some sort uh that area is still being vetted out a little bit in terms of what It ultimately will look like but this is a good representation and fair representation in my mind in terms of what that space will will be used for and and look like uh there will be a uh some new sidewalks installed uh specifically down in between the uh the what I'll call the uh southernly uh building wall and the existing service roadway there's a new sidewalk uh being installed in that location to maintain circulation pedestrian circulation in a north south Direction uh there's also a new sidewalk in uh Landscaping that will be proposed outside the new main entrance that's being being created again that's on the uh southwest corner of the building this short little uh wall of the new footprint uh that area here we've extended out the uh The Hardscape in that area to allow you know anyone that's coming for any type of event to have enough space and adequate space to make their way into that building um there's also some other modifications to the sidewalk system just to kind of make it a little bit more efficient uh and that's located in between the music building and uh the up and I'll I'll zoom in maybe it'll be a little easier to see that so it's it's in between the existing music building and the upper school building some of this sidewalk in here some of it's there now we're just reconfiguring it a little better just again to uh kind of uh you know make it a little more efficient for what we're doing um other than that there are no changes to the existing uh main uh what I call the main access driveway that runs uh north and south on this exhibit right to left uh other than the reduction of the uh pick off and drop off area that's currently on campus and that sits down in this southwest corner of the exhibit off the corner of the new uh the new multi-purpose building uh that drop off and pickup zone is being reduced from 175 or 170 ft in length roughly to roughly 80 ft in length and we did have a traffic consultant uh review that condition uh they went out and they prepared a report that was submitted to the board uh Dolan and Dean uh prepared the report it was dated September 17th of this year uh and they did the evaluation of any potential impacts of the shortening of that uh pickoff drop off Zone and uh they visited the school during a peak dismissal and arrival period uh that was done on March 14th of this year and uh they have opined that there will be no impact due to the shortening of this area Okay couple other quick questions uh we are adding another lot that the school has acquired uh to the campus is that correct yes that's correct and if you can again go to the top of that exhibit it that lot is on the extreme left hand side of the exhibit right and that is a dwelling correct yes and it's Lo it's it's for the record it is block 466 lot four okay and the township uh ordinance requires that there be a buffer around the perimeter uh of the school where the uh School AB buts residential uses and even though this building is a residential use we will be putting a buffer along that property line as required by the ordinance is that correct that is correct we are required to comply with section 112 -47 of the uh that's the conditional use standards for a uh School within the R20 Zone uh and we do agree there'll be a uh um a landscape plan modified landscape plan that will be submitted that will include a buffer planting plan along with a 6 foot high solid fence in accordance with that standard okay all right hold on I just let me ask a question while you're still on this so are you going to consolidate this slot yes what are you buffering the residence adjacent to that lot to that lot yes to that lot we actually lot prior uh actually to the south of that uh is was a former residential dwelling when we purchased that property some years ago and had to come before the board we were required to put a buffer up along that property line now we're going to basically move the buffer one lot over to to buffer the existing dwelling yeah okay thank you now Scott you mentioned that there was a previous approval for basically this building in a little bit of a different configuration and a little bit of uh and a different size but substantially the same correct yeah within a couple hundred square feet just a different configuration okay it allows for this Courtyard this open Courtyard area to be developed and constructed because the prior uh and actually you can see it I did have a it may be a little bit difficult to see but in the lower right corner I had um my office outlined the the the prior footprint of the what was the approved Performing Art Center building and and I'll I'll just run it through with my cursor and it was a very oddly shaped building uh more so maybe than this one uh it came in here and it came off the dining Commons and then I'll just follow it down and it had a bunch of um ins and outs in terms of the the building as it got to the existing main access driveway and then ran it a um an arched uh fa side along the service driveway and then it came back up and tied directly into the corner of the what would be the uh the north uh northwest corner of the existing music building and then all of this space that we have now proposed as uh Hardscape and some landscaping and some Turf and uh open space area that was all encompassed by that prior approved building okay and and when we did that previous application we had a storm water management plan yes we did okay did we ever put that storm water management plan in no it was modified as as required uh because we had a big open space area with no building um one of the things that we were asked to do on the prior application when we were in for other site improvements for the for the school um one of the conditions was for us to install a rain Garden in that l in that large open space area which was installed and it was it was there and it I think a board member had asked for it as a mitigation for uh the the uh the variants we needed for impervious coverage uh so we agreed we put that in I did speak to uh Darren Mazi prior to the uh hearing tonight um because I I try to always reach out to him before the hearings and I did talk to him about that and he thought it was important for just to get it on the record that that rain Garden was not installed as part of a condition or requirement to meet storm water management standards it was there as a as a requirement or suggestion by the board that we agreed to do uh so that that r Garden will be removed and again Mr Mazy just thought it would be good to have that on record okay and we are providing obviously now storm water management for this new construction correct yeah that the storm water management regulations from you know the time we were here last to now have changed so we're now obligated to meet the current storm water management regulations with um infiltration and water quality standards um we are really vetting that through not only Mr mazy's office but the Delaware R and Canal commission who has a um and they they do a very thorough storm water management review we've gone through their process we're on our second um review letter with them and we're whittling down the comments as we need to and can and uh we're we're confident that what we've designed now will meet their standards and and you could see it's it's again on this lower right corner we've kind of outlined one of the portions of the storm water management improvements which we on campus is an underground uh we we label it here as a basin but it's really an underground infiltration system system is what it is we had soil testing done and um and and we're confident that we've designed a system that complies with the standards and and what we're here to tell you that we will okay uh are there any variances that are being sought with respect to this application yeah as as as of with most all of the other prior applications that we've been in front of this board for um there is an impervious coverage uh variance as well um the the current approval uh have we got a a variance uh Grant for 27.7% where 25% is permitted in the zone uh this application reduces that coverage by 1,891 square ft and brings the coverage to 27.1% so we're we're getting closer to compliance and that's a product of adding on lot four which has open space area uh and that that's what prompted the reduction in overall impervious coverage on the campus but in essence this board previously granted a variance for greater impervious coverage that's correct yes y now uh there were staff reports that were generated in conjunction with this application yes have you had an opportunity to review them I have okay uh do you want to I'll let you go and just uh indicate uh whether you have any concerns with any of the reports sure so the first one is from uh uh Mr uh Hey dated October 16th 2024 uh and and Mark if I missed anything in test ton that you want to hear please let me know uh the second page under review comments um he did uh ask about the intended use of the of the the lot that's located on Lot 4 and that is uh going currently being used and will be continue to be used for staff housing it's it's an existing dwelling that will be continued to use for that fashion single family yes it's a single family home and then I think we provided the testimony in regards to section 11247 uh which are the perimeter buffer requirements we're going to consolidate the lot into a single lot and uh we've been to the township historic commission um already and I believe we've got um a fairly clean bill of health with that as well in terms of where we're at I I think Mr Dominic reported to Mr hilly that the environmental commission did in fact approve this and U historic commission I'm sorry the historic commission approved it correct mark I frankly don't recall so so just for the record is what's being I mean the um I mean they would have been mostly concerned I would think about the architecture look of the building and is what's going to be presented is what they reviewed and approved okay thank you I think we had to make three appearances there yes but uh we finally satisfy them continue so other than that there's no other issues uh relative to any um conditions that would be brought forth with this application in Mr Hilly's report we have a report from uh Mr Mazi SEI Associates dated November 1st 2024 uh and uh we just I again I did have a discussion with him over a couple of technical items and there's nothing in his report that we will not satisfy as well we'll agree to comply with his requirements we have a letter from the uh Franklin Township environmental Commission dated November 5th 2024 with a number of bullet point items uh and if the board would like we can sort of go through them Point by Point um U we can just go through any ones that you you can't comply with and uh much like much like the CME report that you just testified that you would be complying with we can do the same thing there with respect to the first item there we we'll have the uh architect deal with that issue rather than right Mr Turner um Scott can you uh address the EV issue sure so we're not the the the proposed site plan does not increase the parking on site uh therefore we're not obligated to install any new EV parking spaces however I can testify to the fact that we had a discussion although they're not proposed or anticipated with the application the school recognizes the need and the fact that they're going to potentially need them in the future and at some point in time they will be adding EV part parking spaces not just part of this application they're not required based on uh the law and we will provide trees uh as requested by the environmental commission yes and we'll we'll put the trees we're going to limit that within the significantly around the work space that we're dealing with here but we will agree to add some trees and provide that plan to Mr Hy and and you know I think um you know since we we have the COO of recers here there's a comment sort of embedded in that point that I think Bears emphasis so Rucker prep has long had a very attractive mature tree canopy that has declined over time just due to disease and other things and of course due to building obviously I think a lot of trees were taken out when the traffic uh ramp off of um eastn was constructed um not that there wasn't replanting there was quite a bit of replanting done and those trees look successful but overall um you know and and while it won't necessarily be a condition of this application per se um please consider continuing to keep up that tree canopy is not only very attractive for the campus but it has obviously environmental benefits thank you Mr orini we will take uh your comments into consideration and I am sure uh probably in the very near future you will see us back here again and we can report to you where we are with the trees and how we're doing okay the uh next item is the anti-idling sign should be placed at various locations we agreed we we'll provide that and the last one is a a list of amendments made to plans and supporting documents with all future resubmissions and we will do that as well okay October 30th 2024 office of fire prevention from Mr house uh we have uh I think this school has actively been working with uh Mr house and other um staff in town in regards to the water meter pit and doing those upgrades that are required uh there's been meetings on site and uh they've been actively working on it the timing wasn't in place for us to get all that work done before the hearing but um I I think they they've been acting in good faith and I met with Mr House about an hour and a half ago and he indicated to tell you that he's fine with his report and uh he is working with the school and resolving his comments so we we agree to comply with all the comments in his report exctly yeah because I mean he makes a fairly strong statement that um the new project not be approved until the check valve is installed yeah um so I mean I suppose we could make that a condition is approval because you said you you you will have it done in association with this time um and if that's okay we'll we'll just do that just so we can put a steak in the ground because working there's been meetings they've been they know I think they've got some guidance in terms of what to do uh so and and that will probably be done before we even start the building I would agree yes okay good you hear and I think that covers the last one that uh we did get a traffic safety letter from ooc October 8th and there were no uh comments in that staff report and then we had uh gotten from the historic commission we have documentation through an email from uh from Vince to uh Peter uh and um and I Mark and Christine got this as well this is dated October 28th 2024 uh no exception taken to the application as submitted and surge Authority comments we will comply with those and we're going to comply with them as well yes um I have no further questions okay um any questions from the board for Scott K and on the the plan that shows the tree planting this uh and the mainly the the Tupelo trees to I guess you'd say the south of the main entrance there's this areas of I can only call it reticulation on the plan uh with the trees typically in in it and I wondered what that meant uh does that because one Poss ability that's often represented that way is the pervious pavement and I don't know that it means that but what does it mean so there was a reason why I didn't testify to the landscaping or lighting here because my office was not responsible for that the Architecture Firm and we have the architect here who can I think give you a little guidance and uh an answer to that question okay because I just note the comment in the CMA comments under landscaping and lighting comments um trees are number two trees are in conflict with the proposed drainage structures in addition Landscaping should not be installed over proposed drainage pipes correct yes and we we we will coordinate that work and that was a just a miscoordination between our office and The Architects but we will uh we we will We we'll take care of that with upon the resubmission yeah it's it's sort of unusual for the Landscaping to come in from the architect rather than from the engineer a little bit unusual but the architect's firm has a licensed landscape architect who prepared the plans um and sign the plans and that was part of the uh submittal package okay well so I'll bring it up when the architect comes off but I but I we will address that comment from CME there will be no there will be no conflict with respect to the utility these are trees M okay just to clean up would it be appropriate to abandon that portion of the prior approval that included uh the Performing Arts Center I think it makes sense because this super predes that yeah okay thank you also I'm understanding from the testimony that you haven't finalized the outdoor Courtyard and you haven't finalized the Landscaping so how do we handle that the Landscaping is finalized there's no real change that in my mind in terms of the Landscaping what's in the courtyard that we have to move plantings because they're over pipes yeah we move it we we'll move it 5 feet Jim it's not we're we're not going to lose it it's just a conflict between the landscape architect had their tree installed on top of a as long as as long as there's no change in the number it's just the placement then I'm we're not will n and we're going to be adding trees based on the other comments from the other reports and I think we can indicate in the in the resolution that we will relocate the trees to the satisfaction of the township engineer and Mr Healey and the courtyard as well yeah correct all right and you're still vetting the stormw management and the only comment I would make is if drcc requires any modification all righty uh that it has to be approved by the the staff understood yeah that that's understood thanks Jim um anybody else any questions for Scott if not yeah Mr chairman just one question so um my comment number four I mean there were there was a number of other um you've had a number of different approvals over the years before the board there were a few administrative approvals there were like vestibules and other buildings some of them conflicted with what you're doing now some of them don't so I guess what's staying and what's going I guess is the question well right now those other um additions those small building additions that were part of Prior approvals they're still here um we still identify them on the zoning table um the school I know wants to reserve their right on those approvals um we certainly acknowledge and I think there was if they were to build that building addition exactly how it's shown on this plan or the site plans that we submitted to you there would be some conflict with some of the new sidewalks that were're osing on this plan we would have to come in for a site plan when whenever that addition if it ever comes to fruition we'd have to prepare a site plan and I am certain that we would most likely be in front of this board based on more than likely a reconfiguration of those those additions and the reconfiguration of those sidewalks okay we don't want to lose those approvals okay that were done whenever they were done okay uh they're still there and I I think this came up on the last application we were here for as well and we again we the testimony was we wanted to maintain those approvals but the likelihood of the the building footprint looking exactly like it was as it was presented years ago is is very slim so I guess so you don't want to abandon them but if there's a material change you will come back here we'd have to come back yeah yeah I I just think that's the way it's going to work out anyway so so and and in your calculation the building coverage and impervious coverage you included those yes previously approved yes okay so it might be a matter of maybe some clarifications on the on the site plan sure indic and and I think you did some of that but just maybe this is remaining per previous approval this is remaining and then M there might be some things that this is going away because I think physically this new approvals going on the the same area of the site so obviously you're abandoning that if this I we had a table on the overall plan somewhere near the zoning table that kind of outlined that but we'll be more clear and we'll work with you mark in terms of getting that worked out all right thank you oh I'm if I'm supposed to say something that's U you can go move on to your next I go to my next witness okay evening everyone you got to hold it closer closer yes that's good I'm good you're fine your right hand zie swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth of help you got I do name and address for the record please uh Richard King my home address or business address business is fine 1 23 South Broad Street in Philadelphia Pennsylvania Mr you can be seated Mr King you're a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey I am okay and can you give the board very briefly the benefit of your educational and professional background yes uh educated at Temple University and University of Pennsylvania uh holding a master's degree from University of Pennsylvania I've been a practicing architect for I want not sure I want to tell you exact how many years too many years uh so uh at least 25 years licensed in New Jersey liced in New York Jersey I have been licensed for uh eight years okay accepted thank you Mr chairman and Mr King you and other members of your firm prepare the uh architectural plans for this project that is correct okay and you have an exhibit that you'd like to share with the board I guess the first page of it is is an overview of the site I guess looking at the property from the uhu uh an aeral view showing the canal and showing the campus is that correct correct included in the package uh it is not we'll mark that as A2 A2 on your direction and control included in the package yes it was was page one of the site plan wasn't it yeah looks familiar oh it is there it is there apologies so we don't have not A2 so it's not A2 all right okay and can you briefly Orient the board from this area as to where the proposed building is going to be located yes you could the proposed building is visible uh near the top uh of the drawing um at the center it's an L-shaped building the white shape here that's attached to the existing Commons building which is just to it's left okay so this exhibit shows the proposed building superimposed upon what's there today correct okay yes and and can you move to your next exhibit to show the board the building and those are the elevations of the building correct and can you briefly describe the building uh yes so the center of the drawing uh is the uh the front elevation of the building and I can one moment I can zoom in on that because there's a lot on each drawing this is the front elevation of the building which faces the parking lot and Easton Avenue um you can see there there is a a long uh kind of buff colored portion of the building building which would be brick that is the second floor um majority of the first floor of the building uh you could see below that would be glass um and the entrance is on the would be on the far uh right side and you can see a little bit of the music building just beyond uh the um the proposed building just to the right there uh the building uh itself is um 28 ft uh High to uh the top of uh the parit wall uh above the um average grade plane uh there is mechanical equipment uh that's set back from the edge of the roof that's is 3 6 higher than uh the top of the roof uh and it's set back about 30 or so feet from the from the edge of the roof based on the fact that there is a parit wall and based on the fact that the uh mechanical equipment is set back will that mechanical equipment be visible uh from eastn Avenue or for somebody walking along the campus uh barely yes barely and and if if it is can we provide some screening around it we can great thank you um then if we uh drop down to or let's just go up the uh so uh so facing north so the eastn Avenue face is facing west The North Face of the building which uh looks toward the athletic fields uh you could see on the the right hand side uh is also that same buff brick veneer and then on the left hand side you'll see is clad in uh wood uh and that is for the large multipurpose room so the the classroom block is in this buff brick and the mult large multi-purpose room uh is clad in this wood material and then uh at the bottom of this page what you're seeing in this drawing is the front of the existing music building and the dining common behind behind that to the right and you can see in the upper left and Behind the Music building is the new addition so you're just seeing how those three buildings kind of fit will fit together the building itself is connected to the dining uh building uh just behind it on the right uh the music building is a separate building but they're all so close together um so the the courtyard is really not visible from the street you could see the tops of the trees here in the middle of the drawing that uh would be in the courtyard so in in fact the building that we are going to be constructing is really three-sided because it is attached to the existing D dining comments correct okay by the way this this exhibit was part of our plan submission correct correct okay and this this other exhibit which is the interior of the building is also part of our submission correct okay and although the the board doesn't really have a uh say as to what's inside the building if you can spend the moment or to explaining what the bu the function of the building is uh yes so uh there are several functions inside the building the primary function uh does remain um uh Gathering and this multi-purpose room now that we're calling it so would have a theater function as well as a gathering function um you could see that uh piece here uh there's a there's a corridor that connects that back into the existing dining Commons building uh and then across the uh the western edge of the building here which is along the parking lot and drop off Lane uh that building has on the ground level uh a school store which is being relocated from inside the existing dining dining Commons uh admissions uh Center here uh to greet um guest guests coming to the campus um as well as a Lobby space uh for uh the multi-purpose room for when it's used for theatrical uh purposes and as Mr Turner indicated uh your firm was responsible with for developing the landscaping around the courtyard that is correct and do you have some additional exhibits that you can share with the board to generally show what that Landscaping will look like um I do I can show it a little bit on this page and then jump to a more detail whatever makes you comfortable y so the um there is a there is a significant grade change between uh the parking lot and drop off here uh at the bottom of the page uh so uh there's a ramp that will take you down into this space it is at a lower level because there's a a slope uh down on the site most of the site does slope from the parking lot down to the Canal uh just beyond this at the upper part of the page um the courtyard uh is uh is has a couple of different functions the most the largest function is a gathering space so they will have Outdoor Classroom there so they can use it as an educational space uh and as a gathering space that can be used uh daily for uh students but also it could be used as an extension of the multi-purpose space for receptions for instance after uh after an event or something like that so uh it's for you know modest size receptions so it'll it'll have multiple uh multiple functions so you see uh the white area shown here uh would be uh pavers uh and then there's a a wood bench uh around a um a planted area uh and then at the top here there are some steps that have some seats on them that would come down from this upper level down to the lower level of uh of the courtyard here you can just to understand you can see this higher portion of the building here across the bottom uh is up about 7t from the lower portion and then you can see there are steps here and the elevator that take you to the level of the multi-purpose room so you're stepping down into into that uh lower space so it's really meant also to be uh a green space that uh you can experience as part of being inside the building too uh a large portion of the walls along this uh South Edge and Easter uh and Eastern edge of the building would be glass so that you could enjoy the landscape as you're moving through the building and we have a rendering at the end that we can show what that will look like you want me to jump to that sure okay so this would be this is a view of the courtyard and it's uh standing near the existing dining Commons looking back uh toward eastn Avenue so if you look straight ahead you can see there's kind of a bleacher area at the back of the space uh that you can see kind of in the center of the image um for students to sit uh but it also connects that upper space with this lower space uh you can see there are um Uh Wood built-in benches a planting area here um and then there are some benches along uh this Southern edge with some planting area and then the the building here that you see on the left that is the wall of the existing music building uh and so you can see it's uh it's heavily planted um and we're uh looking at um we're still obviously confirming all of those plantings as we move forward but that is the general intent for the space you can see it the walls are class so that from inside the building that space becomes a kind of uh a nice element for the interior of the building too okay and and based on the prior discussion this evening you will coordinate that landscape plan so it is Incorporated in Mr Turner's plan and you and Mr Turner will work with Mr Mazy and Mr Healey to make sure that there's some there's consistency with what they want and what we're proposing correct that is correct okay is that included in the package this exhibit is in the is in the package is in the package uh I don't think I have any further questions at this time if we have other pretty pictures if you want to see them but I think I'm looking at one of them now and it it is intriguing me because I thought of another application where um such a representation was substandard so I just want to confirm I'm seeing what I think I'm seeing so what I'm looking at in the architectural set is a model view from the canal um and it's looks it looks computer generated right with the building proposed building with no trees and no land nothing that's there in the canal and I assume what you did was you on the toe path you took a picture all right and then you electronically put the building in there to give the board a very good view of what it looks like am I correct in that correct all right so it can be done I'm just saying I mean there was another application shall remain name was a warehouse I'll just give you that clue where um you know they they it was it wasn't mine was it no no I didn't think so cuz my clients wouldn't do anything like that well well no I mean it was it was like a it was a it was a clown show to begin with but more than more than that again I'm going I'm not going to purge I do anything uh cuz you never know but um they basically put like we said well what what is this Warehouse going to look like when your Landscaping matures and of course of course they gave the best possible representation but it was cartoons I don't do cartoons so I just want to know that this can be done so when other people come in with something that's less than this I can point to this and say don't give me that crap so I I I just it's very nice it's very easy to see what the viewshed look I'm assuming you know the DNR Canal commission must be pleased at this and actually the building itself is not going to be visible from the canal because very little of it it's it's being screen by the existing buildings yep and the and the slope from the soccer fields yeah I'm I'm glad I went this far in the report you know it's it's really nice Aerials and you can get uh or viewscapes and you can kind of get a sense of really what the building looks like so commend you on that and and uh we can hold other people to the standard all right I don't have any questions I had this question earlier that I address to Mr Turner um the part the the landscape plan showing where the trees are to be planted there are these reticulated areas that's the only way I can describe them uh in the vicinity of the main entrance uh which is at the end of the building part of the building that runs parallel to Eastern Avenue and I think that the area you're referring to is uh adjacent to uh the storm water system um that menl engineering H has designed and so we just need to adjust the geometry of of this corner uh to uh to coordinate with that system right so so between our system and and between our layout of trees and plantings and their layout for the uh the Basin for the system we'll we'll get that coordinated so that they they don't conflict you you know if you have perious pavement then you have a rock underneath it to create a reservoir for when it rains fairly hard but you can't plant a tree in those rocks the trees go out to be in soil so we understand yes okay well I hope we'll see the revised version of the environmental commission yes we will revise it now any other questions from the board for this witness all right um Peter I don't know if you want to say anything before I open to the public I I think we can open to the public all right then I'll give you a chance to say something as I always do um move to open to the public for any comment on this application somebody say second second it all in favor I U meeting is now open to the public for any comments on this particular application seeing no takers move to close second all in favor I just just very briefly uh ruer prep has been here as you as we've indicated for for many years and uh has come to this board and has really developed I think an outstanding campus uh this is going to be an a a well added addition uh it's a good-look building it will serve the students very well and as I also indicated we'll probably be back here in the very near future with other things that we're working on as the school does have a master plan and uh uh you'll be seeing us and and hopefully having other projects that will also enhance the the campus and by enhancing the campus they're also enhancing the community because ruers prep is part of this community and has been a good part of this community for many years I would respectfully request that the site plan approval be granted and while I don't technically think I need a variance I might as well get it granted for the impervious coverage even though it's less than what we were already were already granted the chair believes that it would be uh inclusive of the approval if in fact we do get it an approval and while we're on the topic although there was no planning testimony uh I think your profer uh is acceptable considering that the coverage will decline yeah and and that's why I didn't present planning testimony because we're reducing the impervious coverage that was previously approved exactly okay yeah I had to I had to ask Jim because he he taught me well you know about C variance testimony and so the fact that he had a previous approval for more obviously takes care of that um any other comments or questions from the board if not um we'll get a motion together here all right so I'll make it in the sense that I will uh I'll recommend approval um uh the following conditions will will take care of the the trees and the conflict between the architectural engineering plans um it's a motion for preliminary and final amended site plan approval lot merger coverage variance abandonment of that portion of the prior approval for the Performing Arts Center uh staff must approve any revisions uh to the storm Warner management plan if drcc so requires and the staff must approve the uh final outdoor Courtyard area uh and any change in location of landscaping that is my motion second councilman and Barson oh yes so uh I was uh at the historic preservation Commission meeting that Rus PR came and uh they did a nice job um so compliments to you guys for putting together a good application after a couple of revisions and Sly I uh vouch for what Peter mentioned the school has been a long-term um asset to the community and to the township my two kids went there with the Dr L uh to twins uh so to speak uh in the high school from actually my son actually went there from uh prek 3 through all the way to high school University of Pennsylvania product after that so um thanks for all the service that the school does I certainly appreciate it and it's a yes just to be around just just to make abundantly clear on the record your children went there as in past tense no longer there yeah oh all right so there's no potential for any conflict no okay otherwise you'd have to recuse yourself so I was just thinking I hope they're still not there long graduated Theodore Chase uh yeah yes I should have asked now where are we about the roof can you I mean the best thing would be actually to have solar cells on it but if you don't do that never put that painted white so it'll reflect the sun and the building will be cooler inside I I neglect that they asked the question that was in the environmental commission report we discussed the the possibility of a a solar roof and is it a green building so you can no no no it was my bad because you and I talked about that and I forgot that too yeah so and I forgot to bring it up uh the roof area is actually quite small uh so uh the solar impact would be pretty minimal um however the school uh but the roof will be white uh the school is committed to uh getting the building lead certified um and really approaching um their uh their systems for the building uh in as low carbon as they can get them uh and so they'll be meeting lead standards which uh are pretty stringent and what's interesting is for those that don't know lead standards are actually getting more and more stringent so uh what was the original lead standard is now building code minimum so they keep upping and upping uh the quality so um the schoolly really wants to take uh a pretty hard stance with themselves about being um you know environmentally responsible so it will be a a lead certified building doesn't tell me what the roof is going to be it it's basically going to be white but they can't do solar panels or they won't or they they they looked into the possibility and and they basically are saying that it's proba you know the juice isn't worth the squeeze of what you get out of it for the small roof area we can't compel them to do it I mean the state the state standard is I think 100,000 foot roof or it has to be at least make ready solar so um yeah the be the best you're going to get is reflective okay J included as the a possibility in the environmental Commission M they asked them to examine it they did and that's their answer and it's least reflective so that's good it's not a huge roof arum I mean it's not a huge issue whenever you can do it it's great um but yeah oh wait we were in the middle of vote somewhere I think okay I would say yes but no I'm glad you raised that Ted thank you Jennifer ragno Yes Mahir Rafi yes Charles Brown yes Robert Thomas yes Rebecca Hilbert yes chairman Rini yes thank you very much so before the board runs out here I need to to ask Mark a question um so it's not COA anymore and what the hell they call it but um they they come up with a number and they have a number for Franklin it's big uh it's over the next 10 years and I just I don't want to get into the details right now I just want to know um and we haven't talked about it so apologies for surprising you but it's been on my mind um what is our my mind too what is our plan to talk about it when when do we want to talk about it do we want to have a special work session how do you want to handle it yeah this is this is public meeting what's the so what we're talking about is the state has released so every supposed to be every 10 years the state releases the um every Town's um applicable Town's obligation for affordable housing over the next 10 years um we've uh we're now in What's called the fourth round um the state has issued numbers for all the towns that are required to produce affordable housing and Franklin is one of them um we do have a relatively High number of uh they've assigned us a number of 714 affordable units in the next 10 years um there is a process um that's outlined in the legislation um the first part of that process is whether to accept that number or not uh and if you're going to say to the state that your obligation is lower uh you have an obligation to do that uh or you have an opportunity to do that um so what I can say is right now we're evaluating how the state got to our number um there's a number of different factors it's based on um in household uh change uh income uh relative to the region um it's based on changes in non-residential evaluation and then also uh they factor in available uh vacant land um so I'm going through all of those different tables and the maps um we may be uh we're having you know internal discussions at this point um how we're going to handle that um I would suspect that we're not going to fully accept their number um so that's going to be the first step um that's you get your GPS uh data so you can work on the vacant land Factor yeah we have yeah we have that and we're we're again basically we're going to be going through you know every single parcel that they've identified in Franklin as vacant um and some of them detention basins and things it's the same thing so you know open space I would imagine might be somewhat included there's some in PR you know my preliminary investigation it looks like some of them were preserved Farms some of them are properties that have development approvals um so um fairly it's not accurate um we have to point that point out to the state how their mapping wasn't correct I mean in slight fairness to them they had to do this on a Statewide basis and um the way that the legislation was written and the time frames that were in the legislation they had basically no time to do it and they had to do it for 565 towns um so yes it is it is you know the towns then do have the opportunity to say well you got this wrong and this wrong and that wrong that that's the process that we're doing right now um what I would suspect Mike is probably I don't think that's really going to be an exercise for the planning board that's really the council um that needs to accept the number or not um when it comes time for the plan that's going to be in 2025 um we don't know exactly what the process is going to be you know obviously the planning board is going to be involved that intimately um the planning board adopts the plan um whether we have some type of committee or something we'll have to discuss I think at the beginning of in January so so I mean that all sounds fine to me the only thing I would say is at this early part of the process um and I know ultimately it's council's decision whether they want to ultimately accept the number or not but there's probably no better people than those on this dis who can help with that you know yourself obviously included right Vin um so I don't want to be in a position where they say the number should be X and we have had no input into that I mean I would least like to somebody on this board of Representatives thereof to be part of that conversation I know Ram obviously is that one of those people because this why he sits on the planning board his council rep but um you know you know I just want to get to I don't want to get to the point where Council says well all right we we we think it should be 650 and then you put that in they accept it and we are like sitting here trying to make that plan work and not not really being apprised of how we got there see what I'm saying yeah so um we had a discussion on the council about this number the state came up with um and we were told by Lou Renown and I believe their firm kind of wrote uh oh I'm sorry yeah so uh L Ron mentioned that the number that was uh given to our town and all the other towns is just a guidance number it is not a firm number that we must comply with um he seemed to indicate that we can adopt any number we feel that is fair in our opinion and and that's not the way it work I'm sorry it's it's it let me put this way it's they say it's a guidance number right but the methodology of how to get to that number is pretty clearly prescribed in the law um so I'll try to do it you know summarize it real quickly but I mean they they you get they have a town a Statewide obligation of 86,000 then they portion that to the region housing regions and we're we're in what's called region 3 the region that's Somerset hunter in the middle sex that region has an obligation of 11,000 those are locked in so Three Counties 11,000 units then they then they the methodology says then you take that to decide how that gets divied up they have three different factors one is based on household growth you know your Regional share of the regional household growth and there's some methodology where they apply the your your income level to that um so it's kind of a mixture of household growth and income then it's and that's based on the census it's kind of hard to come up with unless you come up with your this is what I'm saying they say it's guidance unless we do our own census for every single town in in in New Jersey what more better information are you going to get then the census unless you do it yourself yeah and then you have then it's based on non-res itial growth that comes from every single Town's reporting of their taxation of property again how do you can how do you challenge that you we've been giving them the numbers all along as as as have all of the other municipalities so unless you find they added added it up wrong it's kind of hard to challenge that in Franklin again the vacant land seems to be the way where they clearly really made mistakes and we can document those mistakes so to answer your question Mike I I think you know the report that I do that goes through that is is going to be public information obviously there will you give us like a a little planning board we can have a 20 30 minute whatever you want a part of a regular meeting we can do a work session where you can explain that cuz I totally understand what you're saying the numbers that all these regions and are assigned maybe are but your share of it is not necessarily immutable if they tell you well you know your open space where you could theoretically put housing is a detention Basin or preserved open space or a swamp or Wetland cuz probably from whatever geom mapping they do and with very little time to do it as you outline uh I'm sure they got a lot of that wrong it's definitely appears that that way so so there's that and then the other thing I'd like to understand is I mean under the old coold formula when there was a CO you've got bonuses right we got a lot of bonuses for a multi very low income for uh Habitat for Humanity for you know a bunch of other rehab stuff we did for 100% affordable like RPM M all right um I know there are still some incentives I think in the current legislation but not the kind of incentives that there were um where you could you double and triple count because you gave a very low income rather than just a low income CU you know you'd probably be all shocked at what low income qualifies or you say that should be a pretty good salary but it ain't in New Jersey so I mean it's going the laws the new rules have a bunch of different opportunities for bonus credits that I would say are they're different um but i' say the the overall the opportunity for bonus credits is is is equal I think it's equal it especially has gone no more so but but the way that the biggest one that's the biggest one but but but in Franklin um the the opportunities are there for if you if it's in a Redevelopment area if it's 100% affordable if if it's involves the Redevelopment of and not Redevelopment in terms of the Big R like a designated Redevelopment but if it's a former office commercial or industrial site um yeah what's that got a lot of those yeah and so there's a lot of opportunities there and and just like we did with the last plan you're allowed to to satisfy up to a quarter of your obligation through bonus credits I don't see any reason that that has to be a goal yeah you know and I don't see any reason why we can't do that another thing is that the number of uh units that could be um age restricted went up from 25 to 30% um and we do have a large senior population I would think that that would be a goal to try to hit you know get us close to that 30% for low income senior as well um so you know those are things that are all in the all in the law that you know to the degree we want to provide affordable housing but not necessarily provide more than our you know we should be providing our share in my opinion we should be providing our share but no more than we are obligated to and I think that's the goal of our plan well they call it fair share so we'll just make sure it's fair to us um and you know we've always been very proactive um not as just a board but you know Mark since he's been here as Township planner um certainly very ProActive at identifying those opportunities and getting developers in here like RPM who will do 100% affordable and who will do very lowincome and multifam Etc like um so I mean we've been um I think probably one of the best townships um for for doing affordable housing there's no questioning our commitment and that's been acknowledged when our when we received the third round certification by you know it was by the court like all the towns I mean the judge basically said it and so so did uh fair share housing that we were we're one of we're one of the compliant towns so um yeah so Mike thank you for bringing that up I I was it the numbers came out a while ago but all of the data just got released yeah no I saw them you were texting you and I'm like I don't know I got to digest that for a second I'm not ready to wrap my head around 714 and then you know tonight I'm like all right we got to figure out how we're going to approach this as a board you know I'm not not trying to hide it or hiding my head in the sand over it but you know I was reading some comments from other townships around here they are like this this number is ridiculous because there's just we pave over the township and never never reach it so when you're ready uh and you've digested this I would like you to kind of go go through it with the board um once you have yeah well well starting in January but the the the report that I have to do the council has to either accept or come up with their own number by the end of January so is the council going to involve the planning board it's some advice and consent a non-binding obviously but much like anything with to do with the master plan and the housing El is an element master plan which the township planning board should have control over or a Sayan would refer it to us I would like to see that well Mark you want to correct that they're not just coming up with a number they're going to use the same guidance that you're using to determine an accurate number they're not using their own criteria the council so we don't want to put that out there like they're coming up with a number you can't just come up with a number I mean I mean again the legislation says how basically provides pretty clear guidelines of how you get those numbers um so the whole thing of you know they're saying at the state how it's a guidance number is you can use your own word for what that what that is um but uh it's again so Mike I guess the bottom line is again I think the first step is at some point in January I'll have a draft report and I'll provide that to the planning board and we'll discuss it very good um so you'll have an opportunity if if I miss something or just so you just for your own knowledge you understand what we've you know I'm going to make an I'm going to opine based on the you know the the the the laws the rules whether a site is developable or not and should be included yeah and then you'll have it you can look at it um and then you know the first quarter and second quarter is going to be the plan and that's where you know you're GNA we're going to be busy yeah no and R I'm going to rely on you as your the Lee is on the council and make sure that they understand that we we want to you know we want to be a collabor ative body as we always think we are with Council um and and yeah I just would want to be in a position where all of a sudden Mark calls me up and says well council's going to submit the number of X something less than 714 um and we really don't know why so that that's the position I don't want to be in and I think you know the council would naturally want our advice and consent as the planning board to to to be a part of that so that's I I'll bring that uh comment to the uh to the council I believe land use will meet sometime I suppose this matter will come up and then it'll be Rec we have a land use meeting uh I believe next week next Tuesday so I'll make sure at that meeting to mention it as well so that'll be you know that's where the land use Committee of council as well as the township manager will understand this discussion we've had yeah the land use as well so that would be that would be great it's it's actually interesting that neither I believe bab nor I are on the L use manyoun yeah but there's other people on it at Hawk right no no just Council all right no that's fine as long as stuff goes back to the board I have a question is everyone on the council aware of the three criterias that are being used that Mark mentioned they'll be made aware if they're not already by by or no by by Mark you know the you know the I was not aware of what no I mean Mark Mark is our Township planner so he's he's got the latest and the greatest facts and rely on obviously him for his professional planning opinion so we were all led to believe that the numbers would be could be lower uh that's from what it was published so so I have a question mark so how are you going to communicate that to the council that these are the three criterias that are used well again they're notw already well the council has um you the council has a land use committee so some of those members exactly I'm I'm assuming that one of the meetings in January I'll go to a council meeting and present my report I would think that's would be um that's because they're the council's going to have to adopt a resolution you know you know accepting some number prior to January so you know we'll we'll obviously they'll be made aware of what that you know what that number is and why so can I ask that that number however um the land use committee and people who are like yourself professional planners know or come up with this that it get referred to the planning board we can do it immediately we're not going to delay a council ultimately they do have to adopt it much like we you know adopt the master plan but they they ultimately have to bless it um because they are Council but I would like to see what those numbers are before Council votes on it so like a matter is referred to for compliance with the master plan I'd like that same process to happen here I mean first of all I think it's beneficial to council to have us look at it and it's beneficial to us to make a plan that we're fully in agreement with I don't want to be making a plan that I'm like what the hell the council come up with and I had had no and this board has had no awareness let's let's let's let's do this I I don't think there needs to be a formal referral what I would say is what whatever that second meeting is in January what would that be Christine the didn't didn't we just adopt a resolution as long as it's not the onx hearing I I say I wouldn't have that discussion the night of the Onyx hearing of course they may postpone yet again the on onx look Onyx is never going to come to this planning board until they tell me two things that Texas feaster pipeline is satisfied and that they actually have access to that site other than that I don't want to know that they exist you know I would well well I'm just thinking the state would look at all of that Land South of 518 and say oh that's developable no well the way that they did you know you bring up a good point the way that they um all lands within planning areas four and five um they didn't include so what that mean the state has chopped up the the whole state into planning areas whether it's Suburban Urban and then rural environmentally sensitive basically the areas of our town that are rural those are in planting areas four and five so they didn't count that as vacant um for for the purpose of that analysis so but it's actually interesting though I mean there's some area like a planning area 4B and I only know this because I had to fight this battle many years ago off of Bennett's lane behind that incredibly huge Warehouse on Veronica um and this is when Jack Morris was coming in with the Home Dep proposal and all that as part of our third round you remember that many well you were maybe not here at that point but you were involved I think um I think you were a consultant yeah yeah yeah I I wasn't I just did site plans at that believe it or not that area cross from the open space on the south side of Bennett Lane and the north side of Bennett Lane between those two Creeks that you cross to go to as you're going on your way to 27 that's a 4B and you look at it and you're like it's an open field I think they freaking trailers parked in there or whatever it looks like crap but at any rate um it's 4B now you wouldn't you wouldn't look at that and think it's 4B so that's another thing that everybody has to check from the geom mapping is that it really is because I remember that clearly and they're like oh they can't go any further than that because that's 4B they can't touch it but it's not preserved open space either so souths side is preserved from yeah Southside but this was on the North side it's an area that was the area that Jack Mars wanted to put 800 apartments on that was an even earlier fight which you and I remember and on the board so I think Mike again to get to you the the the the desire to review the report I I don't see any issue with that whatsoever I I don't think there is any process where by it has to be formally referred by the council you've expressed your desire to review it and we'll make we'll make it happen perfect now I'm not wted to process however you know however it works best uh for everyone but yeah I just want to be all holding hands with this though we going go forward with a number is lower than 714 that the planning board who has to execute the plan is on board with it yeah all right cool so with that um we have one more meeting for the right no no this is it Swit oh all right right right switch we yeah so now going forward unless you want to change it back going forward I want to change nothing back okay okay so then November we'll have two meetings and December 1 with that everyone have a wonderful holiday season happy New Year Christmas and um where J all right e