care flag the United States of America to the stands Nation God indivisible liy and justice for all here good evening ladies and gentlemen Mr Shay all right good evening to the February 5th 2024 meeting of the Jackson Township planning board this meeting has been convened in accordance with the provisions of the open public meetings Act of New Jersey an adequate notice of this meeting has been provided accordingly roll call please Mr brassie here Mr binstein here Mr Hower Mr Herman here Mr Mr Riker here Mr marzo here Mr trer here Mr wall here Mr Sullivan here Dr kampbell here uh we'll take a motion for the payment of voucher for the recording secretary please motion Bernstein second Sullivan all in favor all in favor I approval for the minutes of January 29th 2024 reorganization meeting so I'm sorry motion so move Sol second record all in favor I I'm sorry we have to do all call sorry Mr binstein yes Mr rker yes Mr Moro yes Mr Tremor yes Mr wall yes Mr suan yes thank you we have a resolution uh not for tonight yes we do we do I don't have oh 20 nope we do I think I have it Landscaping policy I think I brought it all right I do have it now yes resolution resolution 202 24-5 resolution of the planning board of the township of Jackson County of ocean state of New Jersey granting preliminary and final major s plan approval with required variances and design waivers for a Contractors Warehouse and office building for down toe Farms LLC block 301 lot five a motion please a motion please Mo motion Bernstein second Mr brassy yes Mr berstein yes Mr rker yes Mr suan yes Mr Moro yes Mr wall yes Mr Herman yes thank you thank you all right let's see now uh how about um any engineering planning oh very lovely legal matters not in this time all right I do have some um housekeeping here and the very first thing we will do and I'll need to borrow somebody's microphone because we'd like to make a presentation you come to the center I would I would take the microphone so public can hear it I was a high school principal I can find a microphone you could hear me in Chicago um Mr Harring devoted 17 years to this planning board and I think that is an awesome awesome record sometimes it's not so easy to stay awake maybe on those long nights so when it gets to be like 11 um some nights it's very exciting uh we hope for more boring nights than exciting nights but the mayor and I would uh sign to this for you and uh we appreciate everything you done thank you so much I could say without I'm just glad I was able to um serve the town in a way other than providing tax money so um you know 17 years went by relatively slowly okay these people say fast relatively slowly but I learned a lot met a lot of good people and I think the town is in good hands thank you thank you m chairman thank you Campbell Sor picture you can stand right in the middle I just want to get the full board in there thank no no yeah chair yeah thank you very much everybody real quick sorry all right one two three okay I think I got it thank you Mr Herring Len I was there we got sworn together the first time it was a pleasure for a lot of years great serving with you okay um I do want to do some housekeeping here uh we we have to be concerned about the open public meetings act and uh before people leave tonight I'm going to give all the board members the Salient points from the open public meetings act for those who have not taken the course yet or for those who maybe need a little reminder about some of the uh particulars so I'll do that later I also want to encourage board members to read the mail that you get um on the web it it's very important there were four important messages today so that's crucial that you read your mail uh absenteeism if you're going to be absent we all have I was the first offender this year uh we all have things plans illnesses emergencies I only ask for a phone call Laura really needs a phone call and she needs it by 3:00 there are times when we'll be down we we're down a person already so we have Quorum issues and if there are three or four people absent we're Duck Soup and then that's embarrassing for the town it's embarrassing for the board and we have professionals who are here and it would be not nice to have to tell them to go home uh if you have General specific comments for the board it's important to do things in public it's important to put things on the record if you have something to say you can either say it at nonspecific issues at this time or at the very end of the meeting we'll ask for any board comments and if anyone has not yet taken the board course uh please remember to do that it's important as I say it's tough to play the game if you don't know the rules and as of March we will be beginning at 6:30 on on a test we'll be starting these meetings at 6:30 so uh please keep that in mind when uh when you're making your plans all right let see now uh before our first application is this good change oh changes the agenda that I have another list see here we go agenda schedule changes block 7309 lot 7 stuben office will be carried from today until May the 6th with notice required another thing I might want to say just so everyone hears it if someone cancels after we've gone to all the work and the secretary has gone to all the work and we've buried in paper and we've done a lot of reading uh they're going to go to the back of the line there's they're not going to slide in in the next couple of weeks things have to be we don't want to waste the Public's time and we don't want to waste our time so if things are not handled in a professional manner back of the line we've got heavy heavy agenda on this board block 2501 lot 3 34 40 West Commodore is carried from April 1st to May 5th block 22301 Lots 17 20 21 22 23 and 24 ra Development LLC carried from May the 5th to April uh is carried from May May 6th to April 1st it's moved from May 6th to April 1st that it Laura no that's it okay I I'll be getting time decision rule from each one of these uh from the attorney as well okay very good and uh maybe you'd like to introduce Mr lece all right so we'll introduce the application first block 19703 Lots 28.1 through 28.6 Royal Grove Miss Jennings welcome again we should get you a cut I don't blame you I don't want a cut either all right uh good evening for the record I'm Donna Jennings on behalf of the applicant uh Royal Grove um this is a little bit unusual case this is actually a request to list a condition from a prior resolution um for those of you that are familiar or not familiar with affordable housing back when this original application was approved to create a six lot subdivision there was a condition imposed on the resolution which required the applicant at the time to take one of their six conforming app uh lots and dedicate it to affordable housing that unfortunately was based on the erroneous rules and regulations adopted by the now defunct COA on affordable housing uh which was challenged by fair share housing and a number of other uh individuals and developers and eventually the New Jersey Supreme Court not once but twice throughout the growth round rules and so the rules that were adopted at the time the person was here seeking the approval were found to be invalidated and they were invalidated basically on the premise that in order to dedicate affordable housing you have to get some type of compensatory benefit so often times if you're I'm sure I know the town did their DJ action and you might have interveners and someone might have a parcel of land which by right they could build let's say four units on two acres they intervene in the Township's DJ action declaratory judgment action or your file a builder remedy the town hasn't bothered to do a declaratory judgment and they say hey I'm going to help you out with your affordable housing I'm allowed to build four units but I'm going to build 40 here and do a 20% set aside and so it encourages developers and Property Owners to assist the Township in meeting their affordable housing obligation because the township has the obligation but the township doesn't build housing they need property owners and developers to step up to the plate and actually do this but in this particular instance back in 2008 2009 when the cor rules for third round were inmp complete complete flux and mind you that from 1999 to 2015 was the third round rules when the Supreme Court actually finally came in and said forget it co on affordable housing you don't know what you're doing you can't get it right everybody go back to the courts and we'll do it that way and so my client uh purchased uh five of the six Lots the one lot was actually a pre-exist was a home and they bought the five vacant Lots uh they did not do their due diligence I'll readily admit because that's the first thing I asked them we didn't you check into this when you bought the property and they said well kind of rookies at this we didn't even understand what this even meant and uh in order for us to do this it basically we're going to be giving away the house um and so that's why we're here and basically if you read my memorandum of January 26 I set forth the law for you and bottom line when a condition is imposed that is unlawful or invalid it has to be set aside and so even though they did agree to it of course they agreed to it cuz at the time that was the law but it was found to be unlawful because they didn't get anything for it they didn't get a variant I even asked them did you get a bulk variant did the town give you anything that perhaps you were not entitled to and they said no and the resolution reflects that that it was a fully conforming six slot subdivision and so we're here seeking the board's uh request to have that condition lifted uh just to expand on that um first off um myself uh from a legal perspective I agree with uh Mr jenning's legal position um when this first came about uh I understood it was kind of a convoluted issue I requested that Miss Jennings uh write a legal brief on the issue supply to the board which she did uh and she did quite well was very concise uh listed all the Constitutional issues that were involved um that was much appreciated uh at that point in time we forwarded it to to the affordable housing attorney uh the the the Township's new affordable housing attorney is um is now Robin Leu and Jani I forget the entire firm name I apologize it's very very long it's very long um but they concurred uh with the opinion in their own written opinion uh which they supplied to the board uh as of last night um the board will have any chance to ask the affordable housing attorney or myself uh any questions at all regarding the position of either the applicants attorney myself as a board attorney or the affordable housing attorney for the township so leave it to the board at this time let's let M Leu make maybe make a statement a statement on the record so that that will help us move forward as well uh sure miss Jennings really did set forth the the state of affordable my on can you hear me that's up no red there's a different one can you hear me now get a little closer how about now now we can hear okay Miss Jennings did a very good job of summarizing the state of affordable housing law in New Jersey and what happened with the growth share ordinance and Jackson Township did have a growth share ordinance this resolution of approval did set forth that requirement of the developer since that time the growth share ordinance was repealed and the township did enact an ordinance with 20% set aside in this Zone however this application was a conforming application there was no density bonus there was no other bonus given to the developer to require them at this time to dedicate this one unit for affordable housing would be an ineligible exaction and I believe that the developer would have a claim against the township for that so my recommendation would be and I did call the building department this developer has not paid any affordable housing fees for any of these Lots so the 1% residential development fee would be required on all of the five lots that they built all of those homes to be calculated by the assessor I would ask that the applicant wave any time constraints that are in the ordinance for the calculation of those residential development fees because there our time frame set forth in the ordinance um and then that would be paid into the affordable housing trust fund to be used for the F the development of affordable housing in the future in the township yeah and I I talked with the applicant about that and they believe that that would be a fair compromise okay thank you do any members of the board have questions for any of the attorneys sure um would it be an issue not to approve a legal issue not for the board not to Grant this request I mean I I hear three attorneys all made great points if you were to not Grant the relief requested I I believe that the applicant would then have a cause of action against the planning board yes thank you well good question good answer any anyone else anyone else with questions speak now all right we have a motion go to the public oh Public public anyone from the public wish to speak about this issue s second motion we have to make the motion unmake the motion all in favor I I all right all right now now we'll uh entertain a motion i' like to make the motion to approve by rker I'd like to Second Herman any comments from the board sure I think this is really pretty clear where there's a legal requirements we hear from three expert attorneys in the matter and um thank the uh applic for bringing it to the board's pention okay we'll do a vote now please Mr breim being following any state rules I moving Target and supposed to do and suppos to again this C yes Mr binstein yes Mr Herman yes Mr rker yes the state got it wrong we got it right Mr Moro yes Mr wall yes Mr suan yes uh this is pretty straightforward we're just going to become compliant with the law as it should be uh so yes Dr Campbell yes thank you thank you congrat much have a nice evening you too that could be a record for you that could be a record I don't think we'll be so lucky at the end of the month I'm afraid I'm afraid you may be correct and thank you Miss come back thank you thanks for coming appreciate it you want to stay and watch give us give us a minute to uh change gears here anything colorful love you really thank you very much all right it's already on I fixed it for you good evening Madam chair Dante Al fury on behalf of the applicant um the application is Whitesville Development LLC block 22203 lot 11 if the board um remembers my father was here last in December um we provided some testimony as it relates um to the use itself um we got into a little bit of back and forth with the board there were some comments that the board made um which we then took back and made some adjustments to to the site itself tonight I have three individuals who are going to provide testimony um we have our engineer we have our architect and we have our traffic expert and maybe we could put your uh you on the record Dante Al Fury the attorney right all right Mr Fury um if we could have the uh professionals um just put the background of this on for the record just a a comprehensive um or sure summary what um we started this application on the 18th of um December it involves a um restory 21,000 foot non-med office build and an independent Standalone um twostory uh 36,000 mixed use building involving 31,000 ft of Contractor's Warehouse and a 5,000 ft mezine office um the applicants has submitted revised plans um uh the there was a proposal to have an existing um building uh remain and converted to an office um um or um to keep the building that was in violation and then they moved it back to eliminate um a variants they still have some sidey guard setback variances um but they've been diminished um and and they've also provided some clarity as to the um parking area through the rear of the um the rear of the site and um that's basically it okay thank you madam chair our office has a report last dated January 30th this year um the property is still located in the I industrial Zone Mr bordon at the last meeting testified as to the uses that were going to be proposed um our previous and current reports list the variances that are necessary request from some information to make sure that um some of the bulk standards are in fact met and I believe we were um also waiting to hear through testimony responses as to other Outside Agency um reports and comments that were received by the board during the pendency of the application thank you thank you thank you so without further Ado I'm going to have our engineer uh Mr gr McFarland come up all right please raise right hand do you uh swear or affirm uh to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do please state your name and spell for the record sure for the record Graham McFarland Mac f a r l n professional engineer professional planner principal of professional Design Services previously uh qualified and testified before this board many times se you a few times a few times thank you uh you can see that um accept accepts absolutely thank you Anthony has put up um A1 on the screen which shows the location of the property obviously this is unchanged from the uh from the initial presentation just shows the location of the site on uh on on Whitesville Road uh you can go to the next one for me Anthony I'll just go briefly through the previous um previous um exhibits A2 was the original plan that proposed the office building in in a uh in an L shape that that that plan that the board saw in December was attempting to um to erect a new building in the same footprint same location as the original building uh obviously there was a lot of discussion a lot of input from the board so that that has changed but anyway just for information this is the plan that the board originally saw back in December uh so you can just scroll through the next one Anthony and next we had A3 which was the uh the building rendering uh again with the L-shaped building uh you'll see as we go through that the the concept for the building as far as architecture style and and colors and presentation is still the same but the footprint uh has has changed to just be a uh just be a a rectangle A4 please Anthony and A4 was the uh rendering of the warehouse building that has not changed from its initial presentation uh you can see the multi-tenant building with Overhead Doors uh with space allocated for for the for the for the various users of course since it's a multi-tenant building the exact number of tenants is is not known and could change over time and then A5 so now we get to uh we get to the revised plan which is A5 which is this is just a rendering consistent with the site plan that has been presented to the board you can see the office building up at the top part of the site plan has been has been shifted back so that it complies with the uh with the front yard set back requirement so that building is now set back 100 ft from the right of weight consistent with ordinance requirements so there is no longer any variants requested for the uh for the front yard setback the side yard of the building also conforms at its front corner so the front left corner as you look at the building from Whitesville Road conforms to the 30 foot required uh side yard setback and if you follow that that property line from White road going back uh you know basically going to the right you see there is a jog in the property line so because of that condition that unique condition that affects the property we are requesting what what I believe is really a Domin dominous variance relief to have that that back left corner is at 25.9 FT from the uh from the property line where 30 ft is required so it's a very very small portion of the building that would encroach the the required side your setback so that's the only relief that is that is requested for the uh for the building uh that that three-story office building Still Remains at at 21,000 Square fet it's got a footprint of 100 feet by 70 feet again 21,000 Square ft of of gross floor area the warehouse building uh remains unchanged that still has a a first floor Warehouse garage a floor area of 31,000 Square ft and then some mezzanine off office space you know a small area for each unit uh totaling 5,000 square ft for the for the building the other change that we made after hearing some input from the uh from the board was to propose to fully improve that that that parking area that sits behind the warehouse building when the application was originally made it was requested uh not to fully improve not to pave or or curb that parking area but again based upon inut from the board our our client has decided Ed uh it was in their best interest to uh to show that parking area being fully improved so that's what this plan shows now so that is is a change from the uh from the original plans that the uh that the planning board saw this project requires a total of um total of 160 parking spaces by ordinance uh of course we have a handful of EV parking spaces in accordance with with current regulations so we end up with a uh with a um proposal to provide 163 parking spaces which again does uh does comply with ordinance requirements uh just jumping back to the variances real quick I spoke about the the sidey yard setback for the office building uh your ordinance also does give a minimum uh combined side yard setback for the property uh really the same discussion that since we have the the very slight relief for the office building we end up with with a uh slight relief for the combined sidey yard setback as well when you compare it to the ordinance requirement uh this application we had also requested a a variance for for the number of signs I believe that was from some initial discussion that maybe Mr Peters had offered um Anthony you can go to A6 for me A6 is the uh is a 3D rendering of the office building and I know that uh originally the lettering was proposed in a in a vertical orientation now it's a horizontal orientation I don't really believe that variance for the for the wall signage is is required based upon this current design but that variance was previously requested if if Mr Peters feels that the variance is is necessary we would we would certainly request that that relief um for this particular for this particular building we are in receipt of uh some reviews from from various um various agencies uh one is from uh you know the advisory unit of the Jackson Township Police Department they had some comments and concerns about the uh about the driveway intersection and about W Road I'm actually going to defer those comments to uh to Mr kennel he he's the traffic expert so I'm going to have uh he he's going to address those comments specifically and I know that we also had gotten uh some comments and some feedback from the Bureau of fire prevention when the application was initially prepared it was submitted to the uh Bureau of fire prevention we did get a letter from them uh that goes back to June of of 23 and that's the the last written comments that we have in our file on this particular project at that time they had offered comments uh as to the number of fire hydrant fire suppression system key lock box trust signage labeling the number of units all of those are standard items required by the building code by the fire subc code so all of those items would uh would be complied with also had comments about gas and electric meters being labeled corresponding to to uh to the tenants that of course would be uh would be provi would be provided uh ask for a signage denoting the location uh the entrance on White Road um with minimum sizes for identifying unit numbers of course that would be comply with uh ground fire lane markings uh I believe those are shown on the plan and that of course would be would be comp would be complied with uh Mr rout commented about access throughout the complex accommodating turning radi of the largest fire apparatus within the district this proposed uh Arrangement does does provide for Access and circulation it allow it does allow for uh fire rators to get in and out of the site safely so I believe that this comment meets his criteria for for safe access uh both you know Ingress and egress of any emergency equipment and then of course there's comments about the fire flow information which is related to the fire sprinkler designs um hydrant testing is done at the time that the that the fire suppression system is designed that information gets uh gets submitted and gets reviewed as part of the uh the building permit and spe specifically by the Fire subcode official um so we would of course agree to comply with all of those comments that were offered by uh by Mr Rous in regards to uh emergency access and specifically fire safety we do have letters from uh from both the board's professionals and just going through Mr Peter's letter first which is dated January 30th of course he uh he summarized the project and of course he he provided some discussion um about the outdoor storage area proposed in the back of the uh in the back of the property and there was a lot of discussion about that topic at the meeting in December that the way that the ordinance is is presented um there is definitely a unique character to uh to the ordinance allowing offices allowing garages allowing contractor's warehouses allowing showrooms but also allowing outdoor storage and I think it's important that in your ordinance that outdoor storage in this particular zone is identified as a as a permitted principal use not an accessory use as a permitted principal use and and again there was a lot of discussion about that at the last last meeting and I think we came to the understanding that the outdoor storage was was permissible as long as it was associated with a a tenant in in the building no you know my understanding there was no limitation to uh how big the office or warehouse space had to be or who the tenant was but it had to be the board's feeling was it had to be a tenant who was rent Leasing Property at this at this particular facility either in the office or in a warehouse building then they could be utilizing the outdoor storage space of course the nature of uh of that outdoor storage space just like a multi-tenant warehouse building could change over time uh we're not going to pretend to represent that we know exactly what the products are going to be and exactly which unit is going to be using how much square footage of that outdoor um area that that of course could uh could change over time based upon based upon market conditions and and economics uh Mr Peters of course um presented discussed the couple variances that are requested which I did already discuss uh he he talked about uh or or mentioned the the need need for for buffering with this application and uh goes on to summarize or confirm that all of the adjoining properties are uh industrial or commercially zoned even though there is a house next to the property which is a residential use uh the Jackson ordinance does not require any buffering be provided uh unless it was an adjoining residential Zone uh the uh the LOI has been submitted to the D and and is pending for the wetlands approval and that uh really summar and just to confirm Mr Peters he pointed out that there is no lighting proposed for that outdoor storage area just so the board understands that we don't feel there's any need for uh for lighting and just a minor technicality we did add a um storage dumpster Refuge enclosure we do have Landscaping on two sides of the enclosure we do not have Landscaping proposed on the third side of the enclosure that AB buts uh that abuts the parking lot technically that does require a design waiver as your ordinance does require buffering around all sides of the enclosure so we are asking for that relief on this application we also have a letter from uh from Owen little so just Mr Mr CLE dated February 2nd and Mr CLE also summarizes the bulk standards draws the same conclusions as as Mr Peters that the variances are required for the side and a total side yard um Mr CLE pointed out that he had a had a question that variances may be required um for the bulk storage area as related to um as related to accessory structures but our opinion is that since the bulk storage area is a permitted principal use that the section of the ordinance that Mr CLE cited does not apply to this application uh Mr Cay then summarized other aspects of the application uh and then he did have some technical comments related to storm water management which we will comply with he asked about um confirmation of irrigation um irrigation proposals in accordance with our requirements of the MUA and the landscaping irrigation would be provided by an on-site well and we would locate the well uh in the back part of the property far far away from the adjoining residential property just to make sure that there is no way that there's going to be any impact to that adjoining property uh and again at the end of his letter Mr C provides some technical comments mostly related to storm water management Crossing te's and dotting eyes that we will agree to uh agree to comply with so that uh summarizes my initial testimony at this time anyone from the board have questions okay good evening I have several uh first I'm uncomfortable with the notion that you can't do the flow tests primary before the building permit I think by doing so uh you create a situation where we don't know if there's enough flow capacity in the line and and going forward I'm uncomfortable with let's dump it on the building department I think you've had reasonable time to accomplish that engineering it's just a flow test mua's got plenty of time they could go out there and help you um my second thing is just in general housekeeping as a retired construction manager uh and I don't expect you to do it all over the plan is one big bubble but going forward I'd really like a synopsis on a sheet uh typed up telling me what the major changes are and I like to see clouds uh you know I'm dealing by with 11 by 17s I'm wearing glasses a pushing 60 and I don't feel that I should have to search for these kind of uh minuscule changes fire hydrates and whatnot um going going a little bit further if your testimony is that the fire trucks can do the uh the radius and whatnot unless I missed it here tonight I don't see the turning radius on the plan so I'm forced to take your word for it and Mr McFarland you know I know you're extremely good at what you do uh but one of one of your staff uh should be doing that uh and going along with that this plan is for February 5th um your testimony is that it's it's gone to fire it's gone to PD well I think the the previous plan went there uh I don't see anything that this plan went to PD in its current configuration um and I don't believe it went to fire you could clear up that testimony but I I don't think it went there and quite honestly I think before it comes back here it needs to go there we need to get the letter and going forward um one of the things that I I'm insisting on is when we get a transmittal it shouldn't just say set February 5th I want to see a full list of drawings and a full list of revision days because with the various projects that I'm looking at on environmental that's one species and by the time they get up here they morph three times uh and that that becomes a problem where you know the public is like what's going on um so I think you should go and do the flow test and not dump it on the building department they're not they're they're not your engineers they're not going to figure it out you have you have to demonstrate it and God forbid that you be in a position where you don't have that capacity and then we're looking at now what do we do are we doing underground sisters we doing fire tank pumps whatever um a little out of order I was very clear about cleanup on this property it didn't happen okay and I'm not yelling at you Dante but I was very clear because the board had it shoved at us on another project where they promised us the world and then once they got their approval it died same street same street I'm not going to buyas this application but I'm telling you your guy didn't clean up a thing okay I know it's an existing use he's got three different things going on but he hasn't cleaned it up and one of the tenants when you come here for a variance is you you have to show beneficial use Improvement whatnot your initial use with this property doesn't cut it and if you look back at my record you know what happens when it doesn't cut it I'll make a point out of it that being said the principal use for the tenant in the background uh Mr McFarland you all due respect we're getting a little wishy-washy you had testimony on the record that it was related to a landscaping business business as the primary use we were discussing fertilizers and all sorts of things that are related to that nature of business and it sounds like we're going in a different direction um at the minimum I I don't want to find out that a space in the office building is really just a mailbox that's not what we're doing here if this piece of property in the back is going to become a principal use they better have a sizable office presence that's legitimate up front um and I think we need to clarify for at least this approval at this time what the use is intended to be which I believe the last series of testimony was for landscaping purposes um the buffering by the house uh I think there was some conversation last time that it was going to get stepped up a little bit I know it's you're stating that it's not required hard but the neighbor had some concerns and I think we need to go back um and my my last comment was again the presence of the office relating to that principal use one for bathrooms you got a lot of space a lot of trucks and I know you know they can walk down to the main office but it's it's a far walk so you may want to suggest an alternate temporary solution P to potties whatever uh so that we don't have a problem out there in that backfield and I'll rest there but I I will tell you uh Dante I'm not going to move off that mess I'm not moving off it I'm I'm very unhappy about it I made it clear it was a month ago there's no reason for it I don't know why it's gone on the way it does but there is just one hot mess out there and guys blown it with outside storage none of which I believe was permitted all right we we're talking we have to be cognizant the fact that we're here for this application um we're talking about the merits of this application um one one of the tenants though is to demonstrate a good viable use of the property same applicant same use no I understand I understand so if he's going to demonstrate it I want it demonstrated clearly I was out there uh yesterday it's I don't know if you've been out there but it it's getting worse it's getting worse every time I drive by there every time um I'll bet Mr Tremor has something to say Mr up a few things I thought you might all right first of all you make it sound like we talked to the Fire official since this redesign have we no the plan the plan was resubmitted uh to the Fire official on January 24th right so we have not gotten any feedback you're going with supposition then that he's going to approve all this because he's going to come in and see his fire trucks as Mr rker is said cannot turn around here we also pointed out that especially with what may be equipment and fertilizers in the building we need full access around this building police office Alco did review your stuff and he even said a secondary exit which we've talked about this now all a sudden there's retention basins there which is very confusing to me because we also had the public come in and express concerns about what's being stored in the back now this area is bigger so you may have eight tenants that are going to be let's say eight landscapers you're telling me there's not going to be eight or 16 dump trucks and eight loaders and uh containers back there there's a great possibility which is what the neighbors were concerned about I mean I don't understand why we made this bigger um and again as Mr rker said I can't see fire hydron on here now originally there was one improperly placed in the sidewalk which is in the middle of the roadway there are two fire hydrants proposed on site where are they uh they're on utility plan there was one uh about 75 ft in off of our Whit Road and there was a second one about 2/3 of the way back okay they show on a utility plan so 75 ft up up the plus or minus up the driveway uh correct okay approximately this do you know how wide the Jacks are on a ladder truck fire hydrants will be located in accordance with the requirements of the fire fire Bureau uh they review the plan wherever they want the fire hydrants we provide the fire hydrants if they want us to add fire hydrant We'll add them if they want us to move them we'll be happy to move them I I don't know what the legal realm of new here right of my discussion I actually if I could if I could tell you what what happens is we submit the plan to the fire Bureau and then they'll give us commentary as to where they want the fire hydrants and there are of course specific requirements for for hosle and also for for um separation for distance to a building fire hydrant is required within 100 ft of each building so this this plan proposes two hydrants U meets that criteria but if the fire Bureau says they want another hydrant or if they want the hydr move for some reason we'll we'll adjust the location of the fire hydrants can I ask you a question how many revisions since you you said fire fish looked at this in June of 23 correct uh yes how many revisions have been done since St uh we we had a revision in November and then then a revision in uh in January so it was submitted when the application was initially made to to the board we get their comment we go through other Outside Agency approvals we get scheduled for a hearing we came to the board here in December we got you know we got got comments made changes and we resubmitted back to the back to the fire but here's where my problem is and I'm not trying to be disrespectful what he looked at in June and what was presented in November is different now you're very good at what you do 27 years is a firefighter I'm very good at what I do so a fire Tru if this office building God forbid is on fire will have to park one side or the other or both which basically you have ladders and an engine the engine will have to hook up the fire Hydra which will clog the the driveway so hopefully the ladder gets in first or he can't even reach it you know I mean I I know there's a lot of different parameters here i' I've had some discussion with Mr Shay about it um if there was a secondary exit then the people could get out and we could do our job as firefighters this is about Public Safety why this area in the in the back here is bigger I mean you're actually asking for a waiver could go from 163 to 140 spots correct no no we uh ordinance requires 160 and we have 163 parking spaces proposed you might want to recount that unless you're counting loading docks I counted them today and we have 163 parking spaces I counted I got 141 okay well I got 163 and my testimony is are going to provide 163 okay well there's something wrong with the drawing I guess um why do we need so much storage in the back here for landscape stuff well that that that's a a question I I can't really um answer that question directly I mean the the application the application is consistent with ordinance requirements as to its intensity of development as to the areas of the buildings proposed as to the number of parking spaces as to the use use of the site how any particular applicant uh decides to develop their property and and you know provide different uses on it um of course there's a there's a a thousand ways to answer answer that question but this application conforms to ordinance requirements as to its proposed uses and to the intensity of uses that are proposed on the site so it's an open ticket to do whatever they want back there once it's built in and then then there's no no it's an application that's proposed in accordance with your ordinance requirements and if your ordinance requirements puts limitations on something this applicant is bound to comply with those limitations part of the thing that we expressed to Mr bordon was moving the whole garage down a couple hundred feet and now you could have access and they're not conflicting buildings and it would fix a lot of problems but I mean you guys are asking for waivers and variances but in this letter here that came in the mail today through uh this this um the township email Mr bordon while the traffic study has been completed and is attached White Road is jurisdiction of the Ocean County planning board as a county roadway County All County roadway improvements will be provided and required by the county so in other words he doesn't care what we say that's my interpretation I may be wrong and I apologize if I am but uh left turning lane will be provided southbound traffic Whitesville Road left turns in sight no traffic signal is proposed for this site the County Planning you know if the County's planning to put a signal there but also the traffic calculation uh circulation plan is included with the site and provided with the planning board as for the fire safety Bureau but it hasn't been reviewed because he just got it on Thursday we understand I mean I understand there's a whole time frame thing and you know maybe at this point we need to change what we do here and okay you're going to revise it you may have to expedite it by getting it to the Fire official or maybe even sitting with the Fire official CU like Mr bordon said with the original one with the with the hose there I mean the hydrant next to the building so you just hook up a hose and stretch to it no that's not what the Fire official said because I asked them you know there there's a lot of confusion here because of revisions revisions are a big problem and that part of what Mr reer was talking about we can't keep on revising this stuff and forcing the 45 days Rule Rule and pushing this through this is what the public is looking at and this is why they're upset you know I I mean I stand behind the public that's my job to make sure it's being built properly we're not trying to kill the project but I mean I have grave concerns and my first concern are the people that are going to be coming in and out of here and the firefighters police office an ambulance I mean if you put an ambulance in here no fire trucks turning around or you put one fire truck or how do we know we don't have a delivery truck stuck there you know it it there's a lot of things with access here that are very important and I I I think it's being overlooked you know it's I mean it's go ahead right hello there you go on the uh parking in the back when you said your tenant has to be a tenant there to use it basically that's eliminating leasing that or renting that parking space out to anybody that's not a tenant and to the public correct correct that was the discussion the whole discussion on that together the agreement that we came to at the last meeting now on the admission of uh when you redo plans and you resubmit paper work through the fire or Police Department or whatever agency you do and you get a response if you can't comply you're required to come back in front of us again correct correct thank you all right yeah I just want to address a couple of these things so the first and foremost is so we it's clear for the record I think you did a concise U well put together job before uh of our previous uh condition of approval that we did in the prior hearing so it's going to be linked to the tennessy and once it's linked to the the condition of approval for the use of the property for the four different principal uses that are going to be there are going to be linked to the tency the office space um and if it's not if if it's outside of that they can't use it um so I believe that that kind of lays the foundation for the use of the property as to the different principal uses that you have taken place um when it comes down to the the MUA the fire blowout I I correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that the MUA has to give some kind of uh outside see approval for you guys even to get pass resolution compliance correct I know this is more of a question for uh board engineers and and applicants engineer uh but that's my understanding of it yes yes they do and just to add a little information to that um on a project like that there's there's really two layers to it of course there's the ability for the MUA to provide water for domestic purposes for for the everyday everyday use of the of the facilities then the second prong is do have adequate water to supply to fire demand now the fire demand uh is not normally determined during this this um portion of the project the fire demand is determined when a fire sprinkler designer uh gets involved looks at the particulars of how the building is designed if anybody has famili familiarity with it there are of course a lot of different layers to to the building code and to the fire code and to particular uh use groups and and fire areas of the building so it's a very detailed analysis that's done when the building is is actually designed a lot further than you know looking at a nice 3D with with some lines for for offices um so that fire hydrant a flow test is done and then if if that if there's enough water available to meet the fire demand of the building then then great they design the sprinkler system they hook up they go the alternative is you could get a test done and there's not enough water available to supply the fire demand then that would become one of two types of deficiencies one would be it could just be served by a fire pump two is if there's not not not adequate available water supply you could have onsite underground storage as Mr Tremor and Mr rker were both were both discussing so those are all possibilities as the project moves along reality is none of those are really under the purview of the planning board those are under the purview of the MUA and then under the purview of the building code and the fire sub code official and they all have to be have to be done properly the buildings have to be designed in accordance with every appli applicable code including the fire codes that process is is going to take place all right question hang hang on one sec just piggy backing off of that all right um fire so uh the November plans I guess were wrapped up into these plans which the fire uh Bureau has not weighed in on yet all right so knowing that uh knowing that the change the plans have changed I believe that we resolv the hydrant issue um but this will be conditional upon uh this application will be conditional upon uh their um advisory opinion right approval advisory opinion recommendations um and if if the applicant doesn't like that the applicant has has a number of choices number one one say that one of those recommendations conditions is unreasonable come back before the board um I don't I don't think it needs to go as far as filing another application but petition the board to come back and take a look at that that quote unquote unreasonable condition then you go to the construction board of appeals uh they can file in order to show causes number of different um number of different variations of solutions that the applicant has at that point in time but because of the fact that we're now in a situation where the uh the fire Bureau has not looked at the November plans or the revised plans and put input yet um contained in my resolution is always uh paragra is actually the first general paragraph Just in indicating that all you know inter regulatory inter agency um approvals are required hence this would be conditioned upon I mean just so just so I want everybody to be clear um this is what happens right and we have no objection you have there's no objections to that no no anything so if if something comes back uh the applicant deems it unreasonable they would have to probably the easiest method would be to come back before the board as opposed to go to the construction board of appeals or filing order the show cause or something like that so everybody isuse agreed okay I have one Mr mcfallen uh you said let's say the flow test they don't have enough water pressure and all that stuff you'd have to put an underground tank in which has been done before you would have to come back in front of the board for that at that point correct well I don't I don't believe we would have to for for an item like that that's that would be a Paramount to a to a utility uh modification I don't believe that's something the board would normally would you come back in front of the board if you have to do that because I think the board look where the tanks going what's going on there and everything else uh if the board would like us to come back if that were the circumstance that happened I would like to stipulate if that happens you'd come back in front of we would agree to come to return yeah I'd also like to ask um Mr Peters what about the signage are you in agree that Al and the vertical issue makes the difference I'd like to answer Mr Bry and Mr McFarland's question first I think of change to what type of system they're putting in and if it requires an underground system with different locations I believe it belongs back before the board thank you but they've already agreed to do that but I would just like you to know that is a consistency issue I think that's consistent between what the planning board and the zoning board does as it relates to the signage on the building I believe they've that Mr mcin testified that they're basically addresses and so to the extent that they provide some safety Factor having a bigger address is a positive so it's not like the side of the building says eat it Joe's or rent here right they have the name and address of the building on the office building as well as the office of the warehouse office building so we don't take any exception to the idea that there's for the for for placing addresses the number of signs and the square footage of signs being over what's required is not a significant variation thank you and the outdoor storage issue is compliant and that's what seems to be of issue the applicant has indicated they're going to comply with the ordinance um the town and many other towns struggle with the implementation through code enforcement and good stewardship by owners so to the extent that Mr rker needs to get his code enforcement gear on um yes if if a site is in disrepair um I think the board is letting the applicant know that they're questioning the the veracity of the applicants testimony when they go out to the site and the site its current condition is in disrepair and they say let we want to build out there so that's not what we want um but it's a Code Enforcement issue um the items that are permitted to be constructed they've agreed to comply with Mr Clay about the buffering what are your thoughts and recommendations um I would agree with um Mr McFarland that the the requirement for buffering is to um a residential zone or required when it's but against a residential Zone um this is an industrial Zone I would say probably the home is a non-permitted use so I don't think buffering is required um and I think they have provided um an adequate or a good buffer of plannings along um uh that property line so I'm I'm comfortable with the Landscaping that the that they provided um but just follow up back to the to the whole fire issue um we plans revised plans were submitted and we got responses back from from PD um and I imagine there's going to be some response from the applicant to PD um and what I ultimately I'd like to see um their comments or their um final their final comments is that we have no traffic safety concerns um the environmental commission is nice enough to provide that to us if there's no environmental they specifically say it um say the same thing that goes with fire it makes it easier for me for resolution compliance to just read this other than provide this and provide that fire um if they want to say all all has to hyrons have to comply with mua standard building codes all that that that's fine but I much prefer to see um that there's no um additional concerns in that in that letter um two two questions the trash storage for the office building is that going to be the same as the trash storage for the warehouse yes so the paper whatever is generated from that somebody's going to bring it to the dumpster in the back correct and the I believe it's 32 parking spaces that you have to the rear um and I think that's counted towards the overall um parking requirement um will that rolling gate be open during normal business hours I think the answer has to be yes good answer I would say good catch that's all good catch uh have we discussed solar my favorite topic we have not discussed it we have our architect here who when they provide some testimony they can touch on the solar start thinking architect before you come up and anyone else from the board Mr Solomon um so I want to Mr McFarland how many parking spaces are you stating or are available on this project this plan has 163 parking spaces proposed well I just went through here and numbered every parking space and I came up with 149 if you count the ones inside the fence area in the back that's supposed to be for storage Madam chair if I might our report in a number of places talks about total parking um we indicate there's 160 parking spaces is one for each vehicle used in connection with the building they have 145 spaces eight additional EV Ready Credit spaces which gets them to 153 and they're utilizing the 10 hatched spaces in front of the overhead doors to get to 163 um so while Mr McFall may not have been the original author of the plans I don't believe the plans have changed from the two reports that our office and Mr C have issued setting forth how we feel the parking is being provided we do have a question as to whether or not you there has to be an indication that you the spaces that are in front of the the hatch spaces which are basically the driveway spaces in front of the rollup portion of the building are in fact parking spaces and they'll have to be assigned accordingly I believe that's the way the the arithmetic for the parking count and then there's a doubling of spaces for um handicap parking so you've counted those we have a credit for the EV spaces correct we have eight EV parking spaces so you get you bonus the 160 the 163 includes the credit for the EV parking spaces yes so that's the important thing that the there are parking spaces and then there are credits for parking spaces so I think that these gentlemen are counting spaces but you're not counting the credits for the parking spaces that's a technicality but we all get used to that for every e station you get believe two you get two stat says we can get extra credit for those spaces so you have to count the the credits i' I'd also like to ask if I'm reading this correctly one of the EV stations is also considered a handicap spot correct okay handicap it's good to it's good to have at least one EV station that's handicapped signage so that a handic cap person with EV needs corre has that availability and I don't believe there's any regulation that has gotten to that level of detail yet but I think it's a good idea at this time with with this n with this number of spaces and this number of handicap spaces I think it's only sensible to have at Le you know one of them be be EV I think it's a good it's a good idea and ahead of the game several years ago this board was constantly asking for Ev stations it was not the law now it's the law the same thing goes with the solar but and and I do apology for including one of them as handicapped can the question certain how do we count a driveway as a parking spot it's basically the entrance to the garage we count we count the we count the the uh apron the driveway apron in a home as parking space that's part of the count mhm okay I just wanted to clarify that's why know you're new thank you live and learn Mr rer so where I'm coming from Mr MC and I don't u i don't discount your engineering experience I'll get you the reason that I'm pushing about this fire flow your building is located between two Mains and it's in the center so I'm going to give you hypothetical building's on fire fire pump kicks in once it kicks in you may not noce um there's absolutely no way to shut it off it has to get cut by primary power so once that puppy's on it will never stop until it explodes period so let's just say that this one's a smaller one it's it's it's sucking 5,000 gallons a minute okay Mr tror shows up he decides that he's going to come over by uh Veterans Highway I show up on the other side and I'm going to come in and I'm going to try to fight this fire if somebody on the other side opens up that fire Hydra and you're sucking 5,000 gallons that pipe is going to empty out real quick it's going to fill with air and the game is over the reason why I'm saying saying this is I've seen this happen I've had somebody in the fire Fire Department open up a hydr too close to where I'm drawing water and put me out of business it happens so we're going further away from the building to go get water the reason why I'm I'm I'm trying to guide you on this is if it comes to be that you need a fire pump you're going to need a fire pump house because I'm not I'm sure you're not going to want to take away the office building space or the storage space and you're going to have to put in the sister at least to feed this thing uh somewhat somewhere and I I would rather in the future we clean it up to make sure that one we have enough room to do it it doesn't interfere with your Loi with the D and it can actually be done and the fire pump not necessarily would have to be in one of the buildings you could have a block house uh that's my guidance that's where I'm coming from with this it's not that I'm I'm playing hard ball with you but this building is in the middle of that road uh I know there's Forest Mains going every which way I'm not sure what the uh the ductal iron size is out there but the friction loss alone to try to get from them either those main roads is really going to compound your flow I know I'm throwing a lot of fire junk at you but I'm just trying to make sure you're aware what you could be stepping into if you didn't do that test right now all all great comments and some some great insight to to fire protection um but we we've previously indicated based upon Mr Mr brey's question that you know I think that the agreement is that if the plan for the fire protection changes considerably and something else is required whether it be underground storage SS whether it be a pump house anything else along those lines this application we come back in front of the planning board I don't disagree with you Mr Peters you're next thank you madam chair before we let Mr McFarland go um Graham there was a a circulation plan which was submitted that just shows a vehicle coming into the site we've been your office has been providing circulation plans forever correct uh for some reason this one does not show the path of the vehicle uh going around the site or turning around so we're we'll certainly add we'll certainly add that to the uh to the set all right there was a comment in in the miscellaneous section of our report about um earthor quantities and a statement about compliance with chapter 364 which is a soil and fill importation section of the qu code which is not necessarily in the land use section um your client understands they have to concur with that section of the ordinances as well correct yes and the last item I had had to do with the sidey yard setbacks really didn't spend a lot of time on it and I I think it's important the ordinance requires in this Zone a minimum side yard setback of 30 feet and it requires a combined sidey yard setback of 75 feet so you can make 75 ft any number of ways you can split the difference you can have 37 A2 on one one side and 37 and a half on another you can have a minimum of 30 on one side but then you need 45 on the other so the applicant's asking to provide basically 30 ft where the office building is parallel to the side property line and then where the jog is near the side property line that's going to go down to 259 that's a unique situation specifically affecting this piece of property Mr mcfallen testified to that so let's just say for for discussion that the office building is 30 feet off the property line that means the warehouse building needs to be 45 ft off the property line and it's 30 so I really haven't heard any testimony about it's 30 individuals 75 total we've just said well we have 30 on each one and we didn't have 30 it was 259 because of the Jog and the property the required for both side yards is 75 that's all I had thank you and can that be rectified by uh making this uh Warehouse a little uh less deep well if the if the building was uh was was not less deep it would certainly uh reduce that that variance request um our our testimony was was that this property has does have a unique shape it does it does have an an odd shape it's width compared to its length is uh is unique um we also look at this variance as um you know really meeting the test for both a C1 and a C2 the C1 being cre by the unique factors affecting the property C2 test is where um the grant of the variant doesn't have any significant impact uh doesn't degrade the The Zone plan uh or or or any impact to the you know to the ordinance at all and this particular particular request reducing the varant reducing the lot withd or I'm sorry the side yard setback from a combined 75 to a combined 61 for a small portion of the property uh I I think is pretty insignificant keep in mind that that variance would you know is would technically be required for the depth of the office building which is only 100 fet so we have a uh the warehouse building which is 387 ft deep it's only the front portion of it that is really affected by by this application of the combined sidey uh sidey variants uh once you get beyond the footprint of the office building you kind of you know you lose that combined sidey uh condition because you're only dealing with one uh with with one building uh as to that the sidey yard of the uh Warehouse building we are proposing landscaping and buffering to soften any impact uh of course that side yard setback is to the rear uh part of the warehouse building that's not going to have any activity whatsoever uh so I don't believe it's going to provide any any uh negative impact or provide any detriment to the uh to the um to the Zone plan Mr Harmon thank you is the um right and right out or it's two ways just not notated in the plan no this is full full uh movements and Mr kennel's going to provide detailed discussion about the about the traffic thank you so uh let's talk about the warehouse building the first four sections could the first four sections be shortened in depth and that would make it compliant wouldn't it uh that's certainly a possibility and that would make it compliant with the uh side yard setback uh re and it shouldn't change things too much in the architecture or uh or the or the look except that it would give the appropriate it would make the change that would be appropriate for the yes if if that's something that the board felt was important I think our client would would agree to make that change all right anything from the board should we open it to the public please anyone like to come forward on just to just just to ask questions of Mr McFarland that's all no one else no other testimony just Mr McFarland's testimony please raise your right hand do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the whole truth nothing but the truth I do please state your name for the record David viscone v i s c n live at 441 Whitesville Road Jackson Township you here as a private citizen correct I was going to beat you to it I am am employed by the township as a code enforcement officer but I am not here in that aspect I'm here as a taxpaying citizen gotcha you good good to go all right um Mr rker hit on it on a concern of mine uh regarding the the area in the back um as far as bathroom facilities um I bring it up because since that Pro that property has a uh tainted history and in the past uh and I have unfortunately I had to set up a trail cam which took some ugly pictures of the people that were using my property as a bathroom facility so I'm concerned about that now Mr McFarland was there um did you have a fence uh around the back of that property we do have a fence proposed around the outdoor storage area okay is it around uh three is it three sided anony can you pull up um a I think it was A5 yes there's a g the Shaded shaded portion you canar see over here Mr um there is a fence proposed around the perimeter of the area so there is a fence proposed okay in your your house of course this house right yes correct and also keep in mind also keep in mind that that we've heard a lot of discussion about uh the current condition of the property and some historical use this is an application for redevelopment of the property this is an application that's going to bring this property into full compliance with current ordinance requirements with current building code requirements with every with every regulation on the book so this is an application for redevelopment to you know also increase increase the tax rable base discuss many times in the master plan so this is an application that is good for this municipality and something we should be you know which is think we're doing you know working together as a team to try to make happen to to be considerate neighbors you have to think out of the box such as the buffering that you mentioned wasn't a requirement because it's not a residential area but it would be nice to to try to accommodate the people that have to live next to it uh the bathroom is part of that not only for adjacent residents to avoid problems but as a consideration to the people that work there um that property is probably my property is approximately 800 feet deep and I believe this property probably is pretty close to that also um was there please correct me if I'm wrong was there a d issue that was supposed to be addressed they were supposed to produce uh we we've filed for an Loi with the dup so that's that's under review at the dup and that of course is required prior to resolution um conformance to the resolution resolution approval part of the reason I bring that up is because Miss Campbell you might have noticed it the front left of that property um is a swamp right now we haven't had rain in several days and I know I'm probably going to be scolded for this but the reason that swamp exists is because of the changes that were made to the property surrounding us and this piece of property it used to have a stream that flowed freely uh toward the north south east uh and that that has stopped now because of what was done to the property surrounding us and now the water lays there so so I don't know if that has a bearing on the location of the office building it's going to be very close to this this wet site and I don't know if that comes into play and I'm sure Mr McFarland will have something to say about that yes and and again we're again keep this in in terms of of big picture of this application this is for redevelopment of this site that building was uh was built whatever it is 50 60 70 years ago something something on that order with no development controls whatsoever with no storm water management controls whatsoever this new this application now uh designed in accordance with current regulations designed in accordance with current stormwater regulations that include the green infrastructure the various components that we have that provide the quantitative and the qualitative control uh again as as a Redevelopment project uh this project will enhance the current conditions compared to what's been going on for the last several will be over and and I think that's the important thing that we can assure you there will be appropriate agency oversights it I don't think it could be worse than it is now I really don't think it could be worse so please be understanding that there are protections that are going to be afforded to you from these oversight external agencies that that will answer your questions M Campbell I understand your position but I think if you have used Whitesville Road every day for when it rains all right you've seen the flooding that takes place that's a County Road it's it was a Township approved um and and this is that flooding condition has existed for approximately 15 years and I'm sure agenes will see that they will see it they will know it they will study it and they will either approve it or not that that's we have to rely on them the simple answer is that if the DP comes back and says no Go full stop what lands expanded uh then they're coming back um they're going to have to change the the pretty much everything because the buffer is going to be expanding um a number of feet past where the new delineation Line's going to be um so I mean it could change everything for them there always kind of a roll of dice for any developer when they when they send an Loi to the D anything any other questions for Mr McFarland yes we we just touched on it about the flooding plan can you explain to me how exactly this the storm order how it's collected and where it's going sure uh what happens on on this particular project is we have uh we have several layers to it uh first we have um series of inlets and piping within the the parking areas that collect that collect the runoff you know storm water that falls and collect the runoff we also have a series of recharge pipes that collect rooftop runoff and allow that to infiltrate into into the ground um working in conjunction with the collection system system we have uh two what are what are term small scale infiltration basins in in the current terminology uh that that allow collected storm water to uh to go to these centralized locations uh they infiltrate into the groundwater when you get a really really big storm you know what we term a 100-year storm uh there's Outlet structure or a Spillway that controls um how that water will will discharge offsite out to out to wh Road under all of the storms were required to evaluate which are termed two the 10-year and 100-year storm the project is required to reduce the amount of discharge from current condition to this proposed condition so even with the development being constructed new buildings new parking lots uh being being improved the amount of runoff from this project will be less than it is in the current condition um my other concern was noise being generated from the back area there where uh correct me if I'm wrong uh landscaping materials are going to be deposited in that gray area in the back is is that correct yes okay and that and that area has a rolling gate is is that correct yes for security purposes correct okay can um and it not only affects me but there are houses across the street can we make some reasonable restrictions as to um people delivering materials in that area well yes the applicant is is required to abide by the noise ordinances and hours of operation required in in local ordinance and the hours of operation were in your um St statement of operations statement of operations uh and I think they were very reasonable hours can go over them again if you want that [Music] would uh normal hours of operation uh 700 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday uh hours for contractors to return to the site may continue to 8:00 p.m. seasonally so landscaping business type know they may be returning to the site closer to 8:00 during during summertime and what about Sundays no there are no Sundays no Sunday hours correct okay thank you thank you next so we're G have our AR up we have one we have the duo yes Deborah buscone 441 Whitesville Road I do SAR to tell the truth I have wait there's a there's a formula here we have to follow the formula thank you do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes and we need to put your name on the record Deborah d e b o r a v i s c o n i right and same address as yes thank you I don't know if this question is for Mr McFarlin or for the board um it was asked last meeting and there's no definitive answer given to us when and we know there will be a violation of the operating hours it's it just is the nature of the business and it happens when there is a violation who do we call who who gives them a notice of violation or a summons what do we do all right so so so let's talk about due process for a second so what happens to the situation if they're P resolution compliance if they're P you know Building Inspections zoning permit whole nine yards and it's open and operating has a CO um and it's it's good to go past the Township's ability of you know enforcement during those periods of time um then it becomes a straight up code enforcement or zoning uh officer issue now what happens is that if they're in violation of of what they've agreed upon um throughout the course of different layers of the onion so to speak um then then they will be brought to Municipal Court if if a citation violation is issued um and the enforcement mechanism um you know of the township either code enforcement or zoning depending on what's being violated um will then you know trigger the violation it'll go to Municipal Court um at that point in time time than the um the landlord or tenant or both quite frankly it happens a lot they both get cited sometimes um will have a chance to either say guilty not guilty uh and fight it or they can more often than not what happens is that they Rectify it uh or if it's to a certain extent um for various different types of reasons they come back before the board um and they and they apply uh for you know either a um they amend the application or they um or they make it more concise or whatever they get the approvals that they need or they just stop doing what they're doing um so there simply saying it goes to code enforcement or goes to zoning doesn't do the Justice um that that takes place when it happens um because really there's different options that are available at that point in time I mean ideally in a perfect world we would always love them to come back before the board and rectify the issues you know stop doing what they're doing or expand uh or contract what you know what's taking place on the property um if we go out with a with our phone and take a video or a picture and we document the violation are you talking local CT enforcement that's local code it be the township it have to be the township so okay thank you um thank you answer the question was it okay yes sir gotcha thank you any further questions for Mr mcfar before I bring our next witness Mr micone comment for this only second of the testimony I I'll second that thank you next all in favor all in favor I thank you so I'll have our architect come up good could please state your name for the record hi my name is Rachel pasz could you spell that please yeah r a c h l Rachel and pasz p a s k s z all right please raise your right hand you solemnly swear or firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth for the record yeah can you please provide your qualifications for the board yes I um this is my first time testifying in front of this board and any board and I'm a registered architect of New Jersey your license is current yeah do you when was your license issued probably three months ago take some time to come from New Jersey all right does the board accept the expert yes thank you thank you um so you've heard Mr McFarland's testimony uh the board would like to just see what what the the two proposed structures are going to look like if you could describe those and then one of the questions would be solar panels and if the those structures would be able to support those yeah sure so um there are two structures being proposed on the site one is a three-story office building going to be rectangular shape three floors High I believe up to 45 ft at the roof at the roof level um exterior material is going to be stucco eephus with banded Windows those would be punched glass and aluminum framed windows the exterior coloring is pretty muted tones and um that's going to house the office portion which contains in the interior I believe three tencies per floor and you speaking the the microphone I'm having a hard time hearing yeah hi yeah and the second the second instructor on the site is the contractor shop warehouse and that will be a likely a prefabricated metal building um the exterior will be metal paneling um base would probably be CMU um that would contain I believe about nine tencies and each one would get a garage door and a exterior um standard door could we bring up those uh pictures those yeah I believe that's like Anthony please might be P1 we can see what we're talking about yeah you this referen the exhibits that uh she's relying on yeah I believe it's P1 Anthony yeah that would be the you could look at aing yeah yeah that yes that's one yes thank you yeah so this is the contractor shop um as you see there's metal paneling on the exterior and the base is a CMU block each tenant has a garage door and a typical standard door to get in protected by awnings over the top of the both doors um and where would the Mechanicals be stored on um for the flex space yeah so there's not much Mechanicals required for the warehouse just standard like blowers and then probably PTAC units for the there's like a little mezanine Office Space in each in each tency so any units that would need to like any units that are exterior would likely be mounted on the roof and then there would be some small vent coming out of the back of the building and then with the office building where we could speak into the microphone there sorry and with regards to the office building itself where would the Mechanicals be stored on the on the yeah yeah so that would be um typical rooftop mounted units we bring up that uh if you look at a I think it's A6 yes this is A6 and this is the office building yeah so that would have typical rooftop mounted units and then along with that potential would be given for um to accommodate for the potential solar rooftop on the roof as well as as c f and that would be agreed to H and it would be part of the resolution yes no objection thank you any other questions from this group Mr Herman you I'm sorry what the in the resolution it would be agreed upon to do a solar study or to put actual solar panels it would be an agreement to that the structures would be able to support solar panels and if in the future they want to install no we don't want to wait for the future we want them now want leasts now feasibility study for solar panels now you want a feasibility okay thank you that should be part of the resolution not the few this is the future thank you Mr Herman for clarifying that I heard something was off so that's a Christopher Watkins reference right there I believe can I ask yes there was a question about moving the first four uh Warehouse units in shorter in depth can that be addressed now yeah pardon there was a question moving the uh first four units off the road shorter in depth to help avoid the variance behind it is there any problem in doing that Mr mcfallen indicated there wouldn't be but she's the architect so I fig we'd ask her oh okay good I'll show her yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah I'm familiar with that um yeah we can look into that um it's not looking into it's doing yeah we're talking about making yeah if that would be a conditional approval then yeah yeah but not going to have any if we were to revise those front portions of the flex space to meet the setback requirement it's not going to have a detrimental impact on the structure itself well it will require redesign but the project can still go through so yes yeah okay good answer okay thank you Mr President that's how much of a reduction in the footage that be on each building of square footage just distance back 3 feet four feet I don't care about the square footage just the depth how much further away from the sideline would it be well it's going to have to was I believe 75 ft total so it would have to accommodate with thank you 15 20t approximately whatever but Mr McFarland will update his plans we'll have updated architecturals which will be submitted as thank part of condition of approval thank you Mr rker oh I'm sorry I was just asking the height of the building the height yeah so the office building 45t 45 ft yeah that's to the roof yeah to the roof line yeah rooft roof check sure Madam chair just a follow up Mr Tremor comment so the building Height's 45t there's a 3ot parit shown on your plan building's got an elevator correct yeah so there's got to be some structure above the 45 ft height for the elevator to come up serviced is the roof accessible for patrons it would just be a roof hatch okay since we don't have the plans we don't have the details would it be a reasonable condition that the architect and Mr CLE determined that in fact a height variance is not necessary for the extension of the elevator above the 45 ft other words there are certain projections that are allowed above a certain height not this application not any of the professionals that are associated with the application but I've seen where they say okay well we'll just we'll we'll bring the elevator up because it has to get to that location there's Mechanicals above it to lift it to that elevation so if it only comes to the third floor there should probably only be eight or 9 ft to get it up to the the roof if someone decides to let people out on a roof there's Mechanicals above it still so I want to make sure that we're clear that there's no roof access and that as part of resolution compliance they'll work either with Mr McFarland's office Andor Mr C's office to verify that the extension of the Elevator Shaft above the roof line will not require a height variance and Mr CLE you're comfortable with that thank you we have no objection and Mr alfair you're comfortable with that yes Madam chair very good someone over here over here to say you're good you're good I'm all right thank you any other questions for the architect public then we'll be uh invited to come up and speak with the architect ask questions for just this portion motion to CL close public session second oh berste make a motion to close who someone seconded I did that's good Mr bressie thank you all in favor I thank you thank you thank you and you have another uh yes B and clean up we have Mr kennel thank you oh long time no see all right since nobody has any idea who you are uh do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do Scott Kennel k n NE L with McDon and Ray Associates located at 1431 Lakewood Road manisan welcome thank you can you please provide your qualifications for the board yes I'll make a short out I'm a principal with McDon and Ray Associates with over 40 years of traffic and transportation planning experience appeared on over 2,000 site plan applications many of them before this board as well as his only board sen you once or twice yes and the board accepts the qualifications thank you thank you thank you yes my office prepared a traffic impact study for this development the traffic impact study is dated October 2 2023 and as uh our first um phase of it was to do an inventory of existing traffic conditions adjacent to the S side along Whitesville Road and as part of that uh inventory traffic counts are conducted at whito Road and Graham Avenue just to the south of this uh development and they were conducted on Tuesday July 11th 2023 from 7: to 10:00 a.m. and 3: to 600 p.m. the peak hours occurred from 8: to 9:00 a.m. and 4:15 to 5:15 p.m. uh after this report was issued our firm also did additional traffic counts on it for another project at White Road to the north and they were conducted in November of 2023 and the review of that data indicates that the July 2023 date is consistent with what recorded in November when you had schools open and in session just for the board's benefit the next phase is to estimate how much traffic be generated during the peak morning and afternoon peak hours we're estimating approximately 70 trips during the morning peak hour and 70 trips in the afternoon peak hour and that's Based on data provided by The Institute of Transportation engineers in our latest trip generation manual once we have the traffic Pro uh projections we then assign traffic to the adjacent uh roadway system based on existing traffic patterns uh location of higher order streets and the location of population centers or neighborhoods consistent with the ocean County planning board protocol we looked at a 10-year uh projection or 20 20 33 is our designer and Consulting The Institute of transportation and no let me take that back New Jersey Department of Transportation traffic growth rates we search charged uh the base volumes by 10% for for growth in area we also included three I'll call significant developments uh within close proximity of this development that includes the what we referred to as the ram Office Park or prox uh just to the north of this site before South Hope Chapel Road it's currently under construction that development has approximately 100,000 squ ft of buildout also considered uh another development a warehouse development that's on South Hope Chapel just south of whito road that development is going to be approximately 325,000 sare ft and then opposite White Road there was uh recently another existing Warehouse development that was expanded and approved for an additional 93,000 Square ft so the base traffic volumes are expanded by 10% and we also then did the site specific traffic for those three developments I reference to establish the 2033 no build volumes then it was necessary to search charge the traffic projections that I mentioned earlier onto the no build to establish our build conditions and then we analyzed the site access and determine that during the morning peak hour the it would operate a level service D or average vehicle delay of 26 seconds per vehicle and then in the afternoon when the volumes are are generally a little bit higher in this area and we have um a higher number of vehicles exiting the site we determined that the driveway would operate at level service e or approximately an average vehicle delay of 42 seconds it's our opinion or my opinion that those represent conservative uh delay patterns the county has programmed future traffic signals north and south of this site um there'll be a traffic signal is projected by the county at White Road and then to the south at Faraday Avenue and what that those traffic signals will do it it it organizes or platoon of traffic and then it will'll provide gaps which don't necessarily exists today because we don't have the influence of traffic signals in close proximity this driveway and as far as the next phase of our analysis dealt with the site plan uh the site will be served by a single point of access with with full turning movements uh exiting movements will be left and right turns as well as for the inbound will'll be left turns in as well as right turns the site has been uh designed to provide take into consideration the State statue with EV spaces 163 parking spaces which comply with the township ordinance as you relates to the site access I did have an opportunity to review the memo prepared by the police department first of all as far as their comment on providing a traffic signal this location the traffic vies at the driveway do not warrant uh a traffic signal and would not be accepted or approved by Ocean County uh and again given a consideration of traffic signals plan for White Road and Faraday there's also a consideration that they're taken to um that they consider dealing with signal spacing so that they're spaced uh a proper distance from one another so as far as that comment in in the memo um the traffic volumes that are being generated by the site do not warrant the traffic signal and very unlikely that the Ocean County would approve it as far as a dedicated left turn lane for Refuge or storage on whito road for southbound left turn movements uh that is an improvement that's recommended by police and we'll present that to ocean county and is subject to their review and approval as far as implementing that left turn lane and the design of that left turn lane would again be subject to their um review and approval and in essence uh concludes my testimony questions Mr brei yes um as you said the county probably would not approve that light if they approve it you will comply with it though they say they want it there that's correct I mean typically I mean there are occasions where driveways of this nature have a signal but it's usually opposite in a public Street that's generating much more traffic but just for a traffic signal for a private entity is highly unlikely unless you're dealing with a regional I tend to agree with you but I guess that decision is up to the county that's correct the other question I have just for Simplicity and make sure it's known these plans were amended for this meeting and does that Amendments have any change in any of your projections they do not thank you Mr Herman thank you um you mentioned a few of the S specific um you know future development you know B within your projections you took you sp you took mostly the industry several indust industrial projects surrounding the site um you know the site is also impacted by the RG traffic Wise by the rg2 area which has mostly yet to be built out we have the sworn project not far up we have um grown Bowman you know these are all within the vicinity have you used those um anticipated volumes as part of your projections not as site specific but as part of our regional traffic growth again we increase the volumes uh by 10 10% before I even consider those other industrial developments So based on my experience and utilizing the do growth rate data uh we have appropriately accounted for those developments 10% is based on actual or based on your projections plus 10% it is 10% of the base traffic volumes we have approximately a two-way volume of 1,500 along the Cy Frontage so we increased the base volume by 150 then we added the other developments which added approximately another 120 130 uh Vehicles during the peak hour so we've increased the volumes that are presently running by the site by 300 vehicles to do the analysis and a couple of thousand houses won't really add much more than that well again it's ipation given where they're located they're going to have an influence on this area and it's my opinion they they can be accommodated within the traffic growth that we use can I can I just ask maybe one thing is you know forgot about this board as the Outside Agency I don't know if it really matters for you know for what we're doing here but in your submitt to the county you include the site projections with a baseline of all the rg2 projects and I know your office has been here multiple times for several of the projects you know just use that as part of the Baseline because you know let's be real we all know where Whitesville is going once these you know once these get get built out and I would like the county who unfortunately you know not going to say much more over here but you know I would like the county to at least have the data and instead of saying oh we don't have this project in our file we don't have this project in our file you know let you know let Mr ER have all the data in front of him and then make a decision you know if we need a traffic light left turn lane and what's you know what's best I just don't like the high data be you know that I think should be there well Mr ER is very well aware of all the other projects in area so maybe we could just include it in the traffic accounts is that a possibility well again if there are a numerous developments so it's a question of I mean there are developments that are approved there's developments that are coming in for approvals so um I guess my only comment to that is to are we just looking at approved developments I mean that's typically what we consider in our analysis I mean again most of the rg2 projects are approved I believe there's one large one that has not been you know I don't know if your office is you know aware of that one or not but I mean I'm not expecting you to know every parcel of land and every level that's not up for approval and not on the agenda not going to you know I can never ask that from you you know but at least of what's approved you know you know just as a baseline of what you know just to really include that in the analysis going forward I I can have that discussion with Ocean County and also just for the board members this development also will be paying a traffic impact fee assigned assessed by the county so there unfortunately a traffic impact fee doesn't make Whitesville Road any easier to drive for the residents well but they're collect they're collecting them I'm sorry collected them to make the improvements one the traffic signals on whiter Road as well as a a significant Improvement to the whiter Road in South Hope Chapel is done based on tax dollars as well as contributions by all these developments coming on board okay thank you as long as as long as o county has a full data I'm that's I drove Whitesville Road for 15 years 180 days a year uh it's better than it used to be but it's also much much much more crowded than it used to be so it's got to be a consideration unfortunately the it's out of our hands it's a County Road we'll we'll do our best Mr Herman just to keep reminding them that it's a County Road any anyone else have any questions Madam chair yes sir if I might um Mr kennel would it be a a reasonable request of the board that is a condition of of any approval the board makes that either you Andor the site engineer meet with the Jackson Township Police Department traffic safety unit um and get this report updated we can do that Mr I just saw a letter today that Mr bordon had sent a response to the um I understand but I'll be I'll be I'll be blunt okay I I I have a concern representing the Jackson Township planning board of them approving your application when the police department told you to build a traffic light all right I understand everything you did I understand the law I think it's bad Optics if this board approves something where a police officer told us he thinks you need a traffic light so can we get another report as part of resolution compliance that doesn't say you need a traffic light at the entrance please yes and I and I will if necessary I I will meet with the police department to review this application right thank you just to be clear it's the county that says you have to put a traffic light in right that's correct okay so ultimately it's a county decision um that determines whether or not the light's going there or it's going a block away or block right or a block left or whatever it is but you but you will as a condition of approval you will abide by the County's determination that's correct and I and as I mentioned earlier I I will offer and put the offer out the police department if they want to meet and discuss this in more detail I'll make myself available and you're going to work with traffic safety as advisory uh Advisory Group uh for any recommendations that they make uh as long as it's consistent with the jurisdictional authority that determines who says yes who says no that's correct Mr the final um review from the um uh fire department I'm sorry for the police department won't have anything about um install a light I hope not I I can only I can only convey the message it would be problematic in the resolution compliance if it did to be clear though the jurisdiction does lie with the county so if the the PD doesn't change their position um it's still under the jurisdiction of the county I'm asking that you you and your professionals don't just exchange paper through the mail you go meet with him explain it to him and see if he if you can agree have the officer agree that a traffic light isn't necessary at your entrance I think simply explaining it to him will be well otherwise I don't disagree with your legal point I think it's bad optics for this board to just approve something after the police department told them they think they need they need a traffic light that's all understandable but again the point is really the jurisdiction does lie with the county so if after we do have um a sit down with the PD and they still don't change their position um if the County doesn't permit one we we can't we're not going to we can't install one right we understand that okay we understand that you understand that we need to make certain that the paperwork expresses that clearly that it's the county decision not our decision understand and you will comply with the county decision that's correct thank you yes and and just go back to Due Process got forbidden anything happens uh let's say the traffic safety all of a sudden makes something a condition that's uh unreasonable you have every legal right to come back before the board and um request relief from that unreasonable condition if it's unconstitutional something along that nature L list host of different reasons why uh just so everybody's clear the applicant has the ability of doing that just so that the applicant agrees agrees to comp support with the uh board's professionals uh and their conditions correct yes anyone else from this sport have a question for this witness we'll open the public session to see if anyone has would like to come forward and ask any questions of this applicant see nobody approach the microphone for public comment on this portion and this portion only motion to CL by second by pressing all in favor I any opposed okay all right would you uh like to complete your testimony yes so we have no further testimony provided tonight um we had we were here for two meetings we had uh four individuals provide testimony with relation to the application um I know there were some modifications from the original uh meeting back in December we addressed a lot of the board's comments there were some additional comments today which I feel we've also made some modifications to further get into compliance um we are going to revise the uh Flex Bas building to meet the standards as it relates to the setback so I do not believe a setback variance would be required anymore um so with that said we would like the board to uh approve the application and we appreciate that any comments from the board members uh any questions yes Mr rker okay so we still have an elephant in the room do we want to go to public first we we I think we oh all right let's let's do public first because I don't think there there might be but let's ask all right anyone on the public would like to speak on any issue about this application General comment General comment see no one coming forward I move to close public session bressie second Sol all in favor I all right there you go Mr R okay so back to the first meeting and the second meeting uh let's discuss the elephant in the room uh is your client present here in this room tonight I would like to speak to your client okay if you would be so kind come in uh swear yourself in just um we just closed Public public comment yeah but he's not public he's the applicant he's he's he's the applicant the applicant so I I would I'm not the applicant all right we'll we'll send him back to the gallery and I'll I'll address the applicat attorney and if he wants respond to the the attorney record we can do it that way I I would so the way I would proceed with this is that if we want the applicant if I that's who you asked if the applicant was in the room come forward um we can reopen public comment after the applicant come up to the podium put his testimony on record if the applicant's willing to do that um but we can't do it for in the opposite way procedurally so I'm going to leave that up to the board as to how you want to work that out so Mr rker ask the attorney the questions you wanted to um ask to the applicant because he is the applicant's attorney okay so Mr alery would your applicant be willing to do something to clean up this property and demonstrate to this board in good faith prior to resolution compliance and we'll give you an opportunity to self-heal uh pick a number of days uh and agree upon a scope to clean up this property so that it's handled I guess the scope would be what type of cleanup are you looking I don't know my eyes hurt when I go by there okay you tell us okay and then I'm not here to I'm not here to manage the project they retired from doing that all due respect and what time of what type of time frame would you be requesting I would like you to self-heal and I'm yielding to you you're yielding to me okay 30 days no I think that's un reason 90 days I 90 days I would go a 100 days yeah well ask your questions and then I'll and then I will speak with my client I'll come back all right 100 days to clean up the site which is horrendous do you want to take five and let them have a conversation well before we do that Mr reer are there any other questions that I can take to my client as well no this is this is it are there any other questions from the board for me this is it thank you Mr Herman any questions any questions Madam chair yes sir um speaking to the um um side yard combine side yard setback that's being requested I think there was some discussion that we were going to reduce building I'll say depth and I'm not really exactly sure you know where we're going with that or what it's going to look like but couldn't again speaking to the combined we have um 30 required 75 combined and we have we make the 30 but we don't have the 75 we have 60 so we're looking for 15 ft um I see a 10- foot um concrete side concrete apron in front of the warehouse building could that be eight that we got that we picked up 2 feet now we're down to 13 and I'm looking at the office building and I see a sidewalk running along the um the I'll say the the entrance driveway or with a four or space 4ft sidewalk what appears to be like close to a 14t area between the curb and the building could that be reduced by say good catch um say call no what know call 10t well that'll get 15 that would be the yes if I could if I could jump in on that U Mr Clean makes a couple of good points I was thinking about that uh earlier as we were discussing um you know that variance request as well he makes good points that uh that you know 10-ft concrete apron could be certainly be reduced to 8T and still function um suitably and the setback back from the curb to the office building uh could also be adjusted by by a couple of feet so we would like to look at look at that together uh with the understanding being that the the um the final sidey setback of the uh Warehouse building for the first 100 ft uh combined with the sidey setback of the office building will add up to the 75 ft we would just request a little latitude to determine which of those Alternatives uh we think works best so whether it's just eliminating the building or it is a slight adjustment of the driveway or you know and or that that concrete a you're eliminating the variant we would agree to to eliminate that variance again we're we're I think we're all agreeing that it's only for the first 100 feet of the uh Warehouse building which aligns with the uh depth of the office building everybody understand yes so maybe would everyone be in agreement that that would be a a possibility yes definitely yes yes yes yes and yes all right as long as as long as we can get whether you do it with the building or you do it with the cement as long as we get the uh compliance then the variance can go away 75 ft uh total combined sidey yard uh and again we're really judging it for the first 100 feet of the warehouse building that aligns with the depth of the office building good Mr CL good job very good Madam chair if we could have five can I have five minutes to speak with my client so I can address break yeah I mean five get me some specifics when it comes down to the remediation so I can yeah thank you sherff we appreciate the uh the additional time you gave us um so I I met with the team we spoke about um the condition of the property and we do acknowledge that there is this property does need some cleaning up um to put it lightly I when I was talking to our client um one of the things he did mention is that the property is least there are two tenants in the property and they've been trying to work with them to remove items unfortunately as many times as we my client tells them to remove it they keep putting put it back so um in I know that there was discussions about a time frame to remove the trucks and um I guess the storage of the furniture the trash being that it's not technically my client's property it's the tenants it's going to take a little bit of time to just his property stop right there lo the property you're in control of the property you are the property owner you the property manager I'm not okay it's your problem all the time 365 247 okay maybe property management is not what your client should be doing for a living so what how dare you come in here and say we can't control a tenant how dare you because you're coming here and how many more tenants are you going to create in this property how many are going to be in that building how many are going to be in this warehouse and you can't control the proper operate now this is not a conversation I'm willing to have or listen to so what I was saying was the 100 days that was brought up because there could be potential legal issues that come up with dealing with the tenant I would propose I would propose M Mr Mr rer Mr I was not saying no I was going to suggest 180 days opposed to 100 days because if there are some issues that come up mon with dealing with s okay I would have given you 30 all right let me let me just address a couple of things first of all commercial landlord Tennesse law all right it's governed by a contract within that contract I I haven't seen the contract on I don't know what it is I don't have right but what I'm saying is that um based upon the contractual obligations and duties between the tenant and the landlord the landlord has certain Equitable remedies that they can bring forth to make sure that their tenant is complying now I know nothing about the situation I know nothing about the I I probably have driven past it specifically items of the property I don't personally know myself but I do know that there are remedies by which a landl lord can enforce the ability to clean up the property now I'm not giving any legal advice I'm not telling the landlord to do whatever he needs to do to resolve his own enforcement issues on the property um all we're saying as a board is that uh we'd like to see the property cleaned up of debris and however by whatever nature the landlord needs to go about doing that um I think he needs to open the dialogue with the tenant um to be able to do it that's it I think that's all that Mr reker is saying uh because we're we're I think it's a necessity at this point based upon what the board is representing is a is the condition of the property um and I believe before it even gets to building department or or zoning officer zoning permit or anything of that nature it's probably has to be rectified the way it is right now I also want to point out that this is not the first time we have mentioned this about this property we said it months ago and not only did it not get better it has gotten worse I was by there yesterday I drove by that property for 15 years and it's gotten nothing but more horrendous it is it is an eyesore I feel sorry for the people who live in the neighborhood it's terrible and it shouldn't be that way there are many people who own property in this Township and they don't keep their property in that condition and our fear as a board is if we allow this particular landlord to take on further tenants is it going to be the same problem so no 180 days is six months no give me half that at least half that three months would be tops and a and a a good landlord would comply no objection fine 90 days is more than sufficient 90 days and and may I also add U Miss chairman uh chairwoman um if this was a residential issue that had to be dealt with with con enforcement you would have had seven days so food for thought there gentlemen 90 days is being very generous on our part the chair the current lease on the property is a lease just on a specific unit or it's on the entire property as a whole I I don't have the details meaning does the property manager control the common areas yes they yeah they control currently today yes so the common areas are is where there is an issue the exterior of the property yes so what does it have to do with the tenant it's you know again the landlord today controls the common areas I don't believe you need permission from a tenant or not to clean up common areas controlled by the landlord I mean it's not their property it's it's the tenant's property so there are questions stop that line of conversation once it's the okay tell me about Fe simple who owns the property tenant or the property owner I don't know I want you to educate me on that because I know who owns my property okay and I happen to be a landlord on another piece of property and I know who owns that property okay you got to stop you got to stop this one you have to understand sir that you're dealing with many people on this board that understand tenant landlord law we're not going to be snowed on this guys I just wanted just want to be it very clear we don't have the contract the contract is not in front of the board I understand the the Equitable nature in which the board is making these uh recommendations and I believe that the tenant or believe that the applicant has already agreed that remediation will take place guess 90 days from the date of the timestamp the resolution all right um but we have to be we can only vote on what's in front of us and if the if the applicant is doing this the applicant is doing it voluntarily by their own nature all right and with their own willingness all right so I think we have to change gears and come back to what's in front of the board which is the application correct any com any discussion on the application as it stands as it is going to be amended it as it is we have resolutions quite a number of them that we've uh applied any advice from our um professionals you're good with what has been agreed to Mr Peters you're good with what has been agreed to yes ma'am if the only uh comment I would like to say is I hope that um the tra the updated traffic report as we you know as requested we'll have the approval of the board traffic engineer just you know just make sure the board traffic engineer can go through it and you know just take a look and make sure that all the information is accurate and up to date to the best of both of the professionals knowledge is that is that something you I'll entertain a motion I'll make a motion please do based on all the changes that the applicants worked with us with with all the requests going back to December all the testimony today all are working together with our professionals and and their just professionalism to move forward with the suggestions we made I make a motion to approve and I Bernstein second it we'll have a vote Please Mr brassie yes Mr Brin yes Mr Herman yes Mr rker chman there's a lot of work that was put into this application on our side your side uh I will tell you I'm disappointed in the last 15 minutes I'm frustrated and I hope to never have this conversation again with any app uh on the merits of the application I'm going to vote Yes okay but I'm reluctant based on that last 15 minutes I see the project for what the project is and it's a beneficial use but I don't like the behavior my vote is yes Mr Maro yes Mr tremer no Mr Walt yes Mr Sullivan cautiously and optimistically I will say yes but I have to agree with my colleague Mr reer that what we heard tonight is concerning and hopefully all the appro apprpriate Watch Dogs in the town will'll keep an eye on the situation but you do have my yesk Dr Campbell yes congratulations thank you madam chair members of Bo apprciate is our attitud make a motion to close no oh I have some things to say first thank you thank you we appreciate your time tonight every all right for the good of the order here tonight I would like to make uh at least one comment and then I'll ask if anyone else has any uh although we are fortunate to have board members with vast and varied experience providing excellent questions to applicants this board relies on our professionals as well as upon Outside Agency Reviews to support and follow up on our decisions we have some great expertise on this particular board however we have certain constraints that we have to be uh cautious about and uh I want just to have board members keep that in mind any other comments for the good of the order here tonight before we close I agree with what you said Madam um but even I think you have to respect when you get these professionals you may not agree with them the traffic people the engineers all the applicants professionals they're also putting their licenses on the line and if they're C actually you know fabricating it lying about it their licenses are the ones at risk not us and the Court's way heavier on there and I think we have to cross-examine them and stuff like we do but there's a lot of professionalism out there and I agree with you thank you uh I'm I'm also handing out the um open public meetings act uh some things that I think might help you understand the things we can and cannot do and now I'll entertain a motion to close motion to close Bernstein all in favor I thank you gentlemen and ladies