good evening everyone please stand for the FL salute uned States ofice shall I read it Orman I can read please read the statement of public notice thank you Mr chairman the little FS Township planning board meeting of Thursday February 1 2024 call to order please take notice that adequate notice of this meeting was provided in accordance with New Jersey statutes annotated 10 colon 4-8 and New Jersey statutes annotated 10 col 4-10 as follows the notice of the meeting was prominently posted on the bulletin board at the municipal building located at 225 Main Street Little Falls New Jersey on January 4 2024 copy of the notice was sent via email to the north Jersey Herald in new on the same date additionally a copy of the notice was filed in the office of the Township Clerk on said dat please note that this meeting is being taped therefore we ask that you speak loud and clear and into the microphones thank you very much please call the roll Vice chairman Barry here Mr carage here Mr Damiano Luke Damiano here miss Cataldo here Mr cber here Mr pous here mayor Damiano is excused my understanding is council president Anthony SCA excuse is excused Dr Ellie Abdi here Mr a uh he is excused Mr Dolan here Mr ariemma chairman here we also report that the board planner Miss San shavan is here the board engineer Mr Michael calars is here our board engineer and I am here Mr brigley adoro as the board thank you may I have a motion for approval of the minutes of January 4th 2024 reorganization meeting and regular meeting so moved second moot by Miss motion by Miss catalo second by Mr Deber Mr Kilpatrick yes Mr Barry yes M catalo yes Mr seber yes Mr poses yes Mr Dolan yes Mr arama yes motion is approved I'm sorry minutes are approved there are no resolutions first application is then real estate LLC they usually put it over here good evening stepen Greenberg for the applicants in real estate can Hardley oh the microphones aren't working you have to speak loudly tonight the microphones are not working okay stepen Greenberg the attorney representing Zen the applicant 75 harisman Street Lot 8 block 28218 and it's loated in industrial Zone the applicant is seeking an addition to the property which generates a number of variances and my first witness will be our engineer um can you okay go ahead go ahead continue let me swear in Mark Walker Mr Walker please raise your right hand you swear from the testimony that you're about to give this you before this sport is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I okay please tell us your name spell your last name and give us your business address uh Mark J Walker w k r 21 Bowling Green Parkway Lal yes okay so I hold a do degree in civil engineering North Eastern University a maing degree in environmental engineering I've been licensed to practice civil engineering in New Jersey for 32 years and I'm a principal D design grp I have not had pleasure of testifying are all your licenses up to date yes I are thank you you are accepted thank you okay I'll St side um counselor I'm sorry our counselor Mr brigley Ador um can you explain for the uh citizens attending uh how this works that we uh hear like the engineer and have questions just for the engineer Etc of course so the process that we will follow tonight is the applicant will put on a witness at the conclusion of the witness's testimony um well the board will have an opportunity to ask questions while the witness is testifying or once he concludes his testimony the board can ask questions of the witnesses once the board is finished we will open it up to the public for members of the public to come up and ask questions of that witness now I'm sure Mr Walker will not be the only witness tonight so you may have questions for others that may follow but it's just a situation where at this point we're just asking you to ask questions of the witness at the end of the night you'll be given an opportunity to make a statement and we will we will swear you in you will be asked your name to give us your address thank you um so tonight we're actually here for bifurcated site plan variance application so if we are in fact improve approved we will have to come back with a full site plan uh we'll have to Reen notice the public and we'll get into more details uh about the plan itself but tonight we're here to seek some variances we have D variance for height and Ste er for building coverage and building setback so just let me just run through the uh the uh property as it exists today so it's block 218 Lot 8 known as 75 Harrison Street uh we're located in an i Zone industrial Zone we have Frontage on Harrison Street actually has an exhibit um which I marked up is your sheet three of in your site plan set and I just highlighted a couple of things marked it as A1 with today State thank you Mr Walker so uh looking at the the property you could see the yellow area designates the perimeter of the property blue designates the existing building footprint if members of the public want to come up so they better you welcome to maybe that can be oriented a little more can see it the board members could see it as well yeah the end of our table may have to get up thank youen here um so actually the existing is highlighted and then darker shav areas Clos then I've highlighted the pavement areas um going through the site Aron Street the RightWay actually dead ends into our to so that's all the frontage we we have we don't have a long road running across the frontage of our property we just have this little Stu that that get into the property and then to the east of our property line is is Willow ab and then east of our property is located in a residential Zone Zone and then the three remaining sides are all developed properties located in the industrial Zone um the uh the property itself is three acres which is 130,000 square foot 687 13,685 square feet which is 3 acres and in the I Zone we're only required to have 20,000 Square ft so we're like six times bigger than what's what's required in the um the entire sit is actually now located in a flood zone as you may know in July the DP passed some new regulations that said that all the flood elevations have to come up 2 feet um so the uh the flood elevation uh is now 142. 75 and actually our building floor elevation is existing that 141.5 ft so we're about 1.25 ft below the actual flood elevation we used to be 75 ft above but since they ra the blood El so you have to go to De for approval we will and that's really one of the main reasons why we've bated this application because this is technically a major storm water project and so we would have to design full storm water basin we have to do net fil calculations have to make kind of a substantial application to the D um so rather than uh spending that money up front we would we much rather prefer coming to the board and and working our way through some of these more critical variances before we do that hard engineering final application with D um so before jump into the proposal the uh the owner was actually approached by the township to see if they were interested in granting an easement for an aqueduct that there's apparently there's a study that's going on I don't know if anyone's familiar with it there's a study that's going on to create an acct that would connect the P pman River with the p River and that would apparently alleviate some flooding in this area and actually the core of engineers is working is currently working on a study uh to see how viable that is so I believe you have uh something that the public can see showing those yellow lines where the aqueduct will go I don't have that with me tonight the aqueduct will be underground I understand yes it's an [Music] underground will it be on your property at all yes it will so it would be it would be east of our property located just east of our building and running North and South can you can you show that architect is put together exh so all right we'll mark that A2 um so I can do briefly show you this is not my exhibit our architect will talk about a little bit more detail that's the building uh just to the east of our building is the closed location of the AC and this is the the peum river over here connecting to the paic river for the north that gives maybe a better visual what's being proposed um so the significance of this that there was original approval gred um and actually if you look at the property it really makes more sense to put an addition on the east side of the building so we can have more loading and and access to uh the the roadway system um on the site um so by granting that evenement that pretty much eliminates that potential to expand the building uh in that area and take advantage of the of the pavement and accessing and out of the site so the the owners agreed to the easement and it's actually forced the addition to if you will the back of the building um which we have shown on our map and that that creates uh about a 90 foot uh distance between the residential property line uh and the proposed building I believe we actually have and so it's it's a little less than 90 ft where the existing building meets and it's a little over 90 feet on the mo southerly most corner on that easterly side um so uh so this addition and looking at our access we have cindell Road and we have a private roadway that allows access to the site and then we also have Harrison Street that allows access to the S um so U if you look at this access running through the property really looks more logical that this would be the front of the building and this would be the rear of the build but because our only Frontage is located on side we designated the back property line uh as a as a rear yard inside where the addition is going as a sidey yard and the significance of that is as a sidey requirement is 20 feet and a rear yard requirement is 10t so we are requesting a variance to be 10 ft from this side property line although it technically here's on the site as though it would be more of a rear yard setback and again we have our planner tonight has some really nice aial photos that show the development pattern in the area so clearly preserving this 90 feet adjacent to the residential property makes a lot of sense plus it allows the easement for the aqueduct which is a CommunityWide benefit um and then seeking with variance have some discussion about that uh as the application progresses um Mr brigley yes sir do they have the authority to just say this is the side yard this is the front yard this is the backyard where' that come from my estimation the area on the left would be the side yard though I'm a little disoriented that is correct that's the way we that we show it on our plan that's why are we seeking a variance well you're seeking a variance for distance you're not seeking a variance for changing the front yard you're not no I think it's for illustrative purposes you're yeah well if I'm looking at our definition and a sidey is any boundary of a lot which is not a front lot line or a rear lot line right um what's a front lot line or what's let's go back to what's a real lot line the boundary of a lot which is most consistent from and is most nearly parallel to the front lot line so in my my opinion I think this I would interpret that this more more as a sidey lot line than a real lot line because when you look at the street that is most parallel uh would be uh although there's a private road that is coming in it's not a public road right um Harrison Street fronts on it but it's almost like landlock the parcel so in my opinion I I would just consider it more a side Lot line so that's why we never made any comment about the lot line you know what their engine what the plans called it as a side L line I'm in agreement it is a side lck light the backyard is a side yard it's not a backyard it's a side lck the the 10 foot set back is in my opinion a side lck light Okay the reason I'm asking these questions and uh we need I I hate to interrupt your presentation it's excellent we have a problem and that there are Autos stored in what we would consider a sidey yard I'm not sure what that becomes have you been to the site yes have you seen any cars yeah what side of the building would you call that so the cars on our site yeah so there this this would be so here's our project right here right that's our only project so techn technically you can correct me if I'm wrong the rear yard would be opposite the front technically you're saying the cars are in the rear yard so this this would be the rear yard in here and this would be the side over here I I respectfully I disagree because first off the front lot line by our ordinance it says that boundary of a lot which is along an existing or dedicated public Street or where no public Street exists is along a public way now it's if I look at you know what I wrote in my review I interpret that as a it's really a landlock parcel but um we have uh we have Harrison Street um a butting it so it's that small 50 foot Frontage I interpret that more as the lot Frontage that's why I was in agreement that that's a side s back and Frank and from a planning point of view that that side yard is adjacent to our public works department um as as well so right I my interpretation but but this is the right away and wouldn't the ordinance State this is the right away right here correct isn't the rear yard opposite the front yard it is so that's what we're calling this this is this is designated as a rear yard this is a side yard this is the side yard this is the front yard I IET agree with you okay we're all saying the same withing a b from here I couldn't see I thought you were talking about the foot set back as right so exactly but you know looking at the configuration of the lot and the way the axis runs through you didn't know you were on a public road or not you would think that this would be the front of the building and this would be the back yes right and and that's how I accept it I'm not really willing to accept your definition and there's a reason for that the reason for that is because the side yard in my opinion is being occupied by somebody who's renting a leer VC and uh they had they're using it to store this side over here no or this side uh keep going to the left oh over here well that's off our no all right can either the owner or someone tell me where these cars are being stored all right we need to swear okay so I'm sorry can you just come up and swear in yeah please raise your right hand you swear from the test testimony you're about to give before this board is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth please tell us your name spell your last name and give us your address Joseph 869 Maple Avenue in glenro New Jersey 07452 and I will be talking in on behalf just spell your last name for the record please s a r i are you an attorney oh no um what's relationship okay we're not ready for the architect yet sorry I will be talking on the of owner okay can you show us where the cars are being stored um as far from the pictures they over here is that your property yeah okay is that visible from the street no of course it is I'm not talking Harrison Street which street I'm talking you access yourct sign you turn you turn left you go down no no he heading towards your building you're heading towards your building yes that's fine but that's your access that's your only access yes okay so where are the cars stored okay that is visible from this private road oh he if I may interrupt absolutely Mr G we received a notice on a violation of these cars is there and the owner did not know about it we've sent I've communicated with the tenant to have them removed and we're dealing with the tenant outside of this is this a longterm tenant no only for two [Music] years I guess we have different definitions of long term almost the year is up huh so there's year here to go are these cars these cars have to move where they going to go we've directed them to move it but they're not moved well we didn't it's only we gave him 30 days to pursuant to the lease we gave him 30 days to cure we're within the 30 days what do you think the settlement will be what do you think they'll do either remove or termin my question is move to the backyard but I'm even sure where the backyard is now the backyard would be behind the building this this was before this year when the issue came out with Theon Street traffic and traffic everything the owner of the property lock this store and gain access to this priv door theway fight with the neighboring properties because they believe that they there was no over here so right now 75 property through this private and nobody else can enter to this private than this all right this is a condition that is unacceptable the cars well we've taken we the the lease did not provide or permit that so it's a use that was not in the lease the tenant has been notified and that if they don't Rectify it the lease will be terminated ah okay that's all we can do from a legal point of view okay um very good thank you uh let's continue with the engineer my apologies um so uh with respect to our proposal the addition that we proposing just the whole project is about putting this addition on the building the proposed addition is 19421 uh Square fet the existing building is 38,7 181 Square ft uh total when completed uh the building will be 57,200 um when when if approved a variance of 43.9% uh would be required um so there also as mentioned um the uh Building height we have documented as uh proposed to be 40 feet high uh where 30 feet is allowed um and we've also requested setback variant to side of the building I guess I'm sorry so can you put your laser light back on yeah right here this is supposed to be 20 ft because technically the side way the definition of the ordinance reads we're proposing 10 ft from that property what's behind that we're we're going to have our planner discussing he's got some really nice exhibits that show what's going on in this in this area okay how about the parking are you addressing that at all um doing handle that during the site plan section if you want to talk about it tonight we can handle that tonight as well it can wait okay but yeah basically we're showing that we need 25 parking spaces and we have 25 Poes I was more interested in the uh setback set of variance right what would that be is that now a site yard side yard or minimal distance to residential no I know that but for the parking yeah so it's can you point out where that is that is that's the existing pavement to I think that actually backs up into the baseball field Recreation rec center right Rec Center is not an r1b Zone or are you considering property to the north actually we're showing it as an r1b Zone based on our Recreation Center we're showing it as r1b I believe it's r1b it has been changed I don't think so okay I believe in our M new master plan that that will be change but you're not backing up into property you're backing up into the rec Cent that's correct we're not expanding the pavement in that area the existing so that that is all the testimony I had for this evening glad to take any other questions you might have our architect and our planner be providing additional okay we're going to open up for questions for each uh uh speaker um as they finish okay there any questions of the board or the engineer I had a quick question with the um max Building height of the 40 feet varies that you're looking for is that for the full building or is that just for the uh the uh the existing building is 22 feet the proposed addition will be 40 feet just for the addition yes and and the way the building just for the addition right so the existing the way the building Heights measured is average grade to roof height and there'll be some discussion about that uh from our architect so the the floor elevation is approximately three feet above the grade that that surrounds the so that that's factored into the existing building is going to remain at the 22 feet that's correct so only the Shaded area will be 40 feet that's correct any other questions to the board I have a question for our engineer it seems to be a contradiction of the engineer report which I interpreted to be 40 ft high for the whole building that was what we were just discussing I felt part of the application was to raise the existing building 40t as well so do you want to withdraw retract I mistaken that the existing building will be raised to match the proposed addition do you have any idea what the purpose of that is I do not who can I ask you'll get plenty of witnesses to talk about very good thank you um any other questions the board before I open up the meeting to the public could you go into a little detail about the flood mitigation uh solutions that you're want to propose sure D yep uh so with respect to the D we're subject to N Fill calculations so once the project is constructed uh we have to provide the same amount of flood storage on our property as prior to construction so those uh details calculations will will definitely involve b space uh under the addition and removal of material uh with vents that would allow flood waters to e and flow underneath the the crw space so that's the primary manner of of mitigating um any bill from the building within the blood Hazard have you read the engineers reports I did not get an engineer report we plan we did get a vors came to tonight um all right I have to admit I have never had that before do you want to take time to review the engineer report and R the planers report do we have extra copies or should I give them mine you can take one you're welcome and that's the engineer report do we have a copy of uh planers report report all right I'll give them my copy of the planners report we'll need that have and at this time may I have a motion for recess so that uh they can review those documents may I have a motion so moved second all in favor I I oppos we are in recess can't put a Time on it because I'm not sure yeah yeah I don't know violation on it violation no AR no but even the addition should show next to [Music] the there's like 50 of them here yeah they are I have done it but now I'm like oh yeah it's so concentrating on that that's she gave you you taken it on um doesn't have my notes yeah original this is the plan Eng down this that's we're should we clarify that move along can do that let's get us back on track Rich say still open up to the public for the engineering he told that's was let's see what they have to say go there very good thank you are we ready yes now call the meeting back to order thank you very much everyone for your patience um the engineer has now read the engineer's report any comments uh yes um so there's two comments on the engineers report one is a modification to our key map which we will make uh the second is a discrepancy on the architectural plans which can be made well just a uh a typ a typo area era in the uh in the building s so what's correct which one's correct 38,7 point is correct thanks um we also received the planners report which we'll have our planner discuss yeah back can we go back to the engineers go ahead finish sure well I was goingon to move on to a report so go ahead do you have any other what report are you moving on to the fire department okay yes before that the Building height we don't have an actual me presently 20 22 ft 202 feet I believe is what we have on our plant measured by the architect oh very good than you that answer that question um the uh Fire official presented a report dated January 25th he has four items in there um as I mentioned we're going to be coming back with the site plan and we can address those comments but there is one comment in there that I think the board and probably the neighbors uh want to hear about and that's a restriction restricted access to Harris Harrison app the Fire official wants us to put a gate up and have that as emergency access only um the property owner has no objections to that which will uh eliminate it traffic coming off in a so um I thought that was significant uh for that particular report um and then we also have a report for an email from a traffic safety officer um which he doesn't seem to have a immediate concern about the traffic but there's been some complaints from residents on sindel a uh so he suggested that uh there' be a little bit more of a traffic study done which we can do U at the site plan phase of the application very good right thank you any questions the board any comments from the engineer I actually have a question no go ahead um as far as the police report and you're saying it's not an immediate concern if there's already issues going on and you're looking to add in all these loading docks and additional parking and essentially all this extra square footage how do you not present that being coming any more as a problem since is a problem I'm just reading his report what he says in his report I do not believe in immediate concern with so you're not commenting on the report you're just reading it yes any further questions to the board does I do chairman um the applicant is agreed that Harrison Avenue would be closed down but there's three other issues that the Fire official brought up one is that a fire um Department connection should be provided and then a new fire hydrant does the applicant agree to that as well yes we have no problem doing that and we'll show that on the site Ty plan when we come back thank you all right the meeting has been open to the public any questions members of the public of the engineer please approach might want to set that aside as pleas swear sir please raise your right hand you swear or affirm the testimony that you're about to get before this board is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please tell us your name SP your last name and give us your address Kenneth theer d r c yor so Mr D roer you heard the comments earlier at this point we're just looking for questions of yeah and then you'll be given an opportunity later on to speak this is just for excellent thanks rece yep um with right now trucks back up two or three de down the access road waiting to get a space there is there any accommodations being made on the site for those trucks to not have to sit there and idle outside my bedro window 12 hours of the day and um I'm sure we can accommodate that I think you know we have we only have three loading docks closed in the back we have room to stack stack other trucks in the back area over here I think it's probably more thing and managing the site proper way okay and the second with engineering um it's if the building is going be 4 against the to what accommodations for fire have been there to be able being I'm so close to the property I'm right here so I'm you know this catches and that catches my you know my Tre catching my up so I just want you know make sure fire department be able to get back there back access for them to get for my understanding is the building going be sprinkler yes so the building the building is going to be sprinkled in in this area here so they would have to access from either they had to gain access to around the property they would access from the parking lot on the sides or neighboring properties which are as you'll see in Ro okay thank you anyone else from the public okay let's continue I'll have the applicants representative continue uh he he was but I I think um we swore him in and then he immediately ran to the map so I think you need to qualify I know he said he's an architect but maybe just get his credentials on the record for now he's just okay things be okay so at this point he's not testifying as an architect corre okay so can you explain the proposed business the architect I mean that the applicant having site um the the current owner is doing business since 2017 and it's a paper product and sanitation Product Company such as wipes and alcohol swaps and toilet paper whatever Pap product you can and it's a public uh use product uh since 2020 uh the owner Le applied to purchase this property at 75 harison street but because of the pandemic and because of some legal issues that the with the previous owner there has been has been a delayed closing and the initial uh purchase uh was for for using this property for selling warehousing paper fors um and uh immediately after finding this property there some issues with the traffic and we took care of those immediately we responded uh very fast and uh we opened the gate at the private roadway access basically our only access when during this purchase agreement was from har Street uh but uh with the survey that we received we understood that there's a private roadway over that which was locked for years and this property has been vacant for like 15 years almost uh we had to open those Gates and we provided access to the property from that private project and uh because of the issue with the purchase agreement um uh the closing took some time and it happened in December 19 2022 and uh before we purchased this property uh we knew that there was an approval for an expansion and during this contract period we understood that there is a cber project that was that was ongoing by arm of Engineers um and in fact Mr de Mario informed us about that so we made our research um we realized that we cannot give a expansion but we still needed our expansion for this property to use for our table products storage and uh what we came up with was uh with this plan by limiting the harison speed access and eting the private Broadway as our main uh track access point and because we are selling paper products they are very lightweight products and it can be stored upright um the most feasible efficient way is to stack them up and uh we would like to raise our building height for that reason uh I know it's slightly higher than what's allowed but um the average because of the flood zone our building is already 3 and A2 ft High than the grade over there and when we are calculating the building height we calculate from the grade all the way to the uh although the usual space is only 16 ft inside we have 22 ft right now is for the ordinances um so what we are proposing is uh to use it in a feasible way for our pay product res uh we would like to raise it 40 ft for then we can have around 30 ft clearance underneath and with this buiness you will have less traffic uh truck traffic so we would like to keep only five loading TRS which are existing um the previous application had eight loading dos and it was expanding towards the residential side we totally eliminated that and uh this show uh how we are exp with the ongoing project the yellow line shows where the C work is going to be it's around 48 ft wide I think but each mon is going to be wider than that around like as far as I remember uh so one side of our L is completely unus uh so for to use this space feasible in a feasible way we would like to extend it to the side uh which is industrial side which is by and [Music] that's that's pretty much it and during the pandemic also for us to bu this property we purchased 47 Avenue also because that was the only way to open up that private roadway um because we were not able to use har Street at that point you know it was just a solution for our operations and I'm sure you you are aware of some history of the property and the and the B that you were using it for a short period of time still we get this approval uh we have a temporary tenance which the chairman respectfully reminded about the issue and I know that we took care of our lesson and problem will be resol for prob many employees it's just for be housing so the United stes around what are the hours of operation uh 8 to six but I don't think it will be later than four let's say but we would like to keep six the trucks queue up before and after that uh we solve that problem by scheduling the TR uh so there there are no night Shields night Shi the gate is always open is yes where do the employees Park um we are our friends and we don't have many employees so when you come back for the site plan you're going to show us the 10 ft tall archite will we will provide Landscaping offers within the residential area the residential area may happen after because construction we would like to prop bu around here and uh about blocking the view to what is now the side yard M um the property from the houses to the north black the view from houses yeah and and all the way down will Willow yeah Avenue is this one so we would like to provide the buffering from this corner should you keep going down no oh okay my goal or my thought process is that you're going to have 40 feet that's so it's really uh it's not going to be very nice to look at if I live in one of those houses without screening oh we don't have to resolve that tonight but something that we're going to Happ ni p over here sorry 40 ft 40t wide landscape is quite right I don't know no height oh the height of the building okay uh so you are asking if we are going to provide like gr vitation over there have you done any thought process into it have you put any go processing so how you might block the V uh we can provide fences uh well fences are fine but you can see through them okay continue the only thought that we came up with was the landscape of with a short P like 6t to 8 ft P but uh if you are asking about the tall plants like the conrete plants no I'm asking about plantings plantings yeah we will have a [Music] nice okay thank you any questions the bo are you are you yeah any questions question the uh you said that where the parking spaces would be that if we do end up granting these these variances you would come back for additional variances because the parking spaces where you propose them would be too close to the like his front yard that it you need I think it's 25 feet they'd be 11 and a half feet so you have to come back for additional variances at that point U no we are not antipa no the parking spaces would be in a spot that you do not need variances yeah oh so you do you would come back for additional varant that's not on tonight not on the planners report here that says we require minimum front yard setback Building height and building coverage are the only things that are on the list for tonight so I don't see that um you know it's bipa and typically parking spaces are things complated with the site plan is why I didn't talk about it and really my main con concerned was addressing the D6 variance okay so it is on for tonight as well yes we have a variance for paring setback variant okay is is it possible then to address the screening from Dua field the re set up should that take place now or when they come back to the site PL I mean if we're going to do a variance and we should know that the blocking the view from the field I think that would be information that would assist the board in making the determination whether or not the grant the valance yes don't have that um that's [Music] VAR your variance is for parking up against the recone the field correct that area we was like fence and we was like Greener vegetation we don't want to we don't if I'm sitting in the stands at du field I want to cut down on The View I have of this building uh yeah as far as I remember that there's a to chaining over there that was built by the sport field contractor so on our s we don't need additional fenses I believe we will provide we you may not need we are making it a condition for approval fencing or landscape both so it might be flexible on the fencing if you think through field is enough I haven't got into that in fing see here see the issue is now we're really getting into a site plan issue and the board has nothing before it and but we're being asked to well do a prove a variance without KN maybe the applicant based on this conversation maybe the applicant is willing to defer that variance to when they come back to the cite I think that's a wonderful idea Mr attorney does everybody understand what we're doing yes there's not enough information there's not enough information we're granting the variant based on May and what if correct thank you coun suggest handle that I can't hear you we would defer like Council suggested and handle that variance with the Cy okay in the appropriate fencing or Landscaping that may be any any further this witness I'm sorry not with this witness it's not your fault our microphones aren't working we just have to speak loud tonight my wife any questions just a question he's representing the client right now not as an architect yes so I can't ask him any questions about no okay what a question I'm sorry you did indicate that this is a paper business and you're into paper business and that's what you asking because you want to Stack up the the papers um so the tenant that it's there right now is that their business and after they move out somebody else is going to continue the same business or is it going to change no the the property is granted only for short period of time but two years and one year is already test and once we get this approved we were not expecting this through this to take this long fure I mean we started purchasing this property 2020 we started storing the paper over there but things didn't go well so we couldn't build the expansion and there was good work and there was pmic uh so we had to move our machines to another storage facility and for just two years so that it's not vacant relas it to another another company and what is their business what are they doing in there um it's they sell uh cars to and there's a temporary storage isue as far as I understood don't sh and took of already will not see thank does the tenant have the opportunity to extend his lease um just years so he can have another two years after this year yes or no uh no it will not be extended opportunity so he doesn't have the opportunity to once we get we get this approved we will move in we will the exion any other questions of the board before I open the meeting the tenant has no relation to the app no I agree just was curious if he had the opportunity to extend his no option okay that's what I was asking may I have a motion to open up the meeting to the public to ask questions of the architect make a motion public second second all those in favor I all those opposed meeting is open to the public anyone wishing to address the board please approach the podium you swear affirm the testimony you're about to get before this board is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir please tell us your name by your last name and give us your address uh Drew julan I currently live at 12 sopia Street in Bloomingdale New Jersey I'm here on behalf of my mother Shirley julan at 65 Haron Street and due to poor health you could be here tonight hopefully the board will let me speak in her beh absolutely thanks sir I'm sorry just spell your last name j h l i n first name again sir okay thank you sir did you say 685 65 very good thank you so I've got a couple of questions try keep chronological order as we as we were going um so during the construction if it's approved will business stay open of course that's why we have an extension Plus raising of the existing building we will build the extension first then okay up to 42t 40t so additional 18 oh yeah is inside the structure would there be a second Flor or my understanding it's just increase space for storage incre space for storage okay um I had some questions about drainage in in the flood plan but clearly uh whatever the US Board of Engineers is up to is uh beyond my capacity so I'll I'll wait and see what that looks like but my understanding is that would be completely under correct yes not exposed around I couldn't H the Gres completely but I'm assuming it's between 2 to 5T below this but I don't know how it's going to be yeah and I would imagine it go underneath the ball fields a Avenue me Cutters wall and dump into Shake River yeah I would assume that this is the lowest point for will be around yes currently water does rest in the the right side of your of your map where there is Advantage uh okay um what what is the the building zone for currently what type of Industry industry and is that a broad statement in in any industry can go in there no but warehousing is definitely an accepted use okay are there unaccepted uses yes well there arees everything else is done ex I'm sorry um son do you have that in your report in the report yeah pered uses yes can can you just tell him what the accepted uses are yeah uh warehousing is an accepted use um hold on a second so warehouses are an accepted use um as long as the matter stor therein shall not give uh rise to noxious orders or not it otherwise elates to help safety and Welfare of the occupant of okay thank you okay um so I'm curious to know the the the whether it's Landscaping Hardscape what that would look like between the the property and my mother's house because if you're going up to 40 ft You Can't Hide fire unless you put a 45t wall you're going to look up you're going to see the building what type of property materials that it [Music] notely possible as far as I remember your property is one story right okay I mean we can uh we can Tre that minimum but no Hardscape footings type material walls I suest um okay I I want to go back if I may to to Harrison Street if I could uh I grew up in that house I remember one of was a beta Industries uh I I played in you know that yard and I remember that trucks could never enter a beta through Harrison Street and I I I would imagine that was a zoning issue or what have you trucks would always enter uh where you're currently using now down down the we call the A and uh that's my understanding of how it's being done today my question is did anything change to allow trucks to enter through harison Street and through that neighborhood again I've been out a little false for a little while so I'm not sure that type of decision would be made by the council was it yes yeah so I am unaware I mean obviously it's allowed but I think that would be by the council not here I believe now off of Patterson Avenue there's a there's a sign that says no no trucks are allowed not not trucker so maybe we can follow up on on that one here confirm that that has not changed Ju Just maybe to help you because I don't believe you have this portion of the report the fire department is requesting that that that entrance be blockaded the electric vence that can only be open by emergency services for the fire department key card type entries something like that it's an electronic key card to allow them to access to that and that's the only allowable use at a fin yeah yeah no I want I want to know thank that the tennis doing that because you know early on you had 18 wheelers idling at all all times of the night and you know obviously causing obvious obvious issues and that doesn't happen anymore so appreciate they do sorry I don't live in town but just talk we can't have we can't have conversations going back and forths it's got better Julian right no you're addressing the the applicants witness or the board members of the public you'll be given a chance right okay thank you okay um yeah those are my questions thank you for time thank you any anyone else wishing to make a comment ask questions no one coming forward close meeting the public no sorry um you know the of operation they said only there like there to the night they're dropping Big R something in those trailers that are boom I walk down there in the night I hear so is that something that's happening now that's it's so it's going to be juster again the we know CL it's that's they're going back to that through the night is crazy in the back of ID if you talk your dri or whatever much appreciated because like folks said when on Haron doing it there now they're doing it on on the access they sit there all day and they just sit there back spot was 15 minutes uh any other questions the board for the architect anyone else from the public both meeting to the public you can continue now planner Alex I'd like to ask uh well put Square the planner in then I have a question for you and for him please raise your right hand you swear from the testimony you're about to get before this boort it's going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do please tell us your name spare last name and give us your business address Alex same is do gy on behun Associates at 101 Avenue sweet 1A license license are good and parent PP as well as na certified ASP my education at a rer glin with the Masters in City Regional planning a concentration development Redevelopment study certification and public policy I testify as capacity weekly daily basis I believe I I you and therefore you are accepted oh I'm sorry no well no my my question before he begins is I have have I have front yard setbacks side yard setbacks rear yard setbacks are they based on what based on what what is the front of the building we have now decided that the rear is the side no I we we got that decided so the front of the building is um Harrison Street is the frontier okay so is that what your Bas variances are based on and is that what your variances are based on I'm sorry are your variance based on the front yard facing Harrison Street that is correct and that's as for our ordinance that's what that is as for our ordinance thank you very good so you're familiar Sir with the application testimony the board use of the property certainly um we have our divit packet blown up for us we also print it out a few packets if you want to them out personally maybe the public board I do have 11 by 17 on a smaller scale for the exhibit packet you prepared tonight oh okay that's Mo yes yes this is Harrison streets yeah this is side side rear right and the issue the Reas went that far is because can't have this becomes ins side that with Tire yes just hold just hold on one second Mr Greenberg so why don't we mark this A3 and then Mr doggery can tell us what each there are three plan sheets and he can tell us what each sheet represents I think so C is Dr the property question yellow here for Illustrated purposes we' demonstrated where the proposed addition is to be located um for Clarity on sheet one I think this is kind of what the was alluding to for purposes this patch of grass would be our front yard which would essentially be the residential rear yard so it is a little unorthodox per se but by or that is the front yard the her for um but for orientation purposes of the building when you're on site giving that the Harrison Street would be uh T not not an anymore I think the confusion was we kind of see this where rub road on the ground that this would be essentially Orient the site but by definition of the um the residential rear yards so it is kind of kind of confusing but when we step back is pered for 10 though this is our slard we are asking for p so that that was kind of but for the purposes of this U area here yellow demonstrates to the extent the addition put to the next slide of out a little bit further behind us is theity where the ening again this area is also Zone industrial there is industrial uses happening back here um though a lot of the question happening tonight discussion do directly relate to the site plan I have a good authority from our team that this entire area will be Pally screened with the biggest year round everen you know as well as along the ball field as well so this entire area will be screen with the biggest PS approv by the board when that day comes in front of you if if this is approved um for commentation purpose is that 10 yard uh side yard speaking with the applicant and team you know there is also consideration can screen that as well for the additional residents further down but for purposes of this this is our Public Works facility that um this would be encroaching we'll go into the testimony regarding the height variance we need and the purposes of that height and control from a planning standpoint the next slide slide three around a little bit further down kind of see ex right is industrial um we as we heard agree with the fire Mar agree with the res we feel um given the activity down below more industrial um there is no need for Access or comparison for the applicant he also owns the other adjacent property where he reactivated that private road to access this site we believe it is appropriate that doent the site come off the Syle and not Harrison madis and Jackson come in that direction and if the zone is industrial and the need for other facilities to are are rear um you know this is the appropriate this is the establish route for and whether they're flat beds dump drops that kind of you know veh that's a common feature accessing the site but nonetheless um this is our drowning condition we do have the ball field there we do have um existing condition there today where we have pretty much back up about 11 ft off that V sign we are going to ask for a VAR here tonight so heing some concern depending on site plan and orientation you know the VAR May or day not disappear I don't believe it will but we're asking for that parking Rel related to that ball field we are going to switch that out um and you'll see this during the S this is approved where that would not be freay parking that would be the employe parking so from planing standpoint I think we you know bring this down from standpoint and again we'll Shield that vation as well but we are going to ask for a parking gu and like to speaking that paring it's in Disney condition today we're trying to improve that but the way site is now they're parking right there um so um I think we have an opportunity to hear from um this SL plan organization to kind of C some issues and reorganize it but the big the big variance over here for tonight is that VAR we heard great testimony from the engineer commun is fully aware that we have a fun issue we just off screen here is the river a littleit of it one of those situations where we find uses in the most unlikely situations for today next to River next to train yard that's the way commun kind of develop going forward we have strier access we have heard the product here paper they want the paper off the grounding product you know the height typical in industrial for whatever the reason is they they want the buildings high for stacking purposes um I think when you look at this site I do find it kind of that there isn't an INF coverage ordinance or minimum there is a building minimum um in this particular case I think it serves the community as well as the overall um you know product and the use of the property to to allow for a little bit greater height and we will screen that to the greatest extent possible um but for low building doesn't really work um given you build coverage ordinance that we are slightly over um maybe would be asking more relief ask to the height given that there flooding concerns as well and the propose of H and his drainage from the arm engineer you know we like to bring this in go up bring the product off the ground and it's really for operational efficiencies um when I look at this height and height controls and why we have you know height for adequate light a open space you know not compete on that given that our side setback um is is 10 given the existing property here as it is the fact that whole area I don't see that added height of 18 ft um with the additional 10 requirement would impos on any other purp of Theo case which talk without adequate light a space and public the general welfare um I don't see that impeding on those conditions on an industrial site now this was residential this I would certainly have some conern planning standpoint and giving our technical front yard is where the C is going to be we separation we'll have that high screen of vation there I do not believe it's going to C any shadow effects and you know on any visual landmarks or site there just instu behind there when I look at this application from that side set back I think the relief we're asking for um you know the benefits of that Rel that side the benefits of that certainly out that we have an opportunity to reorganize this site clean it up and and promote a business you know that that serve the boats well um understand this this product paper product they do more than papers anial you know swabs and you know it's it's paper product but you know it's a much needed industry um the industrial zones are slowly disappearing somebody wants in their backyard uh given the unique Restraint of this property it is still viable property fromal standpoint we have an opportunity as well to you know bring in one tenant that's going to utilize this building and you know we've heard sapping is somewhere between 10 and 12 we have um know St and delivery we have our you know our marching orders as far as what the neighbor concerns are and I think we have a s will have a better idea of how that site will function and flow under the guidance right so we do have those those relief here um the relief you can look at the parking relief here as a C1 or C2 C1 being a preexisting uh condition the parking that we're seeking here would be 11.3 feet versus the require 25 let me just stop it here um I thought we agreed Council represented that they were going to defer that to the site plan right so we're not even proceeding with that tonight I I would like to put it out there because I believe that's what they're going to be putting on site plan if this is approved that the parking Varian is that here but we're not approving that tonight we don't okay right well we won't we're g to defer that okay we'll defer the parking Bara that the building coverage the building coverage we're at 43.9% 40 is allow so it's a slight uptick I think we have justification given the flood plane and given the uh um the overall site itself and the constraints on that site um you know we try to go up we don't really want to go too much wider than we need to but with the addition there is a slight uptick on uh 3.9% over what's allowed um as a planner I look at this the zone does not have an impious coverage minimum or maximum I'm sorry maximum um I I do think on a balancing scale um given that the additional 3.9% would not be a detriment uh and erode at the intent of the Zone given the lack of language for the lot coverage when I look at the height I just discussed we're at 40 the maximum height is 30 I know there's been some conversations about where you take the measurement from in the topography and the grade elevation uh we are asking for height um we do believe if approved on a site plan that we can um mitigate any visual impact from those residents um with appropriate screening that height is needed for product and overall conditions affiliated with the site we do not uh violate the the braso test for adequate light a open space and the general welfare of the community giving our Set Side guard setback fact that we're seeking uh 10 versus the allowable 20 is adjacent to the public works again another industrial site in industrial Zone um with that being said um when I look at the positives The Proposal will allow an existing established business to improve his operations at the site the height will provide with a proper clear stand um to a contemporary industrial building better operational efficiencies this allows the business to better serve its customers bring their product off the floor in a flood zone due to the flood zone yeah height is better zoning alternative than having a low uh fly building despite the setback and buffer variance proposed condition um is again AB budding the uh industrial this is better organization we don't want to extend that sidey guard set back into the rear encroach where the uh vul would be CL position in that direction um when I look at the overall U positives here I think we Advanced purposes of M land use law purpose a to promote the general welfare purpose G provide for Varity uses in appropriate locations purpose M efficient use of land and purpose ey desirable visual environment I think we're going to have an opportunity here to clean up this site add some Greenery give it a fresh look uh when I look at the negative criteria I do not believe this's going to be a substantial detriment to the public or the Zone with this proposed plan as we've heard we're going to reorganize the site clean it up and put some better constraints on these trucks and the direction they're going when I look at this um we will not have those trucks accessing that residential street when I when we look at the the sets again we're buting another industrial use an industrial Zone uh during the site plans we hope to provide a better undertone for purpose eye for improv Aesthetics with that Greenery um overall I think we are eliminating um some uh non-conforming conditions versus the uh the zone conformance for the uh we have some zone conformance for the the front yard being 90 where the Zone allows to be 25 we have a rear yard where 10 is allowed and and we're at that um when we look at the um overall combined yard combined side yard setback um we're at 133.25 um so when I look at this overall application um I do think we have an opportunity here uh from the minimum reard setback um the existing condition is 8.2 that new exist condition would be uh 10 so we we are eliminating that um variance as well as outline in the plannner report in their chart so we are bringing a non-conformity uh into conformance and I think three elief is Justified I think the bo look favly upon this application and look forward to the next phase of site plan where we can get into the weeds of things as far as site orientation parking the screening and so forth but the VAR we're seeking I think uh uh have been Justified and approval would be warranted for that reason um okay any questions to the board I have actually two things yes um being that this was submitted as an exhibit can we just correct the address we're not in Patterson certainly I do apologize um and also you're saying you're going to clean up this area but this photo was just taken yesterday and there's a considerable amount of debris around the building now so why is this happening now and then if we're going to expose if we're going to approve the proposed addition to move it out where is that trash GNA I mean it's it's there and that's sizable so I think when we look at this you know at the end of the day gu the trash in the back certainly there wouldn't be that yard there being enclosed um we exp with vegetation but the overall condition of the site as the uh operations uh testify to we have a trouble tenant um that we are trying to resolve but I think overall the intent here is to clean the site off is this not the warehouse that's being used for paper now yes okay so that's a different tenant now that's no that is kind of all over the back from is the warehouse being used for paper now or is that being in the building for my understanding there was a couple different um warehousing I don't think it's being used for paper now that's what I'm asking I think it's a couple different things happening there um the intent is to move in build to a spec that would suit a paper use get rid of a troubl tenant and the other trouble tenant with the auto automobiles um so hopefully this stuff will not manifest going forward yeah I'm just concerned that the condition it is now and you're saying to clean it up why not clean it up now and then you're actually showing us that it's here now yeah sometimes the aerial drone shots you know okay the have you finish the area all this CH is building at 20 feet 22 feet not at 40 feet right we did not yeah that's existing height yeah we show the proposed addition one of the things we're interested in as far as positive criteria is to provide light air open space as you mentioned promote a desirable visual environment do you honestly think we're doing it I think when we looked at the light air open space from a planning standpoint we definitely don't want to say hire apartment complex on a lowline residential the setback with relation to the height behind us is an open public works and other industrial facility um when we look at the residential um over by Harrison uh we adequate distance uh to provide adequate screening to where that additional height would not be an issue by open air um and uh you know casting shadow effects from a desirable visual environment I think when we screen this you know um we can certainly say it will it would be more desirable than the conditions that exist if we're if if you look at page 10 of our planners report which is a picture from Willow yes looking at the building at 20 feet 22 ft do you see that yes okay so you're going to double the height of that shy of 2 feet how do you think you can how do you think that is a positive for the I think when we look at the purpose of doubling the height from an industrial standpoint contained in a flood plane a flood zone and in the conditions there to the warehouse trying to bring Products off the ground to have that additional height um this right here we do have a good distance um know we've had a remember the resident talking about the height certain vegetations can grow I am not a landscape architect if need be I I do I recommend that we bring one in but the intent here is to screen this with year round screening so of vegetation that would be higher so that we would not see this build I just don't see this as a positive impact for the neighborhood visually which is your citing as positive I think the building itself is a better visual impact than the public works or just general outside storage in that regards that that's true but from Willow they're not seeing the DPW site they're seeing you're building they C on this isow is okay from the picture I'm looking at on page 10 those houses and there's at least two of them are not seeing the DP they are seeing will be seeing a 4 build any other questions of the board think just um let me ask our planner considering negative effects you think that criteria has been uh met I actually wanted more clarification um so are you saying that you know that this uh building there is U the height restriction is it creating a new hardship is that what you're trying to say I I think when we look at it um it it would be but 30 feet is still higher than what's there today um from an industrial standpoint um you know there is some kind of uh block if you will because you have a building coverage or so couldn't go left or right um so we're asking to go up but the building is pretty not complying with cover yeah we're 3.9% over um I did express my concerns um you know with the team um as far as that 3.9 I think it's to you know square off the building that that additional space um but the height itself we can't goild left the right because we'll be over more on this building coverage we be you know asking for more and again the height I 10 over what the required uh permitted Zone would be and um dur If This Were to be approved the site plan phase you would see a a landscape land that would Shield we would even see the Zone already allows that you mentioned about uh the um the a not having an inferious cover standard 300% but your uh building will be in actually what's a green space yes right it's not in purpose and be on that so uh are you saying that the plan when we have the side plan there'll be some mitigation that added in for this so I think um part of the reason we bated this was because you know the engineering that would be involved with the site extremely intensive so we were looking um to go for bated application if were we approve the site plan would have a great field of engineering involved U and and concerns I even made a comment toward engineer that given the size of the building you know and when you say that you need that height you know because as you know uh it's either undue hardship or why uh this is a better alternative right so I think you're going the undue hardship route if I if I hear you correct I would prefer to go the undue hardship given this the blood plane um in the flood zone uh but the undue hardship for me I think when I look at this is is um we can't extand left or right so we have to go up um so you have that kind of lock in there um I think you know going up allows us to put in that vegetation um going up allows us to keep a building there versus in outside storage but I certainly boast to the undue hardship with the new flood regulations this is a paper facility get paper off the ground and play water that's the product um but I I do think when we look at the intent of the uh the perp of the pipe and pip control the building itself think will be a better visual environment than the public works the Z I don't know if you can answer this question the Zone allows for 30 feet right is it possible to operate with 30 feet so I think that's what your is getting at the undue hardship because with the the new elevations and and the flug the FL the elevation is 2 feet right the elevation but the product itself they would like to bring that out there are concerns about the regulations are the regulations are they getting water now have they ever gotten water up where the loading do I I don't have person that can you ask your CL have you got water up to the Loading Bo did ited that level did you exceed by a couple inches by a foot did you flood no okay so my question is why do we need 40 will we can do 30 yeah can I [Music] go I can't hear he wants to uh speak on why they need 40 instead of 30 that okay sure now the property is around like 136 ft right now uh the ground around the building and the property is at 139t which is like 3 and2 ft 3965 uh so we are already 3 3 and a half fit higher than the average grade around plus uh and our height the existing current Building height is 22 ft from the average grade below so we only have around 16 ft usable space under the structure existing 16 ft ex existing and 22t existing our height is 22 fet but our usable space usable height inside the building is around 16 16 1 16 60 16 uh so we would like to raise this height because U 16 ft is definitely not enough for paper storage so when we increase it to 30 f uh we will have around um uh 24 ft of height which is also very low for paper storage that's why we would like to raise this to 40 plus you may have to build the new floor elevation 2 and A2 ft higher than the current floor elevation which reduces our storage capacity of drastically even if we do 4ing so if you can get a clear 20 ft height from from floor to under the structure that would be the ideal situation for us what will that be when we do at 40 uh we will have 30 F clear in [Music] structure questions I have question are you testifying as an architect or just no just only um the this the paper business that you that you operate um that was the intended purpose when you purchased the phone um why did you bu purchase fild that was 23 that could support because there was an already extension plan approved in 2005 with a higher and bigger capacity and what was the height of that approval uh that was high than 22t but I don't remember it wasn't for it wasn't 40 it wasn't 40 the prev but it had to be above 30 because otherwise you wouldn't need a variance right yes I you wouldn't 40 would be ideal for us no what was the prior approval you don't know the height it my question is because if it was under 30 feet that's already allowed so you wouldn't have had to get a variance um I don't have that information I'm looking at the resolution from 2005 and that was submitted to us I don't believe there a high read I don't think it was Ty VAR they picked it up to near a little over 47% building coverage because they didn't go for the height they went for the wraparound which would now be where the qu was they got building coverage instead of building but it's not the height so now we're coming and asking for the height okay comments or questions of the board members may I have a motion to open up the meeting to the public so move second all those in favor all those opposed meeting is open to the public anyone wishing to address the board the ask questions of a planner please come forward s back no you don't okay ju just one question is the current property technically in but Zone it is okay no I'm fully aware of it in fact mom's property is in the backyard she's not legally in yes please raise your right hand swear from the testimony you're about to give before this board is going to be the truth the whole truth or nothing but the truth yeah please tell us your name spell your last name and give us your address 51 Harr so I can say that the the trucks are still an issue com down can you step forward like to the Podi thank you no problem the trucks are still an issue for us coming down Harrison Street with this proposal plan are we going to do something about maybe an address change so that the trucks are actually going the proper way are you saying they mistakenly go down Harrison Street yeah yeah and like the v's truckers have showed up the V and they don't have like any direction of to come around the SLE way so when they're putting in the address 75 haris and streets GPS takes them down parison and then we get the traffic back up of them attempting to back up their crossing Jackson which I've seen many times people hitting them and that to me is one of my issues with the proposed plan I'm fully against the reasoning of the proof I think if it's open up to the whole Township and many other people here I'm a parent of young kids I used the re all the time of running Sports and I think the town did a wonderful job with that and I think now we're going to have this massive ey sore that I feel like going to be living in like house and we believe the issue of the address is a US Postal System issue which TR as we might we don't think they'll listen to us you're concerned was very good perhaps the uh owners can somehow convey the the come down C Avenue delivery trucks is that possible or the to Google for address show but I don't know what else we can do I don't know about well this was a unforeseen problem thank you second question about that is if you own the building that's right in front of that can it be can those chers have that with like sign on the building buing right now the property is so we cannot control we can only tell them to ma building this building that building window l the building that would work yeah now [Music] they um you present [Music] this the USPS one of my other questions was about the timing of the facility right now we have we do have mention that we have Tru coming all hours we still do get the trucks occasionally out on Harrison too I back but we still on Harrison um but what is going to be the hour of operation is it going to be like seven days a week five days a week no be normally work it's paper we were 8 to6 so just yeah just okay right now right now that was 8 to six Monday through Friday okay and I just have one question about can I flip to the other page really quick to absolutely three there Curr there's three currently but the new plan three too yeah we just keeping Zone here property and my really right now my house is right here and I am in this house that in the flood zone my is with the property now being taken up in this back portion that's a lot of land that's now going to be abing any the water that we currently have coming down well the one good thing is they are required to mitigate any water run off it should improve or certainly not increase than anyone else please raise your right hand you swear from the testimony you're about to give before this board is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please tell us your name spell your last name give us your address okay Thomas graph spell g r f I'm at 16 Jackson Street okay um just a a first a statement um the difference between between 30 feet and 40t is huge um I know there there was some deal that was made in 2005 but in you know the amount of I guess it's square footage that they need but in considering it to me the biggest thing is you know you know 30 feet is one feet but you know number 10 feet is it's big um so that's a major concern for the whole area um secondly um just on um on the construction the timing of the flood tunnel I don't know when that's going to happen but just on when this U if there's any I I wouldn't want there to be a conflict or a delay on on the tunnel project I mean it wouldn't I'm not the architect or an engineer it appears to me it wouldn't affect the it at all can you comment on that either the engineer or architect in other words the tunnel we specifically when this was being discussed as will recommend you don't build there because you have to rip it all up you're not touching the [Music] Tela construction schu only uh if this application is approv then we are going go for planation and everything then we going provide Landscaping anyone else I'm sorry question anyone else want to comment or ask a question feel you swear from the testimony you're about to get before this sport is going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please tell us your name spell your last name and give us your address Kevin ban r r i g n 55 Harrison Street Mr my only concern is 40 ft you're talking about covering it up with with vegetation I don't really think I don't see how that's possible um how are they going to put in 40 feet of vegetation I just don't believe that's imp possible thing to block out the size of a 40 foot build we don't disagree and then when they put it in would it be put in at 40 fet or would be put in at you know 10 ft and take 20 years to grow to cover the buildings that's my concern I don't think there's any way to cover that up so I just wanted to bring that for thank you very much anyone else from the public and know one last chance now officially close the meeting to the public um Mr Barry you have something you want to discuss I I have been hearing from the public and from board members that um the height of the proposed building is biggest concern that's been expressed tonight and uh at the risk of losing the entire application uh would the uh developer or uh applicant consider a setback of the 40 foot height uh on the front front facade setting it back 20 ft this would visually reduce the impact in other words keeping the 20 foot high existing facade on the front side facing Willow Street and set it back 20 feet and then go up to your additional 20 to keep this 20 we keep it at 20 ft your existing 20 feet 20 that's what it is existing height only able to use and it's not for us it's not a usable space basically we are going to be us this uh portion of the building cannot store anything but um can discuss I'm not sure I understood what you just said I I think what he's saying is the front of the where he's pointing that would be 30 feet which is permitted by the ordinance yes then he would step it back 20 20 feet and then the proposal is to raise the rest the that cuts 10 off we understand set we were looking for 20 he's proposing 30 well that I'm not sure I guess it will reduce a say that like as a planner I can say right now the setback the way it is the building line is at 89 ft so if if it goes 20 ft further if I understand the architect correctly that is 89 + 20 additional feet which is I think you know a substantial like 110 ft exactly and 30 ft at that site is allowed by ordinance so the question is do you want to talk and see if that is acceptable to you so so what I'm saying is 10 or whatever that about it's a better yeah it's a better option than 89 all right I'm going to declare Us in recess may I have a motion for recess move may I have a second all those in favor all those opposed we are recess uh to the members sitting out here this is not part of the meeting do you understand what we're saying if you take what they call the front of the building which faces Harrison Street okay will they will go up 10t higher but not 20t they will set that back 20% 20 20 fet now what happens then is the visual impact lessens the it is allowed by ordinance in other words we can't stop record this is what this is thank you I mean whatever it is distance same thing they did on3 with that por story same exact thing true because if you look at uh if you ever go on 23 and you you see the buildings that are now mixed use that are going up okay so they're four stores but you don't notice the four this is set back 30t so it appears and then that's that's the process the remaining issues that I've heard of they be addressed when they come back to they have to get D that's if they get army cor engineer appr move forward they may not and this might all be mooded anyway yes that's why it's called The Bu just for Varan next one we don't do many April could be a song stess go ahead speak loudly so the applicant has thought about it and is willing and happy to uh accommodate the board's suggestion all right my suggestion is at this point chair I think I think the board would like to see it understanding that the board has suggested it and the applicant's willing to do it if we can carry this to the next meeting show us on a plan what it looks like and we'd be able to move forward at that point uh we would agree to that is it possible to pull the board that they're in agreement with this proposal P the board you see that they would agree to this proposal that we would be drafting oh well no that's approving the variance we can't do that that would be approving the bars you want to know how the board is thinking yes no no you have to take it on good faith I mean remember we did recommend it yes okay so when is the next meeting um it'll be the first Thursday in March March 7 March 7 okay I don't have to notice right no we'll we'll car I I'll make the announcement yeah no no no so the board's amendable will carry this to the next meeting of March 7th there'll be no further notice to the public because you're here tonight we're carrying the matter to March 7th at 7 o'clock so you're here tonight if you want to see what happens on March 7th you should return there'll be no legal obligation on behalf of the applicant to put notice in the newspaper or send you the certified letters that already happened and uh I believe you've understood what the the board has asked the applicant to do which is the applicant is talking about raising that portion of the building to 30 feet which is allowed by the ordinance and then that 30 feet would go back for a distance of 20 feet and then they would raise the rest of the building up to 40 that's what's under consideration but as you heard the chairman board has not made a determination on that yet board wants to see how it's going to look is that acceptable yes and we shall see you on the first Thursday in March March 7 thank you there any old business before the board any new business may have a motion for adjournment second we areour all those in favor I that was thank you everyone