posted on the municipal bulletin board and website by sending a copy to the echos Sentinal newspaper and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk Tom and should be look on the on the on the Das to your right yep there should be a little black yeah looking for a switch aord sorry number two standard board procedures very sop any meeting hearing conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and to quum appropriate to a Judicial meeting or hearing must be maintained at all times number three meeting cut off announcement is made that as a matter of procedure it is the intention of the planning board not to continue any matter past 10:30 p.m. at any regular special meeting or hearing of the board unless a motion is passed by the members then present to extend the meeting or hearing to a later specified cutoff time number four electronic devices all in attendance are asked to mute cell phones or any electronic devices as to not interrupt the proceedings pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice for all okay roll call Deputy Mayor lavender pres committed and Ray is excused this evening Miss D is excused this evening Mr Hans is excused this evening Mr melanowski here Mr oala here Mr Sandow was excused this evening Vice chairman Jones present chairman Sandow uh CH I'm so sorry chairman Richardson here chairman Richardson we have a quorum that is the second in a row that she's done that one more strike and you're out I be careful you got one more chairman it's chairman I don't I don't know what my yeah anyway thank you okay so we're right on to uh review and approval of the March 12th 2024 meeting minutes anybody have any questions comments suggested edits they only have a couple of people who could move and second it yes that's correct from County correctly someone who was at the meeting can they make a motion so moved a second second great all in favor all in I I approved thank you okay we will move right into now uh a resolution so this was the resolution for Jamie colon Carolyn benabe application number 23-10 10 P this was distributed and we're looking for any last questions or comments to this resolution and just as a reminder this is the property that was an adjustment of a lot line correct okay and maybe um um you could just highlight a couple of the adjustments that you made from the prior draft would be great see my apologies is that I don't have the redlined version do you recall I I I recall there was a request to kind of separate out some of the 1994 the historical related issues right with the prior resolution and then make it more clear with regards to what the new modified resolution memorializes hopefully we captured that in the whereas paragraphs on page two going forth uh going explaining the condition uh and the request to modify it and then in the decision section we broke up between the minor subdivision approval and the modification of the condition laid out first on page five the law authorizing the board to have the discretion to make such modifications then on page six laying out uh the analysis by the board the intent uh interpreting the intent of the condition not necessarily to prohibit any uh future subdivision whatsoever but those focused on on uh uh uh offending the purposes of the Zone which was interpreted to be um still providing for one acre single family lots and not to have further subdivisions of buildable Lots this being just the proposal was just a lot line adjustment not the creation of an additional lot uh next paragraph 19 analyzes that and and and hopefully clarifies that distinction between what the board interpreted the restrictive provision to to to be intended to do and what was being done that did not violate that intent uh by virtue of The Proposal uh of the applicant um and then also uh uh a finding by the board that even irrespective of the intent um there was a better planning alternative to make the two lots uh more regular quote unquote in shape than the somewhat odd configuration that previously existed uh and then uh same with the conditions of approval uh the there's a new condition or I should say a modified condition in a deed restriction um which indicates that further proposed subdivisions that are minor subdivisions and are solely for the purpose of adjusting a common lot line I.E not creating a new lot but simply uh changing the configuration of the existing Lots that's permitted so as to memorialize for all future uh uh uh uh owners en title and for that matter Anyone who reads it um what the actual intent of the uh restriction was and what it was not uh to make it a little easier should somebody else come in in the future and want to adjust that common lot line again okay I doubt it would happen but never know great so thank you sure any questions comments is there a motion to accept this resolution so mve second and and uh you have the going back to who's eligible to vote based on the decision I think it was unanimous everyone here yep yes uh committee man ray was not eligible so everyone else it's here is eligible so uh Deputy Mayor you were um the motion correct and the second second was M Vice chairman Jones Okay Deputy Mayor lavender yes Vice chairman Jones yes Mr malanowski yes Mr opela yes chairman Richardson yes motion carries great well done okay thank [Applause] you all right it is now time to move to our application this evening if the applicants could come forward Mr chairman with your permission uh while uh council is approaching I did have an opportunity to review the notice found the content to be sufficient found it to be timely served certified mail and published both on March 28th uh which date is at least 10 days prior to this evening's hearing date so the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide the application and back to you Mr chairman great I'll just announce that this is for a minor subdivision a lot line adjustment for Block uh 13101 Lots 15 44 and 50 uh the address is at 20 and 32 Pine Street uh with uh lot 15 that has no address this is for application number 25-5 P take it away thank you sure we are we on yes that one's I don't think I turned the portable one on yet so good evening Mr chair members of the board board professionals Frederick zeli post poic I'm happy on behalf of the applicants ferano Family Trust Peter a ferano and laurianne rosar as indicated this is for 30 and 22 Pine Street in Sterling as well as lot 15 which is good time tax block 13101 lot 15 is owned by the ferano Family Trust it is located in the R2 Zone it is a landlocked parcel lot 44 is owned by Peter ferano uh located in the R4 Zone uh that's known as 20 Pine Street Lot 50 is owned by lauan Roski also in the R4 Zone known as 32 Pine Street this is an application for a minor subdivision uh but rather than going from one to two or two to three we're going from 3 to two going backwards uh but we're doing something that uh most uh I think we'll all agree is from a planning perspective uh a good thing we're eliminating a landlock parcel namely lot 15 uh dividing it not evenly but dividing it uh and merging it with lots 44 and 50 giving each of those lots uh greater depth there is uh currently a private 50ft wide easement along the southwesterly sideline of lot 50 uh but the property is undeveloped uh save for a detached masonry masonry garage uh the family refers to as a shanty which is in the northeast corner the lot that will remain in place uh but be part of proposed lot 50.01 uh these lots have been owned by members of the ferano family for many years they remain so today as you could hear from the opening M Ros merki is a family member as well uh and like many Lots in the township uh 44 and 50 are comprised of former picnic Lots dating back to the early 1900s in fact 1923 specifically so just over a 100 years old uh board professionals have raised issue that we're going to address uh almost in total I think there are two sheds on the property uh one on lot 44 which is a little bit too close to the sideline it should be 10 ft off it's at 8.9 the applicants will stipulate to a condition of approval if this is approved uh to relocate that shed uh at least 10t off the line there is also a shed on lot 50 at the end of the driveway if you're looking at the plan uh the issue with that one is 149 Square ft under your ordinance uh anything over 100 square ft would require variance relief uh I'm going to at some point hopefully tap uh Miss Coons as with her hat as zoning officer uh to explain that the construction code that this is designed to parallel has actually changed uh so now it's 200 square F feet that's kind of the pivotal uh Dimension uh the zoning ordinance has not been changed to still car correspond with that to my understanding from this C the township is not enforcing anything if it's below 200 uh but if the board determined just as a matter of caution that a variance would be appropriate well we have no issue with that and we would ask that the board do that if they feel it's appropriate uh just as a housekeeping matter the photographs that have been provided were taken by myself shortly before the application is filed uh they accurately portrayed what's shown in them at the time they still do and I have two people with me evening Christ weav who is very shy and does not want to Che and I promis her I will do my best to keep her from speaking but I am going to ask that she be placed under oath in case you come up with a question that Mr Hollows and I can't answer and then Mr Hollows will be our star witness who's our engineer thank you you like to qualify certainly H happy to swear both the Witnesses in as well as our board professionals if you'll all raise your right hand do all of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you all four of you great thank you Mr Hollows I believe you've been in front of this board a few times before I have stand professional engine state newey it is Mr H be qualified as an engineer any objection no objections great proceed did you design the subdivision plan for this application that's correct start by us exis well the property as as Mr zel had indicated is off of High Street it's on Pine Street Pine Street is a dead end Street and it's the three lots on the left side if you were to go up Pine Street and uh existing conditions just for the record Mr Hollows can you give the last revised date of the plans that you're referring to they're dated February 12th 2024 there is no revision date 12 uh 24 oh here we go bear with me yep okay and it's the uh three sheet set that you submitted uh more than 10 days in advance of this evening correct that's correct and it's not changed or handwritten on or colorized I do have a colorized drawing but uh when we get there we'll mark it exhibit A1 sure but so far we're good if you could just refer to the sheet Pages as you go I'm I'm looking at sheet two which we call existing conditions it's a little bit larger than the area map it's got Pine Street is on your right and the subject property is on the left and you've got uh lot 44 with a one-story frame dwelling paved driveway and the shed that Mr zeli had indicated that's 8.9 ft off the property line to the north of that is another house on Pine Street this is lot 50 and again again this one's uh improved with a one-story frame dwelling it's got a paved drive and then the landlock piece of property it's is technically not landlocked there's a there's an easement across uh lot 50 that gave access to this property but there is no Street access other than through this property through this lot and that's a larger piece that's lot 15 and it has the the uh masonry building I on my drawing we call it a garage but it's the masonry building in the uh northeast corner of the property um and then there's another small shed there this is the masonry building is the building that um is 149 Square ft in the area this guy okay just for record there is no driveway or any facility like that leading towards that just we are that's correct yeah and I'm sorry Mr chairman but if you can give us the approximate square footage with help if you need it of the uh Mason Rebuilder 20 by 20 so it's 400 square feet do I have the yeah I think I have the right scale this is a [Laughter] test you get three tries I can't do it in my head anymore it's a between 400 and 500 square feet great what are we proposing we are proposing and that's where I go to the colorized drawing but it is the same drawing that you have it is sheet three I'm sorry uh back to that Masonite building which I can still see on this drawing here yes is that the one that we're asking for a condition is that the building it is not pointing the the other one on the back end of the property that's just kind of in the lawn that's the one that's 150 square F feet so the one the LA there's no relief being requested or as far as I know required the garage that's been there forever nothing leading up to it the one in question though can you just point to the one at the end of 50s that one is approximately 149 square feet so that's what I was referring to under the old ordinance we definitely need a variance under the under the old ordinance that we still have you really do it's just from an enforcement perspective kind of point but if anything that would be a technical variance okay just point of clarity we were both talking about the same building yep the same we're on the same page okay thank you and there's a zone line boundary in here too and then this is the larger Zone the R4 and then this is the R2 Zone and as far as the buildings go and lot width and everything they all comply with the ordinance as it is right now ex except for the sheds I'm Sor and this one you that's colorized correct yes we uh talk about technical variances technical exhibits why don't we Mark that uh A1 since it's changed uh it was sheet two of three I guess the existing conditions but with colorization it's uh A1 I think this is sheet three I'm sorry we're up three three oh you're right I'm sorry conf the two zones R 15 15 is in yes just yes what we're proposing to do is eliminate the lot line U be the easterly lot line of lot 15 which virtually eliminates lot 15 and put a new lot line it's just the extension of the existing lot line that's between the two lots 44 and 50 and then they would just have that additional area in them and the lot 40 44.0 would have 1. 136 Acres 49470 Square ft and lot 50.01 would be 2.02 Acres at 8837 Square ft again this there is no violations with any of the setbacks with this change in a lot line if I may Mr chairman just for the record I'm sorry Mr the the the am I correct that there the lot other than the 8.9 versus 10 foot shed setback and the 149 square foot shed there were no nonconformities prior to the proposed uh lot uh subdivision and there there would be no additional non-conformities as a result of that's correct nothing existing nothing being created okay yeah okay we're exacerbated for that matter just simply the the two that previously existed would still exist but you've already offered to eliminate one uh being the 8.9 versus 10t set back to a conforming location correct and other than that no physical work is being proposed this is purely a paper application I'm sorry thank you Mr chair and if the board were to approve it this would be record deeds will be recorded in the Morris County clerk's office for the the New Lots would anything have to be done to remove the easement or does that stay with the property has to be ter well let's if we could could May yeah could we yeah we'll park let's let's have the board professionals I know there were some comments in some of the uh review that they've done thank you um Liz do you want to go first yeah just okay I have a review letter dated April 5th uh 2024 uh I noted the two existing non-conformities regarding the sheds um I have my planning review comments the first one uh is regarding you know we don't like to have split zoned lots and um you know it's not ideal and so uh I asked if if the applicant would be um willing to you know obviously we can't compel the township committee to rezone it to all our four but if we could request that the applicant request and we have no objection to that to to our to make a request required to make a request yes that would be the extent of the condition as said if they deny it we don't have any control over that right if I may ask a question on that yeah sure Mr chairman um Liz would it be your opinion that in order to eliminate what would be the creation of the two split Zone Lots uh they should both be designated R4 or simply they should both be designated the same Zone I.E potentially R2 for both Lots I would recommend R4 and simply because the improvements the bulk of the improvements are in the existing R4 and the surrounding properties um fronting on Pine and the adjacent roadways are also in the R4 so I I think it personally it makes more sense to make them all agreed offro okay and and uh that request would be just to get the parameters so that it can be objectively measured and monitored uh that request of the township committee would be in writing correct correct and um I mean it's the pleasure of the uh uh uh the board but would it be a one-time request would it be a multiple time request an ongoing request not that anybody should be pestering the governing body but uh in my opinion but uh but what is the uh so that we can make sure it happens one one time based upon our experience actually recently with the fre application we sent in one letter they jumped right on it schedu us for hearing immediately okay this one I don't even know if they'll necessarily require an appearance but will certainly volunteer to give one if they need it okay so a onetime written request would would do the trick okay great thank you okay sorry go ahead on the question with regards to making it R4 and as opposed to R2 is there anything that um in the R2 zone or the R4 Zone that would conflict each other they do have slightly different standards but as I said the improvements um currently are all in the R4 you know the houses and the driveways are all currently in the R4 and um they actually because Steve I think alluded to this before they actually both Lots meet the requirements of both zones Liz yes so I'm just looking at a a zoning map it looks like properties behind this on Long Hill Road are are are two correct but and the ones on High Street and Pine Street are R4 right and so since these are being ass iated with the ones on High Street and Pine Street they should be R4 that's what I think yes yeah yeah makes sense but but to answer your qu if they were R2 they actually would still be conforming okay good um then the second point of I had in my letter is regarding there's a wire fence in the Northeast portion of proposed lot 50.01 and extends into the neighboring lot which is not part of the application and we just were curious about what this situation was we would prefer to not have that addressed the neighbor it's been that way for years there's no dispute or anything between the Neighbors about it your neighbors were to come in and have an issue with they certainly have full enforcement Powers through the township I don't think it's something the Board needs to address we'd ask to just be left alone could we at least point it out on your figure as to where this fence is located it's it's right behind the house okay Along on that Pro it goes extends across that property line from yes it does there's a little triangle what is that a fence what is that yes this is a wire fence it's a wire fence okay if I may Mr just curious to not to beat a dead fence but the that lot what uh what's the size of the lot is it a single family dwelling is it anywhere near the uh the fence and if all those questions are not important my apologies question oh it's the rear I see the far re yeah okay and those houses are significantly higher yeah and there's a lot of wooded unimproved steep critical slope there yeah yeah not not in the middle of somebody's flat backyard okay got it good that's where they say good fenes make good neighbors yes even if they're a little off that's the extent of my comments thank you so much thank you Mr engineer your turn um comments in my letter pretty straightforward some minor revision stipulations have any objections to any of them no I don't okay um then I won't steal your thunder I'll turn it over to our vice chairman for his question instead of asking Joe I'm sorry we can't I can't hear Warrior just turning the E turning it over turning the easan over to our vice chairman Ste Thunder but just prior to that just if you could just repeat so you had a couple of stipulations in my letter and and minor revisions to the plan changes to uh the certification for the boundary um and providing meets and Bounds for review prior to filing so just they're all stipulated yes St 2.1 through 2.6 and 3.1 are all stipulated too correct thank you right thank you okay I'm going to open it up to the board for questions Mr Jes thank you so with regards to the easement that's currently on the which lot is that that top one there thank you yeah that one uh at the top of Pine Street what happens to the easement does that now go away does it stay with the property because you're basically extending the property back and it's now one big property as a practical matter it would be I'm sorry it's more of the legal question so answer um it's really becomes a moot point because the owner now of 5.01 uh would have access to the back back area which was the point of it um but to really clarify it we could certainly put something in the subdivision deed vacating it just so there's something of record for any title Searcher down the road problem okay thank you and it was it was private private yes public road or anything like that okay thanks any other questions just a question with the larger garage and um I see there's a concrete well in the backyards also is there any utilities servicing the garage power or there lights in that larger garage don't that is but along along the lines of what you had seen too with that well is that well operating is it used for irrigation is it defunct is is there's a well indicated on the survey drawing okay is there any reason to think though that if there are any utilities like that that they would be anywhere other than yeah that was the next question where did they come from yeah I think realistic the age of this building I don't think they would have put it underground I think you would probably had a pole somewhere or to a tree so it wasn't visible at the time doing the survey work so it wasn't located reminds me of something can you would you stipulate that The Shanty as you called it would not be um used for a residence as a residence okay and no uh no kitchen facilities Andor bathroom facilities located therein and will not be we'll we'll stipulate that there are no such amenities and will not be thank you is it a hazard is that Masonite building a hazard yeah just amazing St crumbling okay still sound structurally sound it's fairly prominent in the photographs if good yeah you're going to make me luck any other questions comments good okay um I'd like to open it up to any public but I think the only public right now there was a gentleman here seems to have left so seeing none I think we can move on no other Witnesses no other Witnesses summation it's pretty much as of right unless the board decides that the uh and again AR hardship on that because it's again just to confirm there are no future plans to do any development toward the back portion of this property it's pretty much to leave it as is that's certainly the plan now if any future owner or current owner would want to change that obviously they would have to comply with the zoning requirements or come back to the and they I would assume and Liz Can we and perhaps as well that they at a minimum they'd have to uh get a section 3536 uh mlul uh a planning variant because they uh would not if they were going to do anything in the back they'd either not be on a lot not AB buding the street or for that matter if it's one of these two lots uh they'd be um uh I just lost well if if if you were to re subdivide it in the future you would need you would need to get uh in order to build anything back any sub you would you would need to N More narrow long Lots or what have right the bowling alley Lots as they sometimes refer what I would suggest and maybe this is a legal question as well is that the applicant request just as a matter of recordkeeping the variance for the shed oh and just with the idea that okay that you know might be want technical variances that's like you know close only counts and whatever yeah I mean a variance is a variance whether it's technical or non technical so at least there's a record if the board isct that the board consider it and reflect it yeah okay I could argue that the hardship is that somebody hasn't gotten around to changing the zoning ordinance comply with the construction um would you like me Pine is the zoning officer momentarily if you would like to to be on record or or or simply concur if you agree with what the representation from Council was I do to a point historically in Long Hill what we've done if the applicant has come to the board for you know what um please raise your right hand if you swear to God or affirm the testimony you're about to give us the truth the whole truth or nothing but the truth I do thank you please proceed zoning Officer De currently test is Deborah Coon's zoning officer versus Board secretary okay um so the use the original from my understanding the original ordinance was written at with that 100 square foot number for sheds because that was what the UCC uniform construction code used to be that meant any shed over 100 square fet you needed construction permits in addition to zoning the UCC raised that to 200 square ft but our code did not change so what we generally do in the zoning office in construction if people are coming in for a shed if it's over 200 sare feet they can have their shed without a variance they just get permits construction permits in addition however if there's existing structures that don't meet the code um historically the boards have given variances for those structures so because it is existing the code still says 100 feet if they're here for other I would say give the variance for the technical variance technical variance that would come under the zoning correct right okay great all right I have nothing to add I think it's fairly straightforward great thank you very much thank you for your time apprciate appreciate a positive vote could you give us a quick summation of what the resolution Concepts would be and we'll move to uh motion certainly Mr chairman uh it would be a monor subdivision approval uh for in essence a lot merger from three to to um the uh one variance would be for a 149 ft shed as opposed to a 100 maximum permitted square foot shed on what would be proposed lot 50.01 um the 8.9 foot setback is being eliminated which perhaps the board would consider uh a a benefit uh as would the landlocked lot that does not a a street um but we are creating two split zon Lots but the conditions of approval include uh the obligation of the applicant to request that the township committee consider rezoning what would at that point I guess be the rear portion of both lots 4.01 44.0 and lot 50.01 the former lot 15 landlock lot uh so that uh both those lots would go back to being are4 zoned in their entirety um the 550 I'm sorry the approximately 500 foot detached masonary masonary building that would be on proposed lot 50.01 uh would not be for uh livable floor area would not have any kitchen Andor bathroom facilities uh the all the comments set forth in both the plannner April 5th report and the engineers April 9th report would be stipulated to and bear with me uh the offending 8.9 ft off the setback line shed will be relocated to the conforming location at least 10 ft from the setback line and the easement existing easement on what would become proposed lot 50.01 will be vacated uh same can be done in in the minor subdivision deed or deeds that will be recorded with the county clerk's office after review by the planning board and or Township attorney and our Township engineer for meets and Bounds and what did I miss no we got it just point Clarity question clarification yeah just point a Clarity the you mentioned Township committee and the rezoning is it the township committee that passes that yes only uh yes we are the guardians of the master plan they are for lack of a better term the Guardians of the zoning ordinance okay thank you yes but there there is a recommendation in the master plan to remove split split Zone lot yes it's consistent that's right if it yeah if it comes our way I I suspect we know how master plan consistency determination will come out or as we say not inconsistent not in thank you any other questions comments for this resolution is there a motion to accept this so moved second Deputy Mayor lavender yes Mr opela yes Mr malanowski yes Vice chairman Jones yes chairman Richardson yes motion carries great congratulations thank you good to see you again okay the only thing we have remaining this evening was just to review a little bit old and new business uh the first is just uh a quick uh update on some of the committee activities uh I believe Mr Jones you have um an update with regards to some of the open space related yep thank you Mr chairman uh so I did meet with um the open space uh committee uh I guess about two Mondays ago uh and we talked about several properties and what we would like to see uh at those properties also in attendance was um the rec director uh and also committeeman verza uh Daniel Rogers was present and several other members were present from the open space as well as myself um we talked about um various properties uh what could we do with those properties that the town has on it uh on its uh we focused in on the two Greenways um the pic Greenway as well as the Central Park Greenway talking about uh looking at um creating Trails whether it could be contiguous Trails or are they just portions of trails uh cuz if anyone saw the rain that we've had the last couple of days the ball fields were Underwater All Along The Pake the banks were overflowing uh so um there there's a lot to assess there um but we were definitely looking at what could we do with that what the beauty with living next to the swamp is they've been doing a lot of work uh with upgrading their Trail systems and putting decks uh and platforms a lot of um uh is it Ada accessible um um Trails so um there was a suggestion made by the group that we should be talking to them uh about how can we leverage that what you know what are the obstacles that they see um because we're going to be going our Trail systems are going to go over Wetlands so what can we do we may have to go around it we may have to deviate um even when we do the and and and Tom I'd like to talk to you about Trails um what can we do uh in those spaces so um really good meeting very productive um it seemed like everybody's walking away with a little more energy uh and taking on some some work that needs to be done good job thank you no and I appreciate that and that's exactly in line with uh you know really our goal this year which is to um do a better job of taking the master plan that we work so hard on and bringing that now down to the different committees uh that are involved with the township so we're going to be looking for opportunities to do that with each of the standing committees and creating better liais on so some of these projects can come up from the Grassroots so thank you Tom for taking that out thanks for pointing out the fact that U yeah I was there to speak about the master plan and making sure that you know we are consistent with what the master plan has laid out as a plan uh and how to take on these uh these projects right so thank you and then uh while you have the stage just uh ordinance uh committee I know uh our key uh goal right now is to to update the existing um uh really zoning map first and foremost yes as well as other Maps but the zoning map being probably the the first and foremost so it's about prioritizing and getting the resources necessary together to to update that yeah the zoning map uh is definitely going to be the Bedrock for how we move forward and there's going to be overlays of other Maps uh that will come on top of that so uh definitely look forward to working with uh Joe on obtaining that um also with regards to the ordinance uh committee uh I will be sending out an email to both Dave and Teresa who are not here today uh to kind of lay out all the recommendations and there's I have over 286 line items here but recommendations from the master plan uh and how we were going to try incorporate those into the ordinance it's a big book of work um but I've got it laid out in a spreadsheet so this way uh we can start U putting together a game full attack and and perhaps by the next meeting if possible we could begin to set suggested priorities too much to too much to tackle all at once thank you good any other updates from any other committees at this point we're just uh with the site plan review committee we're kind of in a different boat where we can't go out and recruit people to come to us so we're kind of in a waiting holding pattern uh we have spoken with Deb and our plan is to just keep in contact with her if anybody steps forward we will schedule meetings and great work with them to see what we can get done fantastic Advance it would be you know Tony myself and probably one other yeah I think uh expert I think you know both Deputy Mayor lavender Brendan right somebody from the committee or depending you know if there's an environmental concern then sure you you probably step in sure um so we're going to kind of just take it as as they come along hopefully good they come along good thank you uh and then um I I've uh we still have the SOP I believe Dennis is still working on the standard operating procedure so we'll get an update next meeting on that okay good uh the only last um um new business is just to remind folks you should have gotten an email on financial disclosures so please don't wait till the last minute to get those in by the end of April uh or else you'll have Megan Megan and Deb after you when's the first round I'm trying to stay out of it but yeah don't need that responsibility first round of reminders will be coming out soon right exactly yeah Deborah you notified once we complete the application to the submission no only Megan has that information okay but she does she does get it once it's she does okay she once once we don't have to send or anything great good what is a due date for that do we know 30th yest of April Don I think there's training too that um Megan sent out right yes HR training for committeemen uh for chairman and vice chairman and probably the same for the zoning board so I've already completed mine and I did let um uh Randy know that I had completed it yeah that was only for chairman and vice chairman correct okay good no thank you for that reminder right and you know just as a reminder I mean that is mentioned in the NJ LM uh guidelines um and you know I think over time we may phase in the entire planning board and entire zoning board but thanks for good stepping up yep fantastic thank you good anything else anybody else has if not is there a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn second fantastic in favor I I thank you e