e we're on the air all right I hereby declare the zoning Board of adjustment regular meeting uh for March 19th uh hereby call it to order at 7 36 uh call to order and statement of compliance adequate notice of this meeting hearing has been provided by posting a copy of the public meeting SL hearing dates on the municipal bulletin board and site by sending a copy to the echo Sentinel in Courier News newspapers and by filing a copy with the mpal clerk standard Bo excuse me Pro procedures any 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 deorum appropriate to judicial hearing must be maintained at all times meeting cut off announcement is made that as a matter of procedure it is the intention of the Zoning Board of adjustment not to continue any matter past 10:30 p.m. at any regular or special meeting SL hearing of the board unless a motion is passed by the members then present to extend the meeting SL hearing to a later specified cutoff time electronic devices it is suggested and recommended that all attend in attendance are asked to mute cell phones or any electronic devices as to put as to not interrupt the proceedings Tom would you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance please I ALG to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you I will call yes Mr ronio here miss Brenan Miss Brennan is excused tonight Mr gakis here Mr Flatley here Mr Rosenberg is excused this evening Mr Watts is currently absent Miss Collins is excused this evening Vice chairman Groff here chairman GRE here chairman we have a quum all righty uh hopefully the other gentleman will be here soon uh the next thing on the agenda are the meeting minutes did everybody have a chance to look at them yes and review them is there any changes comments suggestions or other verbal input on those hearing none do I hear a motion to to move the February 6 2024 the February 20th 2024 and the March 5th 2024 minutes so moved do I hear a second second all in favor I I okay they're passed and yes Deb just of as always just note the abstentions please yes yes uh okay now we have two applications tonight one you did all three at one time we did all three at one time but the motion and the second were made by board members who attended all three so I let it go thank you for the wait a minute Happ so I I will just say that for the record I abstained from February 20th okay okay that's fine uh okay now we have the application the first one is a bulk variance block 11106 lot 5 Zone R-3 located at 87 Locka Boulevard application number 23-13 Z of Michael Riley applicant proposes to construct the deck to the rear of a single family resident is the app applicant here I am come on up have a seat at the table and while you are with the chair's permission I did have an opportunity to review the notice uh for this application the content was sufficient it was timely served served by C uh certified mail on March 5th published on March 7th both at least 10 days prior to this evening so the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide the application this evening and it is a bulk variance application only uh so we do have five board members so three out of five for passage when we get there okay sounds good thank you would you swear everybody in please happy to do so I uh both our board professionals and the applicant if you'll raise your right hand do you all 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 back to you Mr chairman okay now uh we've all looked over your application uh I understand uh do you have any Witnesses besides yourself I do not okay just just getting that because I wasn't you know there's few people out there I wasn't sure if they belong to you or the Elder applicant or just people um all right now would you just briefly tell us what you want to do sure um on the back of my house is a a current um brick patio that's sinking and falling apart okay um I redid my kitchen and I um want to put a deck out the bat um directly attached to the house on the same space that the current brick patio covers okay so there'll be no change in lot coverage it'll be the exact same size okay uh did you did you put I noticed you it looks like you put a sliding glass door there too okay so that was part of the reason to want a deck at the height of the doors correct okay is that brick p radio going to be taken out or left there it's just going to be left there and the deck will go right over right over and the footings for the deck are going to go around it or through it right we move whatever we have to on the bricks footing right at the same area um any questions by board members of this applicant yes just just so I can you're rebuilding an existing deck no there's no deck on there now just a patio just Pao patio used to be steps but there are footings for the patio or there's not will need to be new footings okay I misunderstood that Reus Foo okay that's okay and there there used to be a regular door out the back with steps going down to the patio and those okay steps okay so now basically there's no way to get from the present doors that are there to the ground as of now correct yes it it it looks like the same the picture you showed us here okay which is uh his picture uh uh there's no don't Iden on it but it was taken Tuesday November 25th 2023 at 5:16 p.m. if I may Mr chairman uh Mr Riley did you take those photographs that were submitted with the application materials and uh the the um and you took them on November 21 uh okay and and do they accurately depict what presently exists exactly the same thank you and they were one two four of them three four photos correct okay okay and they were all submitted with the application materials they don't need to be marked as exhibits and they're stapled so we know which one is 1 2 3 and four you were referring Mr chairman to page to page to page uh page two and it's and it's a time it's a time stamp on them it's 5:16 p.m. 516 okay for that photograph thank you CU that that seems to be the one way one way of identifying they have different time stamps on uh I have a question yes in uh your depiction of the Right View you show four a four or five steps up to your deck but you don't show a handrail I think anything over three you must have a handrail okay you're willing to attach a hand rail def willing to put a handrail y okay F could you would so you're going to do it to code yes yeah which will be a condition of approval anyway should it be granted but that will be called out specifically so that it's not missed right yeah the uh the drawings did not show it and I understand and if I may Mr chairman those drawings are the uh you did you hand I did prepare though or prepare by hand the handwritten uh uh architectural plans so to speak I didn't need an architect but if I do I will happy to see uh the uh I I suspect it's sufficient as is I just wanted to call them something so I call them architectural plans the the the uh okay thank you uh I have a question the uh survey that you showed us that's from Murphy's and Hollow dated um's the date on it sorry it's the for 1704 uh that is an accur accurate depiction of the of what your property looks like as far as what structures are on it yes okay and and did you hand draw they're on the proposed deck and its perimeter I did right over and it seems to be drawn if I may Mr chairman beyond the brick patio as opposed to Simply over the brick patio are you testifying that that it's the size of the brick patio and not a greater the size of the house it will be the exact SI will that's my question too sorry is it the ice the same dimensions as the patio correct okay but if I may the patio on the plans does not extend the full width of the house it's the the patio and then um rro ties and just um there's a picture of it I saw it but is the deck going to go from one end of the house to the other oh so it is extending slightly over little bit over the ground correct okay so it's in the area that is kind of a scrubby area with that used to be plants or something long okay Sor um so it is slightly over that okay um any other questions um the uh view from your neighbors what would they see of of the deck if anything they have um a fence along our driveway that if they're in their backyard they won't see us okay but um I guess from their Windows like second floor looking down they'll see the de okay if I may Mr chairman for clarification I I suspect you're referring to the neighbors are immediately adjacent to the North Lot 4 if you know as opposed to the ones immediately adjacent to the South lot five that lot correct lot four okay uh that's the lot that is uh immediately adjacent to your driveway as well correct correct thank you how long have you had the house since 1994 any other questions by board memb just wondering what the neighbor to the back might see if anything looks like you just planted some spruce trees is are those freshly planted in one of the photos Evergreens might have the I saw one in the side that's the side of I don't see I see some bushes on the side talk about this picture yeah oh that's that's the side the Christmas trees yeah well that's the side so they're they're actually on lot Four's property correct yeah correct those are lot four properties so that that pallet is on his driveway fa and and that curbing or railroad tie is yeah that's the one I was looking at the last page of your application yeah that is those are my neighbor Christmas trees yes okay oh he plants them there every year okay um any other questions do you think you're going to enjoy your deck if we Grant it they will be over a lot well good for them oh your neighbors will be over yeah neighb so it'll benefit them too it'll defitely it's improving the neighborhood okay good point of you're going to enjoy it too yeah of course yeah will he bring a call yeah I will um are there any questions by our experts yes certainly hi I just have a couple questions um that identify him I'm Liz ladyy the board planner high and I had done a memo I'm not sure now what the date was March 14 thank you uh with regard to this applications I just have a couple of questions that I raised the first one um you've already answered which is I was trying to understand why the lot coverage didn't change and so it sounds like maybe it is going to change slightly is is that correct okay right but I had to the left of the the patio it's all in with railroad TI still so I assume that was still considered Black cover so you didn't okay so that was already counted as being locked covered okay okay I counted it okay so that that was one question I had um uh the other is that in the survey there's a concrete pad at the end of your driveway that used to be um a one car garage that fell down and that would be my next application now the the driveway I'm sorry the garage is even closer to my neighbors so that's going to be my next fun project okay um and then the the next question I have these really relates to sort of planning justifications for the variants and you um you know your house which uh you didn't build the house right you bought the house and it was um already 17 feet 7 in from your side yard property line and um so the deck the rear deck I don't know how to make this a question naturally would go in the rear so I guess my question is would you um would you agree that there is a hardship um that you were in you had a hardship that your property and your house existed the way it was and configured when you bought it and that there was no way to build rear deck without having a side yard variance right a similar sidey you can't move the house and you can't buy more property that is 100% correct okay okay um and that would you agree I think that you're not going to have any negative impacts on your neighbors I I definitely do not picture any negative impact they're all excited okay and that uh I think I think that's actually the extent of my questions yeah thank you I I was hoping that you'd bring that out all right anything for the engineer no questions just a few comments for the record uh my name's Joe V I'm the board engineer as well as the township engineer um for the board's understanding the project is exempt from minor development storm water standards because of the limits of disturbance and no increase in runoff uh it also is exempt from the lock rating permit review and our soil movement permit review so uh with this approval there will not be a prior approval that comes through as a Township engineer okay um so the only gu soft conditions I wanted to uh encourage were to limit your disturbance for your foundations um any areas on the outside of the existing patio and railroad ties that you disturb to uh top soil seed and mulch so that they vegetate back in um and with that disturbance just try to restore everything to maintain existing drainage patterns ex yeah you the existing drainage patterns need to be maintained correct okay and I have those three as stipulated to along with the railing along with the railing or the handrail the hand rail and railings around the deck obviously there definitely railings on the um what's the deck material it's going to be some um are you who are you having a contractor build it okay so the contractor should get a permit for the building and it'll be inspected okay that is correct any other questions okay uh hearing none uh Tom would you like to start the deliberation what oh yeah I'm sorry yeah is there anyone in the audience that would like to make a comment question or say something about this application no okay I didn't assume so but legally I have to ask that and I sorry uh hearing none from the public and assuming everyone else is sitting out there is for the next application I close it to the public okay Tom you can start yes this seems like a slam dunk doesn't it kids well it is um you are restricted by your current meets and Bounds your house is where it is so you have pre-existing conditions um this is going to be a benefit to you uh perhaps even to your neighbors having cocktails on your back deck not that that's a stipulation not stipulation yeah um the the positives easily outweigh the negatives on this um I'm all in favor for it thank you Gary thank you for taking the time to come in front of the board and present your case and listen to the comments and questions and uh I think it's going to be a great addition to your property and I'm in favor of this and hope that it gets enjoyed by everyone thank you joery I'm favor of the application I think it's a good application I don't think it impairs the neighborhood or I don't think anybody's affected by it it's an improvement to your property and good luck with it Tom you've answered all the excuse me answer all the questions that I had um it was very complete very thorough I think it's going to be good for the neighborhood I certainly support it thank you and I concur with my uh the rest of my board members and I think that I I uh appreciate the fact that you've actually come before the board and ask permission because far too often people build these and then ask for forgiveness so thank you I I'm good point I'm very happy that you actually took the time to come and get it approved correctly and have it built because it'll make a difference when you go to sell the house but hopefully you don't to Too Soon uh I would also uh be in favor of it so uh Mr chairman with your permission yes uh I take it the vote uh is based on the deliberations will be a motion to Grant uh the one and all variance at issue which is a side yard setback uh 17t 7 in versus 20t uh minimum side yard setback required uh it's essentially a I guess horizontal extension of the existing uh setback deviation uh and uh if it is a grant as I anticipate from the deliberations it will be uh I assume the motion then would have the stipulated two conditions uh limiting disturbance all disturbance shall be restored with top soil seed and straw mulch existing drainage patterns will be maintained post construction uh and there'll be compliance with all code requirements including but not limited to uh the appropriate uh handrail being installed on the stairway of the deck and if that accurately uh memorialize the the anticipated motion someone can make that motion can I have a motion Jerry's moving second last second okay W call Mr ronio yes Vice chairman grot yes Mr gas yes Mr Flatley yes chairman gret yes motion carries congratulations thank you very much thank you for all your happy to be she is we will be in touch okay awesome you want than good luck well done want this have that uh I have you have thank you thank all right see I told you it was me Qui uh yeah okay the next application is a minor subdivision and use variance block 14701 lots 35.1 and 79 in zone C the address is 651 White Bridge Road application number 23- 08z estate of David major care of rosak trustee applicant proposes to we conf figure we look and current the current lot line between the two lots is the applicant applicant present Mr okay but yours representative yes I'm attorney okay okay yes Susan I'm sorry can you speak s you speak in the microphone thank yeah you can sit down Mr W did sign the application okay did you provide that to De to Dev okay you so you have all the paperwork de okay so um I actually just met him on Zoom for the first time the other day is her mic working I don't hear that it's I assume it is sounds like oh yeah I hear it yeah it just didn't seem like it was and Mr chairman if I if I may we I did have an opportunity to review the notice I found the content to be sufficient found it to be timely served certified mail March 5th and 7th published March 7th both at least 10 days prior to this evening uh and it did address uh the uh D1 use variants uh for the non-conforming structure uh and VAR various other variances there may have been one or two additional bulk variances identified by our planner uh in a recent report um but in my opinion those would be covered under the uh governing case law uh by the catchall language in the notice uh so uh long- winded way of saying that the applicant in my opinion has properly noticed and the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide the application thank Youk no no sit sit but you may you may stand if it makes you more comfortable no the microphone won't pick you up if your stand set no we usually save the podium for your Witnesses because they have they'll have an easel or something they have to go back and forth ask any chair you want they never teach you that in law school just in case you wondering we we're here to make you feel comfortable so don't worry about it I've watched terry mas though so I know okay yeah sure he does my name isan in New Jersey and I am here this evening representing theate of major by the the property is 61 Road 1471 l 35. and 79 um the property is um in the sea conservation Zone and it's there two locks adim the1 super site part of the super site and it has a on it and is um and that is bounded by and the other half is front on the road and um that's the portion that we requesting that theard approval for the subdivision to allow that to be if I may interrupt for one moment just while we're on that Mr chairman just for the record uh it's my understanding that the owner of lot 79 uh Mr centore has uh signed an owner's consent with respect to this application and it was submitted with the application okay thank you just want to make sure we had that on the record so both Lots the owners of both Lots uh are are either the applicant or consenting uh to the application and and whatever transpires Visa uh if there's an approval any conditions of approval Etc thank you thank you um the capped area um if if the board is um the board is so kind as to bring the application the capped area um will be only 2 will be 26145 Acres which is below the minimum which is one of the reasons why we're here asking for VAR from the minimum la si in connection with that what is that it's just general feedback I think oh okay yeah our sound system is is lacking that's okay no it's I yeah shut that one off maybe it was that one the problem is that we don't know which one it's coming from I just turned M away I think he's got it yeah I think he shot you shut that other sh that one that one might be it okay we just want to make sure your your testimony isn't isn't over by that um so we asking for we're asking for commonly called as referred to as a planning variance under njsa 40 55 36 as that lot will not have direct access will not have direct Frontage and therefore access to the joining roadway but will be accessed via an easement over what will become part of the joining lot 79 testimony that there will be a very limited need for Access onto the cap um the cap will be maintained by Mr centore who's currently maintaining it and he will own both Lots 79 and lot 35.1 given that the cat lot will be developed for will be never be developed for residential purposes we believe um we also use variant because the cap is technically a principal structure um and it is not one of the listed principle permitted uses um I I would like to see the ordinance that allows U super fund sites as a pered use sh Mr War Shing perhaps there is such a thing and you find it if there is one um but that aside so we're seeking the use prods for that um as you as you as you'll see is that we're simply moving the line um nothing on the the ground is is going to change and um assuming that based on since we're simply moving the tax assessor with we spoken so you might ask why we this why the property is being held as we reference in the name of the estate of major and the trustee is Mr William WJ who lives in California um the estate needs to be settled it's it's gone on for a while um C needs some minor maintenance lowing and the neighbor our neighbor one of our collab Mr sore who was the property maintaining it and he will continue to maintain um so that's why we're here we need to settle the estate and we believe that this is makes the most sense for both to I have a number of different Witnesses thisis is our surveyor and planner Francis francella is my colleague and the attorney from Brock who worked extensively with the trustee and the NJ DVP with um I will provide certainly provide her credentials introdu her to testify she has testified others ases and then Robert cence to there are some other variances that we will we have your engineers and your planners reports and we will to the extent that we do not address all of those conditions or concerns comments in our direct testimony will go through those okay so what I'd like to do is the testimony just sort of set the area we have this mic that's movable so you can use that if you want to stand in front of your uh and if I may Mr chairman I'll swear everyone in now so I make sure not to forget uh do you have wait a before you do do you have an easel did we have I have one in my office I can go grab it would you like yeah I was just going say we normally have one sitting over there no I I hide it because oh yes you have to hide it because while we're waiting may I ask a question of the attorney well you know what we might we might have to wait for de to be here yeah she has to go get that so no I like how the flags look somebody must have straighten them out this afternoon oh how do I know it was this afternoon I saw the guy who did it look a lot like me I got two that hurt I hate watching them from looking at them from home and they're always messy it's a blessing having OCD yeah okay did you get the deposit fee uh could you put them could you uh put them on the other side of the uh just so that everybody can see it right there is good J actually more in the center so we tell uh I honestly I was say it's brand new you have to push that middle down I you have to shove the middle down so it how how many planners and and say fast how many Eng a take well the engineer might stand out of it actually he's a Sur make sure it's level yeah yeah can we have our engine make sure it's level all right now go ahead swear them yeah okay yeah I'll swear in our two board professionals and the three Witnesses uh even though Mr senore could you uh see we can see you you're hiding behind the uh do all five of you swear to God please raise your right hands uh do all five of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is a truth the whole truth are nothing but the truth thank you all thank Youk and would you just for the record State your credentials yeah my name is um Peter borbas I am a uh licensed uh professional lyor and planner and um I have had an office in botin New Jersey for uh 37 years or so I've been practicing for about 46 and um I although I have not testified in front of this board I've been in front of numerous boards testifying on subdivision site plans as a surveyor and planner for many years in both New Jersey and New York um I have served on The Advisory board at psmith college for the surveying uh degree program there of which I attended po Smith and I am currently the chair of the surveying engineering technology Advisory Board New Jersey Institute technology past president of the uh Geographic and land Information Society and past chair of the American Congress in surveying mapping and I am an expert in surveying recognized by the courts in state of New Jersey and your licens are current they are yes they are I deem you an expert thank you thank you if I just have one clarifying question Mr chairman um m rubite is uh Mr vorbis being offered as an expert in land surveying only or land surveying and professional planning land surveying and professional both both okay and all licenses remain a good standing and you've been accepted as an expert in both of those areas by land use boards in the past yes I have okay and thank you thank you thank you offering two part ttif and then we'll bring back at the end I do need to stand that's may I ask a question of the attorney continue just I know it's uh but um you explained at the beginning of of your testimony why we're doing this can you just elaborate on that a little bit I I don't understand the concept what's happening so so I will I'd like to give a little introduction I am not testifying do you I'm sorry do you mind holding because people at home have a hard time I'm so sorry you can't sit you don't need to or hold that just straight up you can pick that mic up it might work you can pick it up it'll work pick it up I'm sorry just it so a lot of people at home have a hard time hearing so I I will I will hear the other chair is a little higher if that helps you at all I'm so sorry there you go okay that's much better thank you for that um I'd like to sort of set the table on why on what the application is going to what our Witnesses are going to testify about and um Mr Boris is going to explain um what we're doing and then francc from office work on environmental issues I think you'll get a better understanding of why we're doing it um and then Mr sen as well because the idea is that we want to make the best use of this property and when Mr borbas comes back to testify with his planning testimony one of the things that we will be testifying to is what's the benefit um you knows we see we see two criteria for um granting the balances and one of them is that well I'm not going to testify for that but you'll hear more about that that we're trying to make the best use of basically a contaminated area um segregate that and then provide um benefits to um the rest of the neighborhood the rest of of the property um for use that Mr centore currently uses for about um and it's really to make the best use of does it CH does it change the number of building Lots or anything like that does it does it add a property does it add a bu a building lot it does not add a building lot and that's it's it's it's a good it's a good question and a good comment and one of one of the things that we will be showing you is that if we were to keep the Lots as they are now a house conceivably could be built in front of the the cap but realistically would not be a attractive in our in I think in our opinion in the state's opinion um this is a better alternative for the neighborhood for thank you that answered my question I appreciate it thank you J continue okay thank you very much so um Mr B if you could you put a plan up is that um need to yes because that's different than what you've given us right color what is that explain what that did you mark that A1 in the date okay so this is an exhibit that I prepared um to show you where in Township uh the subject properties are located uh we have White Bridge Road and near the intersection of uh New Vernon Road it's an aerial map this is an aerial map and it's uh colorized yes it is to colorized to designate the subject well the proposed subdivision sure so on this um color arial map I have the um two lots in question outlined in heavy dark black line and I have the existing capped area on lot 35.0 identified in the green shading and I have a proposed access easement from White Bridge Road to the capped area designated with the orange shading so that you can see overall um where where we're located and what is surrounding here and on both sides of this property we've got uh Federal lands the swamp the rear of the property is approximately that Black Brook that changes in size as it rains and does whatever it does in the swamp sure this heavy black line is this is the outbounds of the both of the Lots you can see a lighter line that passes down through the middle that's the existing lot line between between the two properties between lot 79 and lot 35.0 one can I ask a question about put that it shows it on there as well but um in the I guess the combined properties how many structures are on it in the combined property so we have um on lot 7 79 we have a residential building there's an older garage there are a couple of there are three sheds one two three and there is a barn and on lot 35.0 one there is a small shed which overlaps the current um conservation easement line and perhaps the engineers or planners put this in there how many structures are allowed to be on the property they need a variance for the number of sheds yeah yeah we are asking for that and and those are on his property he can address that well it's all going to be one property it's all the the application is to become one property right no we're still going to have two lots just Ming and let me describe that for you let me describe that for you yeah describe what okay so lot 79 is this basic rectangle shape over here with Mr centor house and his sheds and the barn lot 35.0 one is the estate property and highlighted in green is the existing uh landfill the spous landfill cap and the ex it's the it's the dash line that kind of comes through the middle of this whole thing if you follow my finger right there to be removed that's what that's correct so the second lot is going to be that green area what we intend to do what we hope to do is to reduce the size of lot 35.1 from this basic rectangle down to just the green area which is a cap the green area right now which is the cap has an existing conservation easement on it that's filed and uh you'll hear more about the cap in a little bit and and the dealings with um the D and so this doesn't change this conservation e actually the landfill extends onto the government property as well and if you can see the dash or the Phantom green line onto the government property extends over there but what our application doesn't include their property just lot 35.0 the estate property the government's property is 35 2 correct I believe yes it is 352 and the document or the the diagram that you're referring to was that a colorized site plan with a certain date that is a that is the uh colorized subdivision plan uh the subdivision plan that was uh submitted dated uh January 2nd 2024 and I have taken that and I have colorized it for the benefit of this exhibit to talk to you about this would you like me to design A2 too yeah thank you the and it's a good time for my pen to run out of ink but I think we have that on there that would be terrific thank you okay so just just so we're clear then Peter could again1 okay so on lot 35.0 is the um is the landville cap and there's a shed there's there are uh fences around the cap there is um there are manholes with a a type of drainage system around the cap that I believe you're going to hear more about that cap and there is a uh there's a gate in a fence um that there's an existing traveled path from White Bridge Road to the cap and the orange area I have on here is the um proposed access easement and that covers the existing travel path that uh D to go out do inspections other people who have to um open monitoring Wells or uh do observations in the manholes ETC they use that path just so happens and we know in the area the swamp both sides of the road have a lot of drainage ditches along them well there happens to be a little Crossing in that area and then there's a path and a gate and that's why we've chosen this location is the access easement because that's already being used and that easement would be given to the state de well that easement um who's that easement to benefit to well it's going it's going to benefit it it certainly would benefit the um the folks who are maintaining the DP they're maintaining the um the oversight of the cap okay and the proposed conservation easement is exactly I think the term is coincident with the pathway lines well there there's not a proposed there's not a proposed conservation easement as as there is um there's access easement the access easement that is coincident with a fence line the crossing at the road and the gate in the traveled path to get to the cap that's a visible travel path yes right yes okay thank you uh at that at the current time there are some railroad ties that are stacked in the place to keep uh people from coming and driving in and whatnot um you you can testify later I don't want I don't want to have you come out of turn because you don't have a mic so what will happen is if if subvision approval is granted lot 79 would gather up the rest of the white area that is shown here and the access e all be annexed into lot 79 and lot 35.0 would just be the green area so the the area of 79 would expand now uh as Susan had mentioned the um the green area lot 35.0 is under the 3 acres but that's the existing easement as it is we're not looking to expand that or anything and we we proposing the new lot line to follow exactly um where the easement is and it and there's no way of making it smaller bigger or changing it well we certainly can't make it um smaller and i' had a question about that um maybe somebody else but perhaps it you can you talk about the future of the easan to the NJB the super fun site Environ be Francis that be the other lady thank you so there um and I'll I'll testify on behalf of the variances later but um as we can see the um the proposed lot 35.0 will not have Road front on a public road except for the easement its access will be via the easement yes so there's but to be clear that access is on what would be remainder lot 79 it's not a part of lot 3501 so lot 351 is completely without uh buting any any public road that is that is correct and so the the access easement actually would be on the new property of lot 7079 79 would extend clear over to the existing easterly line in this area of lot 35.0 one Peter I know you're going to testify um at the later about issues but um in your opinion what's what what is the purpose of having having F Miss could you put that microphone in front of your face because we're not intending we're Nott to build a house or anything on that lot are we no well and certainly the the 3 acres Zone would be to control density right and and eliminate you know the densification of the lands uh in the township and this Zone and there's no once you know once this goes assuming the subdivision is approved and all this area becomes part of lot 79 and if you could only have one principal building you're not going to be able to put another residence another Residential Building on on the property okay all right I just wanted to just wanted to start with that um it's your understanding that both and Mr senore will testify about that but it's your understanding that both of the Lots if the is gred will be transfer to that's the problem Mike that's the one making the noise don't use that no that's good as long as I can keep maneuvering it no that's all right we're going to give you this one a little easier yeah that's cuz you're moving it once you put it down it'll stop yeah take the other one time you're very sensitive to the touch the other one back up on the uh di I feel like when I go to touch my dog when he's in Twilight the term hot mik means something else you don't have to worry about that that that one's a lousy mic no it's the one you got no no no we'll we'll find her one we'll plug in this isn't distracting at all is it to your they weren't able to hear you at home yeah oh they were not no unfortunately let's try this one again that's the other one so yeah right it was a little little bit closer move that chair so you can come this a little bit all right she's good she's good now she's good no right good but I think that one's good waiting for you all right all right yeah don't plug that one back in this is White Bridge Road right about White Bridge Road okay all right do you yeah I think we're fine Miss Co are you going to be able to tell whether they can hear me um I well I haven't gotten any messages yet so that's that's assuming everyone's listening I know at least one individual who is okay good okay all right so um where we left off was that your understanding and Mr Mr centamore is here and he will certainly testify um but your understanding is that he has been mowing he will continue to maintain that is my my understanding is the the surface of that grass is that what's on uh you know the entire surface of that yes and you'll hear more um from other okay all right Witnesses on this you're understanding that new lot that you would propose would be restricted you couldn't build anything on it you can't do anything with it it it's totally restricted because it's a cap for a landfill you're going to hear testimony from others about that yes excuse me can I clarify that my understanding is that it's going to be lot 79 is going to consume all but the landfill correct that's correct yeah okay so you can't build on the landfill anyway but you can build part of 79 that's correct so there will be no building on the landfill on on either on either of these on lot 79 would that be encumbered the new part of lot well you couldn't have you couldn't have two principal dwellings on here sheds and barns and whatever Varian as long as he has variances for right not by the by this board or the board now we were talking about because he had mentioned that that new lot is undersized and that's kind of a moot point because you can't build anything on it anyway so so can the concept here it looks like there's no utility to 351 right now there that there that lot has no utility in its current form because of the super fund site consumes all almost all of the lot so so you just want to really get rid of it isolated and the neighbors will willing to buy it or wants to buy it or do some transaction with you folks and we're just going to leave the super fund site on its own that's correct so you there's nothing in this plan that makes improvements changes anything other than moving the lot line to be coincident with the existing easement line if if I may Mr does the resultant lot 79 uh become a lot that is of sufficient size and Dem mentions to subsequently be Subs subdivided into two Residential Building Lots back I have not analyzed that you're a you're a professional planner right what's the size of of lot 79 now the the size of lot 79 as it exists is 5.59 acres and the proposed law 79 will be um 8.96 77 Acres so it goes from being under six acres which could not necessarily by way of lot size support two three acre lots to being above 6 Acres which at least by lot size could potentially support two buildable Lots two lots uh three acres or more correct that would be correct but um again I think we have issues with um lot wids and from depth and and in Access you know that and correct and and that's frankly that's not why we're here that's not the intention and you will hear from Mr centamore what his intention is to do with the combin lot 39 um and I don't want to speak for him but I I think I I'd like to be able to present the rest of the testimony the reason I asked what I asked was and and I apologize if I misunderstood board member Ron's questioning but I thought that was part of his questioning or the intent of some of his that's not that's not the intention it appreciate that um and obviously any kind of a subdivision would have to be to come to obviously absolutely one of the boards yeah one of the boards um now um Mr Boris that you're we're also we're also seeking some um variances for setbacks on the exist of the of some existing accessory structures um and those were raised in the planner's report and um we will we will address those as we move forward with the plan testimony correct yes you want to just show the board just briefly where those where those are so there is an existing frame shed that Is straddling the um the proposed lot line would that be removed well that can remove it if it's requested okay we're seeking a variance to to leave it but if there's a requirement to remove it I believe that the U okay well we're going to we'll I'll hold that question or that concept for the other witness do we have the legal authority to grant that lot change if it's on there already that that's a question that would' have to consider because if it's imposing on a new lot even though it's owned by the same person it could potentially be sold off to the government or sold off to whoever and you know uh but I mean that's something is as long as we where where how big is that shed as I recall from out there it was probably about 10t by 10 feet or 8T by 8T okay so um there's a potential that it could be either moved off of that that stradle if I may ask one relevant question as to that shed is it currently uh uh uh deviating from the setback requirement from the present lot line Del ating between lot 351 and lot 79 no or so it's it's it's it's conforming in its position and its setbacks at this time okay so the proposed subdivision would render the existing uh accessory structure shed side yard setback it's a lot of work uh from being from a conforming state to a non-conforming it would be non conforming yes just wanted to get that clarified thank you there would be no setb it's right over the working right but the key was to make sure that it was at least 10 ft tap tap the mic so it's R yeah red is supposed it's supposed to be red they can hear you what what is the shed used for thank you I think Mr centore can testify to that yeah I shed on your property he can you he can testify to um Mr sore um maintains the lands around here and I'm going to let him testify as to what the shed is for um when I conduct this survey there at some point in time I believe it was there wasn't anything in it was kind of very open and whatnot okay okay thank you right U that concludes this part of Mr bis's testimony okay who's your next next next wit Stella Miss Stella can we confirm for the record that there are no members of the public oh uh yeah hold on a second um are there any members currently sitting out there a member of the public I can't see uh Beyond this easel but I I Mr senore anybody behind you okay um okay I'm closing it to the public before you sit down would you stand up again I was we miss does our planner or engineer have any questions for the testimony that he just gave surveying Tes the surveyor I do not okay how about the Eng okay just checking okay you can sit down because I I don't want to leave them out because they might have a questions Francis Stella we can qualify her Francy if you could uh give the board the benefit of your credentials uh your educational credentials and that you've been where you've been qualified as an expert and um what's your what's your work with n okay good evening um thank you for the opportunity to come here and explain that what we're trying to do here um I think it's really important uh this application I well before you do that just give us let let me explain so the reason why I think it's important is I've been an environmental attorney for 33 years I work on super fund site remediation compliance everything with the DP for the last 33 years I actually have had the privilege to work on this particular site I went to school for environmental law I have been qualified by uh many towns in New Jersey as an environmental expert but in this situation I'm sort of an environmental expert but also a fact witness here to explain to the board what we're trying to accomplish uh on behalf of the town so uh I have Francy just by whom are you employed oh I sorry I'm an attorney at Brock Iker I thought she had said that before specializing in environmental yes I'm chair of the environmental Department of our firm and I have um worked on about 700 sites in the the state of New Jersey for site remediation I'm common Council of two superf fund sites that I've been running cleanups on since the early 1990s I was involved in the telman site here in your town uh historically with the um debacles that happened there uh involved with the litigation that arose out of there so I'm quite familiar with all these sites um that occur I I deem you an expert in that area if I may Mr chairman just for clarification for the record and and there is Absolut no prohibition or restriction on being both a fact witness and an expert witness that is absolutely fine just so I'm clear and everybody else's um uh an ex are you being uh sought to be accepted as an environmental lawyer or some other expert uh some other expertise in environment in my environmental law I mean yeah I think actually maybe you can explain one of you or both of you exactly what you're being sought to be introduced as an expert in for purposes of of being able to be asked hypothetical questions and and so the board understands I were gonna be really asking any kind of hypothetical questions Francy M Miss Stella is here really for the most part um to give a brief to give a history of the cleanup what was what was done here um why there's no what the ongoing maintenance is required the interaction with d and I think for benefit of the board I know I know a lot of people in Long Hill town have lived with these with the asbest cleanup for for many decades um and so has she um certainly with this particular as she's indicated and I think for the most part um it's to provide the board with the background on why we're doing what we're doing and um what's the benefit of it what's the benefit and and she'll be rendering expert opinions to some degree that's why she's being s and and that expertise is as an environmental attorney correct specialized in site remediation is that accurate yes okay yes thank you for go ahead and EXT so uh thank you um thank you for the opportunity what I wanted to do here today is um we have a super fund site we have an estate we have a site that was partially capped on the major site uh and on the department of interior site there this super fund site may I use the exhibit here yeah take the mic with you um so referencing A2 referencing A2 this is the superf fund site on the current lot 30 repr in the green area the green the 3501 this is the other portion of the super fund site which is on the department of interior's property the D the EPA came up with this remedy back in the 1990s to bring in asbest from this area and from other sites around the town and put it all here and encapsulate it in a solidified cement mass and then an earth and cover over it that's what we call the cap with a Tren a trench sort of around here to collect rainwater to prevent erosion and it's to be kept seated lawn uh landscaped with grasses um to keep it from eroding right CU otherwise rainwater would erode and then you'd start seeing the solidified uh Mass that's under here but what we are trying to achieve here is we have an estate and there's no one to take care of this and if I were Mr senore we're grateful that he's willing to take this on but he doesn't want to own a super fun site and I don't blame him and so so our plan here is he we will be transferring the um existing lot 79 well he owns lot 79 we'll be transferring a portion of this site to him to add to his lot 79 if he takes it we will be G you know selling this to him transferring it to him and also lot 3501 and he will continue to maintain it under the um administrative consentor at the DP it will be assigned to him it was intended at the time that I negotiated the uh agreement with d that it was probable pending approvals that Mr senore would be the person doing it he was maintaining it for the estate for us a long time because he lived next door and was able to mow the the property he has been involved in taking care of this he has been very good at taking care he's actually been watching it for us which we greatly appreciate um and so to enable this to not go into tax foreclosure or something else with this town because there's no one to deal with this who's alive anymore we have Mr sen we're willing to take this and this is really a benefit to the town that there will be someone here who will continue to maintain it the uh administrative consent order obligations will be assigned to him if you we provide you a copy of the administ sh consent order where it was intended there was going to be an assignment because D was quite aware that the majors had passed away uh they had worked with the majors back when they were alive on this cleanup they were super great with working with everyone on it Mr chair if I could I apologize for the interruption but the uh lot 3 when you say to prevent it from going into tax foreclosure I assume correct me if I'm wrong you're referring to the entirety of lot 3501 as it presently exists correct right we have no one else to take it you're referring let me be clear yeah uh so that you understand the question so that you can answer it the uh lot 30 you're referring to the entirety of lot 3501 not the green portion that is the proposed lot 3501 correct that's correct and am I correct that the uh uh uh green Port the superf fund capped portion of existing lot 3501 uh uh is that taxed as it as a super fund site or is the B only the balance of lot 351 taxed and potentially subject to a tax for the whole property is being taxed by your right there one okay there's no delineation because it's one lot but I guess uh well that's really something I guess for the assessor you're getting to the assess land value yeah there's but but the cap is it's not by an easement no actually I want to correct the record for all the testimonies gone before there's not an easement it's called a deed notice that is recorded it used to be called a deed restriction and now notice now right in 2007 the rules changed and it's called a deed notice which was recorded on the property yes sir um have you talked to the Department of the Interior do they want that at all they you're adjacent to their property and they want everything they don't want that asra uh that's a good question they uh they they I reached out to them uh years ago to see if they would take it on the estate is trying to be responsible here to find a a proper what was the answer no they wouldn't do it uh they were not interested okay so we are trying to be um responsible and do the proper thing but also it makes a whole lot of sense when you have a super fun site there's already a deed notice for this portion of the site recorded on the property it's not recorded on the entire lot 35 one it's just recorded on this portion when you prepare a deed notice and record it it can just identify a portion of a lot that is subject to notice to the world that FYI don't go digging in here if you do beware what's there and then fix the cap when you're done so pursuant to the agreement with the D whoever um is the owner successor or sign under our administrative consent order uh has certain obligations D has the obligation to inspect test fix any erosions divots reductions settlements there's a cement um monolith under there that can settle and will settle and then you fill it with soils over time just like we do at you know Foundation EPA well as EPA is supposed to do at another site in your town um but uh but um the fact of the matter is uh this site needs to be maintained the value of it is open space there is ability for grazing on it you can walk across it horses can be grazing on it it can be used for not to ride horses or putting a riding ring on it but you can have grazing or goats or whatever you want on it can be used for uh use is not completely shut off it's just that you can't build any structures on it right and and it would just have to be repairing divots or whatever that happens so if you put a driving range on there you might have to fix some divots along the way but um to the extent that that is the problem Additionally the estate agreed with um the D that instead of a party maintaining a trust in the event that we failed to perform that D could come after the estate to fix it we gave the estate we gave the DP the amount we would have put up under a um Financial Assurance for compliance to the state that they've put in designated separate fund that in the event that a party doesn't take care of the lawn Ming whatever they can hire a a contractor to come in and handle it so we've really maintenance guarantee essentially in essence if D um I have a question who's ultimately going to be owning 35.0 one Mr senore Mr senore or some entity that he might set up fine but I mean the entire lot 3501 is going to be sold to him including the rest of 70 yeah the entire lot but the lot Line's going to be moved and that's going to be a separate lot but he's going to own that yes we're going to so the Deeds are going to be changed around the deed is going to be changed to him to own both and he and the deed uh now the new deed for 3501 is just going to delineate the green area correct we'll do a lot lineing right right so is there an expectation that there would be separate ownership between we don't lot 3501 the remainder lot 3501 and the remainder lot 79 I I I don't represent Mr senore yeah we don't know at this point that's go ahead corre maybe our engineer would they not perhaps it's a question for our surveying expert but would they not consolidate by Common ownership that's where I and so that the lot adjustment would just be unraveled by a consolidation by Common ownersh I don't think they would I don't think they would be Consolidated because the reason why we're here is that the cap is considered to be a structure it is not a vacant lot um even though it is undersized and if it were by way of subdivision approval I don't think that would constitute a lochner Doctrine situation but I have to look into it question on that if if he creates a different entity does that change anything or is it still go back to him like we made that in LLC we made that in St well it avoids a it avoids without getting too far a field it avoids a lock ner type situation if if if if which is if there otherwise were going to be a lock ner type situation if there were two uh immediately adjacent actually I take that back it's going to be well that's right it would be it could potentially be viewed as two immediately adjacent Lots one of which is undersized and therefore under common ownership uh uh uh would be uh considered one lot but I don't think it would be because of the subdivision approval in and of itself negates would negate that but also I guess we have the issue of it not being vacant to uh they both would have structures on them obviously lot 7901 and it's or the remain even a lot uh 79 excuse me 79 the REM uh as it presently is constituted let Al as it will exist as a remainder lot 79 if there's a subdivision approval has many structures on it um and 3501 has at least one I'm sorry I would submit Mr Warner that um if the board grants the variants the use variants it would be part of part of the rationale would for the for the grant would as part of the the grant you would have to indicate that it's a structure and I think that that that helps to set the to make it clear that it's not a lot and that it um not not merge by operation by operational law and maybe we can triangulate our planner if she's willing to allow us to do so if she would concur with that analysis yes so I mean yes I I have an overriding question I was going to wait for the witnesses to all finish but I guess the overriding question I'll ask you just since everybody's interrupting you I'll do it too um it's um the why not merge the two existing Lots what's the benefit of isolating the super fun site um because no one I can't give a super fund site away but you can't give a super fund site what away away I mean if anyone else wants it we'll give it to you but um so that begs my question so why not make it part of the a larger lot that has a has a use with the residents and and and agricultural use why keep it as a separate lot going to be stuck with it like that because you're going to separate it from the bigger lot try good luck maybe I had a similar question and really specific to you being here as an expert in environmental law MH so forget the land juice for a second is there any environmental law benefit to that landfill being exclusively held as its own lot particularly in that you discussed the transfer of all the property subject property in front of us will be to the same party uh it was my understanding originally with the application M my misunderstanding that the landfill would be held by the estate while the remainder would go to Mr centamore but if Mr centamore is to own both then I I'm looking for a reason in environmental law to distinguish the two for him to own both for the benefit of the landfill obligations as opposed with just being one Big Lot under his own whole thing being Consolidated as one lot under the same person as owner okay um because he's willing he's he hasn't testified personally but you've identified that he's willing to accept the landfill LW he is but he probably won't own it individually because no one wants to have individual liability with respect to owning the landfill okay so that's that's the environmental law benefit to it okay might be more than just environmental law benefit practical practical benefit but so and you you indicated that the estate has already provided the for lack of better term the maintenance guarantee on the the maintenance of the landfill the obligation of the property owner under the closure agreements yes under the administrative consent order yes with the D we've set aside $30,000 in the event that whoever owns this property fails to perform its numerated obligations identified in the administrative consent order of which is divided between DP and whomever owns that property and so the best use here is to find someone who can properly maintain it continue to maintain it do those tasks at which is a cost to whomever will own this there's task to this cost to these maintenance and so it's kind of hard to give away a worthless property with costs agreed and so the entity that Mr centor creates to own that lot seems to be the inevitable end Giver of the maintenance guarantees to the DP so let me ask the question why not just let the DC major estate own that property and allow it to be unmaintained and the D to take it over as opposed to Mr centore we and we tried to give it to the D they're not going to take title to it but they will have to take responsibility of Maintenance to it if somebody would was to not be available if if the parties after notice to perform and fix failed to perform D has the right to come in and fix whatever they're complaining needs to be done mowing filling and charge that amount that you put in and and pay the contractor with whom they retain to come out and do it um from the trust funds right through the trust funds right right so so Mr WJ jaak WJ wak is currently the keeper of that estate he's protected by the estate from the D coming after him other than the funds of the estate so why impose that on Mr senar uh let me I have to interject here wouldn't you rather have the gentleman who lives next door maintain the cap would I'd rather the state of New Jersey take care of than have the state of New Jersey I mean how do we know when they're going to come in I mean I'm going to defer to so let me just explain so the state of New Jersey makes everybody do everything they have to do right but the state of New Jersey so when there's a super fun site this is where I'm going back to my environmental law side when there's a super fund site and the EPA takes lead on it when they finish cleaning it up in the state of New Jersey or the state of Texas or wherever they then give it to the state for the long term operation maintenance of the site we came in we cleaned up this whatever site in your state and now D it's all yours take care of it okay um the obligation to oversee compliance with whatever the problem here is that the trustee needs to close the estate we can't keep it open forever to to do this in perpetuity there's no one else Beyond the estate to continue to own this so we have to give it to someone and Mr senore is willing to take it provided he doesn't have to own that this property well he is owning it right yeah but he wants to own it different entity the way I understand it in case there's some future we haven't heard that yet but we will that's is what I'm surmising from based on the legal test I don't represent another entity right I don't represent Mr senore but he will be the assignment we will be notifying D FYI we've assigned the obligations pursuant to the ACO to M to so saying is the state DP would prefer somebody private entity take care of it and they're only a backup and they're only a backup to come in and take care of it but they're not going to own it right that's what I mean I didn't mean to own it but a backup to maintain it but they would prefer a private individual do it yes they won't they won't take uh that obligation so if there is no holder of the estate what happens to the estate the estate has to be closed you know Estates some some Estates go on for for a long time this one has because grc's been negotiating with de on the cap correct but the estate cannot go on in perpetuity there are no heirs it's just Mr W who is the heir he needs to close it so would what would happen respectfully Mr rojack don't wish should have upon anybody if there was no heir to this estate at sometime in the future if this application is not addressed it would just a a sheet to the I'm not a trust and a state attorney but it would go to in default and however that goes into default no no real estate taxes are paid and the title would just go into and under our state remediation program how does the D hand handle that without an assigner to the obligations of the property they try and find someone and if there's no one that exists then they have to come in and take care of it but we're trying to do something more responsible here and have someone who's going to mow it in the spring and the fall and fix the divots and maintain the erosion and Mr senore is willing to do it um all right let's have a question on Mr sen Moore you're here you're present you heard my concerns I'll wait for you to give your testimony I just expanded on it out of an abundance of cost in to what you are inheriting because I have not spent decades in environmental law but I've dabbled in environmental remediation enough to know that I would never personally make that decision but it's your decision to make you're scaring them I I regarding the maintenance not I don't want your legal opinion at this point I want back to your environmental experience because you're doing both I think um why do they mow it I mean that's an environmental disaster I think with all of the you know the all of the combustion right that we're talking about mowing all these environmental sites why can't it just be allowed to go back to its natural state uh because generally uh you you have to keep there's currently trenches here and they have to be kept clean and they have to be weed free so they the swes collect the water and that water goes off of a uh a drain here that's a natural how does grass affect that rather than scrub brushes and that type of stuff well um the point is because it keeps the erosion from happening and you don't have the roots of trees and stuff going in and dist hold the soil in but what I understand it would erode the cap it would erode the cap if you don't continue to maintain removing the trees the maintenance allows the drainage to continue to be promoted in the direction it was intended and it also any other vegetation could clog that and force the drainage of anything off the landfill out into the neighboring property you also don't want getting the roots of the trees getting down into the Integrity of the cap because that's what causes erosion of the soils when you have it going back to a wooded state so you have to keep it green and the grass cut so that the water runs off there's typically only twoot nominal plus of top soil and vegetated cap in these types of conditions uh and then other engineering controls below that so you don't want anything vegetating that will The Roots will exceed those two feet and impact any of the other engineering CS it seems to me like you come cut down the trees every five years instead of mowing it every week you you no cutting out trees doesn't eliminate the roots doesn't what doesn't eliminate the roots that's the problem that is the problem because you have to keep the Integrity so you know there was a whole design plan by the EPA when they designed the um this remedy with the engineering control that's on it with a deed notice that was placed on it uh and the deed notice said to the world this is here we have a monolith of asbestos um which was mixed with Portland cement and it's underneath here and then we cap it because that Portland cement is a little bit soft too so you don't you want to maintain the Integrity of that Portland cement too and you want to prevent access to people going into it right you don't want someone I don't know who would go play in the cement monol is they found it but people would if they didn't know not to go playing into it that's the point of a deed notice is notice to the world that this is here and don't dig in it um and if you do you have to fix the cap that's on there cap being the dirt and the grass the cap is called an engineering cap yeah I use it sorry sort of colloquial but what it is is actually designed engineering cap that was designed by environmental Consultants when they designed the super fun Can't Let It Go Back To Nature because nature would not be the design cap correct and it would also probably erode and then you'd start seeing cracks and erosion and you'd start seeing the cement monolist okay starting to show that's underneath there I call a cement monolith that is not a technical term but I call it that because that's what I think of it as um you know we don't have wells in here what we have in the perimeter area there's three monitoring Wells that uh was installed by epa's contractors of which D has inherited the obligation to continue monitor frequency that is deemed appropriate and protective of human health so they do take groundwater monitoring the EPA still oversees Us in the sense that they have to do a five-year review the last fiveyear review report was done in September of two 2020 and now the next one is due by uh epa's fiscal year is September 30 so they will be probably out they're inspecting this September in anticipation of issuing their review to make sure that the remedy is still protective of human health and the environment so you have two agencies overseeing it um and we need someone local to help manage this uh and so we are fortunate if we're able to help Mr camore by giving him some of this other property to put into his property uh to use for his purposes and he's willing to take on this obligation to take care of it in exchange for that transfer okay is is the portion of the landfill that's on federal lands also the obligation of the estate to maintain the cap no that's actually where I came into this process because uh d sent a notice about this and I started looking into and said oh all the deed notices that were on here are wrong this is not part of um the Major's property okay and we redid All the deed notices on the property back in I recall I think it was 2020 that I started working on this with the D and fixed the um the deed notices so the um DOI Department of Interiors has the obligation to maintain in the other part there's also a fence across there that has fence po fence posts that are put into here there's a fence right here across the landfill that um the fence posts that are within the cap the posts can't be taken out we can just maintain the fence line that's here but the post can't be taken and that's because this was going to be allowed to be used for the majors used to have a horse farm as I understand it where they would just horses would graze on top of here okay question not as substantial as all that we just heard the orange uh section the proposed access easement is there is necessary to be on the uh was it the Major's property uh could that not just be put on the United States property this this is all of the majors property this is the United States here correct this is is that not one super fund site yes sir it is except that this is all extremely wooded area and there's no access to there okay so D requested that we get that they have um that we worked with uh Mr if you read the consent or worked with Mr senore to have access to come across and get to hear which is a pre-existing path exactly which is assuming they they've accessed it through there before yes I think they've also come in this way too but they you know DP comes across to check when they send out field people I have a question um in all of the other sites that you've worked on how common is it to I mean obviously the super fund site is by law fenced how common is it to subdivide just the contaminated portion of a larger site from that larger site yeah I think that happens a lot of times in development uh across the state because whatever Township is doing what they're doing but you will have an area of a site that may be um a pond of wetlands or unusable space and so you may want to subdivide it off as part of the cleanup there's usually some other just as a Great Swamp has quite a few Wetlands parts a lot of this was pretty Wetlands to start with at some point in near Wetlands but it happens a lot where you subdivide off the contaminated part so that the other part remains more valuable okay can I valuable and usable right and this has a use I mean this open space use is a nice use it's got a beautiful it looks nice like if you saw it you wouldn't know that was a super fun site you would think it's a beautiful uh backyard and so it has an open space value to the town I I have a question uh so we subdividing off part of it and it looks like you know part of it's on the government land and you seem to be familiar with the thing as a whole not the two sections the government side and the estate side you're familiar with the entire thing right yes sir okay so is the uh it sounds like Mr senore has been doing a great job of maintaining the side that was with the estate um and it sounds like I heard you say that there's trees and no access on the side that's the government side in um there trees growing into the cap which doesn't sound like that's ideal no no it's I don't know exactly what's on this portion what I'm saying is this is all wooded Oh I thought you meant around it Oh I thought you meant the department of Interiors owns a huge section here an oh yeah maybe that would help thank you I wasn't really prepared for some of these questions but I cany you can see this is a treat area and and a nine treat area this is all the Great Swamp area that is owned by the department of interor trees ruin the C no the how close are the trees to the cap uh I think there are probably some on the DOI site and that's not for us to maintain that's not our obligation it's not our problem DOI needs to maintain their peace they need to come in and D can tell them what to do good luck um but that's what they're supposed to be doing but I don't have any ability there is one monitoring will on the DOI site uh that DPS to access sooner or later and DP pretty much goes in and and I realize that's not the that you guys are representing you can't represent really what's over there so I appreciate your Insight on what's what's uh I mean I haven't seen the site in quite a few years but um I don't walk up here but as you can see it's fairly clear right yeah I can see it but it's not our job to maintain our M this it's the department of Interiors to maintain its side of the super fund site you you can give us their phone number monitor the EP monitors the full landfill and the estate maintains the cap within their subject property and then the federal lands are done by the dep Department of interior yes so that's for the state and the EPA to deal with Department of interior on correct okay so I have a question so in the order it says the state and I guess the feds have access to 3501 but now 3501 is going to be much less than it currently is so they're not going to have access to what they thought they were getting when they signed the agreement is this something that requires their review and approval uh no it there's nothing in here that requires the review and approval what it is is their access to the landfill so which happens to be on 351 which happens to be on 351 it's not like they have jurisdiction over the whole rest of this it's just they have to come in and so that's why we're doing this easement here so that they can come across this property to get into as long as you don't what I understand as long as you don't restrict their access to that super fun site you're okay yes there will be no physical barrier pointing out the easement it's going to be his lawn Mr store's lawn and but they'll know that there's a path for them to get yes they're very familiar with this site they send out their site teams their field teams so if when this predes years go by Mr senore moves on some other place the new owner or whoever that might be refuses to take any action to do anything anything on the site and the trust fund is expended then what happens is it become Estates probably yes that's why we have a spill Fund in the state of New Jersey to handle these Rogue sites at some point that's all funded by uh the sale of gasoline okay thank you um and whether this and Francy whether or not the the cap is on all of what what's currently 351 or whether it's subdivided 3501 it's still once Mr centore moves on so to speak it doesn't there's no difference if it's subdivided or not subdivided if he's going to take control of it let's say let's just say hypothetically because I I can hear I can hear the comments why don't we just leave it and and convey all current lot 351 to Mr centore and then he can you know do what he wants to it um there's no difference if he then moves on to how how the spill fund would then have to take over 3501 as well whether it's subdivided the way we're proposing it or whether it Remains the Same right I can't speak for the DP of what they would do but they have the right under environmental law to go back to Mr senore or whoever owns this lot to have them comply right this this lot is here and it's going to be there in perpetuity right and so whoever is going to own this for the value of it is um but if we are not granted the subdivision there's no reason for him to take this and take on this obligation and so I behoove the zoning board to please work with the estate and help us to put this and it was D is quite aware that it was intended that the adjacent property owner would take this on when I negotiated this agreement well the one question I would have then is if this property would to be sold by Mr senore or anyone else in the future he would be selling 79 plus 351 not necessarily not necessarily well who and then it becomes lost all well whoa wait a minute if if he was just to sell the the now the new 79 and still own 351 then he would still have to M mow it and maintain it but he potentially could sell 3501 and 79 to a new entity that's correct but he could also just solely sell 79 leaving 351 take the loss on it and walk away could do he or the estate he or his estate yes right but we're trying to set it up for the for the long term to have it properly maintained because it is he can still use it for grazing and whatnot there's still a value to using it for his property is there anything in this proposal that would uh have a deed restriction on lot 3501 remainder lot 3501 recorded uh uh such that it would put any subsequent purchaser of lot 3501 on notice perhaps that they were acquiring the land with the concominant obligation to maintain that super fund site we we're going to be advising the DP that this consent order is being assigned oh it's so it's a consent order that's that administrative consent order with the D that we have to do what we have to do and this will be assigned to the and that be recorded in the county clerk's office the LW the law is coin the proposed law is coincidental to the existing deed notice over that landfill okay so I think the county the county clerk already has that same description what will then be coincidental to proposed lot 3501 and it and is there an obligation of a subsequent owner meaning a purchaser or acquirer of the lot subsequent to Mr centamore or his entity acquiring it uh would they have that obligation to maintain that he had if you heard my question I I'm sorry sorry I missed part of it asking the the the if Mr senore were If This Were to be approved and he were to acquire the lot or his entity to acquire lot 3501 the smaller version the super fund cap version uh only uh uh is there anything that uh would if he would have then subsequently transfer it would that transferee have the same obligation that he or his entity had Visa maintaining that super fund site yes under the consent order provides specifically that and and this was anticipated when um when this consentor was issued by D they understand the Quagmire that we here and the fact of the matter is a lot of sites in New Jersey would go fow and not have someone as responsible as the estate of Majors coming into your board to try and set this up appropriately they just walk okay so that's the value of this um with respect to the maintenance in the site and that they there was a lean filed on the property um we entered into a consent order the lean was um but it provides specifically that the D notice Department agrees that the estate it's accept cessors and assigned shall not be required to do 1 two three but it shall be required the O andm obligations which are paragraph 23 enumerated specifically their obligations paragraph 23 to 29 this is an exhibit to the um documents provided to the engineer in in our um application application thank you uh and so it throughout the document you'll see the department shall provide the state its successors and signs with written notice to perform if they see something so whoever owns this site whether it goes to the township or it goes to whomever who takes this on this obligation will run with the land and it'll run to all successors and assigns meaning all subsequent owners of the land correct and it is recorded in the county clerk's office so they would be on notice all these prospective potential subsequent owners um I can't honestly say whether or not this consent order with the state of New Jersey is recorded in the county clerk's office someone can stipulate to having it recorded by way of a deed restriction the deed restriction is already recorded I'm using term meaning uh uh when I say deed restriction I mean somebody could file a deed to themselves attach the uh uh administrative consent order right and record it in the county clerk's office cuz cuz that's a another dat restriction I think that and that's something that could be stipulated to that that addresses in your testimony you said that you would be noticing D that the AOC is transferred or ACO is transferred right correct that mechanism would automatically C transfer that ACO to the next assigned of the property and all subsequent Pur right now it doesn't exist and that's why you're filing it well I honestly don't know whether or not DP recorded this as I stand here this evening but it's an administrative consent order with the DP and there is a recorded deed notice which identifies this administrative consent to with the D to and it's recorded and I just was trying if you bear with me one minute to pull up the deed notice which I believe we provided a copy of oh it's attached yeah you did it's the last I not getting any younger so um you have but you know in in over overall you have two agencies feds and States overseeing this plus you have an adjacent property on which is the Department of Interiors that's going to oversee this you have an adjacent property owner who for the benefit of obtaining this other land to put all into his one lot is willing to take on an obligation to continue to maintain this cap and you have an estate that needs to close okay it's it sounds like that where're I think the board and the experts and our attorney their main concern is is that Mr senore fully understands what he's getting into and doesn't um and and knows what the obligation entails and that what we're going to do is is acceptable to him is acceptable to the state and the state so and you know that's the main concern the fact that this property is delineated or not delineated I think is really not that important as far as that goes but it's just maintains and as you said it is grass it is mainly mowing as long as somebody doesn't go in there and dig it up or or damage it it's mainly grass cutting basically that's correct okay so it's just one big lawn that you cut and the prior owners had horses on it could use it for animals could use it just for grazing grazing right or or just for fun you know just for whatever exactly uh so it's it it it just can't be used to build on it can't be used to do anything that's invasive to the land that's correct okay so um so it has value for him for using it for using it right aesthetic value it creates open space you can have a picnic there if you want it's protective of human health and I think what you're saying is by by subdividing it into its own lot you've now protected it from being bu on because it's too small a lot it's a structure so you really can't do anything with it as opposed to somebody saying it's part of the lot and I'm going to put a structure on it because it doesn't have any restriction or trying to put a structure on it structure somewhere that's correct okay or a structure somewhere on the lot so now actually by subdividing it you couldn't even put a structure near it because then you'll have sidey yard setbacks you'll have S you know you'll have a lot more restrictions to build around it now you make a excellent argument I wish I had said that sh overlapping but that well we'll deal with the shed but the shed notwithstanding we'll deal with that but um so I I you know I I hope I've summed it up to the point where you know we're trying to make sure that what we doing is is correct and and is going to be something that's going to be long lasting into the future that's correct okay all right and it was the anticipated plan when entering into this agreement with d um any other questions of this witness do you have any further direct or you're done no I I think there was some I want to clarify there was some discussion about how the AC and rep intertwined interwin to subsequent purchaser right okay recorded as an attachment to the deed yeah just like a survey description no right so that anyone is put on notice if they to search the deed um well so I just if you bear with me one minute I'm just looking at the actual deed know change in ownership reson uh the owner and subsequent owners shall cause all leases grants and transfers of the restricted area to contain Provisions expressly requiring all holders to take the property subject to restrictions contained herein in the deed notes which is D standard deed notice language and um well we're just concerned that that that the need notice is actually recorded in the county it already yes sir the deed notice is yes the deed notice was recorded on 67 the ACO is not correct right that's it's just referred to in the deed notice yeah I think that might be beneficial to have the actual ACO we quoted what it will it will show in a title search yeah well that will that document but then I have to go look for the a ACO because it wouldn't be there yes yeah no that's what we're talking about the AC the the deed notice was done before the ACO is finalized okay so now since the ACO is finalized that can be that can be uh uh finalized or or uh that can be that can be incorporated and and filed it can be recorded also but the deed knows is fairly detailed of the requirements yes but never can have enough information recorded So it's there for the public um yeah do good that's not a problem uh is there any other question question for this particular witness so we can move it on okay um do you have any more questions our experts um the just go ahead so in the EPA documents and the DP documents the site it's operable unit 2 and has a case number with the state both include lot 79 lot 30 35 1 and lot 352 it lot 79 was closed with no further action yes what activities occurred on that site was it the transport of the asbestos to the landfill uh there was some bits and pieces of materials how this are you aware of how this asbest got throughout your town sh yeah we have a national gyps into right there's three three sites all tied together so some of it was put into driveways oh yeah some of it is placed everywhere right it's a gift that keeps on giving that's correct um and so there was there was locations where lower areas were filled in with this um basically it was like these ceiling tiles that were broken that they used and they break up and they filled in these areas and so these were dug out and all placed and Consolidated in this one area so that's why 79 got the NFA that was the NFA of 79 yes okay so some some of the stuff was on 79 and it was moved over into 3501 as well as other parts of the township yes other parts of the townships cleanups were brought and put here because the majors were Cooperative with the EPA to allow that I didn't represent them obviously not the the subject slots in front of us 79 and 3501 was at one point all in whole owned by the estate of the majors yes this was the Major's residence and they lived here for many many years and was was it a separate was it all one lot or or then subdivided there's no no information we might hear from another witness yeah okay okay okay it appears we're waiting with baited breath I know that the app true the one of the benefits here is that the 79 has been cleared with an NFA and by addressing the subdivision the majority of 3501 can then be transferred into 79 to clear that land as well from with an NFA which couldn't currently be done because it's the landfill is part of that subject lot that's right yes so it's only this area that's impaired right that's another benefit whole lot is still under an active case and can't be NFA unless it's sub divided well there there is um another further action the remediation has been done with just a long-term omm plan for maintenance of the landfill right but now as he said now it's 3501 total when you make it part of 79 and subdivide that out then that remainder the Clean Pro Clean area will be that much more separated from the right it's no longer housing a super fun site and it's no longer accessible to DP in any form of forclosure or lack of well there's no longer any necessary cleanup to be conducted anywhere outside of here the only thing that needs to be conducted here is long-term right uh maintenance of a cap on top of the site on top of the what's on underneath which is solidified mass of asbestos fibers and soils that were mixed with Portland cement and and the main main object is not to get into the water or the air that's correct and so that's why there's three monitoring Wells that are periodically tested by the DP they take the um monitoring samples and that's their obligation specifically identified in the administrative consent order so they want to oversee it D wants control of this they want to make sure like they want to oversee this and they specifically only want to oversee the meats and Bounds of the landfill right yeah that's why they have no interest in the remaining clean portions of the lot no so that would be of benefit to subdivision yeah that would that would further delineate yeah yeah because just so I'm very clear because one of my concerns you said something earlier like well who would want to buy a super fun site so I I get that we're creating a very nice a better site um where the existing residents or you know the former residence was but I just want to be clear in the future Beyond Mr centore and let's say Mr candor's heirs or you know it's talking very very far into the future um sell his property based on what you said and what makes sense to me is who's who's going to buy this lot maybe di will come to its senses and take it at some point but currently not or the Interior Department of that's di Department of interior excuse me I I didn't know I thought you said D and if not would it you know it becomes derel or I guess if if it if it doesn't sort of have an owner presumably DP will come in and take care of it they will okay they're required to right they got the obligation transferred from the federal government the EPA spent federal funds to come in here and clean up this town would they but they don't like to take ownership they'll take responsibility but not ownership correct okay they're not in the business of owning property got it okay thank you so that means as they monitor the wells if something was tested and they said okay this something's wrong here then they come and repair what Mr centore owned that's right they have the obligation to continue to make sure that the remedy is protective of human health in the environment including water air um and the soils okay the only thing that the majors agreed to back when was to continue to cut the lawn and make sure cut the lawn and make cut the lawn and make sure nobody's digging holes in it right Unfortunately they agreed to that but they did and so you know DP and EPA is holding them to that but that's what they agreed and so it makes sense and they were using it to continue to graze their whatever so it was still usable on the surface yes they had a horse farm and they were using it for grazing horses any new information so in other words we're not looking at something that is totally a parior it is usable it's green it's grass it can be used for something and D is required to make to make sure that this remedy remains protective okay to the residents and citizens of the town okay do any member of the public have a question for this witness okay seeing no member of the public I am closing it to the public um I'm going to we're going to take a short break till quarter two and then we'll hear from Mr camore which I'm sure we're all waiting for so is there a musical inter no all right we going to take a short break e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e all right we're back in uh session at 10 minutes to 9 10 minutes to 8 9 I'm sorry 10 minutes 10 minutes to 10 wow where's my head 10 I was 10 minutes to N9 10 minutes to 10 all right Mr camore we've heard a lot of testimony so have I and we' heard a lot of a lot of things that we referring to you yeah so now uh I like I'll let the attorney that's handling this ask you questions initially uh or if she wants to let just let you discuss it uh and then we'll ask you questions our experts ask you questions and you know we'll go from there absolutely I'll take it any way you like it just refresh my you swore everybody yes I just wanted confirm and he is a fact witness I don't believe he's an expert of well he might be something but not by means expert maintaining if you can just um explain where do you live how long you live um what's the current use um you've heard a lot of questions a lot of comments commentary from the board members um well let me start with a little history of it that'll answer some questions that came up before sure I I purchased the property in 2018 from the estate 2 2018 18 from the estate right in negotiations with the estate we were dealing with the D cuz we knew the site was there okay in negotiations we found out there was two separate Lots so we approached the estate and says we will buy lot with the house and potentially buy the lot with the super fund site so it was your intent all along too well it was based on the responsibility of the site being put back on the D so ultimately I don't want any personal liability for an asbest site okay so Mr wojack outt with attorneys they sent me a letter my attorney looked at the letter and says I don't like it Mr wojack then exhausted his efforts to try and get rid of the property he did approach DOI DOI says we already have contaminated properties at our portfolio we don't want anymore obviously he can't sell it so he came back to me and this was the agreement we came on that contingent upon subdivision that I will buy it okay the the superf fund site itself again I do not want any personal liability to that the plan would be to buy it under an LLC or a conservation trust or some sort of layer of protection okay from the DP so here we are now with the proposed subdivision okay so your the LLC would only entail 3501 correct the rest of that property that's being merged into your property would you would own yes correct okay and you already cut the lawn on it yes I I maintain this the super fun site and I do maintain the outskirts of the site but the entire 3501 is it exists correct what is your daily what is your routine on that green area that's depicted on A2 there what describe what it takes for you to maintain that that is just modowe once every two months okay so that's the extent of your main maintaining yeah according to the the D which I've seen the letter saying that it's mowing any divots which there aren't any okay so basically it's just mowing okay so aside there would not there's no potential for any damage happening to that land unless somebody came in physically did damage to that correct okay or Mother Nature Nature in it of itself is just going to be the grass is growing correct the document which I read also talks about Turtle holes and things like that okay well never seen any four years but okay good good but um what is your intent to do longterm with the property so one of my goals is is to actually seek Farm assessment okay right now the current property is just short of farm assessment so one of the benefits of me acquiring that property is to be Farm assess and what would you be farming I have currently have apple trees planted so I would be planning to plant more apple trees on on the non-affected yes yes and if if Farm assessment needs to I can use the super fund site as a grazing pasture what's the uh minimum a lot size requirement for Farmland Assessment for lot 79 I was told that it was 5 acres of farmable land that they subtract an acre for the house and you presly don't have that with the way it's configured correct but the the new way it's going to be configured you would have that correct I would seek it yes right well you would have that minimum correct basically I didn't mean you would have the actual approval but you would have the reason to ask for it correct apply for you can apply for it right and that is another reason why you'd want that 3501 subdivided so that it's not uh imposing upon the rest of their property correct then I have a question so if if it's not granted this approval is not granted something tells me you're not going to mow 351 anymore right if this approval is not granted I will not be purchasing the property you purchase the property nor will you continue to maintain well they're they're paying me to maintain it right now theate is paying me right now they're going to eventually run out of money if right so or they're going to settle the estate somehow so someone's some arrangement will change you're not going to be mowing 351 at some point if I'm if it's not in my ownership and I'm not getting paid I will not be doing it yeah that's understandable right right now you're doing it under agreement with the estate correct and uh it's once every it's once every two months once every two months so the grass is growing pretty high or how's it how's it no it's it's doesn't grow that much well I mean when we cut it it's a foot tall oh okay I mean I I know the D says it should be two or three inches but the estate is not going to pay me right if you were to if if this went through and you would acquire you would would you cut it more often oh absolutely okay so you're intent would to be to have it mowed and and and maintained more precisely and more particular if you had it yeah I've actually been in contact with the D since I've lived there so Mr W Jack kind of made me like the manager of the property so when the D has to come do something they contact me let me know they're coming you cleared the easement well I actually give them access through my driveway oh okay so they contact me said we're going to be there next day and I say no problem use the driveway there is a road continuing through my driveway all the way back up to the superfront site uh in addition to that easement yes okay yeah what condition is that easan in currently can it be uh uh transgressed can it be yes yeah as long as it doesn't rain okay short of being a swamp correct it can be driven on yes correct there's no Boulders there's no trees across it other than you would mention that there was some restriction that you put in front of it to keep uned yeah we we won't discuss that tonight well that that was just to keep un you know to keep trespassers out basically there was a Township official that was well whoever it doesn't matter but you know kids or somebody going back there correct you'd want to keep them out so that's understandable and that's what Mr wojack put on me says I'm in California keep an eye on the property okay so to keep yeah you don't want people going back there and and partying or something whatever you know kids correct and what if the DP wanted to use it You' just move whatever you had there they're always in contact with me Janette Ables is my contact person she'll let me know when they're coming what they're doing okay um so that shed that's back there yeah pertaining to the shed if it has to go for first of all it's not getting used at all okay it was until a year ago it was filled with horse maneu oh so that was something that was already there yeah that was all the sheds that were existing okay when I purchased the property there was a lot now what are the remain shed used for on the um I actually removed some buildings okay the remaining sheds are used to house equipment to operate the farm and the apple trees oh okay so it's actually usable uh buildings yes they're in they're in decent condition well there were some that were dilapidated that came down those are the ones you took down but the existing ones now that you're currently stowing things in are are sufficient to be used correct okay and the one the one um that's straddling what's going to what's hopefully going to be 351 in your you would be willing to remove oh yeah okay it's not being used at all all right well that would be a condition that I would ask for that to be a condition because absolutely you know that that would clear up any issues of structures additional structures before was being discussed the additional structures remain do they need to be approved by variance well that's what I'm getting we'll getting there oh I'm uh now you're asking for a variance for more than one chef on the property correct yeah and just could you take that mic and walk over to there and just show us where these sheds are and let's see on exhibit A2 yeah A2 sh The Sheds are here a as per this drawing there's two two not permanent structures here this is a permanent structure that's a permanent structure what do you mean by not permanent structure these are just like sheds that you would buy down on Route 22 at a shed place just y exactly okay and they were there already yes how close are they to the property line well they were actually located over here and I moved them here so they are transportable so if they're not in compliance they can be moved well is it a 10ft setback list sorry it's 10 10t from the property line yeah could they be moved 10et from they're probably 10t from the prop they are 10 ft okay I I just want to make sure so they are 10 okay so they are in compliance with that issue they 20.1 and what's that little little building next to your uh Barn there your this little building here that was actually an old horse stable okay that's two Stables there and what is it used for now that's just storage for hunting stuff person stuff okay is it considered part of the barn list I mean it it I would say it's an agricultural accessory building okay well I just met it for purposes of keeping track how many structures we're dealing with and well the variance would be just for the number of sheds which is three which is three you're only permitted one so they're agreeing I think to well there's actually uh there's a garage which that's not a shed right I'm just pointing out what's there no but you they don't need variances and then the one story metal building doesn't need a variance the the agricult the barn or whatever I think the the big these are the only two that are sheds yeah and the one and that frame shed that that you said used to be a the little no the little one next to yeah yes that's a that's on concrete that's a permanent structure that was there when I he's saying that was a former stable I think oh okay fine I mean it's labeled here as a shed that's it's labeled on their plane as a frame shed so I was just going by what was labeled okay so Liz how many total sheds are on lot 79 I thought I had I had somewh in a while I thought there were three but um stable is denoted as right correct and then so then the the the other the fourth one is on you know kind of on both Lots strling it's to be removed going be removed so then they he would be seeking a variance for three three three sheds on remainder lot 79 whereas only one is permitted correct correct correct all right that's that's why you ask the cross- examination questions to keep everything clear no well I that's what I was getting to what's a shed what is an I wasn't talking to you Mr chair but I'm just saying out loud to everybody hello everybody the the the the okay the uh okay I'm done go ahead we got Clarity on the sheds the where is the the the neighbor to your to as my left of of your property which is lot um tax lot 78 so other than White Bridge Road I am surrounded by okay all right so there's no houses no okay so your your sheds your buildings are not viewed by anybody else okay so you're not imposing uh any kind of sight line to any other no and to answer a question before this is actually my dream home I'm not planning on going anywhere but they'll be carrying me out of that house we didn't mean toer you were but we were just talking in the future no no but I me you said like plans I have no plans on leaving no okay so that's this was growing up I had my dream home and and this is it okay Mr Cort tells me that you don't want to subdivide this and have a neighbor there by no means no no no Mr senore just as a point of clarification on this map which is the same as that for the most part uh it denotes that the property just south of lot 79 is owned by Ken figer Ken and Edna figer correct because you said everything around you was DOI actually yeah we do touch I think I think the the creek actually is between us okay so physically the land you know it touches through the creek okay and their Frontage is on what road they're on New Vernon they're on New Vernon so they backyard they're very extreme backyard touches yours correct yeah my back corner touches his back corner okay so that that they wouldn't even know you were there basically no Kenny's great you can't even see Kenny's house right Kenny's phenomenal no but I mean can you physically see well I mean when the leaves are off the trees yes but when the leaves are on the trees no okay um all right any questions from the board members of this witness any questions one question I thought there would have been more sorry sorry but um I just want to know we talked about it it's not not a huge concern for me but what did your Council say about creating a separate entity and putting the we call bad property there right to tell you the truth I haven't developed deep into that yet and probably uh any Communications you're having with your attorney probably not uh relevant to the application and might even be a potentially a breach of attorney client privileges share communication the only one who's got the right to breach so he well he can breach it if he if he knowingly wishes to do so yeah that isn't but but it's all based on this application I exess what the intention is yeah no no and we appreciate you I think that your testimony has helped us understand better and come to a better understanding of what is going into this whole idea and why you're doing it um and we appreciate that because um this is you know thanks to National gypson we have all these issues uh to be honest the risk does not feel good okay you know it is a risk oh no so it's I mean I I've been dealings with the estate they've been great try to out like the risk to put it simply the risk is just if something goes wrong with this cap if something leaks from this area correct so other than that it's a mowing obligation it's it's a maintaining of of lawn which you would do anyway even if that cap even if it wasn't a cap you would be grasped there God forbid something goes wrong the D would be obligated to fix it but then it's up to you to make sure they do it and it doesn't contaminate your problem correct okay y so you're fully aware of that yeah okay one question there's there are two it appears two post and rail fences on lot 3101 whatever not 79 351 uh now one yes and then one Trails over into 79 right where your hand was down down down right there right up little bit this is this is is not here that's not oh that's not there that's not existing okay so it's listed as being there my question is the fence that's there now oh actually you know what I retract that this fence is here that is that is correct I retract it the road that the dpus went down my driveway and continued along this on the other on the bottom side of that fence okay y I'm just wondering if this is part of the D's settlement that that fence needs to be maintained or is that something that the prior owner had put up to delineate this maybe that he let his horses graze there that there was and can it be removed so my my question to you sir is do you do you know if you haven't uh or the person who owns this property until you do uh well I I currently own this right now okay do you have an obligation to maintain that fence the D has has not given me any obligation to maintain that is there any obligation to maintain any fencing around the capped area yes there there is yes okay and that's something that you would be taking on when you buy the correct fair enough thank you I've got a question the orange part the easement that is granted to or proposed to get to the White Bridge Road um it's not right now you said they're going down your driveway uh and then also you're going to own it so why do we why is there an easement from the the site the green area to White Bridge Road if who's going to use it why is it there good question maybe because you don't want to grant them an ement through your whole property who's them he's them no no no no the G like at a later point I could say I don't want you going on my driveway anymore the D he may not want them traing through his entire property it'd be quicker and easier if they go through the easement that's the legal access he's granting them that's the legal rather than speculate I think the applicant other Witnesses may know and could answer the question yes maybe we have the yeah if I could just assist here I think the the and I may be wrong but because we can't give a land locked that we decide to do this easement here which is where they the official if yes if if any tractors or anything that DP equipment needs to bring in this is how they would come across to get to here they pretty much come and park I believe at your house and just come with their clipboard and walk around and go okay okay great thanks all good so in other words the informal access is just for inspection that easement would be for any maintenance uh heavy equipment things they have to go in there to do really work on it that's correct I also just want to correct one thing in his testimony about the length of grass just so you know but there is um the grass can grow greater to 12 to 16 in and it can't be cut shorter than than 4 to 6 in so I just wanted to clarify that's set forth in the ACO but that's why we only request that it gets mowed twice here not because we don't want to comply no no I I we didn't anticip we I I didn't assume that so uh I just want to correct the record in case so that was doing the minimum of cutting that was needed by the agreement we're doing what's required to keep the grass high enough that it actually maintains but it legally can go higher but you just can't cut it lower that's correct so he has the opt he has the ability to cut it more often as long as he doesn't cut up below the 6 in that's correct okay and can't let it grow too long where it's going to attract uh rabbits and turtles those down Turtles we actually have a bald eagle that takes care of that so oh good for you so cool yeah it is what's it name I haven't I haven't named them yet but it was pretty cool when's the bald eagle cam going up I have pictures I have video we c yeah swooping down getting a little bunny be YouTube famous no it was it was cool I walked outside I was like whoa that's cool so I have just another question like it's great that you're maintaining it and you know exactly how high to cut it thanks for the clarification and and so there is a fence along before it gets to the uh the federal land right correct yep and so you're not able to maintain that and they're not going to pay you but uh are you do you have any access through there do you ever maintain that other area no oh that's DOI property okay so so that fence is is pretty pretty much the property line so everything on the other side of the fence is DOI okay yes may I just make one more clarification the fence was put there because the Senor had a horse farm Majors I mean Majors sorry the major said No Horses had a horse farm and so that that fencing was part to install into the cap when they built at the post but the post can't be removed removed right and so the fencing is there it's also to keep people who are on doi's property out of the major VI Versa right but that was the reason well you can go on federal lands but um it's private land and so but more importantly it was for the purposes of their how they utilized their property okay but it was part of the design to put that oh I see so that's actually the reason they can't be disturbed those suppos because it would disturb the cement that's correct it was put in as part of the design in what are those posts made out of that it's a split R fence it is a okay do they rot I mean is a tell you the truth they've been good because they're set in concrete oh okay all right yeah they're set we had to replace a few rails broken but as far as the post okay they were set at the request of the the majors for their design yeah no I understand but I was just curious what they were made out of because wood does rot eventually other areas of the property yes they rot but up there they're set oh okay um any other questions can we just and uh there were a lot of items in our Engineers report I I'm not that this is the engineer but but maybe we should just at some point make sure that we at least have a stip to everything and that everything that was need that required testimony was testified why don't you go over that um subdivision review comments were addressed three 1 through uh 35 in revisions 36 was stipulated to they provide the file 37 you'll allow everybody to review uh the access eement would be a step Susan 3.7 on page four of the engineers okay okay um and then the additional review comments are regarding testimony in the proposed subdivision configuration um 3 42 and 43 the testimony we heard regarding relocation or demo of the frame shed remove those so those are no longer applicable same with 4 46 so 41 44 and 45 I believe would be left to the planning testimony okay all right and other and then other agencies just being planning board County planning board um and consideration to NJ DP site remediation program okay well I'm assuming they're stipping to that right Susan yes uh and and uh uh so 42 43 and 46 RE are related to the shed that's coming down and the split fence that must remain so those are no longer applicable 41 44 and 45 I would defer to the planning testimony what was that 41 44 actually you know you could strike 44 as well because it's related to the use of the vegetated cap and I think we heard adequate testimony that it can be in open space and active Okay so we saw 41 and 45 relate to the upcoming planning Tes okay all right thank uh does any member of the public have any questions of this witness did anybody sneak in no okay no members of the public I close it to the public um anything else from this witness thank you okay thank you thanks uh you want to call your planner we still have 15 minutes good evening again good evening again hello again now you have your planner hat on I do all right so um yeah style lead them okay that's fine however you want to put on your testimony go ahead testimony testimony stimy toan I would like re variance for theot size variance ACC sure so um the um we have those um bulk uh variances and the uh the C variances and then we have the use and and the D variance so uh we heard about the um the lot size of the um of the capped area which is is less than the the uh 3 Acre requirement and um and this can be granted under both the C1 hardship and C2 better zoning alternative or the flexible C and uh as well as the um not having the um the road Frontage uh direct access on a public road so as far as the C1 uh variance a strict application of the provisions of the ordinance or result in Practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship inconsistent with general purpose intent of the ordinance uh lot 35.0 as it's currently configured is not usable uh building a house would not be practical given the existence of the cap and it's um the access location to the house uh which would kind of pass right through middle of a house if it were to sit on 3501 in front of that capped area um as before before you leave if I may Madam M go ahead Madam counsel and Mr chairman uh the the the the concept of a C1 undo hardship for the lot size and for the street Frontage um if you were not to subdivide the lot you would not need either one of those two variants es correct that's correct and by choosing to subdivide the lot and create those deviations that require variance relief aren't you self-creating that hardship thus precluding uh a viable argument for C1 relief under the law I I believe that's correct I I would interject I think the last thing that Mr said was that propos as there's really no way to utilize the the way it is for res but there's no requirement to subdividing correct well correct so if there's no requirement to subdivide it then it is a volary action a choice to subdivide it which under the law would constitute a self-created hardship but for the subdivision as it presently exists you don't need you you have Street Frontage on lot 3501 and you have a lot lot 3501 that ex exceeds the minimum lot size requirement of 3 acres now I'm not I'm not talking about an alternative argument on a C2 I'm simply talking about whether or not this board could even viably legally Grant C1 relief for the lot size Andor Street Frontage uh uh uh uh uh deviations and variance requests by virtue of their being self-created uh by way of subdivision and if I'm wrong please as the planner for the applicant tell me I'm wrong and why and I would invite our board planner to do the same I've been explained I've been wrong many many many times and it's been explained to me many many many times why I'm wrong but so I invite either one or both of you I'd like to just make or counsel don't mean to leave counsil out to leave to leave a lot way it is is economic economic waste and we are actually I think do some kind ofis to make to thater in that and not have economic waste by having a lot that's not developable it does that you can apply to self created hard but um I don't want to spend a lot of time beling it under the C2 so we will withdraw the hardship request and so that the board doesn't have to waste any time considering that want2 well the C2 is a better zoning alternative and um as lot 3501 is currently configured um it's not usable and as I said building a house on it would not be practical given the existence of the cap access location in the cap and what are some of the that we are that we are furing under the well we're UMC MP well yeah so we are and um in a manner which will promote the public health safety morals and general welfare uh provide adequate light air open space promote to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that will contribute to the well-being of persons neighborhoods communities regions and uh preservation of the environment to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural residential recreational commercial industrial uses and open space both public and private according to the respective uh environmental requirements in order to meet the need of all New Jersey citizens and can you just give us a sub paragraphs of section to of the municipal land use law that you were just citing so we can it'll help us for a resolution um I recognize them but thank you yes support direct yes if I could on that one just to help expedite the the my understanding and I'm stealing from our planner is uh uh that it's both the planning variants under 35 section 35 uh as well as a a a a variance under our uh Land Development ordinance um so I guess it would be both a sort of a arguable C2 on the violation of the Land Development ordinance provision requiring Street Frontage but also with respect to the planning variance section 36 it's generally a matter of the need for if any uh uh access of emergency V vehicles and the like to the subject lot 3501 which God forbid I guess if we need emergency vehicles to that lot uh but uh but also uh uh uh if there's a need and what and and and does that act access exist correctly as well as any future Street layouts yes I think um um would you agree sorry uh is is there access to um the potential isolated lot um for emergency vehicles if there was ever needed lot 3501 sorry the potential lot 351 oh AB absolutely there is emergency vehicles could use that um what we have designated as the proposed access easement which actually is an existing route emergency vehicles could use that to get to that lot 35.0 brush fire or something that absolutely okay okay and and I take it then your your your benefits substantially way the detriments argument as previously stated you would argue for the zone for the Land Development ordinance uh variance for that same lack of Street Frontage yes please continue Okay so um the the D variant the use variants so uher in corre right and did aw not see super sites as a as a as as principal structure that's that's right I'm sorry you didn't see super fund sites as a principal use you me right principal use the the the C area and the monolith being a a a principal uh use we didn't see that listed but um just just it's the cap yeah the cap it's not the Super fund site it's the cap right I don't think any I don't think anyone including your Council who wrote a letter that transferring this from the planning board to the zoning board and and and and concurring that D1 use variance at least conservatively was required I don't think was saying that it's because it's a nonconforming principal use my understanding was it's because it's a non-conforming principal structure by non-conforming you say it's not permitted and it's it's it's and right I'm sorry I said non-conform I meant non-permitted permitted and I think it's actually both a non permed use and a non I would agree I actually all right well there you go okay then yeah it is it is both of those so that that's why we're here on on the D variants um we also need uh something to I mean if it's a structure and it's 100% of the lot wouldn't the structure be covering the whole lot and we have some sort of impervious no cuz really the cap is I think as was testified too it's it's underground yeah which still counts under our definition as a structure you can have a structure that's underground but it it does doesn't in Impact impervious it doesn't have to have the setbacks it doesn't have to okay you know right it's like a bunker it is a bunker the yes in the purposes of the municipal land use law um many of which we just went over in connection two Varan are there any would you your opinion that yes and uh the D variance also um it permits you to uh Grant a variance uh for a what's deemed to be a suitable use of the property and before any of us got here tonight the EPA deemed that this was a suitable use of the property so we're locked into the use so it's not that we're here to propose a new use but someone else has deemed this to be a suitable use of this property and what you're saying is you can't eliminate this use it's there we cannot eliminate the use Mr chairman yes I move that we extend the meeting for 15 minutes do I have a second second all in favor I I all opposed okay 15 minutes thank you connection also have toile zoning Z as set forth in the uh famous Infamous medich case um and can we do this here is is there a way to reconcile the fact that the Zin does notm Super fund structures and uses in the could you repeat that please I to you're familiar with the medich yes enhanced standard of appr connection with yes toble to gruse VAR we need toile the proposed VAR with the zoning ordinances omission of the use I the structure the use as a of super site reconcile boardin om of that from those that are Z District the Ed a number of um purposes or a number of ways to reconcile that including substantial neighor and the needs of the community yes those two yes that was not something that would of and in that's correct that is correct um and then I think you also noted that um this property is particularly suited for this proposed which is also cited in the because it's already existing deemed to be an approprate by absolutely so this basically took pollute polluting material from other parts of the township and put it there to to isolate it and and and other ities decided that that was a suitable a suitable thing to do uh and this was a suitable property to do it with and suit location absolutely what property9 we're seeking a variance for those um that would be under the C stand us connection onging businesses um of of the Agricultural business and that Mr centore has testified that he his intention is toow app structures yes and I just want to note that um when we inspected the property and then because there were some notes on the survey about what was a shed and what wasn't and you know we could have some field surveyors out there and they look at something they deem it to be a shed and maybe they don't know there's a concrete pad under it or something so well they had no knowledge what it was before so yeah so I I yield to U Mr sen War as to the use of the particular buildings and whatnot as opposed to it it was a horse stall as opposed to a shed right but it's stle a structure you're allowed one and you have and you have allow allowed one and we have more than one and you have three yeah we're going to assume it's three sheds no more no less right okay what about the shed that's on the property line or what would be the property line they're removing so that's removed I I even noted it my apologies it must be 10:30 yeah and then' yes that's right um without can be granted without to and it will Nott z z to the public is the extent to the grer so what's your opinion to well there's no substantial there there there's no there's no detriment to any other properties feral government right and I think part of the reason why the the board was asking the asking Mr sore about the questions the neighboring properties to neighboring properties to this point um that there is one to the rear and is that that's correct and I've I've examined the properties his property from the surrounding properties and uh it it be hard pressed to see um these structures there and additionally um is it your opinion that that that criter would be satisfied because nothing changing on there is absolutely nothing that is changing on the ground other than what we heard from Mr sensore this evening is that one shed would be removed so if you were to go take a ride down the road tomorrow or today and you go down and assuming this uh application is approved and uh perfected you would not see any changes whatsoever other than that one shed to be removed and then the other the other thing that we need to show is zy was previously some of the previous um discussions is that um this this particular use is not could not be anticipated it's not included ump so how we're not impairing we are not not we are not impairing anything no and the deviations in terms of allowing the I'm sorry allowing no um the um aesthetically um you you drive down the road and you basically see Farm type uh atmosphere specific to this property and would not set aec correct no uh um there are very few properties with with have that have this situation on it and um this particular use of this cap uh I can't see that there's a precedent in the township um that would be set by granting these variances allow additional agricultural yeah and that's what we heard from Mr sentor is the um the intent to um continue and uh expand the agricultural purposes um which is part of uh of our uh you know intent in the zoning and the municipal land use law and I would add you that this is providing a practical solution to the situation situation this is a very practical solution to um to maintaining this uh this cap and uh you know promoting um advancing um mble land you slow on the zoning here can I ask a questions yeah so okay I have a question all right so the um you said there's no detriment to the neighbors right um if Mr centore wasn't the neighbor would you ever be bringing this type of subdivision application to the board and wouldn't be a detriment to the neighbor it's right next to this I can't yeah I can't answer that question the property line now goes right up to the Superfund Site right the the new property line that you're creating creating goes right up to the super there's no buffer from the the lot that Mr sore happens to own but if it was Ed's house it might be a detriment to himis a hypoth yeah that's not relevant be somebody somebody else be some other owner that's what I'm saying on what property I I he's asking the question of the planner I think yeah I'm sorry you guys were working together I don't think I'm the appropriate person to to answer that questional question who do I ask then it's not before the board that issue is not before the board it's a hypothe out there may I I I I don't think that the application would be presented if there wasn't a Cooperative neighbor I don't think that's is that what you asked I didn't hear it if I you if you'll allow me I'll try the the the the um I believe what board member gakis is asking is you've testified that uh creating the new lot 35 one which is essentially just a super fund site in the cap uh is not having a substantial detriment to the neighborhood the neighborhood for that particular lot would include the immediately adjacent lot 79 arguably the most affected lot along with perhaps the doi's lot lot 3502 perhaps but uh the the um I believe what he's asking is while the current owner of lot 79 the immediately adjacent lot is Mr centamore and he's obviously not complaining he's consenting to the application um one has to look at that relief the subdivision and Associated variance relief that's granted as being relief that is granted in perpetuity and one has to assume that the adjacent lots and lots in the neighborhood are not necessarily going to be owned by the same individuals in perpetuity I don't know that any one of us has figured out yet how to live in per in perpetuity so so the the um and if we do uh please let let me in on it but um the uh so I think it's a relevant question and maybe you can address it uh as the planner uh uh uh how is that not not substantial constituting a substantial detriment to lot 79 by having no buffer to a Superfund lot assuming that Mr senore will not be the owner of lot 79 in 500 years I think I how'd I do good yeah thank you you could have been more succinct I know but but was that it basically okay it is exting condition and the new configuration of laot 35.1 being the cap area will continue to be maintained the way that it is from the testimony that I've heard the requirements by the D so nothing's going to change there so I can't see a detriment to a subsequent owner of lot 79 and does it really need a buffer is there there's no requirement not it does not need a buffer okay so it's not like a Wetlands buffer or a steep slope buffer we don't it doesn't require a buffer is what you're saying okay no it does not okay I think testimony yeah looks like Farm countries what okay okay um any more questions all right no uh any members of the public have questions for the planner no okay close to the public um uh yeah um do you want to extend a few minutes yeah let's extend 10 minutes can you motion second all in favor all in favor extending 10 minutes I okay go ahead pick a movement and a second Deb the the uh um what it I'm sorry do you have summation I I would have there's no public opposition this evening apparently I hear no there's any public want to make a comment no close it the public I would have AEF and Inc testimony I think given the lat of the hour and um of the hour yeah heard itce no I mean we've heard all this I will PR that I will foro that and um ask respectfully that and I appreciate the comments and the questions from the board to see here and iences um and let us close the estate let Mr centore growing more apples and um continue to maintain the C to you want to summarize sure Mr chair yeah with your permission uh U I'm happy to summarize what I understand to be the relief requested and if it's granted what the conditions uh stipulated to uh would be uh it's minor subdivision or lot line adjustment uh between lot uh 3501 and lot 79 as they presently exist uh it uh that's the minor subdivision uh in addition there would be D1 use variance relief for uh both a non-permitted principal use and a non-permitted principal structure the Superfund uh uh site remediation use and the uh super fun cap uh uh structure uh on uh lot 351 uh it would be the D variance relief insufficient lot size because remaining lot 3501 would be reduced to 2.6 approximately Acres whereas a minimum of 3 acres uh lot size is required for uh this particular conservation Zone uh a section 3536 of the ml planning variants uh because remaining lot 3501 would have no direct access to a public road uh also that same lack of Street Frontage for proposed lot 3501 uh would require bulk variants relief from land use ordinance 133.33 51 uh because one of the conditions of approval if there is a grant of approval is that that particular shed that would straddle new lot 3501 and and and and the lot line between new lot 3501 and lot 70 new lot 79 would be removed by the applicant so we're still on four variances the fifth variance multiple sheds specifically three sheds on proposed lot 79 uh whereas uh only one shed maximum is permitted for a single family lot uh so it's the minor subdivision the D variance and those 1 2 3 four bulk Varian is the one planning variance correct Liz correct uh that is the relief sought if uh the board does grant that relief uh by way of five affirmative votes since there is a d uh use variance at issue in addition to the associated bulk variances in planning variance and monitor subdivision uh I have the conditions as all the conditions stipulated to as set forth in the planner's memo the engineers memo as well as an access easement from White Bridge Road to new lot 3501 uh being a condition uh as well as the administrative consent order uh that was referenced being uh Incorporated with the previously uh uh uh uh recorded deed restrictions so that the entirety of that document is recorded in the county clerk's office uh subject to the review and approval of the uh Township attorney or or excuse me Township attorney or board attorney um as well as the uh well there's no meats and Bounds so we don't need the engineer um also the removal of the Shred Shed that would be straddling uh remainder lot 351 and remainder lot 79 and cl one more I think that might be it as as far as conditions of approval okay so that is the relief uh and the conditions of approval if there's a grant and again it requires five affirmative votes out of however many board members we have qualified to vote this evening it appears as if we have five uh so I'll defer to the chair and the applicants Council whether uh there's a desire for a vote this evening or not or to carry the vote if we were to carry the vote we would have um we potentially would have more members and they would listen to the tape and yeah and and cert sign an affidavit or certification certifi listen that they did so and uh I guess the effort would be to try to have seven uh minimum one can they make the decision after we after we deliberate can they decide after that or is that too late decide no we can deliberate so why don't we do that and see the board can deliberate and thec can make DEC I'll start I think I think that the applicant has come here um in in Earnest and in good faith to try to improve the situation I think that if we were to vote no we would relegate that property to having little or no utility um I'm not sure if a hardship is required if that presents a hardship but I think it does I think based on the testimony of our planner our attorney the applicant attorney and their planner I think it does do that I think that it's particularly well suited for agricultural use and I think um the applicant wants to grow apples there I think that's uh reasonable I mean it's it's like a Farmland area anyway it was used for Farm it's historically been a farm and other than that you know it's not even unsightly just an area that can't be built on there's no reason to have that as attached to uh what would exist as uh 79 3501 can take that and do what they may with that and and we're creating one good property out of out of one good property and and two and a bad property there's a bad property so we're actually doing something good here I think it satisfies the negative criteria it's not substantially impair the zone or the Zone plan I think it's a good application I think it'll benefit the town it'll it'll uh it'll also benefit some stuff that we're not responsible for which is the maintenance of a superf fund site but that's going to come along with it so that's an added benefit I'm in favor of the application thank you Tom I think this has been for me at least a remarkable remarkable listening to the testimony from the applicant and his experts uh listening to the uh conflict between the uh good efforts of the D and EPA to clean up this property which bumps directly into our own uh Municipal land use law um I at first I thought it was going to be irreconcilable but I think you've demonstrated quite well that you've converted something that was useless that was a matter of economic waste into something is quite viable um on so many different areas of the pro the site will be maintained the property will be used and actually the U the tax value will probably in be increased by this uh uh realignment so uh from my perspective I am in favor of it Gary uh I I think the subdivision of what is it 1305 351 3501 uh is making a site that's uh that had some usability to it making it completely unusable um and adding to uh the adjacent site is more usable space um and I I think that the township is and and the environment is grateful that Mr centermore is maintaining the site that's becoming even more unusable so regardless of me sounding like I'm not supporting this uh because we're making a very very unusable site which used to have a little bit of nice space around it the lot is just completely you know a a super fund site um I'm not really good at listing out the D variances and C variances and what uh you you you done a great case of uh rep in why you want this variance but um I'm grateful that Mr senore is going to maintain this site and I would be in favor of it Tom um this is obviously a unique situation uh super fund sites don't come up every week do they thank God yeah um to the positive I can't see any other purchaser of lot 3501 other than Mr centamore who would pick that up except for the neighbor who gets to expand their lot uh it's this is a special special per purchase uh that doesn't hurt the Comm community and in fact it does help in fact you're going to put an apple orchard there nice hope you make some money on it um that's for the negative criteria it fits the Zone in that it is what it is um you up time sorry uh and La 3501 is is unique uh this does not create a precedent I would be in favor of uh this application I concur with all the rest that have been said and I also would be in favor of it so do I hear a motion to approve this okay do I hear a second second B call and and just to be clear councelor you want the vote Yes okay the the motion was Mr ronio the second was vice chairman yes and I'll assume that's to Grant all the relief I listed with all the conditions I stip uh applicants stipulated to as I stated them yes Mr aronia yes Vice chairman grov yes Mr GIS yes Mr Flatley yes Vice CH uh chairman gret yes motion carries congratulations there you go you don't have to come back well done good luck well done nervous we expect a bushel that now I'm only teasing that's how recording I know t a joke I know come AC men like this super fun wow wait time out out please have a motion oh yeah I have a motion toour all right we're adjourned for