##VIDEO ID:P2JQcKhu-PE## Mr how much how much longer do you anticipate taking um terrible estimating um I I I don't know maybe a half an hour suggest when we take five we're stream set up it's ready to go finish you okay yeah yeah it's fine I just figured some techical difficulties that's fine live okay okay okay thank you um at the last hearing we [Music] were oh my good you can hear me you ready yes okay um at the last hearing uh we discussed the the Nur school and also the Hebrew school you said that the Hebrew school was for ages uh first grade to seventh grade um and what what were the ages for the nursery school because I heard a couple of different uh age ranges and I just wanted to confirm do you know will it be for and under or it's a work in progress and um based on the questions and so on so we've given than get some more thought it it will mirror the programs as I testified last time that that would be similar to the pr programs available at other house of worship I talked about his program Maplewood um so again it's something that's something that we've done but we anticipate regularly the full range of uh one year it seems to to about two and a half years old or so but uh it's a work in progress as I told one of the board members last time um and have you submitted an application yet to the state to operate that school or have you started preparing that application no um do you know if uh that approval will have a maximum number of children that can be enrolled at the nursery school I imagine so and uh will the applicant make that application any approval for that school available to the board in the township I don't see why we do that no you will not no it says something that Our obligation to the state I don't see why it has to with Bo um and you testify that the nursery school will uh will occupy the the ground floor of the building is that right most of the ground floor not the entire ground floor yes okay so uh the ground floor is approximately 8,000 square feet is that right yes so about how much of that 8,000 square ft would be occupied by the nursery school about 5200 okay and the rest of that although I just would excuse me sorry I just I did want to point out there will be a testimony from the architect who has the dimension and scale floor plan so that and that's been on file for several months so uh he would be you know the professional who squarely within his Bailey like to answer detailed questions about square footage um and and what about the kitchen with the school also be using the kitchen on the property I don't think so the kitchen's on the first floor right the kitchen is on a floor above yes okay so then the kitchen would only be used for the uh services that you talked about is that right I don't anticipate the nursery school students using the kitchen okay well there'll be on-site cooking for the nursery school I could not I could not answer that question today I don't know okay you don't know if meals will be provided for the students or anything like that I don't know um and will the uh the nursery school also occupy uh or or use any other portions of the building other than that 5200 square feet on the ground floor no um will there be a separate entrance for the nursery school yes um and would the nursery school have a set area outside of the property that it can use I'm not sure what you mean by that well the plans show to play area one point I think the November 13th meeting a play area was added to the plans um is is that exclusively to be used by the nursery school that play area no um and will there be a set uh time when that area will be exclusively used by the the nursery school during Nursery School hours I imagine uh you know teachers or staff or security would prevent strangers from the street from coming in general so the answer is yeah probably and you said that Nursery School hours would be 9:00 a.m. to 2 p.m. um I actually didn't say that um the hours we're not 100% sure about still okay I believe your traffic engineer testified to 9:00 am to 2m but those are those are not the set hours for the nursery school no I think I I think I testified actually if I remember correctly I don't call 100% but I do think I said that there's early drop off there's late pickup I do think I spoke about the program that we would be imitating in Maplewood and I did I do think I also spoke about the other temples and other house of worship that have late pickup early late early drop off laid pickup I recall I spoke about that and you know that and it just did testify again that we would be modeling after the local programs so both to be competitive and also F fill the need um so where there there will be uh before care and after care offered for the nursery school is that what you're saying that that is our plan yes so the formal Nursery School hours will be 9:00 am to 2: p.m we don't plan a nursery school yeah just to correct you we don't plan a Nursery School per se which um one of the members of the public corrected us that that's a term for a specific age I think a preschool that is generally a better term um be as it may we we will have a range of hours which I've testified to and a range of arrivals and and departures as I've just testified to and I think I said that last time too uh will you provide the hours for the before care and after care that are going to be offered at the property we can I don't know if the Board needs that we can don't you think that's relevant to your Traffic Engineers analysis I think I indicated at the beginning of the proceed meetings this evening to the extent that that's relevant to um satisfy the board's traffic consultant that that information is needed in order to be satisfied and comfortable with the track traffic analysis that yes we'll provide that but over and beyond that to kind of again it's a new program that's not currently in existence asking for projections and to micromanage that impose conditions on on numbers at this point would be premature and and not appropriate okay thank you um is this uh we've used a couple different terms uh during the application a house of worship um your plan say a Shabad um Is this different from a synagogue I'm just trying to understand like is this a smaller type of facility or what's the difference between the terms synagogue shab sha I've heard the word sha what does that mean I don't know the difference between the terms um is this considered a sha or a Shabbat or it's the synagogue they're all the same things I just testified that I'm not aware of this a difference between the terms is a Shaw like more of a school is that what it is I think he provided a testimony to to that that I think satisfied the question that they're all a similar definition and is the school the nursery school and the Hebrew school is that a significant part of the application for the board it's an important part of a religious Mission yes okay and I understand you said most of the ground floor is going to be occupied by the nursery school and then the second flooor will be occupied by the Hebrew school right um second second FL third FL uppermost the the uppermost floor as yeah uh it's it's a third floor you know in a commercial building it would be considered a third floor and then would there also be outside areas used by the Hebrew school I'm sure there would be yeah and are there going to be any temporary structures on the property at any time I cannot tell you right now I don't we don't plan on having temporary structures but I can't tell you that now do you know why the use of the property as a school and a nursery school wasn't included in the public notice for the application or any of application materials it was actually well actually it wasn't I have a copy of the the public notice here and first time I I actually learned that Nursery School was proposed for this application was from the November 13th meeting when a play area was added to the plan so I'm wondering why wasn't that part of the uh description in the application why wasn't that in the public notice for the application the uh the relevant term under milburn's ordinance and for purposes of the planning board application and proceeding is house of worship sh is not is not appear in milburn's ordinance um no other term uh whether it's related to the Jewish relig or any other religion down is of is use or relevance in the ordinance other than house of worship and that's what was used to describe this proposed use and notice consistent with how it's handled and contemplated in zon she did ask a question regarding the this the use yeah so the answer is we noticed for a house of worship and all of these other uses are completely inal I if we didn't notice there's going to be a kitchen we didn't notice it's going to be a bathroom we didn't notice be an elevator these are all incidental uses and integral parts of our religious Mission I've testified to that about six times several times tonight well wouldn't you think members of the public would be interested in knowing that a nursery school would be operating at the property in addition to a Hebrew school in a house of worship that there is multiple uses of this property you asking me a legal question or a or a or a um community relations question leg question I'm not going to address but community relations your you and your clients were well aware of exactly the square footage and everything that's happening some of I don't know if she's reclined or not is posting all over the place everything that we're doing or planning on doing so the plans have been online and uh 10 days before the application of first thing and and in the plans the rooms are clearly marked and the answer the short answer to your question is the public was well aware of everything that be contemplated doing in a building based on Market the rules so I'm just going to object to the notice of the application it didn't include any language referring to the fact that there was a nursery school offered as part of this application um Nursery School uh is a significant part of this application it's taking most taking up most of you know almost like a a third or a fourth of the building is being occupied if this Nursery School it's not mentioned at all in the application materials it's not mentioned at all in the public notice to the um the public and pretty sure that most of the public here only learned of this Nursery School used which is an addition to the house of worship um from attending these meetings so I'm sure there's a lot of members of the public that aren't here that might be interested in the fact that a nursery school is operating at the property in addition to a school so I object to the public notice for the application and I ask that the board um ask the applicant to Reen notice so certainly the uh obor's attorney is is well within rights to object to the form and substance of the notice my response will only be that uh house of worship is the conditional use that we're seeking approval for as the rabbi correctly stated it's very clear from all of our submissions uh exactly with a breakdown by room of what the proposed use is so also has been substantial testimony in public being broadcast over Zoom there have been leaflets and pamphlets circulating in a bunch of other means of making the public very well aware in addition to the fact that I'm sure longtime residents of no are also very well aware that virtually every single existing house of worship in town conducts uh Associated uh uh daycare services Educational Services and have been for many many years and that's a part and parcel of nearly all of the existing houses Worship in town and has been for a number of years um just to respond to that and you know that there is a significant amount of the uh space for this building that's being occupied for school um and uh the applicant uh hasn't provided much details about that school um because they're still developing the application and it's just something that's been developing over the course of these hearings it's not mentioned at all in the plans um I think anyone could have uh assumed that um you know an identification of classroom on a floor plan uh refers to perhaps weekly religious education classes which is something very different from a nursery school um and I think that it's important that the public have notice of all of the uses that are proposed for this property um the property is zoned as a conditional use U for a house of worship and there's also a conditional use um for school uh that's allowed on this property so um objector position is that there's dual uses on this property um there's a nursery school and there's a house of worship and it should be in the public notice okay my advice so my advice is the board attorney is that uh the standard for notice is that it has to put a reasonable person on notice to enough sufficient enough so that they would be inclined to go ask questions if they want to right just given that house of worship was included in the notes and given that as Council stated Nursery schools educational programs are often an accessory use to house of worship use I believe the notice would be sufficient provided it stated that a house of worship was being proposed it did right yeah it yes and also the as an initial matter as is usually done before the board accepted jurisdiction is there was a finding and determination as to the accuracy of the notice uh which is certainly part of our record but yes answer your specific question the notice does call out house of worship and identifies it as a conditional use given that that's the case I don't believe the applicant needs to re this I have a question if this nursy school requires state regulations and we enforce those state regulations with that not how do we monitor I don't believe we I don't believe the township of Milburn certainly not the planning board of milour enforces State education not not board the town itself be the state department of ucation so that's my advice I don't believe the injury notice I necessary um well I just say that you know there's not that many people that youd have to re notice to notice is jurisdictional I don't believe the board has jurisdiction over the application to consider if the notice is sufficient so um you know it's our position that it should be Ren noticed all right so you're you're not requiring any notice is that it chair I think we I don't feel that take any additional action at this point okay um Rabbi there was prior testimony regarding uh storm water and a lot of concerns expressed about effects on drainage and flooding um but the applicant agree to a condition that if this application is approved um it would ensure there's no negative effects on drainage and flooding to adjoining properties no I mean that's a completely subjective standard the African is required to comply with the applicable storm water management regulation both under the local ordinance and those that are imposed by the D at the state we have we will comply with what's legally required um I think that's a fairly common condition that um you know you won't affect drainage of nearby properties so the applicant won't agree to that condition are you aware that we are in fact and I One Jefferson is the nearby property that would be affected solely are you aware with that Well I this is my turn to ask questions so yeah Rabbi you would have to answer the question not with the question please what was your question sorry uh would the applicant agree to a condition that um it won't negatively affect uh drainage of AD joining properties if this application is approved I think that's a fairly common condition a lot of resolutions I see no no um and what's the anticipated length of construction for this project do you know no um do you know if the applicant would agree to a condition that um it provide notice um to the township and the uh adjoining residences on the commencment of construction or the construction schedule I do know that the ordinance requires that there be a preconstruction meeting um with the township engineer and other representatives of the township before uh commencing construction so certainly we'll comply with those requirements but that again and an additional kind of General notice to the public uh is it's not required I don't believe appropriate or I think it's unnecessary burden on the applicant can I ask our engineer is construction fencing required during the time of constru okay thank you and certainly applicant will comply with all those regul all those requirements okay just looking for my notes um I believe I asked you a few questions about cooking on the property you said that cooking would be done in the uh kitchen listed on the floor plans um and would be used during religious Services is that right I I never said that okay what when do you anticipate that the kitchen will be used how often I couldn't tell you as needed as needed I don't I don't know standing here today I could not tell you that um and do you know have anticipate um how many persons might be served with food like over the course of a year how many events you might have that as far as planning I think essentially this has been asked well I think the witness gave testimony that as many as 200 250 persons might um uh attend services at the property and then also be served food at the property that would be cooked on the property so I was trying to understand um you know how often that would occur and what other cooking would be done on the property there was reference in some of the testimony to you know weekly meals are there going to be weekly meals at the property at at the end of the day I'm not aware of a single requirement under either the ordinance or the general Municipal ordinances in Milburn that puts any restrictions on when a property owner can use its kitchen and whether the neighbors happen to approve of when this facility uses its kitchen and when it doesn't use its kitchen is not relevant to the board's consideration of this application we're not required to take a straw poll of the neighbors to determine when they think it's okay for this particular facility to use its kitchen and repeated questioning along these lines is simply fruitless and a waste of time well if I might respond to that um you know I think everyone can agree that this is going to be a pretty drastic change in use of this application this property this property has always been residential so um you know it's it's a big change in the use of the property there's neighbors nearby and they're concerned about you know what's going to happen on the property and how it's going to affect um their quality of life and the fact that there's going to be large amount of cooking on the property and how that might affect joining it residences I think is something that this board could consider it could consider conditions to try to address some of those concerns so that's the reason why I'm asking the questions understood but I think you I think the comment was that you asked multiple questions regarding the the use of of the kitchen right and I don't think I just I ever got an answer to that last question that's why I was coming back to it what was the question sorry are there going to be weekly meals served at the property I I refused to answer that question it's not your business the board has no jurisdiction you can just say you response Rabbi EXC members of the public I'm sorry mad chair please no no no Rabbi please please this is a this is a quasi judicial proceeding okay this is almost a court okay you wouldn't do this in court please don't do it here okay everybody here is trying to take a testimony the board these are all volunteers none of these people get paid to be here okay so please be respectful of them and of yourselves because you're frankly you're not going to hear the testimony if you keep chattering so please just be respectful that's all we're asking please so your question was were there weekly mails and I believe you you are not providing response to answer more fully I I testify that we have no I have no I have no way of predicting or knowing what the need will be uh standing here today and I further say um and I'm happy to testify to that that if we meaning the people of use the congregation perceive that there is a social need a religious need uh of any sort um whether it's um uh attending the service or people who might need food this all falls within the rubric of a house of worship and um I am not prepared to have you or anybody else tell us what our religious Mission should be or is if you have somewhat to testify contrarily bring that person okay thank you for the response um so uh you won't be answering the question it sounds like you don't know I think I just answered the question um I don't believe you did but um that's the extent of my questioning so I have no further questioning this witness time okay thank you um because it is 9:30 and we've been sitting for two hours we will allow a five minute recess for folks if anybody needs to stretch we will come back and continue with questions from the public um and I will ask if any question of yours has already been asked during the last two hours please don't Reas that question so as soon as you hear one of your questions asked please strike it from your your list and we welcome new uh original questions right matter chair real quick if I could I know a number of people from the have Jo the audience if anybody is represented by Miss Dory I said at the beginning um the the M Municipal land use Law requires that if you're represented by Council all questions have to come from your attorney so again if you're represented by her you can't ask questions all right just want to make that clear to everybody thank you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e okay thanks we're back in session um continuing the public questions or questions from the public for um the rabbi regarding testimony and operations so uh if folks weren't in the room when I mentioned it earlier if you have questions uh that are new that we haven't just received in last few hours and regarding the rabbis testimony we invite you to come forward you would state your name and address um and please do spell your name um again our stenographer is not here but we do have uh this recording mechanism um so please just say uh name spell it uh if it's at all complicated and uh an address and then you may ask questions so we welcome members of the public M Madam chair if you don't mind I'll just point out also this is for questions only there will be an opportunity at the end of the proceedings for members of the public to make comments you be sworn under oath and you can provide testimony again just please try to keep it the questions and open you know sometimes there's a little bit of a factual predicate but I'm try to keep that to a minute yeah my name is Jeffrey Feld FLD I live at 11an Alexander Lane Short Hills New Jersey just want to have some various brief questions um would the based on security plans would the applicant SEC share his security plans with the local police department say you wouldn't share with the planning board or the um other people would would you share it with the local police that is that a question yes that was a question oh um we'll certainly have conversation of the police I'm sure we will I don't know I didn't ask a question would you answer yes or no would you share agreed to share your security plans with the local police department my answer stands uh we will have conversation with the police if they uh would like to have something more detailed there's no question we cooperate with them but I can't tell you right now what they're going to be comfortable with or ask I didn't ask I said would you share your I asked a yes or no question can you direct him to answer my question in a yes or no form thank you thank you Mr okay I just think I think the witness should make a good faith effort to give as wholesome and respons responsive answer as he can the question was would you share your plan and he said we will have discussions so that that is not a question yes we will share our plan with them or no we will not share our plan with them I think that we're looking for a yes or no response to that question no okay thank you thank you is this the applicant's third application to a Milbourne L use board to establish a house of worship in Milbourne is it our third application uh I can help you with the dates I think it's our fourth why do I think it's our fourth I think it's our fourth yeah it's our fourth okay all right it's your fourth um are you in current litigation about one recent application that was denied from a different land use board in December 2022 that is irrelevant to this application in front of us all right how many stories is this Building G to be including the basement three three excuse me that's a loaded question in that there are very specific definitions and requirements under the ordinance as to story and height which are that information is provided on our plans and that's information that the architect calculated in preparing his plans and will testify to okay there's a there's a specific meaning as to story and height that we have to comply with under the ordinance lay witness should not be testifying to okay all right but that be a question question for later on when you look back at the notice when it says um a twostory building you know whether the ra a rational person that lives in the community thank you all right um when did you add the playground was it after the public notice I don't recall if you looked at exhibit I think C or D was that after the notice is your does your answer still stand yeah I don't Rec okay just want to look at it um at your last testimony not tonight but at the other meeting you talked about being discriminated that other places worship do not comply with the zoning law um at the first hearing there was a handout given to people in the public and it listed various other religious establishments how many of those religious establishments existed before 1947 in our third state constitution I'm not aware that there was any sort of handout that's been entered into the record and as part of these proceedings I just ask agree the board has not received any handouts well I can tell you the public received this on September they were handed out questions it's not statements it's not presentation all right but he's talked about discrimination and he's comparing other places of house of worship in the community i' like to know when he says discriminating of these other establishments how many were established before 1947 with our state constitution how many were established before 1975 with the enactment of the municipal land use law which is what's governing this whole proceeding you have a question for me yeah you you said explain you said you've been discriminated against you're asking him when other houses of no basically I want to know the basis because he he made a state factual statement they's been discriminated i' like to know the basis to understand that how he's been discriminated against all the pre-existing um places houses of worship I'm not sure what is what what what what exactly is your question sounded like the question was you made a claim that you've been discriminated against what is the basis for that claim yeah I reject the Assumption of the question I've never made the claim uh I have not made that claim in these proceedings I was merely sing what I proceed I I thank you but I I have not made that claim in these proceedings but what I did say it's not a question that you asked what I did say was that we are the only application and that's how I started my testimony last time were it to be approved by the board that would be in fact in compliance today with the ordinance that stands today I stand by that all right thank you okay thank you are they members of the public Christine Bast 15 Fair tff Short Hills good evening everybody um I had to drop a lot of my questions so if you a little patient I apologize my whole thing got messed up here um Rabbi what is your relationship with um Harry gross is he an investor in the high Center in any nearby adjacent properties um I'm not sure if your question has to be regarding his testimony I it's a question for the rabbi because it affects the entire you know overview of the area I want to understand what his relationship he's an investor in the high Center I believe from the documents I've read so I just want to ask him if that's true was that name mentioned in the application documentation uh it's on it's on record for the high Center if you look up public records and tax records so it should be on application I would imagine that it is it's not within the scope of this testim but but it is because I want to understand what type of heavy-hitting investors are behind you testified about the investors behind the excuse me I'd like to address I'm sorry okay go ahead we're all here for for his testimony there's a transcript of his testimony from the last time there's been no testimony within the scope of his questioning and answering with with regard to any uh investors any particular members of his congregation has not been part of his testimony and Miss best is it I'm sorry yes yes so again as as I st to miss Dory earli the questions have to be relevant to what the board is legally allowed to consider okay we're talking about the development on this property if you have a question I'm very clear on that yeah no I but I I just want to at least explain to you so maybe you could reconsider what I'm trying to say I wouldn't like to say that I don't agree with your St I'm sorry to keep interrupting you did problem I'm trying to so the other attorney was able to actually explain so I'm not allowed to be pro pro like I'm not I'm not testifying asking a question explaining testify so I can't be a pro attorney for I can't I can't do that I'm not allowed is that testif remember I'm not giving testimony I'm trying to explain to you just like the attorney did the reasoning no the reasoning for the question to be how the question testimony okay so it's allowed for some people but not others okay I understand if you're attorney yes so that was actually asked so I don't that was that wasn't his testimony could you please ask me a question I just did so I can't ask about any investors even though he said there were multiple private investors in his testimony I don't see how it's relevant to this application what I don't see how that's relevant to what the board is legally allowed to consider right okay doesn't the board get a list of we have a list of certain percentage in the application in the introduction if that's the case part of the record why would question there are it say there are no individuals or entities that have a 10% or greater ownership which is okay can I ask any names about congregates of the organization am I allowed to ask that I don't think how is it I just asked I'm asking you if I'm allowed to ask it I'm trying to understand how was how would it be relevant to what the board is about to do it's relevant so you can under a holist understand a holistic Viewpoint of whether there will be an expansion as there are multiple llc's in the area compounded very closely to that location at 165 old sh Hills Road and I think it's very relevant relates to the development on the property right I can't I'm not going to try to argue with you testify to either something like well he did testify to not that he wastim proed right when when right when there is opportunity for public comments that would oh okay well because he did testify to that that he had no affiliations with anything such as that before so I was just asking for him to reiterate that through multiple questions but I guess I can't councelor you have any objection ask applicant what is it specifically You' like to ask oh well you know maybe I'll give a more general question maybe this would be more appropriate are you engaged or do you have any Associates friends families investors congregants Partners or acquaintances involved in any covert land acquisition nearby proximity to your home at one je or 165 old short road so if the answer if the question is do I object to that question yes okay not only the question but the characterization of the motivations behind I believe it's appropriate that's fine I'm just asking not an attorney um I wanted to understand your motivation in selecting a property in a very bucolic quiet residential area may I ask that question you can ask questions but I just I don't want to offend any I'm just trying to ask questions I'm not skilled like you are I'm not trying to be combative with you at all okay that's okay the board this is again this is a Judicial Jud There are rules and regulations when you start saying you and you're essentially testifying right you understand that we're running I'm just asking you if you can just keep okay I'll I'll I'll sorry I was as I understand the township offered you alternative properties to build your um house of worship such as the rimbach moving company property and the old Shanta Clair property prior to engaging in an agreement with the township is this true or false no it's no it's true or no it's false no it's false okay so it's not true okay thank you what was your reasoning to build this house of worship in a very residential area versus an area that has more accessibility downtown for example what does that question what what does that question mean um I'm I'm trying to understand you know your vision and your mission okay you talked about that in your last testimony so I'm trying to understand you know why you would select a residential area that's on quiet streets that's more tricky to develop in versus a place like the Annie says property where you have access to the train neighborhoods you know it's easy in and out access why you would select something that would be more challenging to acquire I don't know every part of that question is simply untrue so I don't know where start no I'm just asking you what why why you chose that over that so you say it's a quiet street it's not a quiet street ask the people on Park there's 20,000 cars there every day you say that Annie says is easier Annie says it's not legal to have a house of worship the short answer is because it's legal and because that's the only place the township allows us to have a worship house worship is right next door at 165 surance road so is there a reason why you waited for over like 20 years to acquire this property versus just having it somewhere else again your questions about this proposed application why they might have taken actions the motive frankly the motivations of the applicant are somewhat irrelevant okay it's all right I'm going about whether or not again the applicant has submitt its burd appr proof to establish an title with de site okay um and please correct me if I make any further mistakes I um have um prior to demolishing the property at 165 old CH Hills Road prior to demolishing the property did you know that there were deed restrictions of the equivalent for one Jefferson um for at 165 were you aware of that when you made the decision to demolish think I expressed my objection to the nature of the applicability of private restrictive covenants in deeds and I think the case law was clear that that's not within the purview of the CL rle right and not only that but it's not we don't it's a question you got have to ask the owner of the property it's not me and I didn't I didn't file the permit and you have to it's not a question to me it's totally irrelevant Miss best just real quick so so these covenants restrictive ements that's an issue for the you know fullon Court to decide not for the planning board to decide right that's only you know okay the superior report can really you know throw deep restriction and as I understand it I I could be wrong but as I understand again the covenants that you may be referencing don't actually prevent the proposed use of the property they um I don't know what to say to that because I'm not allowed to respond to you so I'm sorry I'm not I'm just telling you I'm just putting it out there I'm not asking for response I'm just tell no no okay no thank you for telling me that appreciate it so um I just wanted to understand um you do understand that that high Center the applicant doesn't own 165 and high Center the applicant did not apply for the building for the demolition permit you understand that it was not me I'm not sure if you're aware of you were directing other entities correct I don't direct anybody do they direct you I'm not gonna respond to that I'm sorry um I just wanted to understand that if you understood that uh deep restrictions um were you aware that um there's a rip perian stream going through your property when you decided to do this application I I don't know what right here in stream is it's I I I it's just a Waterway going through the property you aware of that yeah I don't no the answer is no I don't know Mr with respect I think it might be a question better reserve for their engineer the civil engineer is it no well I wanted to ask him if he was aware of it I I already spoke with the civil engineer about it thank you so um okay I'm sorry I'm just going a little bit around I apologize I'm not as organized as everybody else is um so you talked about um there's no difference between um a sh or you don't understand the difference between a temple synagogue or sh or habad um and uh isn't habad a specific denomination of the religion when that's characterized that way is there a reason why you wouldn't want to say that no I stand by my previous answer that you don't know was not my answer actually I think you I I think you said you didn't know matter I said there's no difference actually difference so there's no difference between somebody goes to reform Temple versus in terms of the Traditions then somebody goes to habah there's no difference in walkability there's no difference are you asking about the you were saying there's no difference maybe I don't understand your question although I think you said there's no difference although I will say I do recall that there was fairly extensive testimony that the rabbi offered the first time around comparing uh and contrasting you know strictly Orthodox versus reformed and there was a fairly extensive explanation from the rabbi as to that very question yes and um excuse me for for asking that again but the reason I asked it was because you contradicted what you said in the previous testimony and I wanted to make sure I was clear on what you were saying so I'm going to take this testimony what you're saying um I don't I don't agree that I contradict myself okay well maybe um watch the tape again uh so you stated in your earlier testimony and I'm not quoting you your congregants are not traditional Orthodox but regular liberal Jewish people that want an orthodox place to learn and worship so if that is the case then why is there a need to expand this house of worship particularly when you stated your congregants are not local what does this serve to the existing residents of this town I never said my carg are not local and and and frankly you inquiring into their need for a house of worship is out of out of order um I mean I think that you have to establish a need when you're bringing in a commercial business and and this is while it's not a variance it's still subject to approval by the planning board it's a conditional use application not only is that testimony it's an opinion and it's legally incorrect with regard to a permitted conditional use Miss best again please questions is there a reason why you decided to um engage in an AR an architect that designs very modern more industrial looking structures um versus selecting home that a sort of a home facade so it fits into the neighborhood likening it to sort of um Temple SI and Summit or um also trying to think sh Fila another beautiful Temple um is there a reason why you didn't want to have the architecture fit into the neighborhood to sort of accommodate more of a residential aspect is is there a design reason for that a design need supp there might be a question reserve for the architect who's going to be coming up next excuse me it might be a question I wanted to understand his motivation not an architect does what they're told they designed what they're told so okay thank you we're not going to do testimony but so question design of the building is the board's um perview and I don't think you should be asking questions about it well I think you made a statement um the reason why I was asking it is you talk about inclusivity and being a good neighbor and so I think a lot of people in this story you think statements like you think that's not that's a statement that's not a question please questions the questions regarding the operational use as he testified to exactly so we're only allowed to about ask operational use question about his testimony he didn't testify to the okay you said operational use questions so I'm confus I'm just getting really confused I'm sorry irant maybe it's surgery have I apologize um so when you have um sua like you had recently you know this year at your address of one Jefferson I'm assuming you'll be doing that and carrying on that Tradition at 165 will you not be having that under attemp because you testified earlier that you would you don't know if you're going to be having structures but that's a big part of what the real is juuse is oh is that is that what Jeff temporary structures that's what I think they meant by I say yes we'll still be erecting ahoka every year for about a week week or two weeks okay so it will be coming down unlike the one at one Jefferson uh that's generally what happens with the Suka yes thank you so much for the time and I apologize for being not the any other members the public have questions Ted when Short Hills old Short Hills I ask you to spell your name k n DTC first name is Ted T thanks I'm not sure we covered this I thought we did There's sort of an issue of transparency and I was just wondering if you know your investors that are helping to finance the position and build out the school and the in the religious Center sir we just we just went over this with the last and he I thought he said they they um they were one and the same there were investors that were also investing in this and also investing in the not a relevant question for the board's consideration it's when is it who is it relevant for because it goes to the long-term plan of of the rabbi that he has for the neighborhood isn't that your isn't that what your what the board can consider is whether or not the applicant has met its burden of proving an entitlement to site plan approvement okay what investors do if we're talking about this particular property not what's going to happen in the future what's going to happen on this particular property not outside aren't you interested in what he may have what he may plan to do with this property and other properties around the neighborhood is that not an interest of of this commit this property is one thing but offsite I don't believe that's really relevant isn't your mission this isn't your mission to uh um to really can't carry out your mandate for the planning uh your master plan him and in 101 you know the objective of of objective 101 the first mission that you have is to protect the character of establish residential neighborhood encourage land use and development sir at an appropriate scale and density sir does not that cover the future of this piece of this of this development so the master plan is is a more hate to call it a mission statement but it's essentially mission statement that's supposed to guide legislation not that doesn't directly influence how this board oh it doesn't how you vote or think is that correct it depends on the context but I'm not going to get into this with you because quite frankly it's a far field and it's not relevant to what the board is to be considering right I would like to provide a little bit of context by way of explanation yes we are we are the planning board and we have we develop the master plan and re revise it every 10 years as we are required to do by the municipal luse law so yes you are correct in that master plan we then submit to our elected officials the township committee they review the plan and they may say oh yeah like that idea we like this part we agree with that and now we will change the ordinance to reflect the master plan and we as the board now we have to obey our Municipal ordinance of which this application is a confirming application conditional use does this go forward to the township Council after after you guys vote no you don't it doesn't so you really should be interested in the long range plan absolutely are and we make recommendations to the elected officials who then choose well I was trying to get to the point what is the long range plan of this of the chai Center what is his long range plan that that was a gist of the that's not what you can that's not what you can think about we are not weighing in on whether we agree with another plan on other potential properties no we are weighing in on this potential this application this particular complies with the ordinance as it stands today all right okay so it's very narrow got okay properties if something happens to them that would be another application exactly that would come back in the future and you know if there's some you know plan where six properties are you know it wants to build housing on all these whatever or anything like that would come back to the planning board for that particular application so it's not over you know if that happens but this one is just it's like the Trojan Horse once it gets in you're really um you're really kind of stuck on that's an opinion and that's not okay questions for the rabbi based on his testimony good evening thank you Jean Pastak do I have to give my address too please 342 Hobart Avenue thank you um um I have a couple questions regarding um parking traffic so you made some testimony and there were also questions regarding um parking at the current location and and then also how that that's going to be handled in the new location at 165 so you said I believe in your testimony that you can park 40 cars in the current lot and we also heard that there's overflow and it's into the surrounding streets and neighborhoods um given the space available in the new parking area do you anticipate that there will be overflow into the streets given the numbers of people that you discussed at the high holy days and so forth well we don't anticipate okay so you you're you're I'm asking you do you think that the current parking lot is going to accommodate all the parking that's going to be needed as proposed I think it will accomodate yes okay um the new plan that shows the driveway being moved across from Park uh uh my question I guess is do you believe that that's going to end up resulting in a need for a traffic signal given that it's be going to be like a four-way intersection it's a question for our traffic people and they have testified and will testify but they didn't actually testify or no one has about this latest plan that was submitted that moved the driveway so I'm not Council will we have testimony when we have the well there was actually extensive testimony contemplating that the inter redesigned and there was actually a followup subsequent report that was issued by the board's consultant uh commenting on additional thoughts and input based on that rign we are as we've explained required to submit you know full revised plans that reflect that change that change in design um but we're not proposing a a traffic lights early the board's traffic consultant can weigh in as to whether or not that would be that would be required here um but at any event that would certainly be beyond the scope of this witness's expertise okay I mean I'm not sure is going to address that so that's why I'm asking it now okay um the other question I have is would you would you given your operation given the testimony of everybody combined and you being the operational head uh would you consider leaving the existing driveway where it is and organize everything around that rather than move the driveway I'm not sure what you mean the existing driveway there's an existing driveway com out yes yes that comes onto Old sh Hills Road would you be willing to leave that don't believe the town's experts would be happy with that no the answer is no okay and um would you consider having one driveway onto parsonage Hill Road so that all traffic enters and exits through that and perhaps consider that a more safe way to deal with tra The increased traffic have have you thought about that or have you discussed that with your experts yeah asking for my extra testimony on traffic and and that's not not really I'm just saying have you as the operations head have you discussed that or would you consider that no okay so my question is is it on the r testimony that you ask the questions or these are a whole separate questions not based on his testimony is allow I can't hear what the question she asked is is are questions permitted if it's not on the rabbis [Music] testimony I it's supposed to be relevant to what what you testify to as well as relevant to the yeah operations MERS of the public able to ask questions about operations of the proposed site even if he didn't testify to it I from my own appication I'm just car I yeah I suppose to an extent I mean it really depends how far a field you want to get from what he's he's brought you know it's hard for me to say it's a general matter but Case by case would have to be but nonetheless I believe you st this would be a question better resered for the traffic engineer who I believe did testify and was there's a new plan though with a new driveway that hasn't had Public public hasn't been exposed to it until just recently I believe what we agreed was that because you're correct we we sort of received it and we the board asked some questions but we said we would reserve the right for Mr visho to come back and answer questions from the public so because you haden't had the opportunity to see it okay I didn't know that until right now so think was covered at the last that's correct coun Eng I'll come back great okay great so you can ask those questions at that point thank you um would you be willing to omit the playground no okay uh would you ever um consider having any residential component to your campus that you're building for your congregants if they required housing are you asking about our plan that's in front of the board right now yes there is no residential component to the plan I'm asking if you would consider that in the future with the campus that you're proposing I think if they were to then that would have to come back before board yeah okay um um and just the last one um have you or any of your Associates uh related to the high Center approach the owners of any adjacent properties to ask them if they would be interested in selling to you or your Associates or private investors associated with the high Center again that's not really relevant to the the proposed application for use I think it is but thank you thank you anyone else from the public only once only twice all right you're out here you uh yeah go ahead yeah so I I realized that the hour is is drawing late but I do also believe we're not at the end of our time um I would like to make take advantage of all of the time that we've been allotted our architect is here I'm hopeful that um we've we've heard extensive testimony now directly through the rabbi but also through uh indirectly through the traffic as with regard to the specific hours and activi uh they're going to be conducted throughout this facility through the kitchen through the the lower level the upper level the Hebrew school the Nursery School uh those are all labeled on the plans that's all been uh testified to um so I'm I'm hopeful that the uh the scope of uh testimony and questions for the architect will be relatively narrow but we'll we'll see how that goes but we love the opportunity to get started with our architect if we could please Danny so was he sworn in already or we got we have not I don't know see that a mass swearing in the beginning sir hi do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to revive will be the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth I do okay great and uh I'll let your V on your so uh can you just briefly uh acquaint uh the board and the members of the public with your educational background professional your name for the record my I think you said it already but just yes Daniel dubinet du b i n TT thank you just want to make sure it's picked up and if you could just uh if you could review briefly your educational background and professional experience thank you uh Syracuse University um undergraduate degree and then masters of architecture from ngat I graduated in 1995 and I received my license in 2001 is your license still current it is have you been qualified to testify as an expert in architectural design uh not only here in Milburn by the planning board and Zoning Board but also other planning and zoning boards in the area yes I've appeared before uh the Zoning Board in in Milbourne quite often Essex County my practice is located in Short Hills so I've been practicing architecture for 23 almost 24 years um so yes i' like to offer this gentleman as an expert in architectural design if I may I'll probably will hear you as such thank you um so Daniel you prepared the um elevations and floor plans that were submitted as part of our application that have been on file I did uh I was hoping that you could walk the board through uh those plans but before you do if I could just uh lay the groundwork uh a bit uh as I'm sure the board's well aware uh but just maybe perhaps for the edification of the of the members of the public um there are no special design uh requirements or specifications or or stipulations that that apply either to houses of worship generally um or uh this particular property the pro this particular property 165 old Short Hills Road it's not designated as a Historic Landmark under the Milburn ordinance although other properties in town are this one is not it's also not located within a historic district that's been designated and recognized under the under milburn's ordinance there there are others this is not part of of one of those um and so for that reason there are no particular requirements or guidelines that the applicant either had to comply with or seek waivers from with regard uh to the design so I certainly want and invite Daniel to go through his design what the building will look like um and what have you but I just asked that you know folks involved be mindful that there are no specific requirements with regard to what the design must include excuse me must include or must not include uh but with that by way of en background daniiel if you could take the board through your plans please yes I'd like to just get a set up real quickly if I I prepared um you all have the drawings and renderings that we submitted but I have some additional information so I'd like to mark it as an exhibit well why just explain what it is if you could okay uh yes pretty much um a little bit more information so there's a some Google imagery let me just roll through it so this like a revised plan set or is it just a it's not revised it's uh just so I could communicate the plans and elevations and the site uh in a different format okay so so no no new design elements but maybe some additional information so what is it photograph um I have so Google Earth image I have the zoning table okay so it's not a set of plans in and of itself it's a bunch of different things it's a bunch of different things with the plans I figured it'd be easy to go through the plans individually I I hate to lean on you but you know what A7 you okay so this would be A7 this would be an architect let's call an architect exhibit okay thank you so do you have one that I can mark for identification and give to miss dbit so they can and also uh I will uh stipulate that the applicant will provide an electronic copies so it would be available on website available for you know further analysis and and questions can it be projected tonight yes yes Fant but looks like there's a stack copy there yeah 18 copies I think that's enough yeah saying yeah yeah I'm just asking is it would it be helpful at all uh to go through what has been on Tri or ises it more helpful to go directly to this A7 I think go through A7 okay there are extra there will be a screen it'll be on the screen to the extent there are extra copies we can leave them here in the back sure okay if I may please thank you um so again my name is Daniel dubinet I am an architect I've been practicing architecture for 23 years I've had the privilege to apologies if I can just ask everybody in the audience just we just want to make sure that the YouTube is able to pick up just the one voice thank you so I've had the privilege to have worked in town in our Community I've had the privilege of of working here for the last 23 years and I've take a lot of pride in my work and I think one of the things that is important to me is that I create beautiful architecture uh not only for my clients but for the for the neighborhood it's it's something I take a lot of Pride into so I was honored uh to be asked to design a house of worship uh for Rabbi binsky and his congregation and was involved in some previous designs uh on different sites so this site located old sh Hills Road and pars the hill is over a 3 acre lot it's a 3.32 acre piece of property again it's on the corner and it's in located in the R3 Zone and there are no variances which is hard for me to say because usually I'm presenting and I'm needing a variance or a a waiver of some sort but here we are with a fully conforming architectural set of plans in front of you but I would like to explain uh a little bit about the design and the floor plan uh but I'd like to start with the site itself um and I look at this Google imagery and one of the things excuse me one of the things that uh I've been driving down old sh Hills Road for many many years and I never honestly notice the house that was on the property before unless you were specifically looking for it and I think it's a street specifically this part of the street portion of the street there's not a lot of homes that front on the road see a lot of trees kind of fast and I I'm kind of pleased to say that as a result of this application and how the building was cited that I think it's going to stay the same where you're going to drive by and you you'll have to look for it to notice it it's a relatively low structure uh the way that the topography lays out um the first floor if you're standing on the corner and I'll go through some of the exhibits but the first floor is 5 feet below the street level so it's a two-story structure with a walk out lower level and the height of the building from the corner is about 16 feet tall so I I thought this image was good because it we're going to maintain a lot of the mature trees that border the the property on pars Hill on Short Hills Road to the neighbor to the to the left or I should say to the West um so that's our imagery and one of the things that's very interesting is that the house of worship requires it to be on a 3 acre lot so that's very hard to find and it it's one of the conditions that be a residential Z go so here we are um in the R3 and with a conforming use and and building and so one of the things about the property is let's go to the next Slide the bulk requirements so the bulk requirements of are the of the R3 are as follows so it's 133% of the lot you could have a building coverage of 18, 818 the proposed is 8,443 so we're we're about 5% almost 6% where 133% is allowed so again the building by itself on on the lot is small in nature lot coverage you're allowed 35% because of the parking requirements we're at almost 35% we're a little shy of that and the fa are that's also very low 25% is the um maximum allowed and we're proposing 14.53% 21,000 square feet um our building Mo in residential applications the basement or the lower level does not count as F so as a as a reference point we're about 12,000 foot of f if it was a residential application but because we have the lower level and it's a commercial building the lower Lev counts so we're at uh 21,000 square feet and Building height maximum low is 32 feet it's 32 feet from the average grade around the building so there's only one portion of the building that will be 32 feet which is a lower level the main part of the building is uh about 20t tall it's a 10 foot high first floor 9 foot high second floor so get a relatively low building and Dan is that methodology that you just mentioned for purposes of calculating the height is that the methodology that's mandated in the ordinance yes yes um then all the other bulk requirements which is a 100 foot 100 foot setback from we have two fronts we have par Hill we're at 105 from O Hills Road we're at 100 and uh the requirement is that we be 40 feet from the side we're actually 178 and 99 from this little funny shape here on the property it's also some of the requirements uh for the house of worship follow uh again it' be a 3 Acre parcel have a lot Frontage of 200 feet we have 371 ft and 318 ft where 200 is is required so we're sign significantly larger on the frontages okay and I think the sighting of the building that was our first step is how do we site the the the parking and how do we sight the structure so I think it was a really nice approach that of course we push the parking to the rear of the property and so from the because if it was the alternative it would be worse you would have a parking lot that you would probably drive down and se but now the front of the building is going to be located this portion so that's like that's our main entrance um so it's not something that's going to be it's not like here's the front of building here I am you know so you'd have to be part of the congregation and actually make your way into the site to appreciate the front of our building okay let me take you through the plans um but before I take you through the plans I want to just tell you a little bit about the logic behind the plan or the reason for it the way it's shaped and the way it is we wanted a very symmetrical very symmetrical structure uh part of it dates back to the the history and the timeliness of it and so it's a very very organized architectural plan with the sanctuary I I for me I look at the sanctuary is is obviously the heart the heart of the building and so for me I I try to create like this rib cage that would be a protective layer which is the program that rounds the the sanctuary and by the design of the the hallways that wrap around it and and through maybe I'll show you the exterior is I want to try and separate the sanctuary from the the surrounding protective layer uh that surrounds of course the uh Torah or the ark needs to face East so that's that's why this part this portion of the building faces East which faces old sh House Road So the plan is very organized and very logical um if you're coming in from the parking lot there's a one-story vestibule then you enter the building there's a two-story lobby with uh some functional coat closets and things strollers so you can it's kind of our mud room and then you could decide to enter the sanctuary or move around the hallways to get to the additional program we've we've created two stair towers for ESS um that balance both on the north and south of the property and then we kept like I said all the other supporting functions for the sanctuary wrap around it um so we have um on the on this level we have the kitchen then we there's a portion of a storage facility so things that we need tables and chairs that we need to facilitate for the sanctuary be housed in that storage area then there's going to be a library over here and then the rabis office to the North and the sanctuary is a two-story space and it's going to mostly be divided with a movable partition and so this is the same plan but just a different function shown for the sanctuary so uh normal um I don't know 90s 95% of the time if not more there'll be uh scening in the sanctuary I showed 150 seats um I was trying to show a very packed seating arrangement this is probably not what we will wind up with but I didn't want there be any question of like oh can you fit more seating in the sanctuary uh so this is 18 by8 chairs with the 18inch aisles and so this this shows this diagram shows 150 uh seats with the flex space or I should say the Gathering space over here that's more flexible which will have probably uh tables and chairs and other other things that will happen most of the time it probably be empty but when there is a large function of the high holidays and the bigger events we'll be able to move back the walls and add another 150 seats BRS it's about 300 uh chairs and again these are a very tight arrangement of of chairs that's our first floor I'll take you to the second floor so to get to the second floor we'll have two means of egress so we'll have the staircases that are located in the corners we also have an elevator will take us upstairs upstairs will mostly be the Hebrew school classroom and uh some additional office space so we have uh three classrooms dedicated and an additional office space and and some bathrooms so we have a double height forer here and then we have our sanctuary in the lower level again we'll have the ability to get to the lower level with two means of erress an elevator we'll also have that lower level entry here so the things that will happen in the basement will be uh please please keep it quiet in the audience thank you actually need some water drink that open sorry the anticipation of presenting got overwhelming uh so lower level is is where we G to have the daycare um facility and some additional program that U I'd like to show you so basically before you I just a followup question is there a a means uh internally to the building for folks that um nursery school children and their parents that would be dropping them off is there an internal route to get them from what I'll refer to as the upper lot or the a lot immediately to the west of the building down to the lower level area that you've described is where the Nursery School location is thank you so yes on the first floor you'll have the ability to obviously enter the front uh main entrance and you'll most likely take this stair Tower to get down to the that facility in the basement I can take the elevator too you can take the elevator as well thank you um yeah based on the new traffic pattern this if if we're going to park and walk your children and you probably come from the upper level and if you're doing a quick drop off well that would be lovely because we had a little reception space uh an office that would probably have some class on it so you can see who's coming in and control the flow of of of whoever down there and uh then we were asked to design we have four uh rooms available uh those have uh egress windows two of the classrooms will have direct access if needed and then we've created some Flex space probably maybe uh some interior uh interior play Space which could function as a classroom but this might be you know in inclement weather place to play a little Teachers Lounge um and then in the back we have the Mikvah that didn't get much air time but we do have that program that's in the basement and storage area and mechanical so obviously we have some construction drawings to do and development so the mechanical might have to grow the storage might have to get smaller but in general this is the program that uh we would like and their fits and I try to identify because I know there was some conversation there's about 5,000 square feet of available uh daycare stuff and and the rest the rest 3,000 squ feet is other program you have a separate exhibit that that shows that Dani or no just here like I try to shade in in light pink so could you just ID are you able to identify what sheet number in the in the set that's been marked as A7 that particular slide relates to the 1 A1 1 A1 and is it your testimony that the areas in pink are the areas that are are devoted to the uh Nursery School use yes and what is the square footage on that 5,100 sare ft thank you okay so that's the the overall view of of the planning of of the building and then the next is the elevations that that go with it um so my inspiration was again a very classical uh Old World um style structure that was had a more Hess feeling uh we did not want to we want to depart from looking like a residence because it's not a residence and I think it fits in because it doesn't fit in right so there's this this notion okay well we're going to try to make it look like house but it's not really a house so now we wanted to have our own identity um we wanted to be rooted in Rich architectural Styles and be something very classical um of course I tried maybe to do something modern uh a little bit more creative in the sense uh a different style but we kept coming back to let's keep it rooted Rich into the traditions of of of potentially what an old Civic building Temple would would feel like and look like so one of the things because the property really nice with 370 feet of Frontage and about a 25 foot change in grade just kind of gently slopes off so I Tred to design the building with a very strong what we call plin base and it would look like the architectural elements are sitting on top of this plint Bas and one of the things that I'm going to develop is try to create this like big separation here architecturally so this the synagogue the sanctuary part of it uh feels like a little Jewel sitting on top of the box of course with the limitations of height and and other things you know I I try to I have about two foot differential from the things so uh but again I think through slightly different treatment of the materials and design I I'll achieve that that look I'm looking for um you'll see this is the rooftop mechanical and it looks really bad two dimensionally but I I'll have some renderings for you that they'll show you that the mechanical because of the cycl lines you won't see it and actually are those mechanical units or are they screens that's a screen that's going to hide mechanical units and uh I would testify that you will not see that uh it's located in the center portion of the roof of course when you see the two-dimensional drawing it it looks like it's a strong design feature but it's not um and then the rest of the architecture just going with with the same vocabulary uh that's used as inspiration we're going to uh most likely Earth Tones uh some rough cut Limestone for the plin base and some cast stone details for uh the other elements in the building we're going to introduce a lot of stainless glass a stainless not stainless stained glass thank you stained glass to create that spiritual light and the Kaleidoscope effect um on certain certain Key Parts obviously in the sanctuary and probably on the a little bit on the front entrance want some stained glass um if you could stay zoomed in on that that sheet that you were just before and if you could identify again what sheet in as uh we're zoomed in on at the moment thank you uh it does not have a sheet name seven okay thank you so um if you could zoom in I think as are you proposing as an architectural feature some um balconies on the second floor uh just for to try to create an architectural interest uh the balconies will not be accessible and or usable um for function they're just purely aesthetic uh balconies yeah that's exactly the reason I was asking there was a question I believe was in the planner report as to whether or not those can be accessible right the the front one is this is the uh vesu will have a little bit of overhang so this is purely uh aesthetic uh I think there was also u a question the in the planers report are you are is this building going to be designed in order to afford uh you just mentioned the rooftop Mechanicals will there be access for any technicians or maintenance Personnel that would need to have roof access to attend to that hbac will there be an access point for them on the roof thank you yeah on the second floor we'll have just hatches rooftop accesses with ladders so um we'll only we I'll have two of those I believe to be able to access the rooftop so if if the board if the board were to see fit to approve this application I believe the the planner report had had requested uh that as a condition of approval that the your architectur will just be resubmitted to show the precise location uh of that of that access is that something the applicant could agree to absolutely yeah we uh there is a slight change so I thank you for that so we the drawings that we're now looking at are after planners um some of this comments so they do show the rooftop access they do show the rooftop account mechanical that weren't shown before um so with I guess the only other uh uh detail is uh with regard to the kitchen and certainly that's shown on the on the floor plan cor yes now you also had alluded to um you know construction drawings that would you know come further further down the line but there was a specific there's been a lot of testimony and also a specific question again I believe in the planers Report with regard to um air intakes and exhaust bands um has there been um at least General thought as to uh how those would be routed yes uh any any mechanical devices for bathroom fans kitchen exhaust fans will be located in the rooftop as opposed to what would be the other alternative mounted on the side of the building for horizontally outward yes so we'd like to avoid that both for visual and yeah mostly visual because obviously be more practical but everything on the roof so is it your opinion then as an architect that visually would be preferable to Route those to the roof no definitely yeah do you also have do you have an opinion as to whether or not that by doing routing them through the roof as opposed to pointing them horizontally out through the sides would likely to have a a lesser impact regard to yeah neor absolutely I think any smell that would come from cooking you'd be certainly were 100 ft if not more from the street and and the neighboring properties yeah be negative when it comes time to actually uh fine-tuning construction drawings that you need to submit in order to get you know an electrical permit building permit what have you are there applicable health and safety codes that pertain to those types of installations yes of course and will your uh plans be submitted uh you know in compliance with those applicable rules and regulations yes I will um I think the last question that I have for you and thanks very much you would earlier on in your testimony recited and I think you showed the bulk chart on one of your slides the various standards that um the ordinance requires and that this particular application complies with uh those standards do they in the Ordinance do they specifically contemplate that these are the standards that apply in residential zones if you're proposing a conditionally permitted house of worship in a residential Zone yes we were Bound by the same bulk requirements uh for residential home the house of worship is that um do that answer your question essentially yes yeah yeah so the same uh setbacks Although our setbacks uh let's say if you were in the zone you'd have a 60 foot sorry 40 foot front yard setback now we're have to be at 100 yeah I guess that's a little bit more restri I could have given you a better question let me rephrase that uh the specific conditional use standards uh that you testified we comply with are those conditional use standards under the Milburn ordinance applicable to houses of worship that are cited in residential Z yes I have any further questions for we do thank you thank you I have a few more slides if I have and then I think we're gonna question thank you so much uh this uh I thought was an interesting diagram basically it's a site section so in this section again there's when you say this you mean page of the package thank you good for the record thank you and just this is an 11 page exhibit right by my by my account so make sure it's accurate yes okay so I wanted wanted to show in this diagram is a person standing on the Parson hill side and the five foot level change I was trying to explain when I started the about the the site so basically the first floor is located 5et below the street level and the top of the roof that you would perceive from standing on Parson show would be 60 feet tall is the top of the roof is 16 feet above your head um and then when you get down to the parking lot um and you're fa you know you're in front of the building that height will be 23 feet 4 Ines so a relatively in my opinion modest uh height U that the building will you will perceive uh then I wanted to show again the perspectives so of course it shows off the architecture but what it doesn't show is is the significant amount of trees that will be on the site but if I showed the trees you wouldn't get to see the building so for this purposes of these renderings uh We've really kind of took taken all the trees out of the site but that's not how it'll be I'm going to show you the next slide that shows you with the trees and you won't see the building um but basically these are the different views that I have so uh this top right one is from old sh Hills Road this one is uh also from old sh Hills Road this is the um view of the few uh parking that we'd have before we could enter the building uh then this is parage Hill Side the bottom left good to say and slide on page nine yeah I apologize this is from the parking lot this our main entrance and this one would be from Parson Parson chill this one mean directly to the right label there North elevation North elevation yes then then next two slides the last two slides uh was our rendering of the site with the trees so again back to my testimony which I I truly believe that once we're done and the projects complete you will drive by and you'll have to look to see the building so I think I think it's a positive 10 and 11 show with yes so this this was from the the view of Parson chill Road and Old Shore Hills Road uh so all these all these mature trees will stay um this is where our sign is located um so the building is back there hiding so I'm excited about that for for all of us I mean I think that the rabbi his community will have their house of worship and we won't be negatively impacted by let's say a large building that just you know is is you know we're not used to seeing you know it's it's like no one likes change but I I I feel really comfortable that as a result of of of how the building is sighted and you know the setbacks that are there that we don't see it and so then this one um I wanted to show for the our our neighbors on Park and I think um well I guess after the traffic testimony it's a better safer situation to have these two opposing uh entrances and exits but what I discovered is that this elevation down here on the site is about 305 and our building which you'll have to take this turn up here our building's at 3:14 so uh it's significantly set back and a different elevation and with the opportunity of all the trees again I don't I don't think we we we'll be coming out and seeing uh the building and with the swell gone we'll be able to render this better but we'll be able to plant a lot more in this area that before was going to be this um drainage sell which we couldn't plant on so now we can just a more fairly character it was a full blown Basin where it's not it's not really a squ central the Central Area previously this is being changed and was reflected in the concept plans and will be reflected in the fully engineer plans the the area that uh Dan's referring to viewing to the west from Park Road to the left was a former location of the uh storm water Bas thank you that concludes my slides thank you I know um likely the board many questions I just have one point of factual clarification just based on most um just with respect to the bulk chart your your indication figure for the lot coverage is that with respect to the prior to the concept plan that was presented or is that based on we I haven't gotten the new numbers but obviously we're not I just wanted to make thank you so these are potentially to be updated yeah just a lot coverage everything else I could I could attest to understood thank you thanks gr um we're gonna hold uh questions from the board for the next meeting okay yeah yeah yeah go ahead no maybe make a request these are excellent I building is beautiful the Vantage points are great is there any way we could get a vantage point from the property line so the neighbors can see what they would be seeing absolutely yeah uh the hard part is because we're we had it all prepared last time and with all the trees and really took our time to sugar maple sugar maple this with so as soon as I get that new planting uh I'll be able to get it more accurate but absolutely I would love to show show off that thank you okay so we're gonna have questions from the board more then questions from the public at the beginning of the our next meeting which I believe we're going to carry to January 8th if I understood uh yes and I'll follow up but yes I did State on the record I'll follow up inwriting so that DAV can have it but yes the app has consented to an extension through July uh January 9th excuse me and if I could just have a sufficient uh a sufficient um announcement that the application is being carried without need for further notice yeah so we're gonna hear appliation at the meeting at the because there will be new board members who have [Music] not I don't anticipate that they would be participate they I don't anticipate that there would even be a vote a vote on on the night likely not I I don't know just depending on how many how much more testimony likely not right so those three Bo new board members I mean I guess nothing can stop them now but they would have an opportunity to go back and review the tape before they vote and they would have to do that before they so a lot of lot of catching up to do I'm sure there was Gap the YouTube recording potentially could we get that transcript from from those devices yeah I believe the these devices will provide a written transcript prepared it would have to be prepared okay we get the raw audio recording in anticipation that there'll be new board members that'll need to yes in the instance that we go when we go back if we can't find it I think we can provide it and will we have the updated Plans by January 9th we have the updated plans I guess I know that the civil engineers are working on them uh so tomorrow I'll get kind of a status report on on where they stand um it's it's in the applicant's best interest to get them submitted as soon as possible I believe me they're working hard towards that with understanding it's the holiday season and all um but I'll find out more tomorrow but that's certainly Our Hope um and we're very motivated to get them in sooner rather than later right and so hopefully not no no and and the applicant also recognizes that when we get to the point where a formal vote has to be taken those finalized plans will have had to have been on file a minimum of 10 days before that date appat very well aware that okay yes and would give our traffic consultant an opportunity to review and provide response through respon okay um with that said motion to adour wait make the announ sorry no no good no worries okay so this matter is going to be carried to the board's January 8 2025 meeting at 7:30 pm here at the Milburn Town Hall I think everybody knows how to get here um no further notice either by uh certified mail personal service or publication shall be required by virtue of me making this announcement that is your notice that this is going to be reard again on January 8th so that's it see you all then Happy New Year Merry Christmas inbody oh --------- ##VIDEO ID:HGusEtRN090## ch e e in accordance with Section Five of the open public meetings act chapter 231 Public Law 1975 be advised that a notice of this meeting was made by posting on the bulletin board Town Hall and mailing to the officially designated newspapers a list of meeting dates annually indicating that this meeting would take place at the Town Hall at 7:30 pm on Wednesday December 18th 2024 Cy vill here Allison Campfield here Michael C here de NIS here Frank Sandi here shy VJ here David cosgro here gon Halbert here here thank you uh we have two um sets of minutes to approve before we get into our application process tonight um the first one is the meeting minutes of October 16th uh were any comments received to you I mean or any corrections no okay anybody have any L comments I move to approve the minutes of 10:16 we have a second second all in favor oppose and assume any not in attendance would recuse meeting minutes at 10:16 pass um meeting minutes of November 6th were also circulated no comments on that as well I okay um I move to approve D have a second second Deborah thank you all in favor I oppose and also anybody not in attendance would recuse meeting minutes of November 6th were passed um we're joined tonight by new Council um who is just a colleague of uh Mr Warner's I introduce sure absolutely thank you hi everybody my name is Chris obesi I'm the uh acting board attorney tonight I work with Steve Warner at sa shul over in Somerville nice to see all you I actually used to go to seen Hall University so I went I drove through mil a lot in my my younger years so hopefully thanks for having me I gu great welcome back um one order of business um Mr sakandi as you were not here uh at the last meeting you have attested um that you have watched the meeting so you're all caught up on the application in its entirety yes that's correct and sign you signed as which I did notorized as well so great thank you I wanted to read that in for the record um also for the record um Su Shan is with us tonight um and similarly welcome s sorry for calling you as you're arriving um just wanted to also um ask you are you also able to attest to um the fact that you have watched meeting minutes or the the meeting in its duration from December 4th yes okay and we will similarly have you sign and we Mize for say s okay thank you all right fantastic um so we're going to move into our application for the evening that's application 24003 the matter that was carried from our most recent meeting um for the fourth time um on December 4th and uh I see I'm kind of stalling a little bit for Council um but I believe where we're going to begin tonight um is a continuation of where we left off which was we had had um witness testimony from um Rabbi and was uh asked questions by board and professionals and I believe we're moving into a public question session for that witness good evening EXC me notic there's no stenographer there's not a stenographer thank you I also didn't mention that tonight um what you see uh this uh box right here um sir if I could ask you to explain what it is I'm recording the audio for the rep so on behalf of uh the court reporter uh his associate is here tonight making a recording but not doing the stenography so thank you for that observation and if a transcript is needed he would be able to do it all please uh also clarification on Gram's comment and the attorney was going to give the applicant about uh 50 people yep portion so that was never finished prior before public I mean before we to public questions great okay um so we will allow uh Council to give an opening uh statement and then perhaps if you're able to address that thank you yes absolutely thank you very much uh good evening Michael LaVine Fox raild here this evening on behalf of the applicant the high Center for living Judaism Inc um the chairwoman was correct in her basic summary of kind of where things left off the last time um I think there were two open items um that we were going to and I say we me on the applicant side of things going to discuss um and circle back to uh this evening one was um you know the extent to which tonight was some sort of deadline for taking action whether or not there was going to be a further extension obviously we're not in a position this evening to conclude the proceedings um that's very clear so rather than have that be a lingering question or issue kind of in the background of things I want to make a clear up front then know we'll be proceeding this evening we'll get cover as much territory as we can and the applicant does consent to an extension of time to take action through January 9th which I believe is your next public hearing you'll probably be doing your rework and probably at that time is when you'll be scheduling uh the further hearings throughout the remainer of the year um yeah so I want to make that clear up front so that that's not kind of a lingering issue um the second one was uh was what the chairwoman touched on with regard to um the traffic study and the enrollment of the of the preschool and we had discussed uh condition um my understanding and certainly we've got the Consultants here this evening that can correct me if I'm wrong my understanding is there has been some constructive dialogue back and forth between the board's consultant and ours with regard to that General issue and how to best kind of study and capture the potential impact of that preschool and those preschool activities uh having to do with traffic generally but in particular the intersection of the realine driveway that we had agreed to with Park Road and there's been some uh discussion about the best way uh to handle that it the the uh Institute of Transportation Engineers has a methodology for trying to calculate the impact of of traffic with regard to uh preschools that's tied to the square footage that's devoted to that particular use uh my further understanding is that if you're going to use that methodology you also have to have a fuller understanding of whether or not there's going to be staggered start times whether or not there's going to be staggered leaving times whether or not there's going to be full day programs half a programs those all kind of have to go into the analysis of how best to capture those traffic impacts so those discussions are ongoing I think ultimately both the board and the applicant is comfortable with the notion that there should be some sort of condition um so that the board can have comfort that the traffic study was accurate kind of captures the anticipated impacts and if there's some change to what we're presenting to you that that would require further approval uh applicant still maintains that that's appropriate I also think it's uh very wise that prior to taking any final action on the application that that condition be reduced to writing and circulated and discussed so that there's no misunderstanding as to what it says what it doesn't say um so that still very much uh part of the equation it's just in the relatively short period of time we've had from the last hearing that process is still kind of ongoing so I'm not prepared to present specific language this evening but we're still working through that process and it will definitely be a part of the equation before everything's said and done so if I heard that correctly you you're you know the experts will be working with the town's absolutely expert you'll be drafting language which will be able to review prior to any vote taking place absolutely okay Alison that answers your question great thank you for addressing that sure thank you any further questions on that matter okay thanks okay um so as we said I just related and if you're going to get to it fine I know that our um traffic engineer had made some further suggestions after reading the report that we got late before the other meeting I don't know if you plan to address it tonight or whether we want to address it up front before get to the Wi yeah uh quite frankly uh we were kind of really kind of focused in on on the other issue that I just kind of discussed the population and and the condition the way best way to address that I don't recall there being anything particularly problematic in the uh kind of reply memo if you will uh that Joe put together but uh we'll certainly we'll certainly confirm that tonight if time allows and if not next time yeah know your characterization it seems like just sort of yeah little right that's my recollection as well yes okay so again I think we've had um we have to recall the rabbi we'll remind him that he still remains under oath he uh responded to questions from the board and the board's Consultants he has not I believe responded to any uh questions as we had from the public so that I think would be the first time in the business so Raba if you could step forward please I will remind you to remain under Ro from the last time yes and I know I need to make way have have you been able to I've been trying my best to kind of stay seated originally I was kind of coming forward in order to make sure it's close to the mic and be heard am I being heard okay staying seated and kind of giving members of the public a little bit more okay you can then that's fine okay good thank you um welcome thank you uh so before we begin I'm just going to recontextualize if if it's anybody's first time here I think I see some familiar faces now um your uh invited as members of the public to come forward um and and you would just come up one by one if you choose to wait in line you can I will continue to ask people if they would like to come up at this time um you can ask questions of the rabbi uh that should be based on the testimony which he provided which I believe included some historical and predominantly operational uh description of the proposed use at the this property subject property um and then I believe Council had a a legal question about representation oh right right um yeah we received not sure we received an email from a individual by the name of I'm sorry her name was Nicole want last name Nicole dor is she here M would like to approach please um as I understand Miss Dory is representing an objector Group by the name of a sustainable development for Milburn Township um I don't sure one of the reasons we bring this up at the outset this evening is because it if a part is represented by Council the ml requires that any questions that that party wants to have asked on the record have to come through Council those parties are still able to put comments on the record but questions have to be through their attemp so um story if You' like to enter your appearance and yes take it from there good evening um Mr orisi and and Madam chair members of the board my name is Nicole Dory I'm with the law firm of Connell fley and I represent sustainable development for Milburn Township um and I do understand that rule and I'm the only one here that's here to speak for that entity so my client understands that um that I represent right do we need the list of members who are so M for this evening we'll take it that no none nobody you represent will be asking questions correct that's correct okay um we would still request a list of your clients well people under falling under that Banner so we know if they do come up to ask questions that they should be going through you is that something you'd be able to provide for us have this evening but you know uh I have to take it under advisement and speak with my client but okay okay councelor if I may I mean uh at some point I think we all agree that that needs to be disclosed I mean the name of the blanket entity just it's in the same way that the afun has to disclose 10% or greater owners you know behind it I think the same would apply here and I don't know why it would be a hardship or not possible to disclose those names now otherwise we could eventually be hearing from a lot of these folks that we come to find out later oh they are represented in which case the cats out of the bag if you will he raises a good point yes and uh you have my word that I have given that instruction to my client and no one else will be speaking for this entity besides myself this evening um you know I'll discuss your request with my client and to the extent I can I will provide that list okay Mr line would you oppos oppose to proceeding this evening L heard just I have not heard an affirmative um commitment commitment to to disclose that which I think is a threshold issue before she should be allowed to participate frankly I do have to agree with uh applicant Council the um well I'm not aware of any uh case law requirement in that regard it was first brought to my attention by Mr Warner at the last meeting that he wanted a list and I told him that you know I had instructed my client that I would be the only one speaking on their behalf so um you know he didn't think it was an issue so I just I haven't Mr War didn't think it was an issue I I mean I didn't I didn't think it was an issue based on my discussion with him I don't know what he thought but um he didn't you know he didn't require me to do anything at the last meeting so um well as I understand you didn't enter your appearance at the last meeting this is your first time well I did int introduce myself um so you know I I'd like the opportunity to speak to my client about it but I can you know are you gon to let me speak tonight if I you're allowed to ask questions I think the concern is if you know people that you represent want also ask questions you know duplicative would be violative of the ml as well and that's what we're trying to avoid here so that's kind of why we would like the verification that sure right and and you and I'm just telling you as you know as an officer court that I will not be letting my client speak um on my behalf or on behalf of this entity I'm the only one that was speaking there there this evening on be you keep saying on behalf of the entity but that they're they're it's the people that are you know no one's going to speak on behalf of sustainable mbour or whatever it is they're going to speak based on their there are people behind that that are neighbor likely to be neighbors of the development so when you keep saying the entity that's a little dis that's a little questionable to me it's the really the people who comprise that entity that I think I'm concerned about right there's no established case law on it you know I I think at that point you know an objection could be noted right but if there's no established case law then I don't know that there's a hard and fast rule that has to be disclosed right certainly the ml does have a specific definition as to who constitutes an interested party that's a defined term under the ml that has been the subject to of interpretation and again that's kind of a threshold issue interested parties that have a established meaning have the right to participate in these proceedings so until we find out who that person is you know their proximity to the subject property their involvement we can determine whether or not they're an interested party as defined under the ml ml all with rights to participate in such a direct manner again good point by applicant Council um well as the um the board member did um note there is no established case law on this and um you know I can represent you to that my client owns property um in the municipality they're within 200 feet of the application and they have standing to object to this application I understand but until we know who exactly your client is and who forms your clients it's very difficult you know I I hope you appreciate the position we're putting here would you like a chance to maybe discuss with with some folks um no but I can tell you that I don't see any you know any clients here this evening I'm the only one here for the entity so the people in this room they're they're not my clients okay um counselor there a lot of faces that are missing that have been consistently at the last few meetings I've noticed there's a lot more empty seats so you know I don't know if this is something that you should unilaterally decide have maybe the board should V on I'm just trying to F some arguments but yeah Point noted um applicants Council Mr leine any would you object to allowing her to ask questions well but the representation she offered or you so I do my objection stands I don't withdraw it if the board feels it's appropriate for them to uh make a motion or vote on it that's certainly within your prerogative but you know I've explained that my reasoning in that objection does still stand okay well I guess I'm not the decision maker I'm just trying to feel some answers in I appreciate it um and mror I just want to clarify just because you made a comment to it you did introduce yourself at the last meeting at that time Mr Warner said if you are to speak we do need you to furnish a list and and you you heard that and then we said we'll sort of cross that bridge thinking you were going to be potentially speaking at the LA asking questions at our last meeting when you didn't the the issue hadn't Arisen I think the anticipation was that if you were to come again and appear again which you are and you are entitled to you would be Furnishing that list um that was how I interpreted his request okay um so I understand if you didn't but I just wanted to clarify that because I heard it as well as you introduced yourself um well that said we're we're here now and you know we're trying to keep these proceedings moving in a timely fashion right so if we have to make a decision on this then you know I'm happy to make a motion we go to a vote but we need to come to some sort of conclusion as to whether this board is going to allow um you know the attorney to to continue agree okay you I think as an officer as a court um you know if she swears and attests to the fact that none of her clients are here in the room that should be good enough she hasn't said none of her clients she said her client The Entity she has not said none of her clients none of my clients none of my clients there's no person here that I represent that's a part of sustainable correct that's that's different I think she also she's made a representation as an officer of the court that and she's attesting on o under oath that that that her her clients are within 200 feet of the applicant property which would give her give them standing as an interested party so just to clar do apologize if I miss it I don't think I don't believe this woman has been placed under oath as correct not placed under oath under ask would you will to swear under oath that nobody represent nobody affiliated with the entity you represent who's present this evening would be asking questions nobody will be asking question except for me yes yes to what I asked yes okay um all right well might as well let your offering as well you swear airm what the testimony you offer and any testimony you would continue to offer you know in this capacity least the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth yes okay I I'd also feel more comfortable if if you did on the record now affirm to the fact that your clients are within 200 feet of the applicant property have and thus our interested parties yes my client owns property within 200 feet of the application and has standing to effects of this application well your client sustainable development for Milburn Township that entity owns property or someone who's affiliated with that entity yes someone who's affiliated with that entity on okay okay is is it one individual is it multiple individuals is are you at Liberty to I'm I'm not at Liberty to say that right now so okay okay if if you'd like to put forth a motion I think we can take a vote if we will be are willing to hear have M represent sustainable Milburn and I her to ask questions this evening without receiving a list from of her clients yes certainly I think it would be good for her to confer with her client and get this result work fully before the next meeting but in the interest of keeping things moving along and making sure that everyone has adequate um opportunity to uh question uh the witness the rabbi um you know I think we should allow her to proceed tonight so I'll make a motion that we uh vote to allow um the attorney here to proceed to ask questions tonight on behalf of uh her client or clients and she's already stipulated as an officer of the Court sworn end that none of the clients are present here tonight and that they have good standing so I make that motion so clarification is it conditional on her providing the list to us in the next meeting I would recommend that it should be I I don't know that we I don't know we can do that because if there's no established case law on this you know I I don't know that that's a requirement I have a question can can you also clarify that um your client is it a corporate entity LLC and and and it does not own the property it's the members and none of those people are in the none of those members are in the audience okay there's one member it's member okay one mean the entity is one member or there's one member present there's one member in the entity and they own property okay was present no who's not pres okay could 20 to yeah I'd like to second that motion I think you know it's very clear that the client is not here is an LLC and we I would like us to keep moving we had a motion made and second it and and is that with the stipulation that they will provide the list or you're saying no again I don't think that we have jurisdiction to do that okay so so it's without without stipulation for the list that's what the motion is that would are we are we going to be in violation of anything should we proceed like I I don't believe so quite frankly I don't believe there's any board rule or any case law that addresses this at all or requires this so Council I just have a question because I think there's a distinction in that the LLC does not own property so technically it might not be an interested part while the individuals are the LLC is not right right well regardless I mean the public has a the the public broadly speaking has a right to ask questions and you know you don't need to be an interested party in order to be allowed to ask questions right okay um but nonetheless author Mr are you aware of any Cas that would require a list to be provided I can't say that I am off the top of my head not off the top in terms of a list but certainly a disclosure of some sort I know it has to be a written list but I'm sorry I just as a point of clarification I thought it had been asserted a number of times by the officer of the court that there were no members no clients here and I thought I just heard well yes there's one client no I I didn't say there's one client here I said that there's only one member there's only one Member One member we we all heard pres didn't don't see here okay just again to be close you're representing the entity and the entity has members and some of the members I guess are clients but other of the members might not be clients rights there's one member L the LLC has retained uh this attorney is Council and that sole member of the LLC we have heard testimony is not in the okay okay can take yes I was yeah my I was before the board votes on that I another thought I had M story is there any chance you be able to reach speak to your client over the phone and get requested you to expose his ID um okay I mean are am I going to be able to let to ask questions tonight or I mean do we want to take we need to take a five minute recess so that but in in the effort of try to keeping things efficient making good use of our time I'm sure there's a host of other folks here that have absolutely nothing to do eager to have the opportunity to ask their questions I'm sure that can proceed uh and however long it may take to to reach the client in the hallway that can I would like to be part of the hearing so I mean if if there's you know you were about to take a vote I guess I mean I'd like to ask the questions to be fair you were advised by Mr Warner to we requested this list you know several weeks ago no he didn't request it of me he said that we would deal with it and I didn't understand that he he meant that he would request it I guess you did because you've worked with him for a long time but I haven't met him before and I introduced myself and I said that I did not intend to disclose my client so you know I he said that we would deal with it and told him that you know well we're trying to deal with it right now that's kind of a problem right right so I mean that was CLE pass even in the event that the client says no they're still within their legal rights given that there's no case law on this to proceed so if we actually fail to allow uh this attorney to represent the interested party then you know couldn't we as a board face consequences for that right you know while while both you know while one side can object so to can the other and that could uh cause legal problems so we don't know that the LLC is an interested party because the LLC doesn't own property but I from what I hear from our Council that's that's irrelevant question may I re heard um the fact that the one of the members owns property could provide standing for the LLC so you know that's enough so there are multiple members I thought you no I said there's a soul member and they own said none of them you one of the members she said only the entity there's more than one member affiliated with sustainable mil no I said it's a soul member Soul member Soul member that's yourone of the members M yeah she again said members very to an organization you I would think you would generally refer to the organization as a plural not a singular so I mean I think right now we're we're arguing over semantics and that's because they're not heard testimony that there's a so we can take a vote then we you know so the motion has been made to hear this attorney on behalf of the LLC and we've had it seconded Cory biller yes yes Michael Cohen no debor Nevis yes yes Frank sand yes Su Sean no sh BJ yes David cos yes G on helper yes that's all no okay so we will hear okay thank you I appreciate that good evening uh Rabbi may I may I call you Rabbi sir sure um name Nicole D I'm off from hope fully I don't know if you remember me um I heard your testimony at the last meeting and I'm trying to better understand all the uses that you're proposing for the property at 165 old sh Hills Road um I understand you're proposing a house of worship with the nursery school and the Hebrew school as well is that right yes okay and I I heard your testimony at the last hearing and you you were explaining your current operations at one Jefferson and and how those might be transferred over to the 165 old Short Hills Road property and maybe expanded also is that right yes um so for the house of worship uh you're presently operating a house of worship at one Jefferson correct no no what what type of uh Services I guess or uh we were just talking about the proposed application so you're asking what they do currently at a different just asking about the use of the proposed application right but in his testimony at the last hearing he was referring to the operations at one Jefferson explaining what the operations were at that property and then saying that if the application was approved those operations would stop at one Jefferson and then be transferred over to 165 over Short Hills Road that's what I heard from his testimony at the last hearing was that was that your testimony was that your testimony okay so I'm asking him about the operations that he's presently having at one Jefferson so I can understand which of those are being transferred over to 165 old Hills Road okay sure okay so you so Rabbi you can answer the question of what what of the operations that happen at Jefferson as you testified to would operate in the proposed build oh our religious Services okay I just wanted to to clarify some of that because you said you weren't operating a house of worship at w and Jefferson but what I understand is there's a what's known as the chai Center Shabad is advertised as operating at one Jefferson and that's is Council being argumentative she's she can ask the question I said answer was no okay we're not running a house of worship and you seems like you're being argumentative well I'm not I'm not trying to be argumentative I apologize for that but um I looked at your website um and I have a copy of it I can admit it to the board and it's a website for the CH center Shot anyone can find it through Google search and it does advertise um Services being conducted at one Jefferson in Short Hills and um I want to know if those same services are going to be happening at 165 old Sher Hills Road and if they're going to be expanded and I wanted to ask questions about that right and you just said when you when you asked just making sure I'm following the conversation confused when you asked what what um activities happen at one Jefferson that would be transferred I believe you said worship worship Services worship services so then you then I thought your followup question was do you have services so I he had just testified yes I'm just making sure I'm understanding your question um do you have uh Services other than religious services at one Jefferson currently are you I don't understand the question uh what type of religious services are you offer off other than religious services do we have other religious Services I'm not understanding your question okay do you presently offer daily prayer at one Jefferson those are our religious services and we don't offer daily prayer we do offer prayer and that's our religious Services yes and you offer daily pray being argumentative she she's not being argumentative now she's asking for clarification if I if I may though I think what would might be more directly relevant and pertinent and a more appropriate way to pursue this line of question which is certainly fair is to have have the rabbi itemize those proposed activities that he proposes for 165 old Short Hills Road rather than focusing on an itemization of what currently may or may not be having happening at one Jefferson which is not the application that's before the board if she would like a thorough explanation of everything that's proposed to happen at 165 old Hills I'm sure the rabbi would be happy to give you the entire laundry list I'm also entitled to question the witness as I would like to and I'm I'm asking him about the current services offered at the property right next door that he's testified to previously would be transferred over to the property that's the subject of this application so I think my questions are sure but but you have asked a question which I know we heard answer during the previous testimony he attested that daily service you know does does not happen now so I did know the response to that from last week's test or last meeting's testimony so I I will allow you to continue asking questions that's fine I understand and you are you are entitled to but if it's questions we've already had the answer to you know to Mr lavine's point of what are you going to do in the new facility I feel that we we did receive testimony to that yes I I I heard at the new facility that he would be offering daily prayer um and at the current facility at one Jefferson I understood that he was offering daily prayer as well allow him to answer as he just did but I also heard that it was not daily was your well at the let me maybe I can ask it this way um at the last hearing you described a settlement agreement between Milburn Township and the chai Center that allows uh operations or religious services at one Jefferson um and you said something about the fact that you've been operating there since 2005 do you remember that yes mam chairman all of these questions are focused on one Jefferson one Jefferson that is not the subject of this application certainly this application has nothing to do with any prior settlement agreement as between the applicant and the town which pertains directly to one Jeffers frankly I have to agree with applicant Council for my opinions were these questions directly related to testimony that the witness has given and so wouldn't it be reasonable to to ask you know if the testimony was that we have various services that were offering at one location they're now going to be offered at this location I don't see why it's not gerain to get answers to that question it's directly questioning the testimony that was made it's asking for clarification and you know why I don't see why this is such a difficult thing to get an answer of you obviously the uh applicant knows what services they're going to offer we should be able to share that exactly what services they're going to offer not what services they're currently offering at one Jefferson well the rabbi has already testified to the long history of this of this congregation in this Township and there's settlement agreement with the township that's related to the property at one Jefferson which is right next door which he's testified to we're not here for one Jefferson for application has to do with the property at one Jefferson any any discussion of this application must include a discussion of what operations will be ceasing at one Jefferson because the rabbi has made a representation about this as part of this application that he will return the use of one Jefferson to his home as a single family home one Jefferson is not a part of this application but it must be a part of this application because this board cannot approve an application for a house of worship to exist at 165 old Sher Hills Road if a house of worship is going to continue to operate at one Jefferson then you're going to have two houses of worship and the a the rabbi has made a representation to this board at the last hearing that he would return one Jefferson to a single family home if this application is approved and I think that is very Germaine to this Po's consideration of this application if this applicant is in fact going to be doubling the use of the property having uses uh on more than one property that's going to affect traffic and circulation that's going to affect all these things so is your question will all current worship activities from one Jefferson be shifted to the new location yes en that was some that was what my questions were trying to get at and I was starting to ask some of those questions and if if I may M chair just to two things there's not that that's what we're proposing and we'll re we we Rabbi testified last time I'm sure he will testify again in a moment but there's absolutely no Prohibition in the ordinances in Milburn from having two houses of worship next to each other as long as each property conforms with the applicable uh requirements under the zoning ordinance there's nothing illegal or uh unto or perhaps even unusual about having two houses of worship next to each other having said that the rabbi did testify under oath last time that there will be no continuation of religious services and observances of any kind at one Jefferson and it will return to residential use I will ask for him to reconfirm that tonight under oath with that being the case the details and minutia of what is going on by in terms of operating as a house of worship at one Jefferson now when it's not the subject of this application would be completely irrelevant and a waste of the boards and the applicant time um frankly I agree with applicants yeah would that satisfy your the line of questioning that you're trying to understand which is in the future condition would the not applicant property be returned to a a residential property uh yes I would like answers to some of those questions but Madam chair I I I disagree with your your Council and also Mr LaVine that anything related to one Jefferson is not part of this application you we've heard the testimony by defition can I finish my my argument um this application and this applicant and and this particular witness have a long history um there's settlement agreement with the township for the property right next door that um you know this applicant believes has allowed it to operate a house of worship on that property there's also a judgment to 2014 that prevented the property from being used as a house of worship so there's a long history with the Township in this applicant and so when the when this applicant says that it will be returning one Jefferson to single family use if this application is approved I would hope the board would make that a condition of its approval if this application is approved but also I think it's very important for this board and for the public to understand what this applicant believes uh returning one Jefferson to a single family home means because in the past the the applicant has argued that one Jefferson was used only as a single family home even though religious services and other events were occurring there and even though there was a judgment that prohibited certain uses it continued those types of events so I think that is very relevant to the board's consideration and also I think that the board should be aware of a settlement agreement that was entered into with the applicant in the Township in 2019 you brought the settlement agreement multiple times that is not within the purview of this board that is between the governing body and the applicant that's we are here to decide this board is here to decide whether or not the applicant has been its burden approve to it you to an entitlement to site plan approval for 165 shorts not one to the extent one Jefferson may be involved here I think that's been addressed by the prior testimony already seems to have been at least so I you know that's my position on at least to the court you know this is kind of getting far field of what is for actually legally allowed to consider well I I've heard your position but I you know I at the same time this board has jurisdiction over this property and needs to understand from this application if the applicant is proposing exactly two houses of worship next to each other or one that that is not what this board is doing this this board is only right but I'm trying to question the witness to confirm that because you know that information wasn't CLE from his prior testimony understood this story I believe he's testified that all religious services and observances would be ceasing at the one Jefferson property I haven heard that that he return it to a single his home that's all I heard so I wanted to understand what he meant by returning the property at one Jefferson to his home so is there a specific question that you can can you more narrowly so that you can ask it to the witness and have him you know affirm or deny s that okay I can try to ask it like that um so uh Rabbi can you tell me uh if this application is approved would the applicant agree to a condition to return uh the property at one Jefferson Avenue uh to use only as a single family residence no no uh and why not would I if I understood correctly the condition your question and I'll restate it my understanding was would I agree that the board should issue a condition upon which they would condition their approval for 165 old sh Hills Road attach some condition to our use of the property at one Jefferson or anywhere else in the world and the answer is no frankly I'm not even sure legally the board would have stand you oppose such a condition I'm not I'm not I don't understand your whole eing and I will say for the board I made up my mind I was not going to speak tonight more than yes or no but I will tell you the Missori represented 165 Vol shal Road she the Judgment she referenced 2014 was solely held by 165 Old jles Road as there excuse me for interrupting you being dishonest is my point so be honest that's all I'm asking if you're an officer of the Court be honest okay but Rabbi are you if you're speaking about something that is from the past and again the settlement agreement between the the township and the you know if there is that it is not that's that judgment and that decision while I understand what you're saying that context could be important that it this board doesn't have jurisdiction to impose any conditions on our way in on what is happening in a separate legal right Madam chair I respectively disagree with your position the the applicant testified specifically to the settlement agreement at the last hearing I'd like to introduce it into evidence um I'd like the board to consider it I have a copy of it with me this evening um I think the board should consider it in connection with deciding this application again categorically object to the submission of plainly irrelevant evidence that would only serve to dirty this Rec I my advice to the board would that I concur with applicant Council it's outside of the scope of what this board is bound to consider as it just explained is it outside of the scope if the applicant introduced it and and used it as uh part of his testimony to you know justify the fact that well I I think what what they were probably getting at is there's a certain amount of traffic right that occurs at that address as a result of services that are offered there that traffic is now going to be shifted to to 165 if if that same amount of traffic is going to exist uh and and not get transitioned over well then I think that gives the board more to think about with regards to um you know what the impact is going to be uh on on traffic and and then that that makes you wonder whether the traffic engineering uh took that into account because from what I heard the Traffic Engineers uh were taking into account the change that we were going to have in in in traffic based on uh you know what they said the proposed use was going I think thank you for bringing that up um one point Counterpoint is that the existing Base traffic would in include the existing facility and now we're talking about adding on top right it would include the existing property that's in the Baseline traffic counts which were undertaken and then what they're proposing would be on top of it so for that reason I have no opposition traff engeline it subtracted out but again that's a question for the traffic engineer question for the traffic engineer but it doesn't yeah it doesn't reference a settlement agreement and bringing that in if it's if if the Crux of your question is about traffic we can ask the traffic engineer that and but presumably your client or entity would have asked questions at that time um so I can allow you to continue asking questions of the rabbi but I'm requesting that we not ask questions having to do with a property that's other than the subject property so you've asked about use you've asked about trans transfer of the use and what uses would be transferred I understand that because that reflected the testimony so I are you prohibiting me from entering the settlement agreement as an exhibit um at the hearing I believe so based on legal advice we have to vote on that do I I I would recommend against just under the circumstances again it has very little yeah speak to the Sor it is is very little bearing on this um an applicant council's objected I I have to concur with him I don't see how it's relevant to what the board is to consider here and what about copies of the the 2014 judgment that were submitted with the application I wouldn't be able to submit that to the board these are items that are submitted to within that were submitted as part of the application then the whole board has received them okay so I mean that's the Judgment that I was referencing is included with the applicants material so I just wanted to bring that to your attention um you know he did testify as to the settlement agreement at the last hearing but if you're not going to let me introduce it then I'll I'll ask something else it wouldn't need to be introduced as we have received it already well I'm objecting to the fact that you're not me to introduce that exhibit I'll proceed question so if it's already in evidence already the application isn't it fair to ask questions about that especially when that was positively brought up and testified about by the app don't see hold the Judgment was entered was submitted or the settlement was submitted the Judgment was submitted the application U I don't know if the settlement agreement was attached with the application materials I mean if the Judgment has been submitted then I suppose the applicant offer that as as part of their case for whatever reason can you confirm that Mr line was the Judgment submitted as part of the application I I I don't see what the bearing of that judgment is on this particular property 165 shortage can he answer the question so part of your competance checklist requires a copy of title search of all the reported easements and incumbrances on the property so we requested a title sech and submitted it along with our other application mat IAL because it's a required completeness item there is a an appet division uh decision that was recorded in the public records that um renders an opinion with regard to the interpretation of two restrictive covenants one dating from 1898 that was imposed in connection with the establishment of the Short Hills Association which was identified and discussed in one of the I think we're up to three now HPC reports that have been issued that undertook a deed review uh is referenced the other restrictive covenant um that was the subject of that decision had to do with a restrictive covenant that was imposed by the prior owner of 165 old Short Hills Road on one one Jefferson and all subsequent owners of one Jefferson that was the second part of that decision that was also uh part of the title Circ so both of the the entire decision has to do with the appet division interpreting restrictive covenants and deeds with regard to that issue I think there is there's case law and the Cox Trea is clear that as it pertains to recorded restrictions and deeds that is a matter of contract between private property owners it is a separate and distinct issue from what's before the planning board in terms of passing on a land use application and the development application they're two separate issues so it was only entered into this case because it was a completeness requirement that we had to comply with it's not been the subject of extensive testimony our uh arguments in favor of this application do not rest on that it's a separate issue that's not really within the purview of the of the planning board and that is the subject of reported case law and for that reason it should not be submitted or or to the extent it's already been submitted because of was completeness item should not be the subject of lengthy discussion and question again Mr I'm sorry last name um I don't see how that is relevant to again what's before the board whether or not the applicant met its burden approved to establish time second approval well I think it also goes to the credibility of the witness and the applicant this board has to consider that the this applicant has had a judgment against it that has restricted the use of a property and that applicant has continued to use that property adverse to that judgment um and then also the fact that there was a settlement agreement later entered into by the township um trying to further restrict that use because the subtle the Judgment was not successful so I think that's very relative to The credibility of the applicant and for the board's consideration of this application especially when the witness has testified that he'll be transferring operations from one property to the next so I that's my position and I think the the way to challenge The credibility of the witness is to ask specific questions as to his prior testimony anything beyond that quite frankly is an aminy argument against an applicant which is clearly outside of the bounds with wasn't wasn't she trying wasn't she trying to do exactly that asked direct questions about direct testimony that was given by the applicant yes so Mr Sor if you could specifically repeat what it was that was testified I think if if you could the question about his testimony I think that would be helpful to give us a Crux you said this and I would like clarification on that which I think is where you began with with saying you you attested to everything shifting that that helps us as the board understand uh the questioning So when you say you reference a settlement agreement can you be more specific of what component he testified to that you asking yeah and reminder to members of the public we are only having one person speak speak it in time thank you this this is a quasi judicial proceeding I you I think people should be very respectful of that thank you um Madame chair I I I forgive me but I am a bit confused at this point um by the directions that have been given to me I I thought before you were telling me that I was not to ask questions about one Jefferson and now um I'm are you allowing me to ask questions to the extent the rabbi has testified regarding that at the last hearing is that I would say if you could bring up what was testified you are you you would be permitted to ask questions about something that was testified to so if he brought up something and and opened a topic and you had a question to clarify to the extent that he asked made a specific statement you can ask a question to that effect Mr Le understood just to emphasize the point and this is exactly what I was alluding to uh more clearly and succinctly beginning with the last hearing which is yes as Mr Warner has stated there are time frames within which the board is supposed to take action on these applications is for the protection of members of the public so that they have a full and fair opportunity to participate it's also in favor of the applicant to make sure that they have a reasonably efficient and expeditious resolution of their development application so when we say that there was prior testimony as to the settlement agreement I think the rabbi mentioned in passing that it exists that's my clarification to so he made a you know a one-off reference in passing that it exists I do not believe that particularly in light of the time frames that the board's supposed to be observing I don't believe that that off-handed comment justifies 45 minutes of in-depth questioning about the subject of the settlement agreement that doesn't directly pertain to this property agree M Madam chair I've five minutes I mean I I haven't even been able really to ask any questions I'm trying to be as efficient as and I think if people know me I'm a very efficient person so if I could proceed I'm sure we could get through a lot more but um thank you so so so we will permit you to continue your questioning I can we ask for everybody to be quiet please and Council as well thank you um you can ask questions as we just have stated and to answer your question and clarify if you like to ask a question to clarify the testimony that was provided if you can cite what it was versus you know if you mentioned the settlement agreement in passing and did not provide any detail about then I think to to Mr lavine's point that was not a testifying to it and and all about it if he if he mentioned that it occurred I'm not aware of any case law that uh supports that position uh Madam chair and all due respect but um I have to say that the the rabbi mentions settlement agreement that he said uh permitted him to operate on one Jefferson I'd like to introduce the settlement agreement to the board and clarify what settlement agreement he's talking about that's what was mentioned in his testimony at the last hearing that's what I wanted to do but it based on what we've talked about for the last bit of time I I don't think you're going to allow me to do that so I I don't want to keep on retracing steps here if you're G to allow me to proceed I'll proceed but if you're going to prevent me from introducing that as an exhibit then I won't ask about it I stand by what I said I so you're not going to allow me to ask about the settlement agreement or introduce it as an exhibit is that what I'm hearing from you at this point I don't think so we being advised not to I guess do we as a board want to take a vote I'm I'm fine to do that probably should uh take a vote so that we I'm fine to leave it to the board's decision so does anybody want to move to allow this to be introduced so I'll make the motion that we allow um you know the attorney here to introduce the settlement agreement that was directly uh testified uh about by the applicant is there a second I second Cory Viller no Alison Campfield yes Michael Cohen no de NIS no Frank sanding yes sua Shan no swey VJ yes guess on Halbert no that's all no okay okay so the no is when so I will not introduce uh the settlement agreement as exhibit I won't introduce the 2014 judgment you have it in your application materials so it's part of the record um and I will proceed with other questions thank um based on your direction um so rabbi can you tell me um how many congregants does uh your congregation currently have we we have a very loose congregational definition of congregates do you mean how many people attend I'm not not sure what the question is uh do you have a list of congregants no uh do you know approximately how many um no I think I testify that we have people that attend services and I also mentioned to one of the board members that he would be welcome to come at any time um we don't have quote a dues requirement of any sort um so I can talk about that if you want but you'd have to ask more specific questions okay so do you have an estimate of the number of congregants that might increase when your services are moved from one Jefferson to 165 old sh Hills Road no um do you have an estimate of how many congregants will uh attend services at 165 old sh Hills Road I I based that estimate on what we have today yes and that was based upon the activities that you testified to at the last hearing that were part of your worship Services yes so can I just go through some of those and ask you some more questions so I can better understand the uses that are proposed for the property yes okay so you mentioned that you'll have daily prayer services um on the property at 165 over Hills Road is that right no okay are you only proposing to have uh weekly prayer at the property no what I actually testified to was that we would continue our prayer schedule which includes Saturdays Sundays and holidays and that I would hope at some point to work up to have daily services but that we don't currently have them that was my testimony and continues to be my testimony okay so your anticipation is that you would have uh weekly Services Saturday and Sunday is that right in the mornings yes okay and would you also have uh weekly services on the evenings and Saturdays and Sundays we don't currently but that would be my hope for sometime in the future yes okay and is it also your hope sometime in the future that you would also have daily Services uh Monday through Friday Also in the morning and the evening think I just said that okay um and do you have an estimation of the number of congregants that would attend those daily Services last time I testified and I stand by that testimony that we would probably have a maximum of 15 between 10 and 15 people and what is the basis of your estimation of uh between 10 and 15 uh Congress attending those Services is that what currently attends at uh Serv we don't have those Services currently so you're asking me about a projection for a service that we don't currently have and we've never had um for during old days of the week so you're asking me what the basis for my projection is and I could only say that's a projection so you know you'd have to be a little more specific have you considered the size of the building and how many uh persons could fit in the side of the building to determine how many people might um be able to attend daily prayer services no um did you consider uh the amount of people that attended uh daily PR excuse me weekly prayer services I think you said uh on Saturday mornings are those held at one Jefferson currently yes okay and and is it between 10 and 15 persons that attend those current uh Saturday morning prayer services at one Jefferson no my testimony last time was between 20 to 40 uh week Saturday morning and I stand by that testimony so uh why is it your projection if uh 40 people as many as 40 people attend uh Saturday morning prayer services at one Jefferson why do you anticipate that only uh 15 persons would attend uh morning prayer services at 165 old TR Hills Road because that's the middle of the week when people have to go to work so is it your testimony that you anticipate that Monday through Friday if you hold morning or evening prayer services during those days that it's only 15 persons that are anticipated to attend those yes I say 15 on the high side we probably get closer to 11 or 12 and that's again a projection for the future and on Sunday there would still be uh your projection is uh 40 persons attending Sunday morning I did not say that what is your projection for Sunday morning prayer same the same as a weekday the same as a weekday yes and and why is it less than 40 uh when you're moving from one Jefferson to 165 B shs Road it's the same day of the week I think you're confused I I I testified about Saturday morning and now you're asking about Sunday morning um I can answer the question even though you didn't ask it and that's Sunday morning our services have between 10 and 15 people and that number would continue okay and for the Saturday morning prayer services do you expect that there would be 40 persons at one the number would continue to be between 20 and 40 yes and uh what approximately is a square footage of one Jefferson compared to uh5 to sh Hills Road do you know no um uh I'll represent to you that I you know looked up the house one Jefferson and it has approximately uh 7,000 square feet does that sound about right to you yeah you can't provide testimony and and not only that I mean the comparison of the square footage of one Jefferson and 165 doesn't give rise to the possib need of any variance relief it's not particularly relevant to the details of the operations and what's been testified to as to the rabbis projections agre yeah well the rabbi is all du respect the rabbi has testified as to projections for his proposed use on 165 Old trills Road by comparing some of the uses at one Jefferson um I think it's important for the board to know acknowledge I think the board can acknowledge that you know this proposed building is about three times the size of what's operating at one Jefferson so projections based upon one Jefferson for a building that's three times larger I think it's important for the board to understand that did she have a question your question was you started giving testimony I think that was what what you started telling how large the existing building is and I understand you're doing in the context of asking question question you had already asked the question are you aware are you aware did you use that in and he answered no and then you followed up with with testimony so I think that's where the problem is once you ask the question I think we have to go to the next question do you know that I just want to remind you that I testify that my numbers projection is not based on the square footage of the proposed building and my numbers derivation is not based on the square footage of our current space that we're using so my testimony tonight is that the this the size of the room that we pray in is completely irrelevant to the number of people who attend but if you have another question I'm happy to answer so what is your uh your your numbers and your projections that you're giving to the board what are those based upon if they're not based upon square footage or current operations they're based on the people that we interact with and they're based on our long experience the township um and I testified last meeting that we have our congregation has a 40-year plus experience with the township and people live in the township and surrounding the township um I stand by that um would you acknowledge that the the building that you're building at 165 uh old sh Hills Road that you're proposing to build there is three times as large as is your existing house on one Jefferson it again it's yeah you're asking the same question repeatedly I don't think I ever asked that question to be fair I think that question has basically been asked at this point so you're the witness is not going to answer the question you're I've answered it actually and I said and I'll say it again I know because you keep going around I don't know what you want to say but I keep saying because nobody could understand what you're trying to say Rabbi we're gonna ask you to answer questions that are asked and not I answer as I stand by my statement previously my numbers are not based on the size of the room that we pray in okay thank you but wouldn't you expect if you build a larger building that more congregants could fit in there and that more persons might come and be expected to use the property no and why not it's an interesting question I'll tell you what I tell people there are a number of congregations with very beautiful and large buildings that have closed down recently in the area um I can think of three off the top of my head well established for a long time in the local area in our towns Livingston Springfield and they closed down with beautiful buildings because the size of your building does not guarantee you and a 10 and I will tell you further that there's beautiful congregation in South Orange that had to merge with another congregation today here in milver because they didn't have the people so the size of the building is very nice but it does not guarantee you any attendance um if you want to testify or you have somebody who can testify otherwise i' be happy to talk to that person but until you produce a person like that I can only rely on my own experience I stand by that about six times already tonight trying to run the you're doing a good job Rabbi please do not uh with all due respect you know I'm trying to go through this as efficiently as possible and I think I've been interrupted a few times so um thank you go to next question um do you expect that you'll have um Congress coming from other areas to the property or just that the the congregation will serve the local area I expect the congregation will continue to serve the local area um and if if you don't think that the congregation the number of congregants or those attending will increase then why did the applicant propose to construct such a large building if if I may the size of the proposed building and whether it's larger or smaller of the same size as the existing facility at one Jefferson is a very limited relevance the only time that the size and the square footage of the proposed building comes into play is if it gives rise to the need for a variance with regard to lot coverage or floor area ratio or that that sort of thing which has been examined by the board and its professionals and it does not it also comes into play with regard to the trip generation rates and the analysis of the Traffic Engineers do with regard to the you know what's expected to be generated by way of trips relevant there all of which has already been delved into and testified to beyond that the continued harping on the size of the proposed facility is not particularly relevant as long it might be if we were seeking variance relief with regard to the proposed size that's not the case it's relevant with regard to the required number of parking spaces which we comply with other than that harping on the size of the proposed structure thank you for your objection appreciate it um okay you have had uninterrupted time of questioning so I we are not trying to dissuade you from asking questions which you can you have asked a number of questions as Council mentioned regarding the size and as we've heard it's a it's a compliant application so yes the board should obviously consider it but I think we have taken that into consideration okay did the the applicant consider building a smaller facility at all at any time during the design process no okay um do you know approximately how many um staff and Personnel will be um at the uh 165 Old shill Road facility uh less than five and will that be staffed for that house of worship the Hebrew school and um and the nursery school no the nursery school I testified last time depends on the state requirements for ratio of students per um per uh teachers and that would depend on how many teachers we have and how many students were enrolled which you know I won't know until that happens okay and and just for clarity uh I just wanted to confirm the applicant didn't make any kind of submission related to the number of students that was spoken about at the last hearing correct I think no we the beginning of this meeting but we will receive it and writing before and will the applicant also be uh submitting to the board at least 10 days before the next meeting uh revised plans and traffic studies I guess we can ask are are there any anticipated revised well just I mean I and we had discussed this and I said we had shared with the board those concept plans that were responsive to input and comments from the board and its consultants and we' share those in a conceptual way and they yes I mean those those Concepts need to be implemented in revised plans which I acknowledge and yes those will be submitted and when the board takes action on those they will have to have been submitted in on file a minimum of 10 days before the date the board takes action thank you thank you um are there any um other staff other than those five staff for the house of worship are there any security Personnel um anything like that uh the number five includes security and um secretary myself um will will there be on-site security Personnel uh probably um do you know if there are any particular uh requirements for security for a house of worship or a nursery school no um do you know if uh the applicant will be complying with uh guidance from governmental agencies regarding uh security for houses of worship in schools I just testify that I don't know about any guidance such guidance um do you are you aware of any guidance from the um office of Homeland Security regarding houses worship no um where there'll be uh security cameras on the property our specific security plan is not something I'm comfortable discussing in public okay will there be a security plan for the facility we will have a security plan that again I don't feel comfortable discussing in public uh so you wouldn't be be sharing that with the board security plan no um and um will you be using any Tye of or installing any new fencing around the property I couldn't answer that question I don't know replace a fence maybe I don't know I mean certain we're not proposing any new fencing that's not shown will be shown on the final final plans okay thank you um would the applicant consider installing new fencing around the perimeter of the property no uh would the applicant consider um increasing offer to ad joining residences as part of this application no no