e e e e e e e e e e e e e good evening everyone welcome to the Monroe Township zoning board meeting of June 25th 2024 please stand and salute the flag I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation and God indivisible with liberty and justice for thank you anoun of the Sunshine Law in accordance with the open public meeting act it is hereby announced and shall be entered into the minutes of this meeting that adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by the following posted on the bulletin board excuse me of the office of the Township Clerk posted on the bulletin boards within the municipal complex printed in the home News Tribune and cranberry press on December 29th 2023 posted on the Monroe Township website and sent to those individuals who have requested personal notice Madame secretary roll call please miss Carrie pres Mr L here Mr Master here Mr busman here M here Mr tany here Mr Jack here Mr F Mr yes here okay board members we have our minutes from our meeting held on May 28th do I have an approval second second all in favor I I thank you busman abstained he was absent okay our first application ba a d our first application ba-52 39-23 NJ cars anyone who's here for that particular hearing it will not be held tonight it's going to be re noticed and it's moved to the August meeting they inadvertently advertised in the wrong paper and therefore proper public notice was not sent out so again ba 5239 d23 New Jersey cars will not be heard tonight they will be held August meeting and they will be required to R notice thank you next application tonight ba-52 48-24 ct107 Shar commercial please come forward chairman good evening Thomas Carol the appes thank you Council uh just for the record we'd like a copy of the transcript please certainly thank you and when you do speak just speak into the mic so we can pick you up because everything is being recorded I proceed you may proceed just use that microphone if you don't mind please yes um the first order of business uh we had sent in the Affidavit of mailing and publication I think we emailed it and FedEx it uh so just like gu initial question jurisdiction over this Mr chairman for the record I've reviewed the Affidavit of mailing and publication and the board does have jurisdiction to hear the matter you may proceed I'm happy to hear we did it in the right newspaper so just to Briefly summarize the application I think you know you folks are pretty uh pretty much familiar with it um yeah for Taco Bell um in the um the HD business district uh you utilizing the Village Center overlay zoning um it's for preliminary and final site plan approval for the Taco Bell along with some variances and design waivers um just to be clear U there's nothing no request before you on this application concerning the bank this is just for the uh the Taco Bell um so what's approved for the bank remains and it's not proposed to be modified at this time um we have you know three Witnesses um at least three probably three um our side engineer uh Jim Henry uh planner Andrew Jano and our traffic consultant Scott Kennel and um if um board has no questions of me um you know I propose to get right into the testimony with Mr hry our site engineer okay Council you you indicated that you're not talking or doing anything with the bank this evening not this evening that seems to be was on the application proposed restaurant and bank with Thrive through yes but nothing is proposed to be changed for the bank that would remain as it is this particular tax lot was approved for a restaurant and a bank but only the only changes requ Reed uh tonight are for the Taco Bell the bank would remain the same okay uh through our attorney I guess my question is is this not a site plan for the bank as well or say what are we doing I'm not sure the bank has final site plan approval right okay I don't think we're requesting it yeah excuse me um you need to in before we use ready testimony you provide us the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do you can state your name spell your last name for the record please James Henry h n r y and your address please uh 1904 Main Street Lake comoo New Jersey from Dynamic engineering could be qualifications briefly just to get that out of the way sure um I'm have a bachelor's of science from Rucker University in civil engineering with a minor in public planning from the blow scene School a Masters of Science in civil engineering uh from Ruckers University as well I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey Pennsylvania as well as New York okay yeah we we'll accept your credentials great thank you the question as to the bank sure um so as far as the bank is concerned we're I believe we're going for preliminary approval tonight and we're likely going to have a phase line which is going to go down um one of the drive aises which is going to be the part of the bank that's not going to be part of the site that's not going to be constructed so we are going for preliminary approval tonight but we're going for uh preliminary and final for the Taco Bell piece okay because I think what council just said was for Taco Bell am I correct yeah and now we're doing the bank I believe we're going for preliminary approval for the bank and then but we're not we're we're planning to phase out that construction as part of a a second phase Jim correct me if I'm wrong wasn't the bank previously preliminarily so the bank was previously approved we we have modified some of some of the site elements on the plans that were submitted um and then we have a further minor revision tonight with with an exhibit uh but we're the bank more or less the square footage is the same as it was previously right but if we're adjusting something outside isn't that a site plan now if they aled something from are you are you Mr chair are you subdividing a lot to separate the bank from the Taco Bell so it's a site just our attorney I guess it's a site plan for the entire laot with both the bank and Taco Bell yeah again I think the bank was previously preliminarily approved right and tonight the request before you is for preliminary and final approval for the Taco Bell but really not proposing final approval tonight for the bank is that clear clear attorney how do we do that that's one lot I mean I I was under the and I think we we were under the impression based on the application at your in for amended liim and final approval for both the bank and the Taco Bell on one lot to get a site plan approval is that not what you're here for well that that's that's my understanding you know granted this is Tad confusing the notice I did you know was um does not specifically request um final for the bank it's just for the Taco Bell now if if need be you know we would request it I suppose propos but um we're not proposing any changes for the prior approval for the bank yeah I was going to say the final doesn't need an advertisement if they haven't changed the bank aspect of it and they're going to address everything that needed to be addressed on preliminary in order to satisfy final they should be okay if they want to change the bank at any point in the future they'd need to come back with an amendment I you know for the same reason that they've got preliminary and final with respect to the site sort of for the Taco Bell aspect of they're not changing the bank aspect of it so that Footprints remaining the same I would imagine and and the logistics of that portion of the use are remaining the same right but how are we defining the taco area your mic's on he said how are we defining the Taco Bell area if there's no subdivision well it's not I I don't want to advocate for the for the applicant but I guess what the the argument is is the Taco Bell's the footprint of the Taco Bell is changing and and certain aspects of the site are changing to accommodate the Taco Bell the bank aspects or you know the the the portions of the bank site are remaining the same or the portions of the site associated with the bank use are remaining the same and they're seeking final approval for both so to speak we understand we would have to return to require final approval for the bank I we understand that okay so my my question is we establish the footprint of the bank is remaining the Same by altering the Taco Bell is it changing any of the roadways any directionals any parking anything of that nature yes so then the restaurant falls under the bank falls under a site plan because you're altering something even though the building is not changing you could be altering something that impedes the operation of the bank am I correct well I could could could we leave this I'm I'm a little bit handicapped can we leave this to our witnesses to explain further I think it's a legal matter isn't it and we're not going to go listen to testimony if it's something that it has to be done in one point I mean couldn't we couldn't we go for preliminary and final and then just have it a phase development phase one phase two other words preliminary final we both to talk about and then we'll do phase one phase two and then if we want to modify the bank approval as part of phase two we could come back for that well sh I I mean I know everything was approved but because of being changed should this application be bifurcated it come for their preliminary and then they would have to come back and at that point they should know what's going on with the bank where it's where now it's a complete because it's one site what's your opinion uh I need some help yeah I mean uh the the concern is first of all it's not there's no subdivision so there is even if we say the building footprint and the Taco Bell building are the new things and nothing is changing how do we Define where portion of Taco Bell site plan ends and where portion of Bank starts I mean it's a common site everything is flowing through and through so it's a overall site plan of this particular block and lot I I can show you the line where you can bu where you can build up to where it doesn't affect the other the site doesn't affect the bank and but H how we Define like for example how we saying it in resolution how are we going to say only this portion you can say that the basically the the western side of the Center Drive AIS the center driveway is the limit of where phase one will be because it includes the drive aisle that goes out to Market Street and includes the trash enclosure for Taco Bell and then anything beyond that to the west of the Westerly you know the Center Drive AIS would would be the bank the the Taco Bell in order to function does not need anything west of the market The Market Street driveway the center driveway anything west of that is not needed for the Taco Bell to function but the dumpster is technically in the parking lot of the bank right well it's shared parking so it's it's it's okay so how about we do this uh ban Meer are you okay if we go with preliminary and not final site plan tonight so then you guys would have time to review anything that's put before us before they come back again here's our practical consideration the the Taco Bell they're ready to go right and we need the approval to make that happen there is no tenant yet for the bank so you know to to put put the Taco Bell on some bifurcated time frame um bices that up okay so Mark and merer have you guys reviewed the entire property for final site plan or you just been concentrating on the Taco Bell is your reports tonight based on Taco Bell or is it a final site plan mine mine is based on both the bank and Taco Bell as per the application that they submitted yeah we have looked at some of the parking requirements and everything for both so you guys then we'll just move forward with it because you established that you looked at the whole enti property is that correct yeah we've asked questions on building hide for the bank and everything okay so no additional notice would be needed because now property is being well the notice U does a notice cover the bank for final well the the you don't need the notice for final so the only thing they noticed for was essentially the fact that the nature of the restaurant use on the site because the Easter portion of the site that was going to house the restaurant use has been reduced in size and uh the nature of the restaurant's changed it supposed to be a 10,000 foot restaurant and now it's somewhere in the 2,000 foot range and it's got a drivethru so I think that's the nature of why they're coming back for preliminary with respect to that that aspect of the use and then really it's it's the whole site is preliminary um because you guys are looking at it and then final only for well final for both but they didn't need to notice for the bank because the aspects of the bank use haven't changed in size or requirements make sense Mak sense councelor yes you okay with that M yeah I'm good I'm good with that because the bank did change based on the maps that I was looking at layout has changed since the old approval so if we clean that all up now that that that works agreed okay before we go any further a few folks in the back if you're here for uh the cars application it was carried to August they notified in the wrong paper so they will not be yes they will not be heard till August they adverti in the wrong newspaper they need to advertise in the correct paper so therefore it wasn't properly noticed okay you're welcome you too sorry okay thank you very much um Mr Henry back to where we were um if you could just begin um by summarizing the application um and um best you can advising the board or what we're seeking today great thank you very much I appreciate the board for accepting my credentials uh and just give you a little bit more more of my background um I've I've worked at Dynamic for almost 20 years I've focused on qsr development uh I've worked on probably 50 to 100 different qsrs accept throughout New Jersey I just want to give you my background I'm very very familiar with how qsrs operate Quick Serve restaurants um I worked at the Starbucks across the way um which I'm going to bring up tonight and then also obviously this is this is a proposed stock of Bel so I appreciate the board for accepting my credentials uh I'm going to start off with just getting everyone familiar with the um surrounding uses um let me pull up exhibit aerial exhibit so this is something that we have not seen before yes okay if we could Mark that as A1 and Mr Henry if you could just describe what A1 is sure you you can pull that out you're gonna walk with that it's your best friend tonight thank all right thank you um so the parcel is identified is block four lot 15 uh the property is located what exactly is A1 oh sorry a excuse me A1 is aerial map exhibit dated uh June 25th 2024 prepared by Dynamic engineering and it's uh updated version uh it's an updated version of the aerial map I believe it's sheet two of the site plan um we updated the aerial so that it reflects current site conditions as far as the Starbucks development which is just to the east of the site um so just going going over the the parcel uh it's block four lot 15 um for the purposes of this exhibit A1 uh North is facing up um to the south of the site is uh Route 33 uh and as you can see on the opposite side of Route 33 is a uh residential development the property itself is located within the HD Zone with a vc2 village overlay um Zone it's located at the intersection of Route 33 and Warren Way Warren Way runs you know roughly north south whereas Route 33 obviously runs East West uh adjacent to the site just to the east of the site there's a strip center with a Starbucks end cap in that which was recently in front of this uh actually in front of this board uh and then to the north of the site are residential uses as well as a kitty kitty Academy uh to the west of the site is undeveloped uh or is a is a property which is used as the farm market uh it's also within the htvc 2 overlay Zone um so those those are the existing uses as just going to refer to um the previously approved Crest plan so everyone can get familiar with what was previously approved on the site I'm going to mark that as A2 and that'll be um overall plan prepared by Crest uh Engineering Associates dated September 29th 2014 last revised uh March 14 2016 uh so this this again identifies the property uh which is lot 15 it's okay um it identifies lot 15 uh on the Westerly side of the overall development uh there was a previous approval for the site as was mentioned earlier for a 4,000 foot bank with drive-thru as well as a 10,000 ft restaurant uh previous waivers were granted uh was for no loading loading space for uh the subject site uh for parking stalls that were 9 by8 and then also for the uh bank which we're we're relatively maintaining as far as a side yard setback uh impervious coverage uh was was permitted to be 50% it was previously approved at 48.2 7% with 32.16 motor vehicle services area the existing topography on site um it's this site was partially constructed because the Basin in front of the property uh has been constructed uh and really as you pass by the site I'm sure many of you have uh really kind of blocks the the property behind it it's it has poor visibility of the actual site uh so the site overall really relies on the existing freestanding sign which is located near the intersection of Joan waren way in Route 33 but overall the the pad itself is relatively flat with the uh the Basin which has previously been constructed uh now I'm just going to refer to the survey which does not need to be marked because this was submitted this is just the um boundary location topographic survey prepared by Dynamic survey LLC and that's dated August 4th 2023 so on this property you can see the the Basin along Route 33 has been constructed uh there's a quite a bit of landscaping that was installed the number of trees that was installed as part of the original uh development of the overall tract um the Basin has a small infiltration Basin as well as an extended detention Basin uh just to the south of the site uh there is a number of uh storm water connections that are made onto the pad site and the pad site if you go out there today is relatively flat it's just grass and then there's a couple areas with utilities primarily located along Market Street uh that were constructed as part of the original development of the site now I'm just going going to refer to A3 and A3 is just a colorized site plan rendering uh that's with the Landscaping overlaid on top of the site plan and this is dated uh June 25th 2024 and prepared by Dynamic engineering and this exhibit is also North is facing the top of the page this will be A3 uh so on A3 you you'll notice in the center there's the modification is primarily on the Easter we've had uh as previously mentioned there was a 10,000 foot restaurant proposed on this property we are reducing the size of that building down to 2,195 square ft and proposing it to be a quick serve restaurant uh with drive-thru as a Taco Bell uh the preliminary approval was granted for the bank already and that's a 4,000 foot bank with drive-thru that is primarily remaining the same we're modifying the canopy over the drive-thru Lane slightly uh but other than that the the building itself is not really changing uh so this exhibit was changed slightly from the uh the site plans that were submitted to the board they were changed and I'll go through those changes but they were changed to address uh your plan the board's planner as well as the engineering comments that we received we wanted to really incorporate uh those changes into this exhibit so that the board was able to see you know I think what what we could do as far as addressing their comments rather than just you know kind of trying to imagine yourself so uh so we incorporated some of those changes and I'll go through that as we get further along so uh the restaurant use is a permitted use on the site um we are in front of this board because the drive-thru facility is not permitted uh even though it was permitted as part of the bank we've determined in talking to the board's planner that a use variant is required a D1 variance uh the bank is really not being changed it's a permitted use the drive-thru for the bank was previously approved uh so that is a permitted use and then that was previously approve approved by um by the previous the multiple uses on site is a permitted use in the ordinance uh so that is also permitted um one thing to note uh the big differentiation between the two applications is the you know we have a 10,000 foot sitdown restaurant versus a Quick Serve restaurant which obviously has a drive-thru uh so it's a small building but as you'll see as we go through the description of the application you'll see a lot of you know obviously many of you have been serve restaurants a lot of the customers instead of coming in and sitting down they they go through the drive-thru Lane primarily um as far as bulk standards as far as what we are pursuing from a setback standpoint we are asking for uh a building a maximum front yard setback of 63.8 uh whereas 10 is permitted by ordinance and we are also asking for uh building curb line setback of 68.7 whereas 20 is permitted by ordinance it's very similar to the Starbucks application that took place on the other side of the street uh that application very similarly had the same kind of variances issued for it uh whereas Starbucks had requested 100 feet um and then 105 ft for those two same variances uh there is also a variance for the side yard setback as for the bank uh for the Bank drive-thru canopy and that was previously granted by this board and we are again asking for that that variance and continuing that variance uh with this application uh topograph from a topographic standpoint the the site as I mentioned is relatively flat uh we're going to maintain most of the existing topography so we're anticipating it to function very similarly uh to the previous application that was in front of this board uh as far as the drive-thru for the Taco Bell uh we're anticipating customers will either come off of uh Joan waren way and then we'll circulate through the site and get into the drive-through Lane that way or potentially from Market Street come in the driveway in the center of the site uh there was some discussion as far as where you know a phase line would be would be drawn and I think i' mentioned there's a set there's three different access points to the site there's an access point off Joan waren way on the uh easterly side of the site in the center the northern center of the site there's an the full movement driveway off Market Street and then there's an Ingress only driveway at the northwesterly corner of the site so um as far as where the phase line will be drawn it would be drawn on the Westerly limit of the center uh Drive aisle coming through the site off Market Street now the drive-thru itself uh is going to operate efficiently uh this the new age of of Q qsrs you have two different menu points um where people are able to take people are able to take two different orders at one time so we have two different uh menus proposed for this particular application in addition to that uh we are also proposing a 12 car stack in comparison the Starbucks across the way uh was designed with 11 car stack so we have one additional car for this type of use even though I would say traditionally Starbucks you know tends to have on the higher end of cues 12 cars is is is very much on the higher end of cues in general uh you know usually we shoot for around 10 11 cars so 12 cars give the board comfortable a certain comfortableness that we're going to be able to properly stack this drive there is also a full bypass proposed around the quick around the uh drive-through Lane um and we're going to show with truck circulation that a truck can get through there even when there's cars stacked for the drive-thru uh so there's two drive-through Lanes they're going to merge after the order point and then come through along the southernly side of the building and there'll be two windows and the southern facade as well as two clearance bars um through the drivethru um we did modify the striping just to the southeasterly corner of the building I believe the board's engineer had requested that cars leaving the drive-thru Lane would line up properly with the egress movements off of Joan War way so based on his recommendation we added some striping to really help direct cars to that egress driveway and properly align with the driveway on on Joan waren way from a parking perspective the proposed bank is going to continue to have 9 by 18 parking stalls I'd mentioned earlier that a waiver was granted uh by the board previously so the parking stalls on the bank uh site or side of the property are uh are 9 by8 for the Taco Bell property we were able to comply with the ordinance requirements so we do have 10 x 20 parking stalls proposed uh for that site overall for the overall site the bank including um the Taco Bell we are required to have 48 parking stalls and we're proposing 58 parking stalls that includes three Ada stalls and two EV credits uh so from a parking perspective uh we have over 10 parking we have 10 parking stalls more than what's required by the ordinance uh so we are compliant there um from an access circulation standpoint I mentioned there are three different access points there's a full full movement driveway on Drone Warr way there's a full movement driveway on Market Street and an Ingress only driveway uh just to the uh west of the drive-thru uh the oneway driveway is approximately 21 ft wide and the other two driveways are approximately 30 ft wide uh the driveway on Joan Warren Way similar to the Starbucks and you can actually see it on the aerial on exhibit uh A3 similar to what we had done there we are proposing a concrete kind of mountable Island uh to really so that the cars aren aren't driving through the extra wide driveway way we made it wider and we made it mountable so just like what was recommended on the Starbucks site uh across the way as far as Drive aisles overall the site complies with your ordinance requirements we have over 24 foot wide Drive aisles where there's two-way circulation where there is one-way circulation we have a 12ft wide uh dryr Lane uh which is also compliant with your ordinance requirement from a loading perspective uh there are no loading areas required on the bank uh the restaurant we are proposing a compliant loading area that's one of the changes we we did have here uh previously there was some parking proposed near the trash enclosure in the center of the site we removed some of that parking so we could comply uh with the ordinance requirement and pro provide a 12x 50 loading space and we had requested a waiver on that and that is no longer required uh because we now are proposing a compliant loading space we also ran a truck where the truck comes in off Market Street circulates through to load space and then pulls out on Joan Warren way and uh we're anticipating a WB 50 truck will be doing that and that will be able to be done even if there were cars in the Drive-Thru and there won't be any sort of conflicts even though we are proposing the the load the uh delivery should be done off peak hours just to give the board a certain Comfort level we did design it so that if there are cars in the Drive-Thru uh we are able to still circulate the site so we do provide one loading space on site from an ada perspective Ive we are proposing uh circulation around the outside we're proposing new sidewalks around the perimeter of the site on the uh on the Northerly side of the site we are proposing a pedestrian access along with a crosswalk into the site you know we're proposing um 88 parking stalls in front of the Taco Bell as well as an 88 compliant entrance we are also proposing a striped crosswalk across the Center Drive AIS on Market Street and then a crosswalk over into the bank property uh so this is a major upgrade um this is going to be fully compliant from an 888 perspective and access can can be uh provided uh from Route 33 I've been out to the site a number of times I've actually seen a number of pedestrians that do walk around this area um so it's good that we are proposing a compliant uh pedestrian access from a trash enclosure standpoint we're proposing two different trash enclosures we're proposing the Taco Bell trash enclosure with a crosswalk to access to the building and then we are also proposing another trash enclosure at the southwesterly corner of the site um the the Taco Bell trash enclosure will be 26 by or 11 by 26 and then the bank trash enclosure will be 10 x 20 um one thing to note I believe there was a comment in the planner's review letter regarding having curbing around the trash enclosure so most of the time curbing is required um if you have for instance a fence that goes around a trash enclosure in our instance we're going to have a masony trash enclosure for both these instances so the m the the masonry wall will really kind of almost act as a curb uh so we are requesting a waiver or variance for that uh because it doesn't make sense if it a curb inside of a block wall um I think that's that ordinance section is really designed for when there's a fence around the trash closure but in our instance both our instances we are proposing Mery so we are requesting that uh that varant as far as operations uh we did speak um at length with Taco Bell about the operations of their facility um the Taco Bell is going to operate through the drive-thru 7 to 1:00 a.m. Sunday through Thursday the dining room will be open 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and then Friday and Saturday the drive-thru will be open 7: to 2 and the dining room will be open 9 to 11: p.m. from an employee standpoint they're anticipating approximately 5 to eight employees uh with the maximum being around dinner or lunchtime uh from a delivery perspective we're anticipating approximately four deliveries uh generally done during off peak hours throughout the week uh and as I mentioned earlier the wp50 trucks we use from a delivery perspective uh there was some question in the in the board's professionals review letters as far as what percentage of the uh customers use the drive-thru versus order online versus actually come inside the building and we did our ask our client that uh approximately 65% uh use used the drive-thru uh which is consistent with the other uh book serve restaurants that I've used generally speaking across all the brands usually they say about 70% of the customers use a drive-thru which is why you see such a big push for drive-throughs uh throughout New Jersey and then generally split the the remainder about 17 and a half roughly go inside and then approximately 17 and a half will order in advance so the people that order in advance can either go through the drive-through lane or they can come inside uh the building for for quick pickup so that's usually the break that's the breakdown that the uh client was given has given us as far as their sales from a trash enclosure perspective both of the trash enclosures can be accessed for the drive a we don't have any parking spaces or anything really encumbering either of the trash enclosures uh from being picked up during you know regular business hours uh so both of the trash enclosures are anticipated to be picked up two to three times per week depending on uh the volume of of trashes there we're anticipating two different um uh two different dumpsters to be in each trash enclosure we've made those trash enclosures large enough to fit a recycling as well as a trash uh and we're anticipating those enclosures to be approximately six cubic yards from a storm management perspective uh we are maintaining the existing basins which are out along Route 33 I mentioned earlier for both of the these uses as you look along Route 33 um you know there are fences and and quite a bit of landscaping that really blocks the overall view of the site so um there is a storm Basin that's out there the storm Basin was approved to to accommodate this type of development we are actually reducing the amount of impervious coverage uh that is being proposed whereas uh I think the original impervious coverage was approximately 48% and we're proposing 44% uh so we are reducing what was previously requested by this board uh so we are and then we also are reducing the motor vehicle coverage from 32 um to 32.16 uh to 32 uh 3 so actually I re excuse me I reverse we went from 44.9 to 48 so there a slight deviation in the impervious coverage but it was accommodated for in the Basin uh but we are reducing the motor vehicle service the motor vehicle coverage which we uh did mention to your your engineer there was a comment regarding the adequacy of the stormw management Basin and because we are not increasing the motor vehicle coverage s 7 Co and 8 allows any sort of development that has received a preliminary approval to be grandfathered into the Old Law the old storm waterer rules so we are able to be grandfathered past the new rules which I'm sure you know were recently adopted last year uh so this type of development uh can be accommodated with it with because there was a previous approval on this site uh so we are reducing the runoff rates uh similar to what the previous development had proposed from a utility perspective uh we are proposing uh domestic uh water to the bank as well as a Taco Bell we're anticipating a a two to 4 inch for the bank and then likely a 4 inch uh for the Taco Bell sanitary sewer um also we're anticipating a 4-in PBC sanitary sewer service for the Taco Bell as well as the bank and both of those will go out to Market Street where I believe they're stubbed uh as part of the original development from a gas perspective uh we're going to be connecting into the gas dub which is actually the intersection of Market and Joan waren way so we're anticipating the gas uh to be provided to both of these buildings and then from an electric perspective there actually are two um Transformer pads or there at least hookups on site for each of these uses so we're anticipating we're going to be utilizing those Bank those pads and you can see the pads on the exhibits at the northeasterly corner of the site and then there's another one just adjacent to the uh drive-thru uh from a lighting perspective there are three existing lights uh along Joon War way decorative lights as requested by the board on the original approval uh those were modeled as part of our lighting plan we are proposing five additional wallmounted lights and then we are proposing uh 13 uh single LED type Five Lights which are again are decorative in nature as well as 17 single head LED lights with forward throw at a mounting height of 20 ft um there was a comment as far as which lights will remain on during security and we will work with your professionals as far as which lights will remain on overnight uh typically with this type of development we do like to have a few lights particularly near the main entrance just for security purposes with the other lights on site uh will be will be shut off uh from a lighting perspective you know we basically designed this with LED lights you know and really to just maintain a safe and secure uh site as well as minimizing off offsite lir understanding we are in in nearer residential uses both across Route 33 and also across Market Street so uh we did we did design the lighting fully compliant with your ordinance uh and we really and we used all the decorative features which you've seen on the other sites throughout this development from a landscaping perspective um we we we proposed quite a bit of Landscaping on site and we'll go through each of the type of landscap we're proposing 33 trees um including 13 shade trees 16 ornamental trees and four evergreen trees we're proposing 289 total shrubs of which are 177 evergreen shrubs and 122 112 deciduous shrubs uh and then 70 ground cover and we're also proposing 61 perennials and 88 ornamental grasses overall for this site we're proposing an additional 54 1 plantings this is an addition to the Landscaping that already exists on site and there is a number of trees that you can see along Route 33 that are already been planted as well as around basically around the Basin uh just some comments which I believe were in your plannner review letter we're going to agree to replace any dead Landscaping between the parking lot and Route 33 so if there's any trees that are dead along Route 33 we'll agree to replace them uh I believe your planner would also ask us to increase the caliper size on a number of different trees and we're agreeable to doing that both for the evergreen trees as well as uh if there was anything required for the deciduous trees um and then there was an additional comment regarding just adding some uh evergreen trees around the trash enclosure and we're we're agreeable to modifying that to the to the boarders to the pl to address the planner's comment so so from a signage perspective just to go over the signage excuse me let just get siple water real quick so from a signage perspective um free sanding signs there is one free sing sign that already exists on site that's being maintained that's not being modified there are a number of existing non-conformities which exist with that and that's not being changed um we are proposing drive-thru menu boards uh two menu boards and then two preview boards um that the two menu boards are 25 feet each approximately six foot high and the two preview boards are approximately 13 foot each approxim with approximately six foot high um your planner had requested that we ask for variances for this and consider them uh freestanding signs uh so we are requesting variances for the the menu board and as well as the preview board uh just to be conservative in nature uh but they don't really function as um as signage they're they're proposed uh to the west of the qsr and to be facing towards the west and also to the north um from a building building signage perspective we are proposing uh we're allowed to have one per use we are proposing eight signs for the Taco Bell um and then one sign for the bank so we're proposing nine total we do require a variance uh for the eight for the Taco Bell and we're going to go over those eight signs shortly excuse me uh just as a frame of reference refence 11 signs were requested on the Starbucks application uh that was granted by this board uh from a square footage perspective on the building signage the square footage does comply with what's permitted on each individual wall uh so we're not really proposing a very large sign it's more of the number of signs which which get us in trouble with the with the ordinance uh so I just I'm just going to refer to the architectural plans because that's probably the easiest way to refer to the signage um so I'm going to mark that as uh this it'll be A4 and A5 the two architectural plants so A4 uh will be the sheet a 4.1 R uh that's dated June 24th 2024 and that's prepared by GCO Architects uh unfortunately the architect was unable to make it tonight uh but we do have the franchisee here who's very familiar with the architecture uh if you have any particular questions but I'm just going to go over and can give presentation based on this uh exhibit so this is going to be A4 there we go got just just a little bit more light I need here and then there is another elevation showing the the other side of the building uh and this will be labeled as A5 and this is sheet a 4.0 R again dated June 24th 2024 again prepared by the same architect this to be A5 um so I think I mentioned the uniqueness of this property is that we really have three different street frontages um so really there's a need to add signage on each side of the building similar to the Starbucks that was previously approved uh Starbucks also had signage on the on the had three frontages and also uh requested signage on each side of building um so on the elevation which is the the one the side with again I'm referring to 85 this is the side that faces throughout 33 this is the side you can see the two different um two different ordering ordering points or drive-through Windows uh there's just one Taco Bell signage really facing the street which is Route 33 and then there's a decorative uh Taco Bell sign uh really doesn't have any real logos on it but technically it meets the defition of a sign so we are requesting uh a variance for that so there's two two signs on that and then as far as the sign that the side of the building that faces Joan Warren Way on A5 on the lower lefthand corner you can see there's a Taco Bell sign shown on that and then to the rear of the building there's another Taco Bell sign and that faces to the west and then on a A5 you can see this is a side that really faces the parking area uh so this is the main entrance to the building you can see there's a Taco Bell Bell over the main entrance then there's two Taco signs on the uh on the purple side of the building and then there's one additional kind of main Taco Bell sign at the uh at the corner of the building similar to the other other frontages so um so that's a description of the the signage that's being requested um the bank sign uh is compliant with the ordinance requirements uh from a directional sign standpoint we are requesting uh three directional signs uh this the directional signs are smaller than what's Allowed by ordinance however we're the Taco Bell signs are one foot high versus your ordinance which allows a 9in high sign so we are uh I think in my opinion complying with the idea of the ordinance but there's a slight deviation as far as the height of the sign itself uh and then also there's a a variants being requested the logo of the Taco Bell um there is a ordinance requirement which requires a blue directional sign only so we are requesting a variance for directional signage for that um other than that the ordinance we comply with the ordinance requirement uh from a directional signage standpoint and that's really it on signage um really those are those are the couple issues that we have from a signage perspective as far as architecture again just referring to a A5 um you know the building itself actually I'll get into the so this this exhibit I believe was previously submitted this is just a FL plan of the um of the Taco Bell itself I just want to talk about the floor plan layout uh before we you know go into the actual facad um treatments so I'm not going to mark this just to be clear that was submitted with the application this was submitted with the application so I'm not going to mark this this exhibit if you could refer to which sheet it is sure yeah so it's uh it's A1 which is just a floor plan it says a Endeavor 2.0 go model FL floor plan and it's also prepared by the same architect g GCO Architects and that's stated uh dece December 20th 2023 so as was mentioned um the square footage of the building is 2,195 square feet uh there's there's door locations on the uh northly side of the building which is facing down on this on A1 and then the uh the easterly side of the building which is facing to the left hand side of the sheet which is really to the east um so there's two two doors uh out out those two sides of the building the main entrance you would enter in from the from the main entrance and come and go into the main seating area and and POS area uh there are two bathrooms proposed there's a men's and a woman's bathroom um from a seat count perspective we're proposing 40 interior seats as well as 10 outdoor seats so 50 seats total uh there's an interior dining area outdoor dining area with canopy customer sales area serving area two bathrooms uh there are two window areas one which is uh for a a pay area and then for a pickup area and then there's an office in the back with dry storage uh Cold Storage a washing area and a utility area as far as the [Music] facade going back back to 84 the facade is going to be a mostly siding um Hardy siding with artisian VG Groove siding uh it's going to be a gray uh material the scuppers are also going to be gray semigloss finish down spouts are also going to be gray with a semi semigloss finish there's going to be a Vertex trim trim around the uh the windows elves um with with canopies over the windows as well as over the uh drive-thru uh Lanes the drive-thru uh drive-thru canopy is going to be approximately uh N9 feet 9 to 10 feet high uh the reason that is so shallow is that you know most clearances under bridges are about 14 ft however when you're talking about a drive-thru most vehicles that are going through drive-throughs are passenger vehicles so there's going to be a clearance bar and then um when you have the canopy too high it actually doesn't provide any coverage so on all the drive-throughs you work on they usually have about a nine or 10 foot high uh canopy if if you put it too high it doesn't really provide any coverage over the ve vehicle that's opening up its Windows um and then as well as there's going to be a stone veneer um on the uh kind of the main Taco Bell Tower on the building uh there's going to be a standing seam metal roof as well on the top of the roof there will be it's approximately 18.6 to the top of the parit um I believe there was a comment regarding uh the HVAC on the on the building I spoke to our client they're willing to raise up the uh the parit to make sure it it it completely encompasses any sort of HVAC on the building um and really it you know overall it's a very modern look it's very you know it has black windows uh many of you have probably been to the one in Robinsville it's a very similar type type building it's very modern I think it's very chic uh and comes off really well uh from an architectural perspective they are using high quality materials they're not using suco they're not using other other materials that traditionally you have issues with we're using siding as well as stone veneer here so it's a really high quality uh type of exterior and that's really it on the I have in the architecturals unless anyone has in comments uh just going into the Outside Agency review obviously um we're in front of this board tonight uh asking for your approval so we do require uh tach Monroe's approval require middle sex County approval we did receive that already fre oldd approval we did receive that already uh drcc approval we submitted and we received a review letter uh so that approval is pending uh we do require dot approval so that approval is also pending Monro Township utility department that approval is pending as well as uh PSP and jcpnl we do a real SE letters uh but we will also require those approvals uh so I think in general I I think this this type of use really fits in well with this you know site it it's located at Route 33 it's a very um it's a mixed use area we have two different uses here which I think will work well uh with the other uses on site we are seeking a number of variances and bulk requirements uh that I did go over I think a lot of these variances were previously granted for the other approval uh and we really tried to incorporate a lot of the planners com the board planners comment as well as the board Engineers comments and really tried to incorporate them into the the plan that we submitted before you to them I do have reduced copies of these exhibits if if anyone from the board does want them um and I think aesthetically with the amount of landscaping that we're adding this is really almost going to feel like a park-like area around the outside um and really fit in more very well with a pedestrian warranted type of development finish that's it so a couple couple more questions um you touched on this somewhat you know with respect to the statutory standards council could you just get the microphone closer to you please better yes just talk a little bit annunciate been hearing out my whole life born in Jersey City you know um Jim I you touched on this with respect to certain um design waivers variant uh uh exceptions under the municipal L use law um is it your opinion that the relief we're seeking um is within the intent of the site plan review ordinances and reasonable right so per Municipal land use law um waivers can be granted granted as long as they're reasonable in nature I think a lot of these waivers that we went over tonight uh are are reasonable and the reasons we're complying or we're not complying with them are you know make sense and I think we're meeting the intent of the of the ordinance and is your opinion that the lit literal enforcement of all of the standards um would be impracticable or exact hardship because of the configuration of the property yes especially with the for visibility um you know particularly with the signage I think the signage is going to be key to the success of this this type of development um really the poor visibility of the site overall uh makes it a difficult site so it really needs proper signage in order to really be properly identified from Route 33 um that's all I have for the engineer okay if you could bring your next uh professional up please great thank you give me a moment sure okay thank you Mr chairman I think you might recognize our next witness Scott Kennel to provide traffic um testimony and Scott if you would start out real briefly on your um qualifications and whether you've appeared before this board he knows what I'll mean here we go do you swear the testimony you provid is truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do if you could state your name spell your last name and give us your address please yes it is Scott Kennel K NE l with MCD and Ray Associates located at 1431 Lakewood Road Manasquan um I'm a principal with McDon and Ray Associates with over 35 years of traffic and transportation planning experience I've testified over 2,000 site plan applications we we will accept your credentials we know you've been here before thank you so thank you Scott if you would I know you've uh studied the traffic the circulation the parking issues intensively submitted uh report to the board and if you could just uh summarize your findings yes um basically our office submitted a traffic report dated December 19 2023 and it uh basically covered uh an inventory of the existing traffic conditions uh it summarized the traffic data collection that was conducted uh for this development which was um with new traffic counts in October 2023 for the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours as well as midday peak hours uh we also did traffic projections based on the intended use where we're expecting this type of use to generate uh for the PM peak hour anywhere from 70 to 80 trips and on the Saturday peak hour 120 trips and that's based on uh trip generation factors established by The Institute of Transportation Engineers which is also recognized by the in uh by New Jersey Department of Transportation and we also considered when we did our traffic analysis uh the full buildout of Monroe village with the bank uh being developed as well as the remaining commercial space developed on site and we analyzed the uh both intersections of Joan waren way for of all the Applegarth Road intersection and determine that that intersection with the traffic light as I'm sure you've seen is all the equipment is in place out there it's just it's just a matter of time before that is activated and a operating is a fully functioning traffic signal and with the traffic signal in place that intersection will operate uh well beyond the uh performance thresholds established in the industry be operating a level service b or an average delay of 12 seconds per vehicle vle so it's a very efficient normally you designed for level service C to D but it's going to it's projected to operate level service b as far as the Joan War way and Route 33 intersection that'll operate at level service d d is in David in the morning peak hour and then level service C for the weekday PM in the Saturday uh midday peak hour there was uh significant testimony on the site design my office has reviewed uh the access on-site circulation and parking the site has been designed to accommodate uh refu Vehicles as well as the delivery vehicles uh that'll be serving the site and it was mentioned that deliveries are will occur during off peak hours uh we have been advised by Taco Bell that'll deliveries either be prior to 9:00 a.m. or after 8:00 p.m. again outside the peak time for the Taco Bell restaurant uh it was discussed as far as parking we have more parking than is required by ordinance uh and it's been our experience as well as review of The Institute of Transportation Engineers uh parking information that the restaurant itself will um have a a demand of 15 to 20 Vehicles it's uh common place that uh basically less than half of the employees actually drive and park their vehicle at the site they're generally car pooling or dropped off but again the observations by my office and and the data from it shows that the maximum parking accumulation on the side of be about approximately 20 Vehicles where we have 34 parking spaces serving the restaurant so in my opinion it's more than adequate and then as it relates to the drive-thru Lane uh as Jim stated we're providing iding stacking for 12 vehicles uh we're have we have two order boards which can accommodate five vehicles based on our observations and other Taco Bells generally the peak demand at the order board is is three vehicles the fact that we have two order boards or menu boards makes it more efficient and the total number of vehicles that we've observed in the uh drive-thru Lane including what's at the order for is in a range of 68 Vehicles so again this design with to accommodate a maximum of 12 vehicles and we also have a continuous bypass lane uh in my opinion has been designed properly can operate safely and efficiently um and Jim did mention as far as NJ theot and I'll just touch on that because of the change in uses that have taken place since the last last NJ do permit was issued in 2018 uh we're NE it's necessary for us to revisit so they can the the two uses and I'll say the the Taco Bell and the Starbucks on a square footage basis have a higher traffic generation per square foot as compared to Prior uses so basically it's a matter of it's an accounting process more or less administrative with NJ do to amend the permit to reflect the traffic generation associated with uh the uses that are currently on the table or in place on the Monroe Village Development and I would expect that we'd have dot approval within say four to six weeks that application was filed back in a on April 5th um so basically in summary as it relates to the site plan it's my opinion that it's been designed safely and efficiently to optimize access and that the design can accommodate not only the passenger vehicles but the large wheelbase Vehicles that'll be serving the site that concludes my direct and uh Scott I believe uh the drawings that Jim Henry referred to before reflect some um tinkering if you will with the um the access drive and the like uh relative to when the plans were first submitted so th those plans that he he showed his exhibits are up to date that's correct we had made those adjustments based on uh recent information were provided by Taco Bell on the type of delivery vehicles right and to meet the comments of the board's professionals that's correct okay I don't have any other questions please proceed with your testimony Andrew whenever you're ready perhaps we can begin with having you sworn in do you swear the testimony you're going to provide is the truth all truth and nothing but the truth I do okay if you can slide up to that microphone give us your name spell your last name and give us your address please for the record certainly um you you got to get close any better better yeah I um if you could Andrew just Begin by summarizing your qualif still need your name last name and your address please I thought we did that already no microphone malfunction Janu ja niw with Beacon planning and Consulting Services 315 Highway 34 cnck New Jersey sorry forgot about the mic issue um Andrew if you don't mind uh Begin by summarizing your qualifications uh for the board sir I am a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey as well as a member of the American Institute of certified planners have a bachelor's and master's degree in civil engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology currently serving as the planner for the burough of Carterette middlex County as well as Freehold burrow in the township of Livingston been appointed by Governor Murphy to the State Board of Professional planners I've been testifying throughout the state for the past 23 years and I've been accepted in municipalities throughout we will accept your credentials as a professional thank you thank you um Andrew I know you've uh been involved with this application pretty extensively and form some conclusions based upon your involvement with it if you could summarize that for the board um certainly so so for the record the property in question is identified as block four lot 15 it is located within your Highway development Zone and the bc2 or the Village Center to Overlay District uh both of those districts permit restaurants and Banks the vc2 uh permits a variety of restaurants but does not permit drive-throughs we are seeking the deviation this evening to permit a drive-thru for the restaurant use which is otherwise permitted um as was indicated previously the property is located along the north side of highway 33 at the intersection with Joan Warren way uh it also has Frontage along Market Street to the north uh it's previously been approved for a bank site and a restaurant site there's a basin that's already been constructed on the property and this evening seeks to modify the restaurant approval to provide for the Standalone restaurant with drive-thru uh the area is a commercial Corridor within Township it is along Highway Frontage um the property is in the vicinity of a Starbucks directly to the east uh further to the east we have a McDonald's there's the Tractor Supply uh and a quick check and across the highway there are several uh service stations as well as the Wawa with convenience store so it is a commercial Corridor and also in close proximity to the uh Turnpike access uh um as indicated the restaurant uh with a drive-thru the restaurant's permitted to driveth through is not we are seeking a d variance for the uh addition of the uh drive-thru uh an Associated uh bulk variances with that um would you like me to go through the bulk variances or Mr Henry I think covered them all but I if if your attorney want you to go through them then go through them I don't know that you I don't know you have to specify them as he did but I'll I'll go through the relief and we'll we'll pick through through those and for the moment I'll concentrate on the preparation for this evening um in terms of getting ready for this evening and preparing for the testimony U part of what we do is we we riew your ordinances your master plan we review the uh particularly the vc2 standards uh I went to the site I visited the site the proximity of the site uh as well as the correspondence from your planner your engineer and have attended the TRC meeting in preparation as well uh so uh in looking at your master plan um it's a great comprehensive document issued in 2022 there are several goals that I believe um are on point here uh goal number three within the master plan is to encourage appropriate commercial development in areas of population concentrations and where existing infrastructure can accommodate uh it also points out uh under point a uh it we should incentivize high quality mixed use development along the Route 33 Corridor this applications on point with that in achieving these defined goals and objectives it is a mixed use Community uh it has approved other commercial uses restaurants with drive-throughs along the highway 33 Corridor the VC overlay District was intended to promote and create new businesses uh for local and Community needs that's one of the stated purposes of that District the uh the master plan specifically cites a lack of commercial development as an issue and States uh in a survey of residents many want to see more restaurants grocery stores and retails for both both personal use and to increase the Township's tax base this application furthers those goals and fulfills the stated design desires of the residents additionally within the stated purpose of the vc2 district uh it reads to promote a full range of commercial office residential land uses within a newly created pedestrian friendly mixed use environment that will serve local CommunityWide and Regional needs and create new employment opportunities land uses within the overlay Zone should be arranged to provide for Highway oriented commercial and office uses along Route 33 again the application is on point with that uh we are promoting a a bank and a restaurant use along 33 we are seeking uh the the desirable drive-thru for the restaurants uh which is the nature of the types of restaurants that are thriving these days it is a Highway oriented use it is located in a mixed use environment along other restaurants which provide drive-through facilities so I think in terms of continuity with the neighborhood character with the highway character we are on point as this board also knows there are special reasons that we have to look to because the variant can not be granted for the sole purpose of benefit of the applicant uh these are known as the special reasons within the municipal land use law and are defined within 4055 D2 of the mlu uh I believe there are three that are promoted by this application uh purpose a they are by letter within the ml purpose a is is to encourage Municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote public health safety morals and general welfare this application promotes a use that fulfills a need within the community defined by the community it's Highway oriented results in a commercial rateable creates new employment opportunities and advances the general welfare of the community d uh G excuse me uh within the ml is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural residential recreational commercial and Industrial uses in open space both public and private according to the respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens again the location for the restaurant uh is in a mixed use Community it is Highway oriented it is along the highway Corridor and it is an appropriate location as was noted with the approval for the Starbucks and the McDonald's um it is that type of Highway Corridor it is that type of traffic that it'll be serving and finally m is to encourage the coordination of various public and private procedures and activities shaping Land Development with a view of lessening the cost of such development into the more efficient use of it of land the application for the restaurant located within this portion of the mixed use building is appropriate a restaurant was always promoted uh as part of this application what we are changing is adding the drive-thru uh the infrastructure asso associated with this parcel has been approved the basins have been constructed the access has been approved we'll be utilizing the same access points for this property we're proposing a use that will efficiently utilize the parcel it'll be safe there's safe circulation around it so it is a very efficient use of land um and and promotes uh the infrastructure uh availability so finally that brings us to the D variance relief um what we are seeking is a D1 variant uh therefore we have to uh qualify under what's known as the medich criteria uh judge skilman wrote in the Saddlebrook Board of adjustment case uh our case law recognizes three car uh three categories of circumstances which special reasons required for a use variance may be found where proposed use inherently serves the public uh good not going to argue inherent beneficial here uh where the property owner would suffer an undue hardship if compelled to use the property in Conformity we're not arguing a hardship but three is where the use of would serve the general per welfare because the site is particularly suited for the proposed use and in this instance the site is particularly suited for the uh proposed use um in recent case La is the burough of Hasbrook Heights planning board uh versus CR uh Route 17 which is a superior court case in New Jersey um and it reads in affirming or revers of the law divisions order the Supreme Court States the availability of alternative locations is relevant to the analysis but demonstrating that a property is particularly suited for use does not require proof that there is no other potential location for the use nor does it demand evidence that the project must be built in a particular location it is an inquiry as to whether the property is particularly suited for the proposed use in the sense that it is especially well suited to the use in spite of the fact that the use is not permitted again your vc2 permits restaurants it promotes Highway oriented uses we are along a state highway we're approximate to a Turnpike exchange we have commuter traffic that is regional as well as local in this vicinity and I would argue that this site is particularly suited for the use as it will accommodate both local uh and Regional uh traffic that is basically passing by um restaurants today you'll see big box restaurants like uh you see you've read recently about the Fridays closing in New Jersey as well as uh Red Lobster the big boxes aren't thriving the big restaurants aren't thriving however drive-through restaurants because of the convenience factor because they're located on commuter routes these are the types of restaurants that do Thrive this is particularly suited for that type of use um and I believe it'll be a suitable addition for the area uh the site's uh features configuration and location all contribute to the particular suitability um the location is ideal to serve this trp of traffic uh and I would argue that this uh access has been determined to accommodate the use and the site is already uh intended to serve a restaurant use and what we're doing is we're U essentially creating a restaurant use that can Thrive at this location with respect to substantial detriment I don't see any the proposed development of a restaurant with a drive-thru is properly situated on the highway Corridor the characteristics are defined within the purposes excuse me allergies some drying out the characteristics are defined within the purposes of creating the vc2 Zone it encourages the highway location Furthermore with two similar uses in Pro proximity being the Starbucks and the McDonald's the drive-through would be uh certainly well situated as these type of uses were vetted for this location previously with respect to the D reconciliation meaning the reasoning behind the omission of the use from the ordinance um I would argue that the overlay Zone promotes uh full range of commercial office and residential uses uh encourages restaurant uses encourages mixed uses and encourages Highway oriented uses specifically along Route 33 we are one of those unique locations along Route 33 this is an appropriate use in there and has been found the case uh in two adjacent sites it's important to understand that while uh the large sitdown restaurant that may have been contemplated here um was previously uh considered by this board the market for that essentially doesn't exist today uh what we do have are these types I have Quick Serve restaurants um they're active in the corridor they're successful in the corridor and we do believe that makes this site particularly suited uh the vc2 Zone may not have been updated for that but it does anticipate restaurant use and in fact it anticipated drive-throughs for the bank use use not with the restaurant use um so I would argue that may be why the Omission uh for the particular restaurant drive-thru but it is a suitable location and again it has been vetted by this board and approved previously when we're looking at balancing the particular suitability of the site with the proposed use I would find there's no substantial harm because the Zone plan anticipated a restaurant use and with that comes the type of traffic the type of trash Generation Um the noise Generation all those types of issues have been considered within the Zone plant for the restaurant use um and we are not something that would substantially Elevate any of those nuisance factors and that brings us to the bulk variances um as the board knows there are two factors within bulk variance relief one is the C1 hardship uh and that pertains to specific uh considerations for the configuration of a site uh again this site has already been contemplated for uh a bank and a restaurant use uh many of these issues have been vetted by the board before and there were approvals uh that were granted for the access points and and many of those points uh would comply with essentially the C1 saying they've already been approved vetted by this board and can be considered there are several new variances uh that we can consider within this District um that I would believe uh would qualify under the C2 criteria under the C2 criteria which is known as the balance test we have to prove that the burdens of the proof uh out the benefits of the proof outweigh any detrimental impacts the three prongs of the positive criteria are that the application relates to a specific piece of property it does that purposes of the municipal land use law would be Advanced by deviations they do and that the benefits of the deviation wouldn't outweigh any detriment um again the benefits of the deviations that we're talking about are largely driven by the fact that this uh has a unique configuration property has three frontages has Highway Frontage along 33 has Joan Warren way as well as Market to the rear uh it is also a factor to consider that the restaurant site itself will be situated on the other side of the basins from Highway 33 so there's a substantial uh distance between the highway and the restaurant and visibility is Paramount to the success of restaurants in this location so when we're looking at the deviations related to the signage that we're proposing and yes we are proposing 8 facade signages Jim went through how they're placed they're all intended to be able to catch the eye of the passer by the the driver in order to Define where to go for this restaurant and this is important to the success of the restaurant uh we are seeking deviations in terms of not providing the bming and Landscaping in addition to what's already along the highway Frontage in order to maximize the visibility from the highway Frontage so that it can be uh accessed properly and safely uh you heard testimony from both Jim and uh Mr kennel regarding the on-site circulation the parking we have sufficient parking for the property we can circulate the property properly um we are not seeking uh variants for the loading we've accommodated the loading with what your minimum requirements are for a loading zone we have sufficient trash disposal on the site um so in terms of the operational factors uh we we are providing a safe environment for the P for pedestrians for vehicles as well as for uh service vehicles such as deliveries and trash um when we look at the negative criteria we have to Define that the variances can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and that the variants will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone uh Zone plan uh in this instance the Zone plan contemplates restaurants it did not uh contemplate drive-throughs it did not permit drive-throughs I believe we are particularly suited for the drive-thru given the location and the unique uh configuration of the property and the proximity to Route 3 three uh with respect to substantial detriment I don't see any again restaurants are permitted here we can accommodate the trash we accommodate the uh addition uh actually we're reducing the uh drainage that was anticipated as we're reducing the impervious coverage we can properly Park the site uh we can properly circulate the site uh so from an operational standpoint we're not creating any nuisances we're not uh in close proximity to any residences where this type of use would create an additional nuisance above and beyond any of the other uh permitted uses within the district finally we have to consider the price veh education which uh spoke about you granting a use variance and and the fact that the use may not have been contemplated within a district it does essentially create some issues in terms of uh other deviations the bulk variances which would be subsumed when you when you contemplate a use variance such as today you have to consider that we it will create issues such as circulation issues distance issues and the like and those would be subsumed in this case because if if you're okay with the drive-through use those are the factors that just come along with that type of use that otherwise wasn't contemplated within the district so when I look at this I think the property is particularly suited for the use um I think it can be uh granted without any substantial detriment to the community with respect to the bulk variance relief and the waivers that we're seeking they are better zoning Alternatives as they create a rable for the community they create proper circulation on the site uh they enhance the visibility of the site and the uses within the site um and in all it's a package that will create success for the commercial uses here well that was very comprehensive thank you very much um any other witness any other testimony Council I don't think so can I ask just we can take a we all going to take a break give your stenographer a few minutes for his fingers yes and then we're going to take 5 minutes uh 8:00 we'll we'll reconvene thank you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e we going to go back into session please everyone find your places thank you so we last left off Council your testimony is all complete is that correct uh that's correct Mr chairman thank you okay we're going to open to our professionals M we're going to start with you please okay thank you Mr chairman um I'm going to start with Mr Henry uh a couple of questions um and I'm referring to the board planner letter dated June 13th 2024 you've visited lot of the items in the review letter but I just want to confirm few more M before you continue can you can you just put the site plan up for people or for the board that wants to watch it as they go along please we appreciate it there you go thank thank you go ahead M I'm sorry thank you um Mr Henry uh to confirm couple of things uh I believe the testimony was the um the Taco Bell restaurant timings on uh Sunday through Thursday would be 700 a.m. to 1 a.m. is that correct I just want to confirm the timing cuz the question is loading and delivery related yeah Sunday through Thursday the drive-thru will be open 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. okay and the regular restaurant will be open from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. yes right and for Friday through Saturday it would be um 700 a.m. the drive-thru would be 7:00 a.m. to 2 a.m. is that is that correct and uh the regular restaurant will again be 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. yes all right testimony that was uh followed by that that was provided uh by Mr kennel basically said that um deliveries will take place prior to 8:00 a.m. in the morning or after um 8:00 p.m. 8 prior to no sorry trying to pull it up I wrot it was after 9:00 a.m. FR before 9:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m. is that that so is there a definite time because again it's it's open till 1:00 a.m. and the regular restaurant is open till 11:00 p.m. we just want to ensure if there is a um confirmed time because again proximity to the residential around it we want to make sure you know the delivery trucks the type of trucks with their reverse um sounds and everything it's it's keeping in mind the residential around I I'll discuss that with the franchise and circle back with you on that um just one thing to point out so I know we said it was during off peak hours but we designed this so it could be delivered during during regular business hours so the truck can come in off of Market come in get into the loading zone and pull out without any impact to the drive drive through so if the board is concerned about having truck deliveries overnight um we can discuss with our client uh possibly restricting overnight deliveries we we talk to him about you know about what we can do to meet the board seon um yeah I mean some confirmation should be provided again because during the daytime as we see the plan this plan was not that was provided to us right to review I mean this is the after our TRC we uh we went and revised this and we emailed it in advance of tonight to the not to you actually to the engineer okay yeah because I haven't seen this all right but um having said that because I do see some parking spaces where the loading has been proposed now and during the daytime that might be used for parking so you know we want to ensure the board is clar is clear on the delivery timing and we exactly know is it off peak and What's the timing of that okay oh we'll discuss that with our client and circle back on that issue thank you um following up again I'm going Page by page so please bear with me um in terms of the uh the bulk variances that were you know you went very detailed through one by one one item I do want to clarify which I know we discussed at TRC but uh again the building height for the bank uh it's going to comply is that still or do you have the height that was proposed and approved yes it's still going to comply still going to comply but we don't know the exact height that was approved right no because I believe the uh I think we discussed this that it was um more of like a pitch roof so uh we are going to comply with the ordinance requirement but it because it had a pitch roof was a little bit all right um the other bulk variant item which uh I may not have heard but about the buffer width from the right of way I believe uh this is looking at Joan Warren way as the right of way yes um could you clarify that to the board that is a variance that you are seeking tonight right that is a variance uh we really have as you look at exhibit uh A3 you can see the landscaped areas uh uh along Jo waren way we really tried to landscape that as best as possible with uh a number of trees as well as shrubs all along Jo waren way to really buffer the use however there is a variance required for that um but we use the Landscaping to really mitigate the impacts could you clarify for the record what the requirement is and what is being proposed Jim could you slow down a little use the mic more thank you I'm his age it's the second to last item on my table it's um 100 feet is required and 18.2 that's proposed is that correct right so 18.2 uh that that was maintained as part of this um we we didn't we didn't modify the the setback from we didn't change the setback from the parking the 10 spaces on the top of the sheet that's set we just eliminated the uh the bank spaces and the set back really shouldn't have changed what was you had seen on the previous can't hear you over not loud repeat that last sentence sure um so 18.2 is what uh what we had shown previously to the right away it that is the same setback as what we're proposing the 10 spaces on the top of the sheet were not changed from what was previously proposed as part of the the plans that uh I believe were submitted to the board okay I'm sorry I'm confused so we're talking about the buffer uh width from the Joan Warren way right there are no 10 spaces there oh I'm sorry so Joan War right so that that area too has not not changed either I apologize I thought I was looking at Market Street yes and the right away um I mean the buffer width is still 18.2 the buffer buffer for John wway is still 18.2 I apologize I was referring to Market Street all right and you see variance from that okay um now um next um going to the landscaping and you did testify to a lot of items that were raised in the memo um one thing I do want to clarify and again because you know ex extensive testimony was given about the visibility of the site yes so um currently as it stands um I believe the the the crest plan which was testified I do have the dates but not right now in front of me you have testified saying that the Landscaping has been provided as per the plans that were approved or I believe it's partially partially provided because um I believe when the and again I wasn't privy to this so I wasn't around when when this was agre upon but I understand that part part of the landscaping around the Basin was installed in order to put the Basin in however um obviously the plan wasn't fully designed so just the the landscaping around the Basin was installed um as part of the original I'll call it a phase one of this development um so that Landscaping was installed as part of phase one when the Basin was constructed and now we're going to be adding additional Landscaping as part of this this uh development of the pad so you are proposing additional parking uh additional landscaping around the storm water basin no just on the uh the north side of the Basin okay yeah um because one thing on the Landscaping note that was the sheets that was submitted to us one of the items that was declared is the applicant will coordinate with the previous developer and the Township in order to meet all the Landscaping that was previously approved and bonded is that still the intention because we want to uh when you drive by the site again I'm not privy to what the crest Landscaping plan was as to what was being proposed but I'm sure you've looked at the ordinance we've looked at the ordinance there has to be a little more Landscaping along Route 33 that must have been approved so is that still the intention that uh we we visit the crest plan that was approved and look at uh today what's on the site and make sure you know it's complying with what was approved then yes okay um in terms of additional Landscaping that you have provided to the north um going back to the comments that were made in our Landscaping plan again um um there were certain comments made to add a little bit more of you know alternate staggered um landcaping to kind of give that effect is that what is being achieved by this yes again uh we haven't reviewed this plan but would you be willing to work with our Landscaping Department to ensure that you know that's the intent that's being met absolutely the one the one deviation from that is regarding the BMS uh we're not providing the the visibility to the site is already poor so the there's not going to be any burm shown uh which I don't think really was the intent of of that ordinance section but we're not bming any anything off of Joe mway don't ask about the BMS in Monro there's always an intention to provide the BMS so but going back to thank you for bringing that burm thing because um that was going to be the next question so there is no bming around Route 33 that is being proposed no just I mean there is kind of a burm that's already along Route 33 up to the Basin wall so there there there is essenti a burm that elevates from Route 33 higher and then there's the top of the walls where the fence is and that drops down where the Basin is so um there there there is a buring effect of the Basin but there's no there's not a full burm I would say that okay but there I mean bming effect means what like it requires blocks it blocks the view of the of the site um because it does burm up a few feet off of Route 33 really it it blocks the it doesn't I'm not saying it definitely impacts the visibility okay um but the testimony is there's no birming around um Route 33 Frontage as today there might be what one foot or two foot buring but not not meeting the six foot birming that's being reversed okay um and you'll work with us on the Landscaping we did ask for additional Landscaping to be provided where the islands are um you know to the the West Northwestern area um around the bank parking I believe it's shown as just grass area but would you be willing to work with us to add a little more planting over there yes are you referring to just to the West Side the top also here yeah um just that area um it was requested to add sidewalk and extend it all the way to the West so there's there's somewhat limited area now but we'll we'll work with you do whatever we need to do there okay um and I believe the rest of the items you did talk about you know we asked for some little more um um for the deedu tree planting instead of uh rigid plastic open mesh we needed to add some other type of requirement and the root flares and everything and those are the things just because that wasn't testified to I want to ensure that all is you would be willing to comply with yes we are okay um now in terms of parking um I just want to get it straight because the plans we had it did show some Bank parking spaces and uh you know now we're discussing the entire uh number of parking spaces could you clarify for the board the total number of parking spaces that are being proposed are there any bank parking spaces that you're still contemplating or you're proposing everything and especially if there are any number of parking spaces that has been reduced because of the loading space that has been provided sure so at the TRC we had some discussion regarding the parking we had previously on the Northerly side of the site uh just opposite where you enter the drive-through Lane uh we had proposed some additional bank spaces in addition to what we had um we went through the TRC there was some discussion about providing a loading zone uh that could fit our truck also we were told that we weren't complying with the ordinance requirement uh so we went to the drawing board we spoke to the tenant as well as our client as far as changes we can make to the site in order to address both the both the board's professionals comments as well as meeting the needs of the tenants so what we did was we removed the bank spaces which were again were just uh located along Market Street uh so those Bank spaces are no longer being proposed we additional additionally removed a few spaces near where the near where the loading space is in order to fit the properly size loading space that meets your ordinance requirement that being said we were under the original design over parked and we are still overp parked we are still have 10 more spaces than what's required by ordinance even with those changes and one of the other things we had to address was uh the board's board's engineer also had commented uh on whether or not uh the proposed development would be grandfathered uh into the the new storm M regulations in order to be grandfathered into the new storm M regulations uh you cannot increase the motor vehicle service areas on site so and by removing those spaces um we were able to comply with that and uh show that we're uh we able to be grandfathered into the old stormw rules so the total count of number of parking spaces is yeah so the uh the total total count is 58 parking spaces and 48 is required by ordinance that's including the two EV credits that is that includes that yeah so actual spaces are 56 right thank you and uh the the the size of parking spaces for the Taco Bell area you're complying it's only for the bank that it's 10 by8 that's correct okay um the other variances again to make it on record there was a parking variance for the front yard parking as well as you know the distance of parking spaces to the building that is still being sought that is being sought then that was um I went through we I think we discussed we went through the old approvals and I believe that was previously granted for this site uh so we are continuing to request that yeah but the buildings the building was modified right so it'll be a variance um all right uh in in terms of lighting level uh you did testify regarding meeting the you know we had asked for uh dimming the lights during non-operational hours so we are fine with that we had made certain suggestions to add uh some more um you know lighting Along The Pedestrian walkways maybe um you know the the lower level lighting again if it's needed because I know the site is substantially lit because of the commercial portion but is that something that we can discuss if needed yes okay um sorry Mr chairman I'm trying to go as fast I don't want to forget anything um in terms of signage um you did provide the location of the signage and the uh requirement of the directional signage um and this is tied with the architecture of the building which you did testify too uh the building itself has a certain specific of color design that's going on is that correct yes and that itself is again because of the national brand Market it is it becomes a signage in itself because of the typical color combination that they use I wouldn't call it a sign I think it's um you know I think there's a color combination that you anticipate seeing with certain brands like McDonald's you would see yellow and and and brown um you know Taco Bell is purple but um I wouldn't call it a sign but yeah there's there's colors that are associated with certain qsr brands okay um all right if you don't call it sign I mean that's that's also a visible cue as to what the building is if if the argument is about visibility from the RO I yeah I mean if I saw yellow I would anticipate it to be McDonald's McDonald's yeah all right thank you um in terms of outdoor seating that is being proposed uh I believe there are 10 um SP uh 10 seating areas that are being proposed outside um is there any kind of ballards or anything again because of the vehicular circulation around that that is being proposed there I believe the oh oh can be request that that that be provided cuz that's something we also asked we provided in um Starbucks and I think we came up with either like heavy plantas or yeah I think we could work with you to figure out something something there um I know there is a fence around the outside but if if we want something that'll prevent Vehicles I'm sure our client would be want to do that okay um refuse recycling um I know you said because of the type of um thing we are proposing we are um you know it's not really needed but you're still requesting that as a variance right the curbing along the yes the curbing within the trash and closure um is technically a variance but we we are proposing a very high quality Mery trash closure here so I don't think it's required okay um and uh last thing for I think it's last thing then I have questions for Mr Jan but uh in terms of um the HVAC and mechanical systems I believe you provided that it'll be provided on the roof can we request a roof plan be provided during resolution compliance to just to uh see where they're located and the extended parit that has been testified to tonight thank you um thank you Mr Henry I think those were the some of the technical questions I do have a follow-up question on testimony from Mr Jano if I can thank you um just two questions in terms of um you know the use variance that is being sought and uh the negative criteria that it's required to meet to discuss about the it's not causing any kind of impair to the intent of the Zone plan uh when we say that uh this use uh is located in an overlay of vc2 Zone which does encourage rightly said uh you know commercial type of uses CH development but you cannot ignore the fact that it does also say about creating more pedestrian friendly development um and that is evident by requirement of these maximum uh setbacks that are required from the front yard like you've said they've said like 10 and what we are proposing is about what you guys are I know we but you guys are proposing is 68 uh I believe seven or two I don't have that so how would you say that even by proposing this driveth through you're still meeting the intent of the vc2 and not the HD because the overlay zone is the vc2 Village um is being met yes no so let's concentrate on the D variance is for the drive-through use not for the restaurant use uh the vc2 district specifically points out that is encouraging high quality Highway oriented uses along Ong the Route 33 Corridor it distinguishes the Route 33 Corridor separate from the balance of the vc2 overlay um so it treats that area a little bit more specially um and quite frankly there is pedestrian uh walkways that are being proposed around the perimeter of the site so there is no essential blockage or or lack of permission for pedestrians to access this it is a commercial area there are commercial uses directly across both to the north and to the east of this so in terms of whether people will will come from the residential uses by by walkway they certainly can but again this is intended to be a highway commercial use U as was anticipated in the vc2 zone so when we look at the impact of the drive-thru on that I would argue there isn't there the drive-thru is intended to create a convenience for the traffic that is Highway oriented to provide uh convenience for people coming through there certainly pedestrian can walk in there's outdoor seating there's indoor seating um there's nothing that prohibits that um but it does add the additional feature of attracting traffic from the highway commercial for the convenience of the passer by because the vc2 district also talks about the need to accommodate local uh local locals essentially as well as Regional traffic so this I think does accomplish that so when we look at is it a deviation that is a substantial detriment I don't think so I think it can accommodate the pedestrian traffic through there from the community it certainly TR uh tracks from the commercial for the uh excuse me the uh traffic that's Regional coming by on the highway commercial and in terms of the distances uh the distances are provided uh there was a deviation previously granted I believe was 30t for the distance not 10 ft um but it's intended to provide adequate circulation around the site so it is a little bit more uh of a distance setback but that is all intended to provide safe passage safe circulation not only for cars accessing it but for the the truck traffic the garbage traffic the like and those types of vehicles that'll access the site so I don't think we create a detriment I think we meet the intent of the VC district and I think we're properly located okay thank you I mean traditionally you wouldn't say drive-thru is one of those pedestrian friendly businesses from a planning perspective well again this this business accommodates both walk-in traffic and drive-through traffic okay um Specta of her but um the second question I have I think I touched upon it with Mr Henry um in terms of U the number of signage that is being proposed and we've heard the argument and you know it it makes sense in terms of the visibility and everything but uh wouldn't you also say the building itself with the composition of colors and everything is providing that Vis visibility um to any passer by who is you know living in a cosmopolitan area and does know what these colors stand for well first of all the the color palette here is isn't something that's Vivid or vibrant or something that stands out it's not a chartreuse it's not an orange it's not a yellow it's a subdued pattern of Grays with some purple I would give you that probably during evening or dusk hours or early morning hours you wouldn't even be able to distinguish the purple from some of the darker colors yes purple is a Taco Bell color but I wouldn't say that just as you're driving by You' you'd be able to immediately identify because it's not something that's a high visibility color so I do think the signage is still necessary and again we we talked about the signage being positioned around the three sides such that it can attract traffic um it doesn't exceed what the square footage would be for a front signage along the front and one of the added points was that some of the signs that are there they're not logo signs but they're remarkable signs they're not back lit so you'll see you'll see them during the day you won't see them the it's not something that'll essentially pollute the surfaces so I still think the visibility is important these are muted colors these aren't vibrant colors that can be seen from a from a great distance um and while purple is a signature color again it's not I don't believe it's something that would stand out as in orange or yellow wood when you associate that with a McDonald's all right um I just want to clarify that it was testified that the building is going to there there is wallmounted lights that are being proposed on the building yes but the some of the some of the signs that Mr Henry enumerated won't be backlit okay um and that's about it thank you Mr chairman thank you thank you Mo thank you Mr chair I'll just jump right on that note the the signs that are backlit and not backlit do we have uh we have that clarified as to which signs are backlit and which aren't sure yeah yes um so the we can refer to them I think they refer to in the Sage table I an exhibit that I can show showing the s is a part of the plan set or this is sheet 17 of the plan set so this does not have to be marked this is construction uh construction details sheet 17 of the plan set um this does not need to be marked so on sheet 17 of the plans um they indicate the the building signage um the black sign that says three typical it says sign number three those signs will not be illuminated you can see it's a black sign uh that kind of fits in well with the architectural feature of the the building but technically it does meet the requirement or definition of the uh of a sign on on the building so um the other signage will be inter internally illuminated however uh those three signs uh which are proposed are not going to be internally illuminated chairman my review letter uh dated June 14 2024 guess I I'll touch through do you subject to the comments I'm going to make I mean are you agreeable to uh generally agreeable to the comments in my review letter yes other than the uh few deviations that I mentioned at the uh during my testimony so let me just go through my review letter then uh pedestrian access you uh agree to be ADA Compliant throughout the parking lot detectable warning surfaces to be provided where uh required under Ada yes also uh there's no pedestrian access uh along uh from Market Street to Taco Bell um and you get a access from Market Street to Taco Bell you have access to the bank but not the Taco Bell and we just had a long conversation I believe uh discussing pedestrian access uh I think most I mean in my experience being on the site I mean most people are walking are coming off of Joan waren way uh so if you're accessing the bank you would take the sidewalk along Market Street and then come down and go to the bank if you're going to Taco Bell you would come down Joan Warren way and then access off of Joan War way I don't think there's going to be many people if you're coming off Market Street you would just walk to the intersection come down and then walk into the site using The Pedestrian access so where are the Residential Properties in relation to your they're on Market Street but however if you just take the sidewalk down to Joon Warren way and walk down which is um almost all of The Pedestrian I don't think there's any pedestrian access um all the pedestrians that I saw were primarily walking up and down Joan War way when I've been into the site and I think that's a logical access I mean we could provide an access probably through um to the bank through the trash enclosure area um that then could come up to Joan Warren or come up to Market Street I just I think the probability of a pedestrian using that access point um is unlikely is what it's unlikely but if if you want us to provide access that way I'm sure we could provide it um probably would require a little bit higher uh impervious coverage on our end um but we probably could provide it well I don't believe it's uh pedestrian access friendly the way it's laid out uh you don't have a connect internal connections between the bank and the Taco Bell you don't have access from Market Street so I I think the The Pedestrian access as I testified is going to come off Market Street or Joan War way and then they're going to circulate along Market Street or Jo War way to access the site but we can provide the connection to Marcus Street if that's something the board would like okay uh are you uh you're proposing curbs and sidewalks along the frontages of Joan Warren way and Market Street the entire frontages yes where they're not already provided okay so you'll be uh so that'll be added there's a section on Market Street without without sidewalk that will be provided you're agreeing to that yes thank you see the traffic signal that's under I believe it's under construction on appleg and Joan Warren Way um I think there was some testimony from your traffic engineer is that completed or is that nearly completed call Scott C up again Scott Kennel based on my inspection this afternoon before the hearing uh all the signal equipment is in place uh I don't know the particulars but from from my observations it's something that'll occur in the near future uh so I don't have the exact date but curbing sidewalks and all the signal equipments installed so um it's something that is forthcoming in in uh a very short time or order of time okay so is the applicant agreeable that uh no Co would be issued prior to uh without that signal being operational yes thank you and while you're there Scott um sure the the plan that's up on the screen is has been Revis since the um not in the packets of the board not what we reviewed uh did you have an opportunity to review this plan yes I did I was involved with uh Jim Henry as they were developing this uh revised exhibit and did do have you done a revised circulation plan well I've analyzed it I mean our our traffic study speaks to on-site circulation and based on my testimony uh I've reviewed this plan and I'm comfortable that it's been designed safely and efficiently thanks um with regard to the circulation plans provided I did not see a tractor trailer circulation plant or or a vehicle of that size well this was developed with that under consideration we can provide that to your office um to confirm the the design proposed okay on on the circulation plans provided there is um there you are showing some uh the garbage trucks fire trucks that have to cross um Mount curbs I guess and cross into oncoming traffic there was um as far as the larger vehicle the WB 50 when it exited out of the site on the south side of the building to make a right turn onto Joan War way based on my recollection the the encroachment was on to the median but not to the opposing traffic flow so again as we're making the right turn out of the uh driveway as you're coming out of the drive-thru the right turn on the Joon War way would have the the vehicle um encroaching into the striped median but not the opposing Lane [Music] so um so coming in off Market Street the vehicle is crossing the stop bars of the vehicle's exiting near sight um right and both stop top bars the vehicle's coming out of Taco Bell um looks like it's it's hitting the curbs at the drive-thru which we talked about delivery times which I think they're going to go and get clar or discussed with the client the delivery times um if there's vehicles in the Drive-Thru you know maneuvering they they can maneuver around vehicles in the Drive-Thru that's what that's why on this exhibit that's on on the screen or on the Bo on the easel here is that we've en enlarged the pavement area I'll say in the southwest corner of the building so that that larger truck can negotiate around uh the building and not encroach onto the drive-through Lane and we'll Prov we'll provide that and that's on these revised plans correct that's based on these revised plans correct and just for the board's information we uh you know we have not had an opportunity to review these plans and it was based on a WB 50 mark uh based on input from Taco Bell WB 50 is what size vehicle it's a tractor trailer with a 48t trailer and then the cab so it's it's a 50ft wheelbase as as recognized by um njt and that will be able to navigate through the parking lot if it comes off Joan Warman it'll come it'll enter in off of market and exit onto Joan War uh we have the Jim just a and we have the exhibit I mean we can provide that if F and and they'll be revised the exhibits the existing exhibits that you provided with the application will be revised based on any the revised plan for the other design vehicles that we use correct so so I do have one one more thing the the drive-thru closest to the building the U I guess the queuing line where the message boards are the menu board are um the left hand q line the curve when you place your order you're sort of on right on top of the curb curb line um yeah I'm not looking at that now I'm looking at the drive through when you place your order in the left lane you're right on top of the curb and you got a sharp turn to the right um can that radius be opened up a bit you see what I'm looking at when you're you're s at the order board at this location yeah you're sort of then you're trying to make a right and then you're making a left is you know going through that scurve there it seems kind of tight but if you can take a look at that we can take a look at it and amend it as necessary thanks um I think that's all I had okay for you Scott thank you thank you um I have more I'm still going sorry chairman uh and I believe the the planner indicated that that he reviewed the revised plans yes um I guess my question to the planner he wants to come back up is there any new variances or additional variances triggered by the revised plan uh no there are not thank you the square footage of the building 2195 Square ft is that including the outside area no and and if not um what would be the total square footage uh 2407 if you included the outdoor area which is not standard practice okay I think that's an important number to have on a record and and resolution for our construction Department sure um with regard to the outside area any Ballard proposed a proximity to the driveway any entrance uh any any form of protection there yeah I think we testified that we we can add bards you will have Ballard yes okay thank you um line of sight leaving a drive-thru and you come out of the drive-thru and you look to the left you're looking at the outdoor area far as a clear line of sight we can provide uh site triangles to show that that you're able to see the car coming okay hours of operation that were talked about um that that'll be listed on the plans once that's clarified yes thanks as well delivery hours please yes so I did speak to our client uh we are we are uh unable to restricting overnight deliveries um if that's what the board was concering so when we say that what does that mean uh I sorry but 10:30 to 6 a.m. or so 10:30 to 6 a.m. no deliveries yeah okay uh you also revise lighting light pole locations um we'll get Revis a full set of revised plans based on these revisions yes cor uh with regard to the storm order management you indicated that you are below you reduced the motor vehicle surface area yes um where based on the plans provided uh it would there was an increase in the motor vehicle surface area uh you're representing that the revised plans have reduced that I mean subject to my review um um if it is a reduction then I would agree with you that you would be exempt under the new storm order Rec however um based on the information I have it's still an increase so um no it's it the the percentage goes up but the when you look at the square footage on the site uh the square footage goes down so if you look at the motor vehicle service area originally I think it was 4 45,000 921 and then we're proposing 4 4,481 so we're reducing the motor vehicle service area uh the square the square footage of the overall lot uh was reduced the original original lot area was 3.28 and we're now closing 3.23 and that's based on the revised plan that's up on the screen correct yes okay the plan submitted showed an increase St so correct we will review the revised plan should the board approve it and moves forward you know we we'll review that and however you know I reserve you know write to review your revised plans to you know confirm what you're representing um Miss chairman now that's all I have at this point uh they've agreed to meet the rest of the comments and the review oh I'm sorry one more the infiltration Basin um you're agreeing to uh um do whatever modifications are required to the infiltration Basin to get that thing functioning to get it functioning to uh to the design criteria yes for the original approval right for the original design as well as what you represent in your drainage report thank you that's all I have right now Mr chairman thank you any board members have any questions L let me ask you Mr Henry um let's say the the cars that are at the um picking up food on the drive-thru uh you know many of times I know even happened with me you're back they're backed up a machine breaks something happens they tell you can you move up there and wait and park up there um um where do they go where do they Park that runs into a problem so we don't have a space delineated I can talk to our client if they're willing to delineate a space where we could have it where they come yeah it's important and also why what was your reasoning why you have a driveway coming in and going out in incoming is using the same driveway as outgoing wouldn't you think it would be feasible or more safety to put the driveway on the Northern side of the building since you already have the driveway on the southern part and so in other words the cars ain't coming head-to-head they have their own driveway going out and another driveway coming in are you referring to the driveway on Joe M way yeah uh I think I think it's good design practice that the the roadways line up so even though it looks a little bit offset but we designed that um to so that the drive they're exactly lined up uh well that's all that's all well and good but wouldn't you think it would be a lot more safer just to move it up a bit to the northern side and make your own driveway so that's going in and it follows the flow and then the out and outbound you don't have to worry about another car coming at you instead of using the same driveway I could let our traffic engineer get into that if you want U I would like that yeah because that would make sense again so I understand the question you're looking for the driveway and Jo Joon War way to be one way instead of two-way as we have it absolutely for a safety purpose and if uh again it's my opinion based on the the low speeds that we have in this area with the driveway and on Joan War way because traffic is just coming off of 33 that it can it can function efficiently uh me safely without having to Route everybody up to Market and bring them around behind the drive-thru so I'm trying to the design here is to allow customers are destined for the store itself to be able to if they're coming off with 33 now again only approximately 40 maybe 45 maybe 50% of our traffic is coming from Route 33 they would make you know if they're going to the store they would make the left into that driveway and then access those the parking spaces closest to the store entry rather than doing a secur toout no I don't mean that I mean just leave it right where it's at and just leave one driveway where you have it and and just the width of the building on the North side put another one in so you have they have each has their own separate driveways well again when if we add another driveway to on Joel Wen way is what I I'm saying you're requesting yeah uh then we're going to lose parking spaces and then you're creating another conflict Point as someone is entering the site into the parking area we're kind of trying to consolidate the number of basically entry and exit points they have that at McDonald's when you come out they have their own driveway the main road comes in they have another driveway coming in so you don't have that I'm all I'm trying to do is prevent two cars coming at each other I understand one stays to the left and one stays to the right but you know when you deal with kids and Things Can Happen 2:00 in the morning I'm only trying to be where from a practical point of you as far as safety I think it's a I think it's a I'm defer to the board it's my opinion that this design is is safely safe and efficient and works well with this with this um this use and the parking layout um obviously we're you know subject to the board's uh recommendations thank you no more questions hold on I I actually that was and I appreciate that the board engineer already um asked for some of that striping in that corner I did that was my first concern looking at this proposal is that the there two lanes coming in it seems like three lanes going out and it just looks confusing and I'm worried about people pulling out of the leaving the pickup area and somebody coming in and how are they not conflicting with each other and then you've got the the seating area there and you've got the EV stations right around the corner it just seems like a lot going on in that area and they're not exactly lined up right well again this exhibit doesn't exactly show I mean we had discussed internally and it's kind of difficult with the um the coloring on the ARs but basically this and we obviously be subject to the the board engines review the striping at the East side of the building be modified so this is merged to basically one lane um and then there would be skip lines that would direct uh traffic to the Stop Bar so there would be additional striping that wasn't conveyed on here because it would get too busy if we start showing all that on here but there's additional striping that we had discussed internally within the last week to uh better organize and have the exiting traffic get to the Stop Bar and not be in conflict with entering traffic I'm GNA defer to our defer to our board engineer who obviously knows more about this than I do but um I like it and I understand it's it's a concern to bring too many driveways farther closer to the next Corner also um so it's a tough area I don't know what what the answer is but I just want to confer with my I'm also concerned about and I guess I just add another point you mentioned about EV space and just having too much we can move the EV spaces to another location so it's not competing with the other activities in that area as well again just sort of board's consideration Mr Mr chairman um you know to Scott the the striping you show at the leaving the drive-thru Lane can that be a curb can that be a curb line instead of just a stripe it can be curine or we can do different texture with do as concrete but uh that we could add carving there um and it'll still allow the large wheelbase vehicles to circulate around the building so to better encourage a direct traffic yes we can we can work that uh with Mr Henry and think maybe a curb line will help uh channelize the cars to you know avoid the concerns that the board has okay if we can do that and I think it still allows your vehicle access the large Vehicles because they would be going straight out the exit out to uh Johan Warren way that's that's correct I have a question for Mark Mark where are the cars after the question I posed to Mr Henry they don't have any at least that's what he said so the cars that are pulling out from from um getting their food and they the place is backed up they said can you go up there and wait five minutes now you got incoming cars coming but you have no place to park well I don't know that I heard an answer to that question where he says they're going to work on they don't have anything right now we'd have to assign spaces my my thought would probably be spaces along Joan Joan War way you know that are just to the west of Joan War way would that but again we have to we have we'd have to work that out with the operator because they're you know we're dealing with this on a daily basis so I mean that's something that we can get back to you after talking with the operators but you do have that you have like the mobile and you have where sometimes someone will have to pull up and wait for their order correct is that the normal fast food they don't have that so I just spoke to our client we can designate one of the spaces in front and that's why I'm saying as far as the driveway is concerned if it's just going out that gives you some more space to have another driveway on the north side of the building you know what I'm saying I I I understand what you're saying um but I I I also I agree with Scott um as far as the circulation As you move the driveway closer uh further to the north all of a sudden if you have the driveway right where my cursor is kind of where there's the no I don't mean up there I mean Rich can't you just make it on the on the north side of the building let's say the width of the building because you got the uh the you've got the quick uh you know where the people are picking the food up right alongside the building so just go on the other side of the building which is the north side of the building and bring it in and then hook into your circulation pattern yeah uh it works better where the where there there's less conflicts because you have people making a right out of here typically you want to t you want you want to basically intersection where they're all facing each other when you have it offset like that you have people making a left-hand turn that conflicts with people making a right-hand turn they're not looking at each other so General typical engineering practice I'm sure you know uh your here would agree is typically want all the all the conflicts be limited to that one area could you bend it could you bend it you know or no well Mr chairman I I I wouldn't agree with uh with their professionals on on that driveway if if the Cur curb line is provided as you're leaving the drive-thru and it opens up a wider radius there and as long as you have clear line of sight with the outdoor eating yes I I think the driveway functions much better and addresses your concern Mr lo as far as the if a car has to pull up I will agree we I I did speak to our client in that little break and we will add the pickup spot that is a good idea adding the pickup spot in front so as far as the pickup spot the concern is where the EV spaces that is not an area for pickup spot because anyone bringing the food out of the store has to cross the main driveway where you got cars coming in cars exiting so that that was my exact comment to our client and I I said it's safe for it'd have to be by the handicap spot at it next to the handicap spot and that's where we're going to add it yep okay so wait that says mobile pickup right there right two spots the mobile pickup in the front right yes so it's not going there then CU those plans say it so it's not going to go there because they're requesting a change no so the mobile pickup is what's going to is where they're going to direct the pi the pickups areas so that's going to be those two spots directly in front I thought we said we weren't putting them there we we can just call a pickup area instead of just calling it mobile pickup area can can you point to it on on the plan just so so there's two spots uh to the right East of the Ada stalls which are pickup area spots and we're going to designate them as just pickup in general we're not going to designate them as mobile so I'm just saying maybe it's an error in the plans where it says mobile pickup to typical right and it has them on Joan Warren way now they're they're pointed oh they're pointing over there yeah they're pointed to the two spots next to thank you and and the green is the EV spaces the green is the EV spaces and if the board feels that we have to move those we can move those where they feel is appropriate I'm okay with that okay any other questions from the board I am just about the bur can you clarify you were talking about the BM before we're not putting a burm in sure I'll just get the grading plan give me one second uh so along Route 33 there's a retaining wall that uh runs along obviously the Basin and then there's also a sidewalk that runs along Route 33 then there's the curbing uh to the to 33 so the inlet uh um you know roughly the grade drops drops down as you approach Joan Warren way so the lowest spot is roughly at the intersection of Joon Warren way and Route 33 um and then the top of the wall uh varies between you know roughly it's about 115 or so um so there's a little bit of a a jump as you go towards the the Basin itself it jumps up to about 15 or 16 elevation and it drops down a little bit as you get towards the retaining wall so there there's not a huge hump but there's a little bit of a hump as you know between the curb line of Route 33 and the top of wall for the Basin it's it and I actually from looking at it uh thought it was actually more than what it shows on on our survey uh just because of the presence of the uh I believe there's uh a fence there's a retaining wall there's trees there's landscaping and I believe there's also guide rail so does that muff roughly match what they have in front of Starbucks or is it going to look uneven yes it's very similar yeah any other questions from the board okay I have a question uh being we clarified the delivery hours does anyone know how long a an approximate delivery takes to unload I do have that um I think it was 20 minutes yes 20 minutes 20 okay so there not going to be a conflict with the tractor trailer leaving and the business being open at 7:00 a.m. if people are coming in for a breakfast meal they're going to leave at the same time no there isn't a conflict uh although I will say I haven't I haven't uh gotten any breakfast buritos from Taco Bell yet I I haven't gone that route they keep marketing it to me but I haven't done it uh are there any potential generators going in or anything of that nature there's none propos okay okay that's it I have no questions anyone Mr Cy one last question uh during a snowstorm what do you do for snow cleanup out there uh they'll what our client will do is they'll likely contract uh with a landscaper and then there's they'll likely push the snow within the grass areas around the perimeter of the site um down behind where the trash enclosure is there's some Landscaping areas and there's also uh the area which is adjacent to the bank uh which is is an area where we could uh use for snow piling that suffice I think so just looking at it um I'm assuming some of the landscape areas would also be used uh around the perimeter but you know again it would all obviously depend on how much snow we get um the last few years I haven't seen much but uh if if we hit we h a three foot snowstorm it might be you know obviously it's going to be require a lot more effort thank you any other questions okay I have one final question and then we're going to go to a a vote public I'm sorry I'm sorry is there any reason why the zoning board nor the planner nor the board members have not received the new revised plan that's before us today I believe they were submitted but yeah we did we did submit it to um the board engineer in advance of tonight I know he was I think he was away uh so I don't I'm not sure how much he is it supposed to go through the office or the board engineer the board engineer works for the board well we reacted to the review memos and putting these these tweaks together that you see before prompted a lot of question marks here this evening and understand the fact that my professional planner did not have previous viewing of this with her questions and her being a little skeptical that puts the board in a compromised position to proceed with anything because she hadn't had ample time to review the proper documents and we basically heavily rely on our professionals as we're regular lay people yeah I was just explaining to you why the you know complete completely revised plans weren filed with the board we reacted to the review memos tweaked them I think sent them to at Le your engineer if not the planner um and brought them tonight to because they explain you know our responses to your professionals essentially which is you know meeting their comments okay anyone in the public wishing be heard on this application please come forward Jim I'm going to ask you to take a seat back and we're going to let the public sit there if you have anything you don't want anyone to see please close it very secretive stuff here I'm just if I could quickly just swear you in in case you make comments instead of questions you could raise your right hand you swear any testimony provides truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do you can state your name spell your last name and give us your address please un g n k m Kelly Port Monroe Township um couple of things and want to piggy back on what the chairman said it's it's obvious out here that it's not fair to the board not to have upto-date plans prior to the review and it's not just the professionals every member of the board uh to do their job and not saying they didn't do it and do it well and in fact it's impressive how everybody fought through all that uh but the idea of showing up here and taking up the board's time in with a not up to-date um presentation I I don't get it U it's unprofessional I'd like to go um first I also need to apologize I got here a little late so I may ask questions about something that was covered if so just go on um in talking about uh runoff from new Paving and impervious does it go to the millstone I don't or or where does it go um it's um the word infiltration was used I'd like to understand a little better where it goes and then there's the other question about what is being grandfathered or not depending upon the amount of of imper of impervious that's added by this project Council I'm going to refer to your professional engineer to answer those questions you could sit next to Council just grab that mic I guess we'll take one question at a time he's uh his first question is about the the runoff and then we're going to get into the impervious coverage yeah so there's um two different basins uh that are existing today there is an infiltration Basin which is located in the top or the Northwestern corner of the the Basin area uh so any water going in there uh will be partially infiltrated into the ground and then go go into the uh groundwater uh then there's an extended Basin which is the area which consistently holds water uh that area discharges into Route 33 into the dot system and then that system will then take it uh you know to the nearest stream I'd have to look at um where that goes in order to answer your question about the millstone River okay so that's not known and um what do we know about the adequacy of those offsite um places I mean you don't have to miss enough Med to know that on the news every night now is an extreme weather event all over the place we had one in this Township in the last few years that cost the town taxpayer money of millions of dollars to help remediate and it was just simply a very heavy rain that this system did not cope with so wanting to be G gone grandfather into a older uh requirement that uh the that your existing plan might not meet the credentials for doesn't seem to me the direction we want to go in I think we want to go high uh rather than squeak in under an old um requirement uh we all know that we're having more and more of these extreme events and it shouldn't be that it just becomes the town and the taxpayers problem uh to recover from these so that's just my so just to clarify um per the old rules you were required to reduce the 2-year storm by 50% uh the 10year storm by S by excuse me the 10year storm by 25% and then the 100-year storm uh by 20% so that those were the old rules so we were reducing what was existing under the old rules um the rules just got a little more complicated they allowed certain type of basins and and and and the last revision so we're not increasing the amount of flow for the 210 or 100 Year based on uh the storm water report that was submitted to your professionals and was reviewed by the by your engineer Additionally the water that's discharged out to Route 33 uh that's subject to review by the dot and that was reviewed and approved by the dot to confirm that the infrastructure within Route 33 has proper conveyance uh for that storm water uh that is being discharged from our basins so so there's um several different layers here obviously you have your Municipal ordinance which we comply with we have the state level which we comply with there is a caveat in the in the state level that allows us to revert back to the old rules the old rules did not allow us to discharge more storm water off the site than what it previously existed so we me me met those rules as far as the previous design and um and we did submit the stormw report to the to your engineer um which showed those calculations chairman if I can just add to that as well um you know under the requirements um and to reiterate some of the things that the engineer has already said um they they are exempt um based on the previous approval to B are built um the the previous approval took into account a total impervious coverage for this site um and then there's some criteria in order for it to be exempt that certain changes did not happen so one is they did not increase the impervious had they increased the impervious coverage then that would trigger the new storm water WS the most recent ones um so so they did not increase that and then there's seever there you know there's about a half a dozen items and if there were any of those changes they would not be exempt so the only one that that raises an issue and they're and they're they're in they do meet the exemption except for the one that we've talked about which is the regulated motor vehicle surface area so based on the original plan that increased so that would trigger the new storm water RS and they would have to go back and um you know make some modifications minor modifications uh it it may trigger however based on the revised plans it it's been represented that they've actually reduced that motor vehicle surface area so thereby um and and subject to my verification and review of that plan um if they have reduced that surface area then they are exempt and they meet all the exemption allowances of the storm water regulations understood who maintains the Basin um Association yeah the association maintains it and then I'm sure there was um operation of Maintenance manual that likely was recorded um when this site was originally developed right the plan represents it's a uh Master Property Owners Association okay um I I do have to comment that it's very nice to say that you got dot approval Route 33 was shut down within the last last month from flooding so much for their capacity it's not there or they wouldn't have had to shut the road moving on there's there's some confusion about who's the client here if it's the property owner or the the the wood be tenant but my question is what provision is there for spillage uh there's cooking oil that's going to go somewhere on a regular basis uh I assume there's storage containers what provision is there in the plan uh to prevent spillage are there BMS around were those uh mini dumpsters that they use for cooking oil what is going to protect the uh surface runoff oil that we don't contaminate the ponds and all the places they go to sure um we are proposing a th- gon grease trap external grease trap out side of the building uh all of our sinks and anything that exposed to grease or cleanup areas uh is run through there and then the grease trap uh captures the grease and then is removed uh on an as-needed basis I'm sure as many of you are aware I think you have one of the most diligent muas in the state of New Jersey and they have uh very detailed reviews and and do check uh a lot of the sewer stage to confirm there's no sort of dumping on on site Mr chairman if I can just say that where is that shown on the plan where is that how is that going to be emptied on the on the utility plan uh there's a there's a thousand gallon grease trap shown behind the building uh and then there's uh manholes on top of the grease trap uh which is how you remove uh the grease from the underground Grease trrap and that's the responsibility of the property owner or the operator SL client you refer to them in different ways at different times sure so so the we're working for the property owner and then there's a the tenant who's the Taco Bell uh operator um so I I'm unaware of the agreement but it's going to be one either the property owner or the Taco Bell operator that'll be in charge of removing it my my guess is it's probably a Taco Bell operator but I'd have to confirm their client can we is it possible to re mandate request that it be recycled I'm going to go on a limb without knowing anything and say that it falls under the jurisdiction of the owner of the building meaning the tenant who's using the building because they're producing the the grease trap grease normally there is an outside contractor that comes in and they pump it out out with a pumping truck and whatever they do with it is their business they're supposed to dispose of it correctly um some people steal used oil cooking oil because they could use it for for diesel fuel so that's another Factor so we're speaking about hard to steal when it's under we're speaking about you know that we have a holding area for used oil no we're not proposing that it would just be removed directly from the cre similar to what you were describing it would be put directly into a uh a grease truck trap that or grease truck that would come and clean out the grease trap oh cooking oil doesn't go on a grease trrap no I'm saying as far as in interior of the building you're talking about yeah I'm I could talk to our client as far as where that's stored so if we empty a fryer usually maybe hypothetically five gallon for it to be picked up would you like you'd have to come up and get sworn in sure Mr chairman that's all I have thank you sir if I could swear you in quickly do you swear any testimony you're going to provide us the truth all truth nothing but the truth yes if you could just state your name spell your last name and give us your give us your address John thomaso t m a s u l o I'm the franchisee Taco Bell operator there there are two things that you really been talking about one is the grease trap it gets to flow of the water the grease goes down that gets pumped out at least every six months by a reputable company we use Wind River right now and we have five restaurants we do this all the time the health department reviews all the reports to make sure the grease trap is functioning correctly and and that that's taken place second excuse me second issue is the cooking oil we have a tank inside the restaurant that holds the used cooking oil we have a company called darpro comes periodically and there's a p in the side of the building they hook up a hose to that port and they draw it out of the tank the grease never goes outside the old white and the the drums that were out in the dumpster area that made a mess and you're right they come and steal it and make a mess so we eliminate that by having this system inside the restaurant so the used cooking oil never leaves the restaurant until they pump it out so basically the answer to the question is that the grease traps in a normal condition would be in the floor within the kitchen yours is going to be outside in a lar it's a, gon grease trrap it's going to run outside being in so they can come at any time to pump it out and they usually come early to do that because doesn't smell pretty okay anyone else in the public wishing to be heard come forward seeing there's none I make a motion to close the public portion do I have a motion motion second second all in favor is not Clos board members we have an application before us however before I put it out to a vote I'm going to make one last comment to the board um considering the circumstances that took place here tonight uh I'm going to make a a motion if we do proceed for preliminary site plan approval only um I think our professional engineer or I I should say our professional planner needs some time to review everything I don't think it's fair I don't think it's fair to this board that we haven't had a chance to see everything so therefore if we do make a motion it would be for preliminary site plan only it will not be for final site plan Mr chairman I just take a moment to discuss with my client take two moments there's a motion on the table I I put something forth so at this point I don't think Consulting with your well I might be be Pro proposing an alternative that works as well or better use yeah yeah oh I just have a moment okay so let right we would do everything but the final which would require you go right ahead and speak to your client which would require a subsequent application for final site plan approval correct okay can I just talk to my client yes you may if you doesn't make a difference you open it they want to see this there's so you want to make Mr chairman if I could um sorry guess initially just to um make clear our intent in submitting the revised drawings again as I said before it was to respond to the review letters of your professionals we didn't want to ignore them uh we could have come tonight and just addressed them on the Fly you know but we thought it was better to do what we did which is to Tinker with them and show the results of the tinkering to meet you your uh your Consultants concerns that said um what I would propose to you rather than just voting on preliminary tonight and requiring us to come back in the future with the final sight plan application because you know we have a tenant here that we're trying to meet his needs is to suggest to the board that you make no decision tonight and that we we come back next month and within that month your consultant certainly and you whoever would have the opportunity to further review those revised plans the tinkered plans that I think were already submitted to engineer but on on a formal basis um so that at that time you can consider everything and vote on both preliminary and final for the Taco Bell so and the variances and that's that's what I would request so Mr chairman just from a scheduling perspective we do have another applicant um who is already on speak I'm speak sorry your name oh sorry Kevin McGowen um just from a scheduling perspective Mr chairman we do have another applicant who's been carried to the July meeting who will need quite a bit of time and will likely if not almost definitely take our entire portion of the July meeting I'd be wondering if the applicant would be amendable to being our first applicant up at the August meeting which I don't have the date off the top of of my head but that's sort of where we are from a scheduling point of view sorry laor it be August 27th so again that that was just my recommendation I'm going to leave it to the board if the board wishes to proceed based on what was transpired today based on what Mark's testimony was based on what M was able to communicate to us and put forward if someone makes a motion we'll move forward if someone doesn't wish to make a motion and they wish to go with what I said that's fine as well but I'm going to leave it to the board however they choose Mr chairman I think your recommendation was very good even though it's going to be perhaps two months I think there was a lot of details that we went over this evening even these plans that you presented we've tweaked them again so I think um to give the board to give the applicant the two months to get not just this but to put on what we talked about this evening get it all on a plan let our engineer and our planner review it one more time and have it be clean and that's going to save you time in resolution compliance in the end anyway so get it all on the paper let everybody review it I think you know get them on the August agenda and hopefully it'll be a quick meeting and and everything can be approved and will have been reviewed um I I think that moves you along the most quickly I think that's fair to our professionals and it lets the board see everything that was agreed to this evening and that it makes sense okay board members we have the application in front of us do I have a motion what do we want to carry you want to carry well a motion to carry I'll move to carry it is there a second I'll second it okay Madame secretary roll call please um wait sorry Mr chairman just to clarify this is a motion to carry to the August meeting Mr Mr Carol the applicant would extend the board's time to act until the end August um have to they expire in September so I don't have to worry about that even better Miss Carrie yes Mr Lupo yes Mr Masters yes Mr busman yes M kator yes Mr tany yes chairman La yes it's Carri to what date August August August 27th no further notice so anyone here for BA 5248-r 07 shared commercial LLC and dt07 shared commercial LLC that application will be heard at the boards August 27th uh 20124 meeting 7 p.m. actually s 6:30 p.m in this room thank you thank you he board members we still have some uh work to do okay memorialization of application ba-52 21-22 the I have any motion second all in favor okay application for memorialization as well ba-52 30-22 3C Sac self storage do I have a motion so move second second all in favor thank you anyone in the public wishing to be heard this evening on any on any topic any matter please come forward please come forward state your name we'll get you sworn in okay com thank you my name is Paul loo I uh you're good you don't have to S you anyway 131 prola Avenue there's some project going on next door to me at 135 prola Avenue um when I bought my house in 2017 it was explained to me that the property next door didn't have enough Street Frontage the original owner offered to buy a small section of the front of my property to increase the street Frontage to make it a legal building plot I see there is Advanced Construction going on there right now and I'm curious was there a variance issued for this construction do you have any knowledge of this it's chairman said there's a house being built there it has building permits and um as far as I know there there was no variances to the board I don't believe any were required based on what he's is there is there excuse me is there ample Street Frontage to make it a legal building plot this is was explained by my attorneys when I bought the property I I I I don't have their plant in front of me so but based on that there were issued building permits I would say there is however I'll give you my my card and you can give me a call tomorrow and and uh you know you can stop in my office I'm right down the street from there again if everything is legitimate you know and it's on the up and up that that's fine I mean I certainly understand the answer is yes I know some of the history with that property at one time this is only one single family home being built there that's correct up on on perola app at one time they were marketing that property and trying to get multiple Lots correct so in order to do that they would have needed to get a road in along along the property from prola right so I I think what at that time what you may be referring to is they needed more Frontage in order to fit a house and a road to get to another house behind the front house okay that's what I recollect so so that might have been at that time that sounds like a reasonable answer right that was abandon I know they were looking at multiple Lots they wanted to get in there and they would have needed a road to get you know off of bergola okay so now it's just the existing home and and yes to have ample Frontage based on they have their building permits okay and if there's any it was a very simple yeah you know whatever I just want to make sure that everybody uh understood or at least I did that what was represented may have changed yep and if there's any questions call my office the engineering office and I'm right down the street you know not a problem free thank you for your time welc thanks for coming out anyone else in the public wishing to be heard seeing there's none I need a motion to close the public portion motion close second second all in favor I thank you I'm going to turn it over to the attorney at this point yeah Mr chairman uh there's a matter that regarding pending litigation that needs to be discussed in executive session I would ask the board make a motion to enter executive session so that we can do that okay I need a motion to go into executive session so move second second roll call all in favor good so e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e okay got should open the door I don't think anybody's out there executive session I need a a motion to enter back into the meeting do I have a that motion do we have a second second all in favor all right we're back in session are there any correspondences that have to be discussed none none seeing there's none are they uh I need a motion to adjourn motion adjourn I have a second all in favor thank you everyone have a good Fourth of July sure you for