stes can we turn the microphones off please thank you Mr chairman Mr Goldberg here Mr Williams here here Mr here Mr here Mr wood Williams yes Mr Hansen here Mr Fishinger here here Mr rer here okay next is consideration for approval of the minutes of the March 25 2024 meeting any comments on the uh minutes if not I'll entertain a motion to approve motion to approve second second all in favor I any oppos approve next we have several resolutions the first being va- 22-23 Mr ol thank you Mr chairman the first resolution is a memorializing resolution with respect to an application filed by Handover Estates LLC who apply to the board for uh variance relief pursuant to um for D1 variance relief um to construct nine townhouse St attached residential units within the ra7 zone as well as D5 use variance relief with respect to density property's at 245-251 East Handover Avenue in the ra7 uh for the reasons that are set forth in the resolution the application was conditionally granted board members any comments on this resolution Mr chairman I have one comment yes in our discussion before the end of the meeting you talk about uh the design standards orance in place and how to to the how it needs to apply to the project as well it wasn't mentioned as one of the ordinance to be considered in the resolution toward the end comply with other ordinances and other rules thinking maybe that should be included well it would I mean in number one right the condition number one says all construction shall be in accordance with all applicable Township County state federal law ordinances regulations and directives then it says including I'm Wonder put there it would apply yeah you know the issue with just putting one in is I don't want to miss something else you know you could say including you're not limited to that one to highlight it but all the ordinances apply okay thank okay do I have a motion to approve this resolution so moved I have a second second thank you Mr goldber yes Mr Williams yes Mr yes Mr yes yes okay the next resolution again a memorializing resolution with respect to the application filed by Rita fan um who applied to the board for permission to modify an existing non-con forming dwelling by constructing a one-story addition which requires variance relief for sidey setback combined sidey yard setback and expansion of a nonconforming structure that property is located at 18 uh brayburn way and is in the ra15 zone and for the reason set forth in the resolution that application was conditionally granted any comments on this resolution if not I'll entertain a motion thank you a second second thank you Mr yes Mr Williams yes Mr yes Mr yes Mr yes the next resolution again memorializing resolution with respect to the application filed by Thomas Giordano um who applied to the board for permission to construct a one-story Edition and a portico at the front entryway uh which required varant releas for front yard setback to Arrowhead Road front yard setback to Honeymoon Lane and for expanding a non-conforming structure that property is located at 17 Arrowhead roads it's located in the ra 35 Zone and for the reason set forth in the resolution that application was conditionally granted board members any comments if not I'll entertain a motion motion to approve thank you yes Mr Williams yes Mr Ben yes Mr yes Mr yes okay so and the final resolution again a resolution a memorializing resolution rather with respect to the application filed by Columbia Road Partners LLC who applied to the board to amend its site plan approval to permit the installation of three padel courts in a location previously occupied by a single clay tennis court uh the applicant also applied for D2 use variants approval to expand its existing non-conforming use that property is in the OSG Zone located at 65 Columbia Road and for the reason set forth in the resolution it was conditionally granted board members any comments if not I'll entertain a motion so move second Mr goldber yes Mr William yes Mr yes Mr yes yes next we move on to our public hearings first ba-23 yes Mr chairman this is ba8 1423 block acquisition LLC L 581 and 543 L 18 and n Road and 22234 mimble Avenue for section c and d this is a continuation from November 27th 2023 January 30th 2024 and February 12 2024 public hearings applicant proposes the minor subdivision to create one additional lot for the construction of 13 deep cat single family Carriage Houses with other related improvements good evening Mr chairman members of the board for the record Joshua cudre appearing from the law firm of Sills cus and gross on behalf of the applicant eslock Acquisitions LLC so it's been a while happy to see you all hope you're enjoying the summer um Mr H chairman sure it's k o o d as and David R why first name Joshua but please call me Josh so where are we going tonight so I'd like to give a brief overview Mr chairman recap sort of it's been a while since we've been here um but I'm not sure if you'd prefer I believe there are some represented parties in the audience if you want to have them make their appearances before I begin I defer to you Mr chairman sure uh why don't we have uh Council representing any parties their uh good evening Mr chairman uh members of the board professionals and staff Robert mcbrier MC capital b r i a r I'm an attorney with the law fir us skank price Smith and King we represent a group of objectors uh which consists of approximately 40 individuals uh earlier uh today I provided uh board attorney and uh Miss Santiago uh with an updated list thank you good evening Mr chairman members of the board my name is Richard d'angelus with the law firm of Connell FY I represent 236 Mount kmav LLC and Paul schle the owner of that prop shy the uh owner of that property uh we had submitted a letter to the board as you may recall there was an issue with the easement that my client has that the applicant initially had planned to open up to the public for the pocket park that's not now no longer part of the application however we noticed in the current notice um that they are intending to uh remove part of our driveway which they claim is on their property we contend one it's never been shown to us by way of a markout we've asked for it as far back when this application was first filed and I filed a letter with this board in May contending that even if a part of our driveway the aadam is on their property at this point and I provided the statutory site so Mr oler can guide you accordingly uh they can't remove it at this point in time based on the statute statute of limitations and we therefore respectfully submit that this board doesn't have any jurisdiction over that part of the application thank you so so Mr de d'angeles I think we went through this last time but just in case um know it's beyond this board scope to determine if your client has a valid easement off site other than whatever the recorded easement is as opposed to the you know what might be the cartway um today um so the board's taking jurisdiction over the entire application and all the property the the issue is different this time uh Mr rer because last time the question was concerning opening up the use of the easen and so forth but now their applications the notice specifically says they're talking about removing improvements on our property that that's our easement it's not even part of the property that's part of the application claiming an easement over the property line right that doesn't exist no no we are allow me to finish please the our easement is over two lots that are no longer part of this application our easement is over the two lots that would have comprised the pocket part right so this is their proposals for new lot 1.01 their contention is part of our driveway is on that new lot 1.01 one and they're proposing for whatever reason to remove that part of the driveway even though it doesn't impact the remainder of the project that's another issue my contention here is Sir that this board doesn't have jurisdiction because my client who has the property interest does not consent and it's not part of the application it's the the property is not subject to the application Josh I would just like to address just to clarify and sort of clear the deck on this issue we we are no longer proposing any modifications to the easement or the driveway that may or may not be encroaching on our proposed lot that was communicated to Mr d'angel be email that was not communicated but thank you very much I can confirm the dates Mr B sent you the email but I'm happy to just State for the record that we are not proposing to modify the driveway we're not proposing to move it we're not proposing to touch it so you send a letter I will send confirming letter thank you Mr chair okay okay any other Council great so thank you Mr chairman so again just to reiterate for the record uh the subject property that we're speaking about this evening is commonly referred to as nine Spring Book Road and it's identified as block 5801 lot one the property is owned by Springbrook Country Club and it is a underutilized portion of the club property that is not part of the 18 hole golf course and not improved with any structures or accessory buildings it's primarily utilized as an open air storage area for off-site maintenance and of public utility service equipment the club has determined that the subject portion of the property is no longer required for its operations and the applicant is under contract to purchase that portion of the property the property is located in the open space government use Zone district and I just want to confirm as it was represented by objecting council at the beginning uh when he's entering his appearance that the property known as 234 Mount kembell Avenue block 543 Lot 8 and 232 Mount Kimble Avenue block 543 lot N9 are no longer part of the application the board will recall that the applicant previously contemplated installing a pocket park with walking paths and other Landscaping improvements on those lots but we did hear concerns from the board and members of the public regarding pedestrian access parking traffic Etc so those have been eliminated from The Proposal so the project as a before the board this evening um the applicant is proposing to subdivide a portion of lot one consisting of approximately 28,2 square feet that's approximately 4.77 eight acres and we are proposing to construct a single family residential development consisting of 13 single family homes we've reduced that number of units from the prior proposal of 16 to 13 and just want to remind the board that the um the development will be operated and managed by homeowners association and they will be responsible for all refu and recycling collection Landscaping uh snow removal common area maintenance Etc um these will all be Market units we're not proposing any affordable housing on this property as we're not required to by ordinance however um while we're not required to do that we've heard the board's comments and concerns regarding that aspect of the application and the applicant previously committed to and remains committed to making a contribution to the Township's affordable housing trust fund to support other afford housing projects in Morris Township so I just want to highlight briefly Mr chairman some uh additional plan modifications hopefully maybe I can address some of the questions from interested members of the public um so the new access roadway has been revised uh to include a culdesac at the end of the roadway with a width that was increased to 22 feet uh a fire truck access plan was added to the site plan that will be testified to by Mr schmer this evening that demonstrates that the roadway accommodates mors Township's fire Truck Equipment the plans were submitted to the board and the fire chief on or about May 9th 2024 and I just want to confirm for the record that the circulation was found to be acceptable by both the fire department and the board's traffic engineer in his latest uh review letter comment number six specifically in the letter dated July 18th 2024 um the circulation pattern has also been revised to include a dedicated pulloff area to accommodate maintenance delivery and vehicles uh all front-facing garages which had had been uh concerned previously have been eliminated um to comply with the municipality's design standards and the building to building spacing between each unit has been increased to provide a minimum of 20 feet or 15 was previously proposed as I noted Mr shmer will touch on those modifications in more detail as well as others and we'll also discuss the uh marant relief and Di Minimate exceptions from rsis that we're seeking so um the applicants aware that the property that's before the board this evening has been targeted in the past by other Developers for higher density multif family residential but we continue to believe that this type of residential development is the most appropriate for this property um just for housekeeping purposes notice was published in the daily record on July 11th 2024 and uh the notice was mailed via certified mail on July 12th 2024 our office submitted an Affidavit of service and proof of publication to miss Santiago on July 17 2024 we just asked for the record if Mr oler could confirm and I Mr chairman I can and board members I can tell you we reviewed the notice the notice is in proper form was mailed by certified mail timely and published timely so the board has jurisdiction thank you Mr rer appreciate that before you go on this uh we were expecting Mr Schuster but he hasn't showed up so miss Sim come just to confirm for the record she's been here since the beginning obviously has roll call on the roll call every meeting the one meeting she wasn't here she's certified she's Mr chairman you're ahead of me and I appreciate it so as far as Witnesses go this evening I mentioned we'd like to recall uh Mr Rusty Scher who's the applicant's professional civil engineer with h2m Associates and we also have our professional traffic engineer Craig Parago from dynamic traffic um we know we'll be coming back for another meeting at least we anticipate um that we will be doing so so we plan to present the testimony of our professional planner Mr Michael toia at that future meeting and then Mr chairman as previously requested by you Mr toia um will prepare a written report a planning report that will be submitted to the board at least 10 days in advance of that meeting great thank you of course we do make sure that he also it also gets forwarded to council absolutely we'll do I already committed to doing that I'll certainly make sure that it's done just to keep me honest Mr chairman I appreciate it um we we I don't want to um there's been a number of review letters issued in connection with the application I don't want to go through all them item by item but I do want to just confirm receip of the most recent ones uh the traffic review letter dated July 18 2024 fire department letter dated July 16 20124 and a report letter from Southeast Morris County Municipal Utilities Authority dated uh today July 22nd 2024 those are the most recent revisions I have Mr chairman we have those um yeah we just we'll be discussing I guess in further the um water uh issues on that we will okay great and then I guess just last bit from me before I finally get into it um the objectors Council Mr mcbrier noted that uh an updated list of objectors stated July 12th 2024 submitted Mr do we want to mark that yeah we are um we can do that Josh so the copy that I have again updated July 12 2024 submitted by Mr mcbrier we'll mark that as 04 you Mr mcbrier just want to point out as well wherever you want to sit that um and really to all the clients your clients on this list um in the event any of them have questions of witnesses that's going to go through you so they would not be permitted to ask questions um since you're doing that on their behalf they would of course be allowed to testify when we get to that part I appreciate that and that uh those points have been uh conveyed to the to the group so thank you great thank you Mr chairman I finally finished with my introduction here so I'd like to call Mr Scher please so Mr shmer would you uh raise your right hand please you Solly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you got I do and your full name for the record please Richard B schmer Jr thank you thank you so Mr Sher you were previously qual qualified and accepted as an expert in the field of civil engineering by this board just want to confirm um that your licenses remain in full force and effect since the last time we were here yes okay great so Mr Scher on May 9th 2024 your office submitted and it's a few documents so I'll just itemize them for the record uh number one summary of plan revisions in a TCC comment response letter number two a revised site plan with a revision date of May 6 2024 revised stormw Water Management report and correspondence to uh the fire chief regarding the fire truck access plan that I mentioned um during my opening remarks is that correct yes okay Mr chman why don't you begin by providing the board with an overview of the proposed plan revision to the site plan sure uh so let's do uh in terms of getting this up on the screen's my technical advisor here we all thank Kaylee for being the technical adviser that's right and then obviously Mr shmer if this is something that hasn't been previously submitted to the board we should Mark it into evidence and I believe Miss Santiago we're up to a11 that corre mine thank you okay so it looks like we have the exhibit up on the screen Mr Sher if you could just briefly before we formally mark it can you just describe what this exhibit is beginning maybe with a title and a date uh this is a an update uh we have previously provided a rendering of the site plan and that's what this is uh and this one is uh similar to the exhibit we presented before this one is dated May 16 2024 great thank okay so that's A1 okay correct uh so just for uh orientation um good evening it's been a while since we've been here on this application but uh just and Mr cud kind of went through things uh and hit on a lot of the highlights uh so uh um just again for orientation um what we've rendered here is the is the site plan and Springbrook Road is at the top of the page here I think the this you kind of see at the top of the page is spring Brook Road uh vertically on the left side of the exhibit is Mount kemell Avenue or Route 202 so Spring Brook Road comes off of Route 202 and then comes down and and we have this Frontage on on Spring Brook Road um across the street is the firehouse sort of up and to the left is the firehouse and you can see the 13th hole of Spring Brook Country Club golf course down on the lower right hand side uh so orientation of the site uh as Mr C said uh this uh rendering and the plans that were submitted uh now show 13 new single family homes and just as a reminder this is not a subdivision uh like we often see of 13 individual Lots with a house on each lot it is a single development of 13 single family homes uh we've kind of characterized them as Carriage homes uh but it is on a a single property uh so a little bit different than what we often see in that regard as Mr cudre said we will have a homeowners association which will be responsible for maintenance of the common facilities uh and that provides for some efficiencies uh and uniformity uh in in maintenance of the site um Lots eight and nine which were mentioned earlier uh which were the area the pocket park and they're over on this left side so there are these two wooded Lots uh to the upper left hand portion of the exhibit as we look at it and as you've heard those are no longer part of the project um so the new roadway that's uh say new roadway it's the layout is similar to what we've seen before uh the road has been shortened and you can see we have this Loop culdesac uh at the end of the roadway uh that provides for enhanced access circulation uh the fire department looked at this and and chief nun is indicated he's he's satisfied with this for fire access we included in the plans uh circulation for the fire truck entering the site off of Spring Brook Road exiting the site onto Spring Brook Road and circulation through the site and around the culdesac so that's that's adequate um we in this plan revised the width of the roadway originally we had proposed it at 20 feet it's now proposed to be 22 feet wide uh if you're recall earlier uh an earlier testimony indicated that it's the width uh is is a little narrow than what you might normally see but we have battered curving on the sides so that it allows for uh for accessibility but we've widened it to 22 feet for a little bit of enhanced accessibility and that 22 feet is the entire Road and all the way around the uh around the culdesac um could you explain what battered curbing means sure battered curbing is it's Al also called uh mountable curbing so it's on a on a slant uh so instead of vertical curbing uh it's at an angle roughly let's say it's a 45 degree angle for for General discussion uh so that uh what it does is when you have an narrow roadway it actually doesn't make it feel as narrow uh so for accessibility uh that's commonly done uh we did this uh same type of approach on another development in Morris Township uh James Place uh which is a 96 unit project which actually had narrower roads that had 20ft roads with battery curving uh so we've used this approach on a few different projects and and it works very well that way you don't have excessively wide roadways so you can narrow the roadways but still not be concerned about the about the curbing on the sides so it's it's it's a kind of curbing Al also called mountable curbing uh if if a truck or a fire truck for example even touches it it doesn't damage tires and wheels and so forth so it's it's good in that regard um with uh the reduction from the 16 units to 13 units the spacing has been increased uh we have a minimum building to building spacing of 20 feet and that's really only at a couple of spots for the most part and throughout the throughout the project the spacing will be much greater than that uh we talked about how the garages face earlier uh we had originally some side facing and some front loaded garages all of them have been revised now they are side facing garages so all of the garage doors none of the garage doors face the street all of them face to the side and you can see that in the uh in the rendering here I was just going to try to maybe enlarge a little bit here so we can get a little better look at you can see the layout uh in terms of all of the garages I mean all of the driveways come in and lead to a side facing uh garage uh we have a dedicated pulloff area in the island at the culdesac uh and it's and it's for either trucks delivery trucks uh uh um uh landscape trucks or something like that again we're not going to have uh 13 different landscapers coming and and serving these homes we're going to have one because it it is going to be operated and maintained by a homeowners association uh we had talked about this and actually shown this on a prior plan uh but it can it continues to stay uh with this plan uh we have visitor parking throughout the site we have 10 visitor parking spaces and these are these areas which a little bit cross-hatching we have 10 of those uh which meets the requirement uh is more than the minimum requirement for uh visitor spaces uh for the project the length of those visitor spaces has been increased uh so that they are 20 uh 22 feet in length uh that allows for the parking space of 18 feet and allows for Clear passage behind it so that where you have a sidewalk running behind that uh in that area of that uh visitor space uh that you can continue to walk as you would in a sidewalk you don't have to go out into the street so we have that uh available with uh for and length for the parking space and for the walkway um what there's a couple of uh items that had come up earlier with respect to the residential site Improvement standards and some di Minimus exceptions with respect to that one of those dealt with the width of the road uh the again we have a 22 foot wide Road uh the requirement under the rsis would be for um a 24 foot wide Road uh again with the uh small nature of the of the project the use of The Battered curbing uh the extra length of the visitor parking spaces uh which is another item but extra length of the visitor parking spaces um uh allows for adequate maneuverability you can pull into the spaces you can back out of the spaces you have as much space to pull in and back out as you do in any other standard parking space uh even in like a standard parking lot uh so we provide that provide that Dimension um one of the other uh rsis dominous exceptions that was brought up I think in the Traffic Engineers report deals with minimum width of a driveway of 20 feet uh when you have a two-car garage and a driveway combination uh so we have all side loaded garages now previously we had some front-loaded garages and I I really think the intent of that rsis standard deals with when you're approaching and you have a you have two cars in in the in the garage space and you have a couple of spaces in front of that uh the rsis calls for a 20 foot wide area um we do not have that front loaded situation anymore they are all side loaded and there is room uh as you enter into uh the driveway off of the street the driveways are 12 feet wide and then you can turn and there's a space to turn into the garage and there is space in front of the garage uh so to the extent that a DI Minimus exception is required from rsis we think it's appropriate there's adequate space for maneuverability into the uh driveways and into the garages uh there's adequate space for maneuverability into and out of the uh uh visitor parking spaces that are stationed along the along the roadway so we think there's adequate space for all of that and that this Arrangement and these Dimensions would function adequately and we've and this has been field tested quite frankly as I said in other projects in the township where where it does function adequately so I just wanted to touch on those couple of uh items um we had previously uh oh and and just talking about parking spaces the township did make a change in size of parking spaces originally we had needed a variance from size of parking spaces that's no longer needed so the parking spaces conform to the municipal standard uh we had also previously requested a variance for height of walls where we had a retaining wall and we had a fence on top of it that's been eliminated by uh the change in the design so we're no longer seek any relief on that um we did uh in the revised plans provide for uh some sight sight distance triangle at the intersection uh of the new road and Springbrook Road this had been a request from the board's traffic consultant so we showed that I know that Mr Fishinger and his latest review that we just got had a couple comments about that I'm confident that we can address those comments and meet that uh you wanted to show the where you sit in the car looking a little bit further back and wanted to look a little further out um and we can accommodate that uh one of the things we want to be sensitive to is some of the trees that we do want to retain uh right near the intersection we have existing trees that we want to keep U we'd like to keep those uh but the basically those trees are are um are fully grown and we want to maintain those and Mr Sher just for the record to confirm you're addressing of comment number seven in the latest revision to the traffic uh review I believe is that correct uh I don't know the comment number but it's correct it's in okay I'll take your word for it it's it's in the latest I know I read I read the report and it was in there um so but we can we can show slightly revised sight distance uh triangle at the intersection and I'm sure we apply um as I mentioned uh the emergency vehicle access and circulation has been addressed with this uh with the latest plan so I think we're we're good there um the uh the overall overall you know sort of complexion if you will here with the driveway coming in and now a new Loop Road uh but with a reduction in the number of of uh units allows us to have some more space between the units as I mentioned and um and space around the outside uh this exhibit uh is reflective of the landscape plan which was submitted as part of the revised site plans uh and you can see we have a a good buffering of trees as I mentioned we're trying to retain as many of the existing trees as we can along Spring Brook Road and also along uh the the golf course side um and even elsewhere through the site um at at the perimeter particularly so we want to try to retain those but we're also enhancing that with a significant uh additional buffering of trees uh at the perimeter um the township has a requirement for tree replacement with removal um and we went through this before uh with the current plan we' reduced the number of trees to be removed we have a total of 105 trees being removed the replacement requirement under the ordinance is 185 trees and we are meeting that and exceeding that with a replacement of 198 trees um so there's a requirement for depending on the size of the tree you're taking down uh that's why there's a more tree trees have to be planted then are being removed so we're taking down 105 but because of the size and your scaling of trees we're required to have 185 but with the trees we're putting in we actually get credit for 198 that includes actually an installation upsizing some of the replacement trees so that they uh they actually get counted uh we get some credit for some additional planting but the total number of replacement tree credit proposed is 198 again more than more than the minimum required um the plantings that we have on the uh on the landscape plan uh we also have a number of hundreds of shrubs also going in uh which uh which will also provide buffering uh one of the things uh that I'll mention is that the new plantings comply with the townships do not plant list the township has the listing of plants that they don't want to see planted uh and that's consistent with the uh New Jersey standards for invasive species and so forth so there's an number of plants that we don't want to see planted and the planting the landscape plan complies with that do not plant list um the uh kind of the the general arrangement of the road and houses is similar to what you've seen before and what we and and to that extent um drainage is going to be similar to what we've seen before in terms of how we're handling it uh we previously actually had three small detention basins on here we've actually reduced that down to two uh and those are down at the downstream end of the site so we have a couple of detention basins uh and then we have an underground infiltration system all of this is to uh address water quantity so the total total run off from the site uh is also address as water quality that's primarily what the two small detention basins do they function as water quality basins and then the infiltration system uh to promote groundwater recharge and infiltration back into the ground uh that's consistent with what we've presented in in the past plans it's been uh revised a little bit based on the change in the plans from the 16 to 13 units to change in the roadway we actually have less uh some less impervious coverage than we did with the original plan uh so uh so we've modified the plan uh to be consistent with that um I think the last thing to touch on and we did get uh a letter from Chief nun and I know we got one just today from the southeast Morris County mua um on that we we modified the layout of the uh um of the water system the water lines that run through the road and the location of hydrants um the MUA reviewed it and they'd like to see some different positioning of the hydrants uh which I don't think is an issue uh I've spoken to the MUA just uh today about their comments uh and I told them that you know some of the things you have are a little different than what the what the fire department wanted and they said it's fine we can we can work those details out as to where a hydrant goes that's really not an issue um one of the comments in there uh what also addresses um a hydrant that we proposed at the request of the fire department they wanted to see a hydrant on the fire department property uh which is across the street so we had agreed to provide that fire hydrant on the fire department property at the firehouse there uh the MUA uh simply says that um uh they can't have their own private hydrant without coming in and seeking to get that as their own private hydrant so like I said I spoke to Patricia danhart at the southeast morisan mua uh just uh just today about uh about her review letter and she said you know we'll work that out um but there's there's a process basically she says for for obtaining a private hydrant uh on on land like that so um that's where she says it should be in the right of way but if they want to have it privately we'll have to go through that process um the key I think to the uh to fire service is really the circulation element uh and like I said the the access into the uh development uh and egress and circulation around on the road uh is is adequate uh the placement of a fire Hy you know a little bit here or there is not uh uh we can we can come to an agreement that between the fire department and the MUA on that I'm sure um I think that's uh Mr schmer for me just two two questions um since we're on it the uh smcmua letter um indicates that we are now seeking to propose irrigation for the Landscaping is that accurate yes we are okay I just wanted to confirm that for the record yeah I did speak with her about that and we'll just have to provide the appropriate metering for irrigation system and then just one other comment in the traffic review letter comment number eight um it relates to the uh proposed striping being mucd compliant I just want to confirm for the record that we intend to comply with that requirement correct we will and in fact the note on the plan says new mutcd compliance striping um right up at the intersection um in that what Mr F calls the gore area but the short answer is yes we will uh we'll comply okay thank you Mr shman do you have anything else on Direct um not on my notes right here Mr chairman that's all I have right now Mr Scher some questions on the visitor space traffic report indicate that there should be some delineation between the spaces and the sidewalk that's uh going in front of it you said they're 22 ft long that would give 18 by9 for parking correct how is the sidewalk going to be so is there going to be a sidewalk going through so that anybody pulling in will know that they have to clear the sidewalk uh we don't have the sidewalk actually showing going across those spaces because the I should have mentioned that the uh um visitor spaces are all using permeable pavers which is actually part of the storm water management system for storm water quality um so we were keeping the permeable pavers all the way out to the street uh it could be designated either with some uh striping difference in coloration of the permeable papers or something like that so that there would be a delineation of where the walkway is to where the parking space is yeah the um when you're coming off Spring Brook Road uh if you the first two visitor parking spaces that you come to on the left side of the road yes uh they look like they're 18 ft still with a 4 foot distance from from the back of the space to the curb line so there's there's a 4ft dimension from there's an 18t Dimension and there's a 4ft dimension okay so that uh the total is 22 so that black line indicates it's crossing the first space indicates the the delineation where the 18 feet go to the first 18 feet right and then the back end of those back behind the spaces is a 4 foot space between uh the space and the curb line how would you delineate where the sidewalk is supposed to be so that cars don't park on the sidewalk how we do that what I was just suggesting is that there could be either striping or a difference in the coloration of the permeable papers is one way to do it um alternately we could run the concrete sidewalk all the way all the way through there but uh it's primarily parking space and we were using the permeable pavers uh if there's a preference for one over the other we can we can do it either way but uh it could be done with either a striping or really like I say a different a delineation in the permeable papers I think I'd be leaning towards the different col papers I don't know what the other board members would think about that I tend to agree with that start c f yeah stri and get fade and then who's going to put back again and this way we know for sure where it is and where it is Mr chairman I don't think there's any objection to that and we could submit a revised exhibit just demonstrating that condition great thank you um so there's no problem with the 12T uh width of the driveway uh going up to the uh Garage in the space turn space in front of the garage yeah the they may still technically need the diminus exception because it says 20 feet for a two-car garage the concern is to make sure you have enough space in order for the a two-car garage with two spaces in front of it to count as three and a half parking spaces which they have the space to do it they've just narrowed the driveways because they're not drive the garages don't face the road anymore so I don't have an issue with it because of the configuration they have but I just to be safe I think they probably do still need the DI Minimus exception and then on the H well let's go back to the um the water lines um you were saying you've been speaking with uh utility yes and uh you said you'll work it out so what you're saying saying is that uh condition of approval would be obviously satisfying their condition yes yeah I've talked to to an agreement with them I've talked to the MUA and she's we'll we'll work out exact placement uh with the fire department so okay and but also for they they're talking about a waterline uh extension I believe well we're proposing an extension of the water main along Springbrook Road uh from Mount kemell Avenue all the way down to I'll say the this end of Spring Brook Road where where near the entrance to Spring Brook Country Club so go all the way through it's going to go all the way through that's on the plans today that was part of the plans that were revised to previously address an mua comment so that's still part of the plans and we will have a hydrant along that line as well um so that's agreed to um it's it's really internally is the hydrant in one spot or another mua suggested having at the High Point uh which is which really makes sense um because that's where otherwise you have to have a blow off valve or something like that so it really the hydrant at the high point is really the best place to put it um I think the biggest issue perhaps was having was the fire department private hydrant that they said well there's a process for that you you can't just give them a private hydrant so everybody has so she'll said we and the comment I got back was we'll work it out and if we have to have a meeting in the in the field we can do that um I haven't mentioned anything about the drainage um when I was looking at the revised plans um the portion of the lot that's closest to to mount Kimble Avenue so that would be uh on this diagram up on the board left um all those properties coming off Mount Kimble slope down towards this property is that correct Mount Kimble is iron it slopes towards this property yes yeah so um you're GNA when you did your calculations for runoff did you include the runoff coming off those properties so that that runoff is going to come in and get collected uh we have a drainage system sort of on the left hand side uh of the plant as you look at it and there are some inlets there that would get collected and would get connected Into the Storm sewer system in Spring Brook Road yeah I saw two inlets does that uh uh collection go all the way across along the back of all the houses that are on that side goes it picks up the water along that side and then it takes it out toward toward Spring Brook Road but when I was looking at the plans uh say for unit seven the on in the lower left corner you're looking at this uh diagram up on the board uh there's no um collection point along there behind their uh that property or that unit and I was wondering how that water that's coming down off these other lots are going to be collected at that point so that would then run uh basically to the I'll say down the page you know sort of plan plan South if you will uh then down to that in that direction uh so that basically the water that comes down toward the back of those units either goes in one direction or another so sufficient to remove all the all the water and where does that water then go into that goes into the drainage easement and the uh along the um back of the other houses going towards back towards Spring Brook Road well the the runoff that's collected at the back of those units yes gets piped over to and and goes into the collection system in Springbrook Road so there is a storm sewer system in Springbrook Road along long Spring Brook Road and we're actually going to be um modify making some modifications to that and enhancing that because one of the things that was part of the plan previously but just as a reminder that we are uh putting curving all along the frontage on Spring Brook Road along there so we're going to be providing a clean Edge uh with a new curbing uh and a uniform uh edge of pavement uh so uh there's storm sewer there today and we're going to be uh utilizing that and enhancing that uh but that runoff from the of those units goes tie into that storm sewer system Into the Storm sewer in Spring Brook Road correct and not go into any of the underground filtration system that doesn't right doesn't go into the into the onsite system mron do you have any comments on that no I reviewed the drainage calculations they meet the requirements for reduction and for storm water recharge okay what they're doing is just collecting the offsite water and taking it away State thank board members any questions yes Mr chair um just a confirmation with the reduction in the number of units as well as the realignment of the garages does that change the size of the units or are they still do they still remain the same they're the same as what we showed before okay that was about 3600 ft for each unit in total square footage I'll I'll say yes but I don't have the exact number off the top of my head okay but the units were showing a really basically the same as what we had before yeah okay thank you just yeah one one question um in Mr F's report um item four with regarding the snow removal I think I had heard Josh mentioned that they're going to be responsible for all snow well maybe I missed it um did you elaborate on that um I didn't elaborate on but basically it will um snow will be pushed off to the side of the road there's Green Space uh you know in front of the Yards uh there's space in the island so there's space to push snow if it gets to be too great of a snow load then it would have to be carted off site but by and large uh this would be similar to a street with other single family homes on it um where the snow is plowed off toward the side of the road thank you sure would uh the U visitor parking be impacted by uh snow plow well they need to be plowed yes okay they'd be plowed oh sure Mr chairman we don't intend to utilize the visitor parking spaces for snow storage and Rusty this is a private road so that'll be a private um private Haller for that's correct correct correct thank you it's a private private road privately maintained um and private snow removal correct so for these type of developments whether it's for on one lot or just a regular neighborhood so the driveway the snow on the driveways the HOA whoever's responsible comes in and the snow on the driveways won't be moved into the street it'll just be pushed off to the side in some capacity right not yeah you can't push your snow into the street okay and block everybody else right okay all right thank you any other board member for questions quick question yes um mentioned deliveries is an access point there for deliveries are like all delivery trucks going to place their deliveries in one spot and home owners come out and get it or no we simply we simply provided a pulloff area this was something that came up in a prior board discussion um is there a spot for you know trucks to kind of pull off so it's simply an area uh for as a pulloff area but no it would be like other single family homes if somebody needs to drop something at a particular at a particular house they could do that how about mailboxes it one mailbox uh we did we did show that actually adjacent to that pulloff area we had a uh a network of we there's a little pad there and a network of mailboxes okay thank you I wasn't sure if that was this yes any other questions fromard you said I think at the beginning it was said trash will be private also but not dumpsters each each home is going to have its own containers well they'd be private containers with a with with a private hauler yes okay correct yes uh Mr crer to answer your question each home will have their own garbage cans and they'll place them out for pickup it will be a private hauler so no dumpsters any other questions from board members any of the board professionals any questions okay Council any questions uh good evening Robert mcbrier again attorney representing a group of obors uh consisting of approximately 40 uh residents um Mr Schumer uh Lots eight and nine including the pocket park uh were removed from the new plan why was that I think Mr I can address that answered that in his earlier discussion yeah U as you know mrb from prior hearings um there was concerns raised by residents as well as your clients some of their objections regarding traffic access Etc um it was a business decision made by the applicants based on that feedback to eliminate that well we thought was a nice amenity but frankly it was causing more concern uh are there any plans uh that you're aware of uh for the development of those lots uh that would not be a question for Mr Scher I can't answer that question what may or may not be done with them in the future we are no longer under contract to purchase them so can't speak to that the uh homeowner property I think it was just uh asked and answered but that prop will be exclusive uh private property for the residents correct so uh no uh public access to the sidewalk area for uh pedestrians uh for biking riding walking Etc when you say the homeowner property what do you mean the sidewalks on the plant the the ones that uh the ones that surround uh New Road a those sidewalks will be private properties that correct correct okay so no one from the public will be able to access these sidewalk areas it's part of the homeowner association so okay uh are there any uh dedicated areas within the development slated for uh children to play like a park or a playground I'm happy to answer all these questions Mr but do we have any questions for Mr Scher because if not I should be sworn in to answer some of these um I didn't know if he knew the answers to them or if you did I thought um so far that they he didn't but he did go through the whole plan so I think that's a fair question I can I can answer there there's no playground or amenity spaces like that shown on the plan okay to the uh the internal sidewalks do they extend it all towards Mount Kimble Road or do they terminate at uh at the main road there terminates at Spring Brook Road okay uh Mr sh I previously asked um if you conducted any studies or analysis uh regarding historically applied pesticides as defined by njd uh I don't think I got a definitive answer on that in so far that the plan was revised uh are you able at this point in time to confirm whether or not there are any haps on site uh and if so whether uh they exceed njd soil remediation standards you use the term I just want to confirm for the record what that means specifically what did you say historically applied pesticides I know that there was a phase one and phase two assessment done of the property I I didn't do it up so I mean I don't know the details of it so I can't really respond well to it but there there wasn't there were assessments done and did you know when they were done uh within the past couple of years has the board seen uh the results of those reports I'm I'm not sure myself I don't believe they've been submitted but certainly if the board would like to see them happy to provide mayware yeah I don't know enough about it I know that there was a phase one done and and a phase two assessment done um looking at those items uh but I I didn't I was not directly involved in them so would you uh be able to provide the board uh and Council uh a copy of those reports I just committed to do so if the board would still like to see it sure Mr chairman if you're asking for them you can you'll certainly get them and we'll give them to you as well Mr I appreciate that thank you sure uh we talked about the pulloff area for maintenance uh and deliveries um if more you know Liv in the real world if there more than one delivery vehicles accessing the site where is the Overflow directed to or are they going to just park in front of the individual units I would expect it would be like any other Street um where they probably pull up quickly drop off and and go so that's how it's that's what we typically see in single family residential neighborhoods and in your opinion uh the reduced cartway width uh would that impact that the increased cway with I believe you mean to say correct well the net decrease right net increase well all right so just so we're clear it's an increase from the last plan but it's it's two feet short of the standard oh yes we are seeking exception but yes we've increased itly I'm sorry yes I still I think that that there's adequate room for circulation and just uh in terms of um relationship between the pulloff area the singular pulloff area what's the approximate distance from that parking area to say unit one um I don't have the dimensions it is at the cuac I mean we could see it on on the plan here um unit one is the first one on the left um the other the pull off area is is at the island um so if somebody's dropping off at unit one they may just uh pull up they might even pull in the driveway again this is similar to other single family residential neighborhoods um uh we where normally there's no pulloff areas available you just have the roadway so we provided one here because it came up as part of the discussion we thought we thought it made sense um but it'd be any other single family residential development the um proposed sidewalk transects 13 driveways and seven perpendicular visitor parking spaces in your opinion does this increase any safety concerns for the residents in that [Music] development I was trying not to interject Mr but thanks I'm sorry I'm asking about the they don't transect all of them right so they transect seven uh visitor spaces right not the three included uh in the Island area right but if you calculate their circumference the perceived circumference of the walking the sidewalk it does indeed transect 13 individual driveways and seven visitor spaces yeah and this was testified to at a prior hearing Mr shmer you could speak to this but it was addressed previously and there were further modif ation made to alleviate concerns from the board regarding this exact issue but please but just conceptually right I mean you have do to uh I'm asking Mr shmer if there if if there are any increased safety concerns we also do have a traffic engineer this as well Mr shmer please in my opinion it's adequate and safe and not unlike other single family residential developments and we have made some changes uh in response to board questions about that issue to main to extend the sidewalks uh across the uh across the driveways um so in my opinion this is an appropriate and safe Arrangement Mr sh on page five uh of your plan set you uh depict the existing conditions uh this is a Revis plan set i' previously asked several questions regarding the inlets along Spring Brook Road uh there are two of them correct I don't know number uh could you do you have your plan set or can we put it up on the uh the screen what plan set are you referring to because you said that there was a revised I just want to make sure we're all on the same page your most uh recent uh plan set that's under consideration this evening so the one dated it's like May five six yeah [Music] the uh the two inlets are located I believe here and here is that correct so wait what sheet just want to confirm we're all on the same sheet what sheet uh five five of 17 I believe it is that that that's good thank you so I I see two uh inlets on uh Spring Brook Road you see those sorry well there there are four inlets along the property Frontage on Spring Brook Road but the the two I've pointed out uh have discharge pipes that flow into the site correct no sir they do not flow into the site they're located on site there are there are some pipes on site yes are any of the proposed improvements slated to be constructed on top of those pipes those pipes uh that you're referring to are leftovers from uh past activities on site um so they're not really functioning as active drainage features or facilities uh um so there will be improvements over those and those will be uh those will be removed and when you say to be verified there was no independent investigation as to uh where they lead is that correct they no they lead into the site um but they're not functional anymore so the answer is yes there was correct Mr Sher the answer is yes we looked at them and they're there but they're not functional anymore thank you [Music] uh were any uh soil uh testing performed uh on the site for what any test pits performed on site related to storm water management or any soil test pits conducted on the site Mr shmer there was testing done as I said uh there was phase one and phase two assessments done and I don't know exactly the nature of the testing that was done on site with respect to that so you uh and your affirm didn't perform any independent soil testing on the site correct just want to confirm again soil testing is done for numerous different purposes test pits are dug for different reasons soil borings are taken for different reasons What specifically are you asking him the question was intentionally broad to understand if uh any soil uh testing was performed at the site clearly it was not I don't think that was the answer thank you thank you as I as I mentioned there was a phase one and a phase two ass done was done by our firm to be honest but I was not involved in it I'm not an environmental expert um so those were done the nature of exactly how what testing was done I know there was soil testing but the exact nature I I can't testify to are any accessory structures contemplated at the development uh um accessory structures do you have something specifically in mind sheds no just Mr schmer what what we're proposing is shown on the plan correct to be constructed correct thank you uh that's all I have for now um but I do look forward to receiving those uh phase one and phase two reports thank you Mr chairman any other questions we'll go to the Mr shmer good evening nice to see you again um following up on the question about testing was it just identify I apologize Mr erer Richard d'angelus Connell Foley who the owner at 236 Mount kemell AV um Mr Scher are you aware was there any Geotech analysis done on the site uh not that I'm aware of anything in particular any analysis of the slope along the um the easan area uh I guess to to the left on the on the plan I'm not sure I understand if you could maybe pull this out you would agree there's a slope along the I guess the western boundary I I don't see the mark right here correct yeah the property slopes from that area all the way all the way to the right as we're looking at the plan so yes the slope's all the way down and you would agree it's a fairly significant slope objection to the characterization but you can testify to it we uh we have a slopes analysis uh uh and I don't think it depends on your characterization of steep slopes um it's not significant and steep slopes if that's what you're referring to and are you aware was there any anal strike that the project will require digging into the slope correct there will be there will be some uh earth work done uh in that slope and has there been just to if I may clarify we did a did a slopes analysis I was just refreshing my memory um and actually on on here the only areas of designated uh steep slopes were right there down in the corner so those were the only areas identified as steep slopes because we're required to do a slopes analysis plan as part of the submission so there was no analysis of the impact of the earth work to be performed along the property law property closer to Spring Brook a can we just be more specific Mr dangel I think you're referring specifically to the easeman area and driveway correct I just want to make sure it's Ong that area along the area of the driveway right correct thank you so is your question are we was any analysis done of the impact on those slopes as a result of the planned Earth moving in that area there was no slopes analysis done there was this it's not a designated steep slope area and is it based on this plan it looks like you're moving all but a couple of trees out closer along that slope all but a couple of the trees out along Spring Brook correct along Spring Brook other words those trees that are circled in Orange along Spring Brook those are going to remain correct that's correct and all the other trees along that slope are coming out the other trees along that left side and the others on the indicated on the site will be removed correct and again there was no analysis of the impact on this work the tree removal digging into the slope on the stability of the slope and the driveway above it no that was not warranted thank you can I ask just a follow on that how close will the soil disturbance be to the eement there uh we're disturbing up close to that property line so pretty much at the property line we will have a slope coming down we're doing some regrading in there will that impact the easement no will any erosion occur to the easement as a result of that disturbance no okay any members of council you have some followup questions I saw you moving around that just okay any members of the public with uh questions of this witness please come up for the microphone you know before you do I just want to point out if you are represented by Mr mcbrier then you're not permitted to make questions now okay good evening uh Nick lakis one Spring Brook Road um can we bring up the last slide please the um overall map I'm not prepared with any notes or anything I'm just going off the memory here okay Mr leak it's you're representing yourself not correct firm has withdrawn from your representation correct okay you want to look at the we had I didn't mean anything by you wanted to look at the so this is the first time I'm seeing this so excuse me if I'm uh you know not fully familiar but some of the questions that you were asked earlier um I believe a lot of your answers went back to the fact that um a lot of what will be done will be similar to any single family type house any type of neighborhood uh in the area where you would see with regards to delivery of packages and snow removal and things like that correct I don't think he said that necessarily but generally let him he can he can differentiate this is a this is a development of single family home as I said it's not uh like others than that it's not individual Lots but you wouldn't know that when you drive down a street whether there's plot lines or not so it's very similar uh the density here for example is similar to The ra15 Zone so in terms of density uh it'd be like you'd see in other single family home so I I made some reference that that would be similar many respects now um one of the things that I I just want to get a better understanding of from a bird's eye perspective of this project there you know may be some similarities to single family homes but if you look at all the thing things in its totality that may add up it may create a certainly a different type of circumstance for example if you have multiple package deliveries uh that the council uh discussed and let's say there's a a truck in the pulloff area and you have another uh delivery service uh I think you referenced that someone like any normal neighborhood a single family neighborhood you'd expect them to pull up in front of the home come out drop off the package and you know the delivery is over and the obstruction so to speak in the in the uh driveway or the roadway is gone um would you agree though uh sir that in this limited uh area let's say the roadway of of new road a um in normal single family homes in the area there's not such a dense amount of of of homes correct I can't even fathom an answer to that and I I apologize if Mr shman you want him to the question I I I know the gist of the question I'll refakis you are a trial lawyer I know that so you could formulate a more specific question if you like I will I usually prepare for trial though I didn't prepare for this um if you like me to formulate a more specific question I can get to it if You' like so I'll I'll withdraw the question rephrase okay I'll rephrase so so this I mean do you have because I don't have this Dimension do you have what you know how long of a roadway this is do you know what that number is is it you know 500 feet of roadway is it do do you have that type of data in front of you the length of the roadway right with and it depends on how you want to measure it but if you start at Spring Brook Road and go all the way up and all the way around the loop um so if you start at Spring Brook Road and come up the center line come all the way around the loop and and back and close off the loop it's uh roughly 600 feet okay so about 600 feet in a cookie cutter you know non variance needed and excuse my uh uh uh not knowing terms or anything about land use at all um but in a in a regular circumstance where you kind of alluded to it's like a normal single family type of scenario um in a 600 foot area of roadway you wouldn't expect there to be 13 individual homes fair to say that's the reason for the variance right we wouldn't expect that I don't think that's not the reason for the variance and just to be clear and I want to get to the the just I I know you have legitimate questions and you're a neighbor and you should ask all your questions I certainly agree but this is a cluster development right of 13 single family homes okay it's there's it's going to operate as was testified to there's a roadway there's pulloff area for maintenance equipment Etc each home has an individual driveway they probably will receive deliveries I think the question is in the worst case scenario if 500 Amazon cars come here at one time how would they navigate the site is that the gist of the question not 500 but than one hyperbole sorry right so if if more than one and and the reason I was talking about a bird's eye view is you know when you talk about having the roadway shortened or or the width shortened by a few feet right about 10% or somewhere along those lines right from 20 24 to 22 whatever it was and you add on to the fact that there is an increased density of single family homes right and you add on to the fact that there is obviously going to be uh potentially uh uh not parking for neighbors and things like that and you add all of that together you could create a scenario where you have more difficult navigation of traffic you know knowing that there are more people there are more packages being delivered this is not like a neighborhood like my house which is right down the block here um I have one neighbor right um or down Armstrong um the the homes are spread out more so in this scenario when you put it all together with the the width exception with the uh setback exceptions and the increased population I just want we can agree that it would not be and it would not operate like the single family the classic single family home neighborhoods that we have alongside correct question uh just point of reference you're saying like a regular neighborhood uh you're living in an RA 15 Zone 15,000 square F feet we also have ra seven which is what 7500 which is like half the size of the lots that you're referring to so uh that density would be twice as much as yours so just keep that mind you're asking question well uh sir I was only referencing when you know when I forgot I forgot your name sir I'm sorry schmer yes Mr schmer when when you made when you made reference to you know certain answers that you had you said that it wouldn't be unlike a normal scenario in a single family home where you push the snow onto the onto the green space or you you you can pass uh a delivery truck or things like that and ultimately the point that I'm getting at is I just want to make the distinction that this is not like that type of scenario right what you were mentioning before it's just like another single family neighborhood this when you put it all together from a bird's eye perspective this would not be like that because of all of the different moving parts may I answer now yeah if I've asked a proper question yet yeah I'm waiting for the question to stop thank you um no it is just like other single family homes um as the chairman pointed out you know and as I testified to earlier this is similar density to R15 Zone uh if you had lot lines here you'd be looking at lot widths of say 85 ft along this Frontage uh if you had a different zone of single family homes you'd have smaller lots and greater density so it is in that respect just like other single family uh neighborhoods it's it's a CU AAC of 13 homes uh similar to other small uh lot sizes of like 15,000 or an and less dense than than 75,000 square foot the re7 zone so when I said it's like others I meant that it's like others it's different and that it's not as they aren't going to be they're not going to be 13 Lots that's the only difference and you don't see lot lines when you're driving down the street so density wise it's similar uh spatial wise it's similar uh the width of the road uh as I mentioned we actually used a narrower Road on a more dense development in the township and it functions quite satisfactorily so I'm not concerned about the about the um congestion of deliveries on in a neighborhood like this I think it and we have a turnoff area here that you don't see in in other areas so and you have driveways that can be entered into so um I'm satisfied uh and we have our traffic engineer can testify maybe similarly or expand and probably say it more eloquently than I can but I think it is very much like other single family home developments and just some quickly general principles that I you know I just want so we can get it out on the record you know 13 homes obviously that density any decrease in that density would obviously decrease the potential for traffic Fair our traffic engineer going to talk about traffic generation so well I was tying it into the delivery and things like that the point is and I've been very up front with um Mr laer about this is I don't think anyone hears against development I think any everyone here is against overdevelopment so you know the question was kind of going back to the fact of looking at it at a bird's eye view of all the moving Parts um you know the the slight variances of the the width of the roadway and and the the amount of homes by decreasing the homes we can I think we can all just agree on a very basic principle by decreasing the homes you would also decrease issues with deliveries and things of that nature and that's all I was trying to get at and I'm sorry I did it in a horrible roundabout unprepared way no don't apologize you're asking questions you're a neighbor the answer is any development has benefits to us we think this is an extremely rational proposal and our traffic engineer will address those questions as far as trip generation and traffic impact because I don't think you think it what it is respectfully so I'd like to you know move on and I I promise you'll have the opportunity to ask that exact question if you want to to our traffic engineer okay thank you thank you any other questions I I think that's all for tonight uh okay any other member of the public with questions seeing n hearing none close the public portion board members any followup questions I have one question um a good point about the accessibility to the public of the dra of the sidewalk along Springbrook Road and I would think that I understand that it's a homeowner association but I can also understand people walking down the street I want to walk on a sidewalk than so just to clarify Mr bah there's no longer a sidewalk being proposed along Springbrook the question was the internal sidewalk Network to the HOA so because of the pocket park being elated the extension to that property no longer is part of the plan there's no along as far as this current version of the plan Dave I'm sorry should developer put a sh along yes it's going nowhere there's no well we have a lot we have a lot this going nowhere but it's there for the Nextel I don't know if the ordinance if there's an ordinance that requires it or whether it's just something that there's a requirement in thein that they can ask for a wa because a is that what they've done the I I'm sorry I was speaking to my client so the conversation was about putting a sidewalk along uh spring Springbrook Road to get you up to mount kemell to get to Mount Kell to mount kemell recognizing there's no sidewalk once you get to Mount kemell but there might be but also don't no property going up the You' only get it would only be the frontage of this so yeah to to to just if if if the sidewalk is being requested along our street Frontage it's something we can certainly reincorporate into the plan we no longer control those two pieces on the corner to go to mount Kimo so that's not possible we certainly can add that back into the plan that's what the board is correct and we don't control Spring Brook correct but so it would just be a side Sidewalk from one end of your property it would be from one end of our property to the other along the street front along the street Frontage correct which is not unusual I understand I'm just like saying how many people walk sexual property and I I not like you're on Madison yeah not like you're on madue most people are going slow most they're either going into the adjoining neighborhoods or they're going uh to the country club and uh have to watch for golf courts any and it's my understanding that there really to the if you just look plan left plan right of us there is no existing sideway Network so we would literally be isolated but if the board's preference is to have sidewalk in front we would accommodate the request cross the street your house yeah um we can get that settled right now what's the sense of the board as far as the sidewalk my sense is that I don't think it's necessary but let uh I'd like to hear everybody else and and just I apologize Mr chairman to jump in again there may be a slight modification to some of the existing trees that have to be removed um as far as that to accommodate it we can do that the landscape plan would have to be modified right I don't know if not as many but some of the trees we're trying to retain may have to be removed as a result and Rusty just for the board's consideration can you verify the length of that um Street Frontage bear with me about 600 thanks I can okay just so the board's aware it's about 600 feet my sense is notary I agree with you not necessary well there's um no sidewalk on M kle right correct correct so we're increasing the impact in this development people will walk up to the corner I would think that we would need sidewalk any other who's going to walk up to the corner probably not these particular H somebody EV gonna have children they may have children I mean this is not a senior housing right they're going to have children they're going to go to school they're going to do something up and down the sidewalk I would imagine res development correct res from this development and the only benefit I could see is potentially for this type of neighborhood maybe there'll be five homeowners that actually belong to the club and they want to walk to the club right so from the safety perspective I mean that's speculation but you could see that happening as well not towards the club the other way would it be going both ways we talking only the street Frontage only the 600 feet of Street Frontage for this lot and the entrance to the golf club is the other way and and I don't believe there's sidewalk on M Mount Kimble as well so again it would it's I we defer to the board ultimately but it is just you're looking at floating sidewalk basically in front of our property fin only question I guess from Mr Hansen's comments was is a waiver required do they have to file for the waiver from the ordinance as part of their application is it a a w it's not going to be a variance because it's not required zoning just a straight design so if there's a design standard that requires it it would be a waiver of that design and I believe as part of the ordinance there's a payment in Lee of providing the sidewalk so we would obviously if we're not providing it we have to pay into the pay into our fair share contribution of that and that would be used elsewhere in the municipality so and I can no comment there's many obors so no comment on that they to so many you okay with no sidewalk I think that's okay any other M this for the record I don't control who gets start we know Mr I was B this discussion any Meers of the public with questions seeing n hearing n Clos the public portion uh next witness or should we take a five minute break five minute break was there a member of the public who still like a question no is there a comment section that's at the end uh we'll take a 5 minute break thank you e e all right turn two turn two yes here yesiam M Simmons yes Mr Ben here Mr here Mr wer here Mr here Mr Hansen here here coun so Mr chairman members of the board for the record it is still Joshua kudre on behalf of the applicant like to call our next witness Please Mr CRA Parago from Dynamic traffic would you stand I was going to do it again anyway I haven't seen you in six months did you uh raise your right hand you solemly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you got yes I do and just State your full name for the record please sure my name is Craig Parago p r g y uh business address 245 Main Street Chester New Jersey um with Dynamic tra and we qualified you on this application price not yet Mr one so Mr Pergo I do know you've been qualified and accepted by the sport in the past as an expert in the field of traffic engineering but if you can for the members of the public please provide the board with your uh educational background professional licenses that you hold and any relevant um work experience please sure uh I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from Virginia Tech I'm a licensed professional engineer in New Jersey and I've been working as a traffic engineer for 24 years now I testify pretty much on a nightly basis in front of uh planning and zoning boards including here a couple months ago uh in Morris Township the one you did the resolution for earlier tonight actually Mr chairman accept as an expert traffic thank you so much so Mr peroy your firm prepared uh a traffic impact and and parking assessment that was dated January 18th 2024 and that was submitted to the board um was that report prepared by you or under your direct supervision it was okay and can you just confirm for the record that um I don't believe you were present at all the hearings but that you reviewed the transcripts of the prior hearings I did okay great all right Mr Pergo I don't want to it's getting a little late so why don't you just kick it off and just give the board an overview of your traffic yeah and and that that report that was submitted was for the prior plan the 16 unit plan so the numbers I give you tonight will be for obviously the current 13 unit plan not much much change there but um I'll start just uh talking about the traffic generation and the trip generation of the project um what we use uh to project traffic generation is the It or The Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation manual uh it's a compilation of traffic counts taken at various land uses and in this case they have a pretty solid data set for single family homes so I referenced that data and what we look at as Traffic Engineers is the the peak hours the busiest hour so weekday morning weekday evening rush hour time periods and then the Saturday midday shopping time period are the you know the three time periods that are typically focused on and in terms of traffic generation for the proposed project 13 single family homes uh morning peak hour trip generation is three entering and nine exiting trips for a total of 12 vehicular trips a trip as a vehicle entering or exiting uh the weekday evening peak hour nine entering six exiting for a total of 15 and then that's Saturday midday shopping hour 11 entering 10 exiting for a total of 21 now generally what's considered a significant increase in traffic in the industry and what the New Jersey do calls a significant increase in traffic is 100 or more peak hour trips so we're at roughly at at worst about 20% of that so certainly not a a heavy traffic generator I don't think you need a traffic engineer to tell you that 13 homes isn't going to create a a lot of traffic and obviously the numbers show that U Mr Fishinger asked in his uh report to take it a little step farther and and talk about the distribution and and dispersion of that traffic and I think based on this site setting what you what we typically look at is the location of major arterial roadways and then population centers and that's sort of what what drives where traffic goes to and from so here we're right between 202 and 287 so you got a good split on Spring Brook going in either Direction with 287 to the East and then obviously Morristown being close by is a a population Center and employment center so you'd have uh distribution there so that traffic as it comes out of this development is going to go in both directions and even be less significant as it gets farther from this site um in terms of the actual traffic impact and traffic generation uh so that was sort of the first part of our analysis is just to identify that trip generation and and you know verify essentially that we're not going to see any substantial or noticeable impact if you were standing out on the road uh today versus when this is built uh the second part of it was to look at the circulation and and the parking um and the compliance with the rsis and you heard the from the prior testimony that we've identified two um the Minimus exceptions from the rsis and both of them I think are really sort of technicalities uh essentially the first one that was discussed earlier by Mr Scher um in order to count the parking spaces in the driveway that are outside of the garage the way the rsis reads is that you need to have a 20 foot width all the way to the street well I think that was written really envisioning pulling straight into a front-facing garage not this scenario clearly there's physically enough room to park two cars behind those garage doors so it's it's sort of a technical issue realistically that width is available that parking area is available uh even though we've narrowed the connection to the street to 12 feet which I think makes sense we wouldn't want that excess pavement just for a technicality in the rsis um that's the first one the second one that got a little bit of discussion is that cartway with where uh we have 22 feet and 24 feet is required now the only reason that we need the 24t is because we have those perpendicular visitor parking spaces if you took those away and just proposed the 13 single family homes that requirement would only be 20 feet so we're actually going two feet beyond what we would need for two-way traffic the 24 feet is for maneuverability into and out of a perpendicular parking space when you go to any shopping center or the grocery store it's a 24 foot aisle with those perpendicular parking spaces so that's carried into the RSI for maneuvering in there in this case the fact that we've set those parking spaces four feet deeper to provide sidewalk access more than makes up for that little bit of loss of maneuverability into the parking spaces so again it's a sort of a technicality that that we need to go to the 24 feet but I think you're going to actually have an easier time pulling in and out of those visitor spaces with their setback four foot setback than you would have uh with just a straight up 24 foot Road and we're again able to save that extra 2 feet of pavement with I know around town and Mr Sher has testified that 20 feet with those sloped curbs has worked successfully I see no reason why it wouldn't be even better here with the 22 feet those slope curves and I think very easy access to those parking spaces so those are the two di Minimus exceptions from the rsis and it does say in the rsis itself uh it gives examples of different exceptions and reducing the cart way width is one of the examples it gives so this isn't like some you know unusual thing and all it has to do and there's four criteria to to Grant an exception it's consistent with the intent of the site Improvement act both of them as I just mentioned I think clearly are uh it's reasonable limited and not duly burden burdensome like I said I think you know they're just really technicalities so certainly not burdensome uh the third one is it has to meet the needs of public health and safety none of these things rise to the level of of of a safety concern uh and then four takes into account the existing infrastructure and possible future development that's not really applicable here this is a a dead end Street that's never going to continue on but um just for the purposes of the record those four criteria in the rsis are clearly met for those two again technical to Minimus exceptions that uh are required and that that's really it that's really what our report for you know something small like uh in terms of traffic generation like this focuses on is more the the site layout I know there's been a lot of back and forth from the original plan to this plan I think things have only gotten better with the interaction with the board and your professionals so uh I think we're in a good place right now um in terms of the layout parking Supply uh driveway access everything is a little bit better as than in the original plan and that's obviously the goal of this process that's all I have and just to confirm and I know you you stated it but I just want it to be clear for the record you've reviewed um the review letter specifically though the um the comments from the Fire official as well yes I understand the Fire official he's seen he's seen the I know there's fire hydrant locations which isn't really my area but the vehicular circulation uh as shown on Mr sher's plans it works and be satisfied and you're satisfied as well as a professional traffic engineer yes absolutely great all right that's all I have on Direct Mr Sharon what would you when you say peak hours what do you can how do you calculate peak hours what are they the peak hour the morning is the single busiest hour generally between 7 and 9ine in the morning and then the evening between 4 and 6 in the evening and then on Saturday it's the busiest hour between 10: a.m. and 2 p.m. 11:00 a.m. and 2 p.m. it's you know varies depending one where what I'm looking at is the the the hour that this project would generate its most traffic so some individual hour during a weekday morning this would generate 12 trips and there wouldn't be any problem getting on the Spring Road out of here no absolutely not that that's that's extremely low traffic Vols like I said if if you counted the number of cars going up and down the road today might be 12 different tomorrow just by happen stance so it's it's a very small um what about the sight Lin coming out of out of this yeah uh I took a look at Mr shammer put together a a site visibility plan the road's very straight the distance is there Mr Fishinger wants us to pull it back four and a half feet to meet the ashto standard doing that is it's still going to be fine the fence at the front might pull back a little bit to pull out of that sight line but there's no obstructions and no no visibility issues we won't put the fence in the site triangle okay board members any questions um nothing in particular as Mr Parago said I looked at the site triangles and they are gonna have to move that fence back a little bit but I don't believe it's going to take out any trees or anything it should be a minor correction the one question Craig just so the for is clear the trip generation your numbers you're giving that's total traffic correct that that includes delivery vehicles or visitors that's not just people coming in and out yes vehicular trips it could be a visitor could be a delivery vehicle could be a resident no other questions Mr chairman okay from a standpoint of uh complying with the fence how are we going to determine how far back that fence have to go that just something we're gonna wing as we go along or there some we'll revise that exhibit and and show the line of sight and then just make sure the fence isn't the numbers in my review memo that I pulled out of ashto um which is the standard 14 and a half feet back from the edge of traveled way and then the distance is based on the speed limit I don't remember the exact number Craig I'm assuming you'll agree to comply with those calculations so they can they can put the a new site triangle specific to those numbers on the site plan and just set the fence right behind that line and then at the time of construction we can then go out there do the measurements and if it's got to be tweaked a little bit it'll it'll be tweaked and make it work okay because we do that with planting right now on on some of the corporate centers and we even did it at James place where we had to move some landscaping around for some of the site distes so not uncommon to do construction okay board members any questions Mr chairman yes we might as well talk about delivery trucks so um I do you have any sense for nowadays during the day in the early evening how many trucks would go to a residential area like this and the duration that they're there and kind of speaking for the room in general and how long they're there and what it might take to just make sure there's no blockage yeah I mean the number of trucks is variable obviously based on the time of the year and is like if it's my neighborhood my house gets uh I don't know 10 of them a day I feel like the Amazon guys over I'm sure my ring doorbell just went off a minute ago for it um so it really it's it's variable throughout the day but um generally they pull up on the curb side and you know my street I measured is uh 20 feet wide so I'm two feet shorter than this they pull up on the curbside it's 15 20 seconds they throw the package on the porch take the picture of it and they're gone so it's really not to me it's not a big obstruction and it's common all over the place here we have that extra two feet occasionally they're going to be there a little longer they'll pull into the driveway but for just a quick drop off even if you provided some space for them they wouldn't pull into it they just they want they want to go as efficiently as quickly as possible and believe me my neighbors complain about everything and that's one complaint I haven't heard is the delivery trucks being parked in the street it really isn't a isn't an issue any other board members have question I have a question just to follow up on that we also heard some comments from the public about the width of the road with delivery truck so if you had a delivery truck that was stopped on the side of the road as you just anticipated would happen and the second truck came by is the road um wide enough that that second truck can get by absolutely thank you and remember we're two feet wider than we would be required if we didn't have that parking we're actually two feet more than the RSI envisioned the side street any other board members request profession with questions any other the attorneys with questions uh Robert mcbrier uh skank price Smith and King uh Mr uh peroy is that thank you excellent um did you perform any uh field inspections of the subject property in connection with uh preparation of your report yes and uh did you personally yes uh and when was that uh approxim I I I'm familiar with the area I'm in the area a lot I do a lot of work in Morristown but uh I specifically looking at this site I went maybe two weeks ago for a field Recon and on the way here today I always like to stop by and and when you say field Recon can you give us a little better understanding of what uh what it entails when you do your site visit like what are you doing traffic monitoring observations traffic counts and the like for a project like this we weren't doing traffic counting uh just more observations of uh you know the neighborhood traffic flows uh site distance is one of the things that we always take a look at and see if there's any issues you know just a getting a sense of of the area for a larger project where we were doing a full analysis then we would do the traffing counts but you know with this smaller project it's not necessary did you uh perform any analysis or study regarding uh the existing traffic operations at the intersection of Springbrook Road and mount Kimble Road no we didn't we did not do any traffic analysis that intersection exists are you aware of in your uh research regarding the area any accidents at that particular intersection no nothing this was red by Township services and I heard did you uh perform any uh study or analysis with respect to the traffic currently utilizing Springbrook Road uh in your uh report you stated quote parking layout and Supply was assessed based on accepted design standards and demand experienced at similar developments uh I referenced page one your fourth bullet point what developments are you specifically referring to just like the it has uh well the rsis is based on New Jersey standards but just like the it has traffic generation standards they have parking generation standards at uh similar developments we always take a look at those numbers I take a look at sensus data and um you know just to assess the parking in this case the rsis number of spaces requirement is generally much higher than reality so it's not as critical of an issue but but you can't identify a development by name that would be similar to the one being proposed is that correct development by me yeah you say demand experience at similar developments I'm trying to understand single family residential developments the r the it manual I don't think I had to print out with me has you know data points from hundreds of other single family residential developments they don't give you all the names of them just statistics but it it just by way of interpretation similar developments doesn't mean that you looked at other developments within moris Township and Drew similar ities or compar to contrasted any differences is that correct no that's corre okay in the event of an emergency that may affect New Road a are there any suitable entryways uh alternate access routes uh along the perimeter uh to the proposed units what do you mean in the event of an emergency if the main entrance to the proposed development was somehow compromised or blocked uh are there any alternate uh routes to access the units in the proposed development you mean V by Vehicles yeah no and it's not the rsis has it specifically considers that provision and it's if you have 100 or more parking spaces you need a secondary access point or a Boulevard style entrance we don't have 100 parking spaces but we still have that Boulevard entrance so we're actually exceeding in that threshold requirement for emergency access and I had uh asked uh Mr Scher this question I'll ask you uh based on your experience uh the proposed sidewalk chain sects 13 driveways and seven perpendicular visiting parking spaces does this present a safety concern for you no okay I have nothing further thank you okay any M any other Journey with questions any members of the public with questions we tough crap um just identify yourself nickolakis one Spring Brook Road um you mentioned it would add 12 trips during those peak hours corre okay I just don't know what what does that mean is it a trip on Spring Brook Road is that a trip from Spring Brook Road to mount kemell to James good question it's it's a trip is a vehicle entering or exiting the property so either coming once they pull on road a or pull out of Road a that's a trip so when I say 12 in the morning that's three cars coming in nine going out is there any study that would um give us any insight with regards to how it would affect the amount of trips on Spring Brook Road or on uh armst uh Armstrong or any of those uh uh I don't want to say intersecting roads but the nearby roads yeah uh the like I said the New Jersey DOT basically says it's insignificant it wouldn't have any impact measurable impact it's less than a 100 in well well well so one of the things that I just was was wondering is I mean and I don't know what whatever you cited I'm not familiar with it but uh is there any study done with regards to the amount of trips over Springbrook Road or over Armstrong or those surrounding immediately surrounding you know roadways uh the amount of trips that that are taken uh during those hours and perhaps the percentage of an increase that we could expect because you know if this was on the green maybe you know 12 trips is insignificant but if it's somewhere that's more remote or not you know accessed as much uh 12 cars could be a 50 or 100 or 200% increase and is there any type of study that um would speak to that yeah no and the percent increase is not necessarily as well like think about it the evening it's there's 15 trips so that's one car every four minutes additional whether or not you're standing on a Royal Road in the middle of Oklahoma if one car goes by and then you're standing there for four more minutes before the next one that's nothing if you mix that into 287 it's still nothing so it's not necessarily a percentage thing it's the the actual number right well I mean the the only thing that I was trying to to get at was you know we obviously we don't want this to become 287 or or 202 right but you know if right now there are 12 trips or 15 trips I see a lot of you know my neighbors that I you know wave to in the morning when we're on our way to work and things like that uh or coming home but if we were to double that it may have a measurable impact on the neighborhood if you disagree going to refer to my wife when the kids are in the front yard uh because that's the concern I I think for a lot of the the the neighbors is you know the amount of cars that it may add visitors deliveries now you have trucks you have to worry about Amazon deliveries Furniture things like that that's going to be added because of the density here and they have to get there somehow so if there's some sort of a study that can be done with regards to how that might impact the neighborhood in general um I'd like to see that if if it's been done yeah we have we wouldn't assess the entire neighborhood for a project of this magnitude and scope that can be done for a larger project but what I'm saying is that the addition the change in this is not something that you're going to you would be noticeable whether or not it was Zero cars on the road and we added 12 or it was 30,000 cars and we added 12 it's so it's such a small amount it's only 13 houses how many houses are in that neighborhood all surrounding the golf course many enough many times more um and the last not very heav you know I I don't find it to be too much traffic going through those neighborhoods so this tiny little increase I have three small kids that play in that front yard almost every day so the every car you know is something that we look out for especially trucks deliveries things like that so uh that's the only reason I asked the other question I had uh was there any consideration as to putting a traffic light on the intersection of Mount kemell and Springbrook up by that Firehouse I don't have we don't have the diagram but um uh on the mount kemell side uh by the firehouse there's the um I think it's a a like a t almost a t yeah a T intersection it's it's not really a t it's like a V it's very odd there's no consideration by us to do that I don't know if do has ever looked at it that's their jurisdiction their intersection Mr you ever no discussions whatsoever by Township state by County okay all right and and has there been any study done how that uh intersection may be impacted by 12 or so you know vehicles um you know accessing one of the major uh throughways uh 202 um and how that may affect the backup towards the firehouse uh how that may affect cars turning on from mck Road onto Mount kemell um and how that flow might change um things in the neighborhood yeah and that's why I look at those trip generation numbers to confirm that those flows wouldn't have any impact on that intersection like I said that intersection is Do's jurisdiction if we were doing this for do they wouldn't even ask us to bother with it because it's less than 100 okay thank you any other members of the public with questions your name sir um Mark herant uh I live at nine Armstrong Road and there's a lot of things about this project that I don't like and this one is right at the top of it and the question is how do you qualify that it's only going to have a tiny increase in traffic um any increase is an increase like at what level at what number would you say yeah that is a big impact on the traffic in the neighborhood 100 you would need at least a 100 to have an impact in our neighborhood that's the generally accepted by Traffic Engineers and by New Jersey do it's 100 peak hour trips is when you might and not even that it's guaranteeing that you're going to have a negative impact check and so they already we have in our neighborhood I live on uh Armstrong Road which is a huge cut through for everybody in Mars toown getting to 287 to get to the ramp on James Street and cars fly down that road so we have a lot of Walkers as well people come from neighborhoods all over town from the whole James Place area that walk around our neighborhood we have tons of Walkers we have tons of dogs and people fly down that road to get to 287 so you know to the point where if you're walking down the road and then you've got guys coming out of Spring Brook late getting home or late for their tea time speeding down the road so if you're walking on you got ask a question yeah I just think that uh thir I I just I think it's inaccurate to say that 13 is timy and I wanted to understand how you qualify that and to say that it's 100 I I disagree with that I think any increase is an unacceptable increase in 13 just it's it's too much so maybe more of a comment than a question that was a comment was a com you'll have an opportunity get sworn in to be able to make your comments we'll do any other of the one hello my name is Amanda wilberg 249 Mount kmav um my question is I maybe you don't know it what what is the the width of Springbrook just so I can make a comparison does anybody know the width give me one second okay because I just wanted to like understand compared to Springbrook if this new area is going to be any smaller when I'm on Springbrook walking and I mean everybody's talking about Amazon trucks which is fine but I think about all the um the trucks for landscaping they're enormous and they're huge and they take up like more than half of why we get the answer to that first question and then you can ask him the question of is where would they Park sure sure sure okay that sounds great spring R right in front of the the property until there about 25 people so we have 25 compared to this one you said would be 22 yes okay so we're losing footage in yeah the trucks on Spring Book like it makes it hard for any cars to go around and that's on a much bigger like expanse so the question is how are you accommodating for landscape trucks right right well this is a home there would be one landscaper that comes it's not each contracted the individual home so they would park in that that carb area so the one that's meant for all the delivery trucks as well no that wasn't the testimony so just to be clear this is a proposed roadway that's 22 feet wide to serve this Home Owners Association these homes so not Spring Brook Road generally no no no I'm talking about that but yeah but you're saying that so that landscaper truck that comes into the the development that would pull they would park in that pulloff area that's the in so but if there's other delivery trucks or whatever then they have to wait the hour two hours three hours that the landscapers there I think Mr testified as how Amazon deliveries typically are I'm not talking about but yeah but like you know the it's not a designated area for Amazon delivery trucks okay so but it for any any kind of bigger trucks like so that's where it would be okay that's where the mail so the mailboxes and landscaper okay and it would fit okay just redirect uh any other members of the public with questions see on hearing those close the public portion just a brief redirect so Mr peroy you testified previously right that even though the roadway with is 22 feet when 24 is required if if there was an Amazon or UPS style delivery truck parked on one side of the street is a vehicle able to pass on the other side of the street yes absolutely just wanted to confirm that for the record so a lot of the concerns about circulation if there's a delivery that takes longer than 35 seconds really is accommodated with this layout correct correct okay and you test ified also I think it's important I want to emphasize this for the board because Ingress and egress is important we're proposing what you refer to as a Boulevard entry correct correct and it's not typically required for this type of development but I want you to just spend a second or two just explaining in a little more detail the benefits particularly when with safety of a Boulevard entryway yeah the idea the re the reason that it's built into the rsis for larger it's 100 more parking spaces is their requirement is if there is a a car crash or an accident in one side then then the other side is free to allow Ingress and egress so you're you're given the option in the rsis to either create an a secondary access an emergency access or absent that the boulevard not required here we're doing it anyway looks nicer too just that we we we don't have a 100 parking spaces on the site so we aren't required he means physically physically what it looks like physically what it looks like oh just the uh the Island and the uh the center of the the inbound and outbound Lanes at Springbrook are separated by an island and then just one last question you are a licensed professional in the state of New Jersey correct you qualified you as a licensed engineer specializing in the field of traffic engineering right yes okay do you often submit reports to land use boards across the state of New Jersey that rely on it numbers and projections yes and that's customary in the industry correct absolutely and for every project that you prepare a report for it you don't go out and do physical counts either of local roadway traffic or intersection volumes Etc correct correct and those reports have been accepted across the state of New Jersey in your your practice absolutely and by this municipality as well correct yes thank you that's all have based on that redirect any board members of questions based on that redirect is there any member of the public with any questions seeing none hearing none close the public course Mr Fish any questions no no other questions right Council Mr chairman that's all we have tonight um I think the next order of business might be securing a continued hearing date okay and next do you we propose on presenting our professional planner who is seated to my right Mr Michael toia okay and he's GNA give us we will submit a report correct his his planning report that we're calling it at least 10 days in advance of that hearing so when would we be youing any professional Planner yeah that's um I thought that should be part of the dialogue we have two experts uh we have uh Steven Duda from princet and hydro and Michael pesano professional planner I have uh spoken with each uh in advance of tonight's uh hearing uh and it's reasonably anticipated that uh each uh will need at least an hour including cross-examination or any inquiries from the board I don't know how long we'll leave for cross examination but I appreciate council's estimate so you just have the one professional planner and then correct and that would be Mr case and we also have a number of members from the group that uh uh will likely provide uh their own fact testimony uh or comments uh regarding the uh pending application when you say their own fact testimony they're going to be sworn in under oath to testify as to what even if they give us comments they're G to be sworn yeah I just wanted to understand um all right um what date are we looking at for this app we'll be efficient and next available full meeting is October 28th Mr chairman give me one second so before you do what I think you're G to do do we have dates um that might not be full meetings but we just have like a one or two simple C variances on we get through pretty quickly because I do think Mr Toby and for what it's worth I don't think I do not anticipate Mr Toby's direct being very long so cross- examination well that's why if we had a couple of C variances that were relatively quick we could probably finish with Mr toia and then we can do any objector case at the next meeting right so what do we got in September my September meeting I have aant [Music] Min that's it's a subdivision mostly in Morris Town part of it's in Morris Township there's no house in Morris Township but there's an ex there's an existing garage or something that's have Ewing's on in September it's August hold on hang a okay are you on youing and were you shaking your head that it's not going to proceed or it's not gonna no it's gonna take oh yeah okay that's okay I just wasn't sure if you were saying it's not going to happen that night have this voice to the right of me just Mr new okay so then gonna ask about I regretfully ask if the board would be IM meable to considering a special meeting date this is July yeah that would be after the August meeting right a neither will I [Music] enjoy your trip you are dedicated Mr chairman I'll give you that all right okay August is out of the question yeah I'm totally booked okay so that least me for September uh and they usually we look at Mondays right yeah but the first Monday is is a holiday so that's not good that moves the schedule around I think that's Labor Day now yeah that pesky Labor Day so the first Monday is the holiday then I have the second Monday which is that's the nth the nth and then the 16 is planning board and the 23rd is this sep 23rd be the n9th let me make sure is the room available I would have to check if the room is available tomorrow usually Mondays is open but I have to double check so can I propose that we let me let me propose this Sonia what's the next regularly scheduled meeting the next regular schedule meeting is August 26 could we that's the one that I'm booked no I understand but in in an effort to preserve notice and I'll give up on this quickly if the board says no could we carry it just for scheduling purpos is to the next regularly scheduled meeting while miss Santiago confirms that the 9th of September would work for a special meeting and that we have sufficient board members correctable correct that was part of it that's the most important part of course I'm not sure we've done that part yet yeah can we take a vote who's available for September 9th right now available okay okay hold on let to you September 9th [Music] Mr benoir yes Mr Greer I'm good Mr Goldberg yeah Mr track number y Mr Williams so far so good Mr Woodford yes I'm available I only have two more members that I have to pull okay um Mr rer I'm I'm available I do want to know if Paul's available any idea he won't be on vacation I tell you that I don't have his schedule but you can find out does I know he wants to be here when Mr toia testifies um yeah I'm not sure we'll we'll work you confirm with okay Mr Fishinger we available I'm available on the okay all right and Mr oler you say yes okay so I have two three with the planner that I have to confirm okay uh and I still have to confirm the room I could do that tomorrow no problem okay so so then Josh's idea might be a good one to just schedule it for the August meeting for scheduling purposes only but then we'll know if we have an issue with the room and if not we can then schedule it for the 9th right correct and then we go from there correct if the board's amable I would we greatly appreciate [Music] it all right so would you want for August the 9th for meeting schuling well date no August 26 I'll go through this for the Public's purposes but for right now it's August 26 would be for scheduling only right and then the schedule would be to a special meeting on September 9th assuming you can confirm room availability and if it's not available then that's going to put you to the October meeting understood and appreciate the board's consideration obviously reest we we all good with that just one point before I'm not sure if Mr MC was done but we did ask and Mr chairman previously requested that any of his experts submit reports as well in advance of the next hearing so I'd respectfully request that that request be made of the objector again um yeah a special meeting probably get plan um would you be able to generate a uh if we do the September 9th meeting would your planet be able to generate his report and be able to deliver it 10 days in advance well I think that puts us at a disadvantage not having seen the applicants planers report you'll have the report by the end of the week okay I don't think there's much of a disadvantage if if we can get just greater clarification uh Mr chairman about the contents is this just a a summary overview of what he intends I mean this is primarily rebuttal testimony based on the reports that have been submitted right so I don't know uh what level of detail um is traditionally required uh on obor cases from this board actually we're trying to in professional planners submit so this is Cas generated uh a lot of public interest and that's why we wanted it to be submitted in advance and uh speaking with Council I know that uh the report will be in basically outlined form so and be a uh so you will you're you will have it well this of the uh and Mr chairman just to confirm as well I understand that Mr M you could answer this the the individual that you retained from Princeton Hydro are they a professional engineer yes okay and is the report primarily gonna uh focus on the storm water management aspects of this application yes okay so because that is a very technical area Mr chairman I would respect I would respectfully submit that he should also be required to provide that would would beest particularly if they're going to uh you know look at Mr sher's report which they've had for months now uh and and criticize any of that data set so is that a problem I mean I I suspect our professionals could do an outline if they're doing separate math yeah I could see that being acceptable well we think we think that Mr sher's report is impeccably prepared and consistent with all engineering standards so I would hope that uh they're not doing for a math but yeah if that is the case I'd like to see the report yeah so that they have a chance toing I'd appreciate that and my experts are here Mr chairman if I could just have one minute to just consult with them on the scheduling all right September 9th uh appears to be um workable for our experts uh we will uh just place our objection on the record regarding an advanced written report um I don't know or see it in this board's procedures or rules and regulations yeah so let me just clarify that it's it's not in our rules you're right um so we can't require it we're asking for it if if you can provide that and I think it's easier for your engineer really right because they have the storm water report and it's easier for the board to be able to see that type of stuff in advance so that they'll be prepared for what to hear and what questions might have because if not once the testimony's done they probably have to have the engineer come back so we can actually absorb what he said or he or she said and then be able to do an effective ask effective questions and that would also be true of the U the op because if you're going into technical detail on storm water management it sometimes requires a little bit of review as you well know in preparing for any hear understood uh objections noted Mr all appreciate uh the clarification um I'll consult with uh our experts and report back so you have you're not committing to provide the report that's my understanding we would like and again we can't require I totally understand I just want to make sure it's clear so everyone goes into it including the board's professionals Eyes Wide Open into coming to the next hearing if are you committing to provide the report or not understanding that you're not required to which I think the board and professionals really deserve the courtesy of knowing we understand uh the comments uh received tonight we'll digest them revie with our professionals and report back got a non all right thank you all right so for for members of the public this application is concluding this evening it will continue on uh in this room on August 26 at uh 7 o'clock for purposes of scheduling only um I anticipate if we can verify that the room is available on September 9th the hearing will then continue on September 9th but we will announce the next date at the August 26th hearing date okay so no testimony in August just a date will be selected at the August 26th hearing thank you all so much for your time see you again soon thank thank you all right any other John oh yeah yeah yeah we met the locker room I'm sorry I'm sorry yeah yeah we just ask you know the 26 Ball's I'm not going to be here when you make that asking lot of I'm just thinking in terms of other people are gonna say hey can you you meet you know come to this no my yeah okay so what I want to say is we don't you don't have a rule or a bylaw that says um professional planner reports have to be submitted so I was going to suggest that we do an amendment to your rule that says then can be required all right all right so I will maybe not for the next meeting but I will do Amendment does the planning board I mean is I don't know I don't know they don't typically have to deal with planners reports right you know maybe but it's yeah yeah because they're dealing with permitted y yep business so MO y second all in favor I