##VIDEO ID:Tbzpl12y6nI## we will call the meeting to order Claire if we can please have a roll call here here here here here here here okay we will stand to salute the flag I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America the republ for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all okay the notice requirements of the open public meeting law for this meeting have been satisfied a copy of the notice having been sent to the Asbury Park Press in the coaster and in the office of the Township Clerk there is an emergency exit through the courtroom doors and two exits at the rear of the room there will be no smoking no new cases will be started after 9:00 p.m. and no new testimony taken after 9:30 p.m. in addition the applicant will be limited to 45 minutes of testimony all meetings will be video and audio taped and shown on the township of oceans Community cable channel channel 22 on Verizon FiOS and channel 77 on cable vision all cell phones must be turned off or if you need to make a call please make your call outside of the meeting room we have the September 18th 2024 minutes for approval and I think I will offer because I'm sure I was here okay a second okay all in favor I any opposed okay we have a resolution for memorialization Michelle Lanza block 39.1 Lot 1 600 bound Road Ocean 07712 a second yes yes yes yes that's it um we have another amended resolution for memorialization Matthew bboa block 140 lot 64 1202 Logan Road Ocean 07712 I'll offer I'll second yes yes yeski yes yes Vice chair no chairwoman yes okay we have a denial of bulk variants for Emerald Jade LLC block 62 Lot 4 515 Myrtle Avenue West Allenhurst 07711 offer second yeso yes yes yes he denial of bulk variants for I aat Services LLC block 34 lot 12700 New Jersey State Highway 35 ocean 07712 offer this was the Billards this is the denial of the D1 D2 D3 D6 and both VAR okay because they non permitted use Poss conditional use height variance expansion of a nonconforming use all those things so and yes yes yes yes yes okay the following application has been withdrawn without prejudice Sammy habber block 67 lot 8507 Stafford Street West Allenhurst 07711 the following is a request for case cases to be carried to December 19th 2024 um and the board will discuss if new noticing is required I aat Services LLC 1418 Highway 35 ur0 7755 Zone 0-140 can we do them both or okay I aat Services LLC 922 Highway 35 ocean 07712 zone C5 I'll offer that both cases be carried to the 19th of December with new notice last second excuse me all in favor I I any opposed okay the next case to be heard Abraham and Margaret moseri block 76 Lot 2 491 South South edir AV West Allenhurst 07711 Zone R5 attorney is Jennifer kmco the applicant proposes to construct two story side and rear editions second floor Edition and install a raised rear patio minimum front yard setback 30 ft required 10.77% back 15% of lot width or 14.22 uhet required 5.8 ft twostory rare Edition and second floor addition proposed minimum rear yard setback 30 ft required 7 point 30 ft to second floor Edition 11.87 ft to two-story rear edition 13.81% of total lot area permitted 33.1% proposed accessory structures including patios must maintain required 10t rear yard setback 3 ft to raise patio proposed minimum driveway sidey yard setback 5 ft required 2.5 ft feet to Extended driveway proposed good evening members of the board Jennifer kmco on behalf of the applicant some of you may have been here I I actually think a majority of you were here for the initial application uh which as you know this board denied and uh we're going to since this is a new application we're going to go through all of the testimony again and new uh there have been some substantial changes not only to the application but the circumstances around the application and that the Zone has actually changed uh at the last application coverage was based on buildable lot area and now the ordinance has changed and coverage is based on the gross lot area and a different coverage is uh permitted uh as you may remember those of you that were here and for those of you that weren't you're going to hear through the testimony tonight uh we have a lot that is significantly encumbered by uh Wetlands flood Hazard uh as well as a very odd shape lot uh it is the quintessential EX example of a hardship case in that I think one of the board members at the at the first hearing had indicated the only thing that would fit on this lot without any variances is a toll booth um so we have a single family home the board objected to uh primarily the volume of the structure as it addressed the street in that what was originally proposed was a full two stories at the existing non-conforming setback which put the front wall of the house full two stories all the way at the front and the board found it was out of character as you're going to hear um we manipulated the architecture in a way quite positively which enabled us to keep the character of the front of the house what do I mean by that as you're going to hear the front porch that extends across the front which is the closest to the street is remaining intact uh previously it was going to be filled in partially with a two story uh Edition uh secondly there's a main uh Gable Dormer as you're going to hear from the architect that really establishes the character of this this Craftsman house that is being maintained and the addition that is now being proposed is all set back and stepped back from that importantly uh some of one of the neighbors I think who lived across the street despite the fact that there's a clear view across objected to anything essentially being in his viewshed and certainly objected to a full two story at 27 ft even though permitted is 35 well we we took that to heart and as you're going to see on this revised plan the section that is extending to the uh North is significantly smaller in height than uh what was there there were a lot of variances I just want to put it into context this is a waterfront property so the rear property line is somewhat of a fiction in that there is no rear yard neighbor at all um so if it's okay with you madam chair there I'd like to just introduce a few exhibits unless you'd like to do Jim and Ben's reports first I'll defer to you yes clear and then the exhibits may I suggest Madam chair if it's okay with you on the board perhaps we can go forward and then we can discuss anything in the reports I mean Jim's report was generally favorable um that's fine okay and and one other thing I wanted to point out and I apologize the last time it came one of the questions that the board had was what's the character of the neighborhood and as you're going to see from an exhibit and it's going to be presented by a professional planner 61% of the Lots within this neighborhood and you're going to see it's a one two three block section or non-conforming as to building coverage um I know that that was important because we were looking at it in a vacuum uh and we only gave lot sizes so as you're going to hear today this is entirely consistent with what the makeup of this fairy mix neighborhood is so to start and and I'm sorry for such a long uh opening but I think it's important to catch up some of the board members that didn't have the benefit of being here for the first hearing A1 will be the uh plot plan prepared by French and Perillo they 41224 A2 will be the architectural plans prepared by Thomas Lavin architect dated [Applause] 4824 A3 and I have copy to hand out is an aerial view with the plot plan and color excuse me overlay on Thea so you can see the context and particularly see the vacant Municipal lot to the north A4 is just a closeup plot color rendered plot plan A5 is a color annotated tax map of uh the three blocks that I referenced block 74 73 and 78 which is essentially the vicinity of thisor the when he testifies explain what the color cing is uh A6 is a street view looking to the South a seven is a photo of the house immediately to our South which I note just because I know that the owner was somewhat vocal it has a building coverage in excess of 33.1% and we'll testify to and I share this because there were questions with regard to when we gave testimony as it related to the square footage of the building they said well what with the lot sizes we need to compare apples to apples and then lastly A8 is a two-page photo exhibit downloaded from Google Google Earth and it's to give the context of the neighborhood which the board also was asking for there's two houses uh across the street to the South West the house adjacent to the one I just sent to you and on the other page the house leading into the neighborhood and the house is at the end of the street and again it's just to give you some context so with all of that I'd like called Keith Smith and just have walk through existing col and if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and you've testified before this board before yes I have and you're testifying Your Capacity as a licensed professional engineer yes sir okay and and again I think I gave an overview if we could just start going into the details of what's existing on the lot today what the constraints are by way of the lot size the topography and the features existing on the site such as the uh water and the uh relative constraints to that so property itself is cons 528 7500 already existing nonperforming lot by size to the the east of the uh property the rear of the building itself is the lake uh and a slope uh which RIS from up to the property may I suggest that you use A3 for purposes of this just to because I think as I was saying to the uh to the east of the lot is the deal lake and a slope that rises up to the rear of the property uh there are um the wetlands in this area are considered State open water we have received approvals from the DP for that uh there is to the north of the lot is and uh the existing Township property to the south of the lot is a 5 foot wide Ocean Township property uh and which is in to further south is the adjacent property on uh lot four okay and looking at A4 what you moved in and you have a bunch of lines there and that shows uh a riparium buffer uh which the existing house extends into but which all of the addition kind of needs to stay clear of correct yes there was a OT repairing buffer which is applied to the state buffer applied to all uh water uh bodies in state and you have to stay out the first 25 ft okay and that's kind of why you know or our addition you located it in such a way to keep it away from that riparian buffer it kind of had to go along that diagonal line that runs kind of um left to right the it's shown in green on the uh reduced copy that you have and yes okay and if I can ask you to just pull up now your A4 in the um the light color in the front I know we're going to go through the architect that's the existing front porch correct yes and we're not proposing to construct anything above it we're just going to leave that front porch as it is addressing the front yes correct okay and then you have pink which indicates just a little portion of a second floor that is going to bump out which the architect will go over and then the rest of the addition is all uh back at the setback uh where if the board looks on the left it says about 12 point 53 so it's online so essentially we pulled back any Second Story Edition as far as possible to keep it out of the uh streetcape so to speak and to maintain the character of the front yes okay and in order to make up for some of the space that was lost we are uh essentially converting the existing onear garage into living space and in order to do that in order to meet the parking requirement we were required to extend that driveway correct okay and I see that you have uh an area that's shaded a little bit lighter back by what was the existing on story garage that's the portion uh that we're extending and that's the portion which just going to be in line and that's what needs the variance correct okay um and as it relates to the Second Story Edition um over the garage the obviously the front yard setback meets that I indicated that if we were to construct a conforming house on the slot can you outline I know that you have a dashed triangle on there that shows where the permitted footprint would be but if you could show that so basically if you apply all the Step Up required by the zone there is a small triangular piece which is left which would be conforming for development so obviously it would be impossible to build a house that would be livable here and we'll talk to the architect and the planner as to the character of the neighborhood and whether or not what's being proposed fits in so we're essentially not exacerbating the front setback while we need a variant we're still behind where the existing house is and we're leaving the open front porch correct and the Second Story addition uh to the north uh is for we're at I'm just trying I'm just looking at at your plan that side yard setback would essentially conform there yes it's 3.47 okay so that one story Edition as it relates to the side yard and importantly as we hear from testimony later as it relates to filling in that um open yard that conforms as a side yard setback yes okay and then we're just the rest of it is really building to the back which would have no impact on the neighbors as well as building above the existing correct okay so and the front steps are staying the same everything else is staying the same um so as it relates to building coverage uh we had indicated 25% is permitted we are proposed at what coverage [Music] 33.01525 point11 okay and did you have an opportunity to R view uh Ben's letter yes okay was there anything in his letter that was problematic or that if the board would approve this we couldn't comply with no not at all the there was one statement about the storm water which we can comply with basically such a small increase in impervious we could just put a pipe in the ground and and carry that okay recognizing that we have the architect and a planner to testify are there any questions relative to engineering doesn't see okay shall shall we wait for the public until after all the witnesses go I'll refer to you madam chair um how did we do it last time Mr Steinberg do you recall if we we we'll do it now then okay any any questions from the public just for the engineer Mr Smith okay um if you can go oh if you can share the microphone and Madam chair I would just ask if you could remind the public that this is just for questions as it relates to what he testified to not statements if you um do you mind letting them hold the microphone the gentleman there and then we'll go to and if you can state your name and your address uh My Name is Earl Jackson I live at 503 Laurel AV across the street from the property okay and you have a question for the engineer I have a question for the engineer um I've reviewed the submission documents um and I understand the importance of the riparian uh Corridor and the preservation of that um I understand that the proposal meets the corner of the limit of that riparian 25 fot setback um but I would like to ask why your recognition of where that line starts is different than the prior surveys that were conducted for the property by two other surveyors the the line as shown on the plan is based on the submission and approval from the D okay so my question is why does your line recognizing the top of Bank vary from two prior surveys that register the top of Bank where the top of Bank actually is madam chair he doesn't have those surveys they're not in evidence and how AER they're not in evidence right now and how another surveyor establish a top of bank is not as relevant as who has jurisdiction to determine it which is the D so another surveyor may have placed it somewhere but it wasn't approved by the D this top of bank is approved by the DP who is the only agency that has jurisdiction over it that's correct okay do you have another question not a question okay um Miss I believe you had your hand up if you can come to the microphone if you can state your name and your address Nancy Flanigan 507 Beachwood Avenue West Allenhurst and you have a question for this engineer yes sir you made the statement No impact to the neighbors in the neighborhood would you explain that please he didn't make that statement the attorney made that statement came out of his mouth it did not okay do do you have a a statement he's not a planner so he can't apply to that any other questions yes well let me let me follow up with that question from an engineering perspective is there NE any negative impact to the neighborhood from a dra drainage not in my opinion thank you okay any other just now it was said yes it was any other questions from the public for this engineer okay so we can move on to the next thank you I'd like to call Tom Lavin if you can Tom grab that mic if you don't mind seems my Witnesses tonight are a lot more softt spoken than I am okay Mr lman if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I do okay and you have testified before this board all right Tom you had heard my um summary in the beginning where it indicated that the addition is uh observ ing the front porch so just on your proposed first floor plan could you point out the front porch uh existing and in the proposed uh number one on the left is the existing you have the porch and the steps and dotted in above is the Dormer that's about and you're maintaining that in the proposed yes okay so you're not bringing anything further than what's existing there today correct and then the addition is if you could just point out the additions it's an expansion of the Kitchen yes and a little bit of a bump out in the back and use of the garage as um living space yes the kitchen Edition on the North the front wall is in line with the existing front wall of the living room and dining room and then we're adding two we're removing six feet of the existing garage the front of the garage and adding 5iv ft onto the back of it to meet the uhar correct and then uh the existing house let's go to the second floor the existing house is three bedrooms and we're just making it four bedrooms correct correct there are three one large two average siiz bedrooms there's a looft over the existing garage it's only accessed through the garage okay so there's three bedrooms and the bedrooms part of the bedrooms are underneath the roof line so they don't have a full 8 ft ceiling okay and so we're maintaining the three bedrooms and converting that Loft into a master bedroom and we're adding some bathrooms and essentially making that floor a little more liveable bathrooms and we're moving the laundry up to the to the up second floor level the laundry is in currently in the basement which is only a six foot seal okay importantly as it relates to the architecture particularly the front of the house what efforts did you make uh in your design to essentially maintain the character of the excuse me existing Craftsman house and you know pull the additions away from the street so as to mitigate the impact number one drawing p2.0 number one is the existing so you have the covered porch down below with the front dorm and number two is what we're proposing covered porch is staying exactly the way it is the front dorm is staying exactly the way it is we're not raising the second floor ceiling and roof until 3 ft behind that door okay then did a double hip roof to minimize the height the actual height of the new roof is only three foot higher than the existing main roof okay so it's it's not going to have the appearance of the it's going to have varied roof lines uh particularly on the North End the portion that is closest to Mr Jackson's house well the permitted height is 35 ft that is only 20t 6 in right we're keeping that below even the existing roof L it's a it's a story and a half originally we were doing a full two story but we've lowered that okay and a majority of the uh twostory editions where the max height is is at 24 fet and the only portion that reaches up to the 27 1/2 ft are the peaks of that decorative door the front the main roof yes okay but a majority of the house is really only 24 ft tall correct no there's a portion is 276 yes which is those two Dormers in the front just to give it some architectural just the main the main hip going front to back beyond Behind the DOR but the the majority of the house is at of the new is at 24 and the existing house is at 246 correct so you're essentially trying to work within the height of the existing house and create a little bit more I'm sorry from grade it's 27 ft right but it's not measured from grade it's measured from finished first floor okay so I'm just doing it according to your ordinance because that's what I'd be required to yeah get it it's but yes it is it's 27 ft High though the building off ground yes off of the ground absolutely cuz it's a about 2 and 1/2 ft up but as you know your ordinance is yeah no no no I'm saying it's I wasn't yeah I was just trying to think of yep where the numbers are coming from um and then uh obviously the in the rear there's a little more substance to it but again that's facing the lake right we wanted to get as much windows in that so it's facing the lake we minimize windows on the sides okay um are there any questions from Tom no questions any questions from the public for this witness if you can please um share the microphone we're going need you to speak into the microphone sir tell have a seat here and if you can state your name and your address my name is Richard Flanigan my address is 507 Beachwood Avenue West Allen H New Jersey okay and you can ask your question there was some information given here essentially saying that there is one additional bedroom in the house being proposed is that correct yes so they have you seen the the two differences between the present house and proposed house does that in fact have a bed bedroom on the first floor there's no bedroom on the first floor says it on the map that's shown it we've all received that's the maps I'm not sure what you mean sir living room dining room kitchen the garage okay one of the do you have it with you sir with you well the fact ones does it matter matter that there's any difference between one bedroom downstairs and three bedrooms upstairs and four bedrooms downstairs there's no bedrooms downstairs sir according to this map it does what is not good you these are the same thing as what you see here that's the exterior the exterior I'm concerned about no I understand here it is that's the second floor and you have one you have one two three four bedrooms on the second floor yes I know we agreeing on that that's the first floor there's nothing labeled bedroom here sir if I could offer I think what you might be seeing is the ex existing conditions plan from FP which notes the second floor bedroom it's just written on the oh is that okay thank you Mr chamar so I I that it maybe that's an exhibit you there it is no it's okay you want to make sure you understand still going to be looking and I may I find it on okay let me know you're welcome okay any other questions from the public for this witness okay okay let's P our planner Andrew Janel um if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I do okay and you've testified before and Andy you're a liced professional planner State jersey you've testified here numerous times many times yes okay certainly it's j a n i w okay Andy recognizing that we've already gone through kind of the context of the home and what the relief is let's turn to the proofs that are required which would be to support the variance either we have a hardship or we have uh a better zoning alternative and then whether or not there's a negative uh substantial negative impact and then let's talk about the exhibit that you created in order to demonstrate that certainly so let me start by saying uh in preparation for this this evening we've been to the site we've reviewed the plans we've uh reviewed your ordinance the master plan the recent change to the R5 District uh this is in your R5 high density single family residential Zone and what makes this lot particularly unique is it is uh a waterfront property with a with a peculiar uh shape um in preparation for this evening I mentioned I looked at your master plan your ordinances and and the reason we do that is because we have to reconcile our variances with your Zone plan with your master plan with what your vision is for the community as well as with public purposes because no variances can be granted for the sole benefit of the applicant there has to be a public benefit to that and those public benefits are reiterated within the municipal land use law U and I'll I'll go through that shortly but let me start with the uh the master plan so in terms of reconciling what we're proposing with the master plan your your master plan was redone in 20123 um and it's a pretty well-versed uh snapshot of the community and it reads with respect to the land use ordinance uh with land use element excuse me it is inevitable that the future Land Development in the township will consist of an expansion of and or Redevelopment of existing developed properties the primary change to the land use should be in the form to respond to ongoing socioeconomic and environmental changes that will impact the types and intensities of land uses within existing land use categories uh and it goes on to say we recognize in our objectives uh that existing development patterns in the township are largely established and ensure that the future development does not conflict with those existing development patterns uh recommendations uh suggest allowing for an increase in building coverage in those areas of the township where small lot area requirements and possibly a variation in building coverage based on lot area so there's a recognition that there's somewhat of an organic uh lot arrangement in many parts of the community uh we can look at that uh exhibit exhibit that I prepared I think it's A5 five correct so this is a a snapshot of the area and and we studied blocks 68 73 74 and 76 here just in order to determine what the Conformity uh ratio is here now the minimum lot size area is 7500 Square ft and you'll see there are many many lots that are unders sized here we have lots that are 30 by 100 uh we have lots here that are uh 50 by 50 uh and we have a a unique shape of lots along the Waterfront you see we're lot two in green there uh and we are certainly a unique uh configuration of land use and you'll see lot seven again is a small Waterfront lot uh and you'll notice uh surrounding our lot there are two white areas to the north there's a long narrow area that's approximately 20 24 ft by 156 ft that's Municipal owned lot uh and then to the South there is a 5ft strip of land between us and lot uh four that is also a municipally loed land so from the streetcape it appears that we have additional Frontage we do not this these are municipal Lots uh on either side of us and we're not taking credit for that that doesn't have any effect on the numbers that you're giving it's just a matter of perception for the streetscape to the extent that Aesthetics and light air in open space are consider then want talk just generally about the character of the neighborhood and what the perceptions are uh so this map uh studied the tax records uh for the community and determined what lot coverages are in the area so the uh lots that are in yellow or Golden Rod are lots that have coverage of between 25 and 33.1% meaning more than is permitted within the district but just under what we're asking for okay and when you say covered you're talking about the building coverage and you did this based on the tax the T tax records indicating the size of the lot as well as the size of the structures on the lot correct and that would be uh principal structures and accessory structures as your anything with a roof essential correct and it would have been impossible to do that under the old ordinance because we could we would have to take it in consideration environmental constraints right which we can't get from tax records build right the old ordinance find that under buildable lot area that's correct okay so what did you find with regard to in that very immediate neighborhood the non-conformities so 61% % of the lots are non-conforming with respect to lot coverage the Lots in red actually show an incre a lot coverage that's greater than we are requesting um so we have this is a sampling of 52 Lots I believe 32 are non-conforming uh and you'll see we are generally right in that median of non-conformities uh with respect to what we're proposing in terms of lot coverage so that is the character of the neighborhood again it's it's a unique neighborhood uh it's a desirable neighborhood so lots have been subdivided re subdivided over the years uh you do have Waterfront Lots here that are uh unique in shape and configuration adding additional uh challenges to the development of the lot and that is the case this even and and Andy just looking at um the lot immediately to South lot four in Block 76 because uh it's obviously a large house when when you look at the photos but it's also smalla they're at 36.83 coverage correct building coverage and the house immediately across the street from that which is lot two is also significantly over uh at not significantly over but it's more than us at it looks like about 33.3 3.37 correct slightly uh greater in building coverage than we are and in the block across from that there are several which are in excess of what we are and many I would say close to a majority which are near where we are correct so again and we're going to talk about the proofs but essentially should the board approve this it would not be out of character with this neighborhood which would be consistent with the master plan saying recognizing that these organic neighborhoods have developed and the infill should maintain that character that's correct okay that's correct so U moving forward to uh points of the municipal land use law which are the public purposes uh within the mlu well uh I would say that this application certainly promotes two of those uh I is to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design and Arrangement U The Proposal before you as you've seen through the architectural renderings and design uh is for a continuation of a craftsman style uh home that's been historically on this property I believe the home was built in 1925 pursuant to your tax records uh the craftsman style uh had that recess Dormer we're maintaining that recess Dormer uh the porch front line will remain as as it is we are extending essentially to our North which is towards the municipal lot so from a streetcape we're not proposing that extension towards any of the neighbors it's towards the open space lot uh and in fact uh given the historic context here I think the Architects had a very nice job in preparing this home facade uh so that it maintains its historic character historic height historic uh appearance within the neighborhood while still providing a more modern livable home the fourth bedroom addition bringing the laundry to the top floor from a 6ot high basement um these are things that'll promote the longevity of the uh neighborhood and longevity of the building uh with respect to item M under the ml which is to encourage the coordination of various public and private procedures and activities shaping Land Development with a view of lessening the cost of such development to the more efficient use of land again we are looking to renovate and add on to an existing building this isn't a tear down a new proposal we are somewhat constrained by the existing footprint of the property and the frontage uh we are working with that and I think uh the architect did Yen's job of uh again architecturally maintaining a balance while making the home very functional um this is an efficient use of the land uh it's it's a challenging lot to begin with well Andy let me just ask you a question so you're talking about the special reasons that really goes to the C2 if we would to argue under C2 so really though most of our variance relief as we're looking at it is based on the hardships that we have based on the undersized lot the unusual shape the topography and the environmental constraints absolutely yeah no I I just want to put that in record because always public purposes for the board to consider understood uh which brings us to the C variant relief so uh as this board knows there's a C1 which is a hardship variance of the C2 which is known as the flexible C or balance the relief that we seek this evening generally qualifies under actually specifically qualifies under the C1 Criterion as they're all driven by the existing conditions on the lot and and the ability to reuse uh the footprint of the building so we have lot area lot depth that we cannot cure there's no additional land to purchase to uh increase the size of the lot uh with respect to the setbacks The sidey Yards the rear yard the front yard setbacks uh again we're building off an existing uh Foundation we are concentrating those improvements where they have the least impact upon the the neighborhood they're going to the north to the open space to the rear out of any sight lines of the neighbors uh the rear addition has been set at a point that is uh consistent in depth with the neighbor there's nothing that will protrude to create any um view from any angle being blocked again not that they're entitled I was about to say but yes we're preserving it anyway in the interest of being good neighbors right and you know you talked about no detriment and as we heard as a preview the the public is going to ask you about detriment we don't have to show that there's no detriment we just have to show that there's no substantial detriment that outweighs all the benefits and the fact that we have the hardship correct that's correct that's correct okay um and we can qualify all these variances under the C2 balance test as well because we do believe it is a better zoning alternative than essentially starting over on the slot working with this slot creating what we've done in in what I believe would be a sensitive man in terms of controlling the height in terms of controlling where the uh bulk of the building will be placed out of sight uh these are all good Alternatives so with respect to the the C2 Varian is we'd have to show that it relates to a specific lot and not only is it a specific lot but it's a very unique lot that the purposes of the municipal land use l we be Advanced I read two of those purposes into the record and that the benefits of the deviation would outweigh any detriment uh when we look at the benefits of this obviously it's something that will maintain the character of the house again we can go to 35 ft in height if we were going new I'm sure we would look to maximize the height uh to the extent that we could however since we're not conforming and we recognize we have a a smaller lot with some restrictions we chose to be keep the height 2 right the 27 ft uh from the ground that's right and in that particular area only 24 ft from the ground right and that brings us to the negative uh criteria uh which means that we have to prove that the variants can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and and it is legislatively substantial detriment and finally the variants will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone plan with respect to substantial detriment I mean typically what we look at from a planning perspective are the nuisance characteristics are we creating uh additional uh utilization of the property additional traffic are we uh hindering storm water management are we creating additional noise uh the answer is this is a single family home in a single family neighborhood the use is permitted it is a single family home we're adding a bedroom to it it's not going to create any substantial uh issues with respect to there's not going to be an increase in density it's a one family home it'll remain a one family home it's not going to create any substantial traffic it's going to be a one family home with all the traffic that's respected and even though we're ining a bedroom we do comply with the parking that's correct and as it relates to the addition where we're adding a second story you had indicated that with regard to light air and open space we're not going any closer to the any of the neighbors we're staying in line with the existing house we're staying in line and we're going off the back back towards the water so there's no neighbor there and it indicated that where we are going off to the back how that could affect a neighbor would be their water view but again we're we're keeping our house in line with the front of the houses next to us and in the back in line so as to not have any impact on a view along the street as well as along the uh water that's correct and the other thing I wanted to point out and and Jim pointed this out in his review letter is we uh we have uh essentially the characteristics of the lot where we have the open space lot between us and our neighbor to the South that functionally adds an additional 5 ft of setback so even though we need uh setback to that lot line we have an additional 5T that we don't get to count but visually is there and protects the neighbor to our south from that setback in terms of light are but again in looking at the area and and looking at the the house it appears from the area that their house is prob looks a little bit closer to the property line than we are so it it you know we point that out so so so when we look at this on balance what what we're proposing is something that uh will make again an existing home more livable uh bring it to Modern standards uh it satisfies uh anything that we need to do with respect to uh parking uh we're not creating any issues with respect to runoff you heard uh Smith testify that uh we while we are increasing total impervious slightly we're substantially under what the Zone would permit in terms of total impervious coverage um our building coverage is in line with the characteristics of the neighborhood so in context we are uh proceeding as your master plan anticipates with respect to the characteristics of the neighborhood we're not doing anything that's offensive to the character of the neighborhood we've been very sensitive to the character of the neighborhood in terms of how we've situated the additions and how we positioned the additions on the lot and as it relates to the zoning ordinance were not contrary to the zoning ordinance because the zoning ordinance didn't anticipate an undersized lot so oddly shaped that's correct and that's the very basis for why the municipal anus La allows variances for instances like this that's correct are there any questions for uh Mr jenu what was the previous building lot coverage on the last design that you put together I couldn't tell you because it was based on buildable lot area which deducted out all of the lands I'm sorry which deducted out all the environmentally sensitive areas so it was like 236 per. okay but I was okay I was curious to see how much the reduction on the footprint the foot the footprint generally didn't get reduced very much it got pulled in a little bit but went out in the backed it got it got reduced in height significantly I said the building LW coverage didn't change the build the build the building coverage didn't change but what did changes the way it's calculated now I get that and importantly now we're giving you the evidence with regard to the character of the neighborhood which we couldn't do before because there was no way to establish that from the tax maps so just a question so the the green lot which is that's our lot that's your lot is technically yellow on this map yes it should be yellow it should be yellow correct yeah well essentially the green map is kind of that midpoint yellow is up to our coverage the red is greater than our coverage but your current coverage is yellow yes okay yes do you the the property that's 732 and 764 that you noted at 33.376891 [Music] or or did they come to this board and ask for a variance for building LW coverage to get them to 36 and 33% so 76 Slot 4 has a year built of 1910 okay but we don't know if there's been additions to it we don't know we don't know there's no way to know if there's additions and when you look at the photo that I shared I mean I believe the owners are here I mean it look clearly looks like the facade has been redone correct but I think Mr de Jero again we're not saying that because they're here we should be allowed to so even if they were all built in 1880 it's just establishing what the character is based on the lot size is not I get that but okay and what I'm saying is it's already above the 25% as it is and now you're asking to go from 28 to 33 and these other houses aren't asking to go from 33 to 38 well I don't they just they're established at that point and I don't know how long they've been there for if they've been there for 50 years or 60 years and aren't asking for a variance that's a that's a different argument to me than what you're trying to make okay my opinion no no no under understood as it relates your opinion and the only AR we're not making an argument relative to those we're just saying this is the character of the neighborhood so one of the things the municipal law makes us say is what's the character what is are you affecting the character of the neighborhood regardless if the character was established in 1902 or yesterday um and also the lot sizes are different and of course we didn't analyze any of there so I don't know what occurred and how they got there we're just saying what's there today we're consistent with yeah I I can tell you based on the tax records um at least two lots were approved at over 33.1 uh one lot uh 68 block 68 lot 11 yeah 2005 was approved at 35.760000 and I can answer that and I I'm sure that Mark can fill in and and so can Ron so the hard what you're talking about the hardship you're talking about a self-created hardship which is if I subdivide the property and create the undersized lot the municipal L use law the hardship goes with the land you can buy a lot that is undersized know it's undersized when you buy it and still qualify for the variant so the fact and it's not that we didn't like it at the time it was bought we didn't have grown children with grandchildren who come and stay at the house so the needs of the family changed somewhat over the years but realistically whether they changed or not as long as the hardship wasn't self-created it goes with the land so the fact that it was a hardship we knew it was a hardship they knew what their rights were under coming to a board to ask for a variant and the like I know that um sometimes you're looking like well you bought it so you got to live with it well you bought it recognizing what New Jersey law allows you to present in order to justify the relief so yes they bought it yes they knew what it was but they also their family grew as often happens and generationally the family's returning and they're just looking to add a bedroom to accommodate that and you weren't here for it but this house was one of the Prime reasons at least for me for turning down the Bild board on mamath road and those the billboard that this is what I referred to when you pulled us on while we're voting now this was the house I gave an example for I don't understand that and was for the heights issues and there's you you weren't here for it so yeah no not tonight but that's wait I don't know what the billboard confused right right but in this particular case we pulled the development back from the street we reduced the height significantly and it is not an overdevelopment because we're substantially under the impervious coverage right the impervious coverage is designed as to what the develop that's measure of intensity of all the improvements on a lot not just the building and we are substantially under what we are permitted within the district we're also substantially under the height that we're permitted and I think Jim in his analysis uh put it fairly succinctly that had this been a conforming lot we would meet the building coverage but having said that even though it's an undersized lot he takes that as a measure of saying the home that's proposed is consistent with what would be anticipated in the neighborhood because the conforming Lots would have a home of similar scale so what we're proposing is not an overdevelopment in fact consistent with the pattern of the neighborhood right and one of the things Jim asked for was exactly that is you know what the pattern of the neighborhood is by way of coverages and that's why uh Andy provided all of that information so I just I just point out that your planner who takes no exception to this the only exception he took was the calling the office on the second floor should be changed to a denner study which is fine I guess I had an architectural question and I apologize for asking this now but if you took the garage like you're doing now and redo the house you can fit another master bedroom without adding any buildable without adding any square footage to the property right and still be able to modernize the house and add the bedroom and change the space the way you're looking so the application isn't just for the one bedroom to add we're no I know what you're doing you're putting three additions on in three different spots just to address what you said we're we're expanding the kitchen significantly it's a little kitchen a little dining room so you know the additions are really to increase the living space for the family as I had indicated uh it's two generations living in this house uh expanding the kitchen and there are always ways to minimize the variance relief you could not do anything and then you wouldn't need any variance relief but that isn't really the test as to how do you make it less the test is you know do we meet the stat to a criteria do we have a hardship and you know what do we doing by way of impact but the space on the first floor is really just expanded living space to allow for bigger kitchen dining room and a real family room okay is there any additional impervious coverage other than the of the there is the driveway the patio additional from existing condition uh the driveway is being increased I believe as we set we setting we're taking the six ft off the front of the garage and extending the driveway the existing impervious is 41.84201 how much of that is broken down between house and I'm not sure exactly we per made up to 65% correct correct okay thank you right and that increase driveways obviously to to meet the recess standard for parking got it okay any other questions any questions from the public yes if you can um the microphone so statements have been made by both the attorney and the planner My Name is Earl Jackson I live at 503 Laurel AV across the street from the property yeah no that's good um statements have been made by both planner and deter on behalf of the planning part of this I understand my questions are to be directed only at the planner and not the attorney she will chime in believe because I hear things that that are inconsistent with with a number of issues um as a planner the public good is part of how this could be argued for as something that could be considered yes and the public good are measured by the purposes of the municipal land law the two that I read into the record the in your opinion the space between this property and the one to the South has a municipal passage I'm not sure if it's used as a passage it's a 5 foot Municipal strip of land it's a it's a right ofo for Waterfront access right now you're testify which you will have a chance to do later right so my question is with a 5- foot allotment between properties an additional bulk on that allotment would you testify that that is for public good um not sure I understand the question further increasing or decreasing the space that allows the public to pass through or the presence of bulk that makes it inviting well we're not we're not we're not increasing any of the sidey yard setbacks as a matter of fact the building's been aligned to be consistent with the existing side yard setback so we're not encroaching into that 5 foot my testimony was that 5 foot acts as an additional visual space um and you know and we had also pointed out that the building on lot four is actually closer to that 5 foot space than we are we're not encroaching any more than we have in the past uh We've maintained that in the past and existing existing conditions right that we we've maintained that setback so there is no additional encroachment there is no there's no impediment we're not putting anything in that five space that would impede any passage so in our setback in your setback which is 14.2 feet required for sidey yard combin there's no no no not combined that's what on each side yes in that setback are you proposing new bulk on the second floor we are we are consistent with what we have there so there's no new bulk above the garage well there is an addition above the so my question is is that imposing second floor addition increasing or decreasing public good for the passage between the street and the water I think it's consistent with the public good in terms of what's there today is being maintained it is first of all but it wasn't my question doesn't have an impact on the public whatsoever the public has the ability to rely on that 5 foot RightWay that is not being impeded in any way by this application I can't I won't testify but I would disagree um do you have other questions um yeah I have a list of questions but I don't want to I don't want to burn you guys out with them um I think I think blocking the quarter is is rough um we're not blocking only to to my extent um blocking views was also an issue when ask him your questions and then present your own testimony fair fair when the building expands or increases its width by nearly 50% does that add to the public good or detract from it okay so let me let me start with the statement they said we're blocking views first of all as a planner you're probably aware of the case law that's extensive you're not entitled to a view if you wanted the view you should have bought waterf front I mean that's basically how the case law has been over the years so in terms of maintaining views we think we've done a wonderful job in doing that when you look at our alignment of the building and the addition to the rear we are not encroaching whatsoever on the lot to the South they maintain The View Corridor and the view angle that they've always had our addition goes up to the line that's consistent with the setback of their property to the Waterfront and they have out on the North though we don't need a variance for that setback right no we're consistent we're we're we're compliant on the North side so so that the ordinance doesn't contemplate a view in that area that's correct and if you look at the alignment of the house across the street that would be concerned about the view whether they're entitled to not mean Mr Jackson's house yes there there is no impediment to that view does the proposed addition to the north side encroach upon both front and rear yard setbacks it's consistent with the setback that's there today yes we are asking for variants Rel for the front and rear yard and again the rear being to the water does the space in the front and rear yard to the north close the view corter between the sidewalk where people walk their dogs and the Waterfront well to there is first of all the view corter there is consistent with what's anticipated in terms of the requirements for sidey guard we are permitted to be where we are with respect to the sidey guard setbacks with respect to the front and to the rear the rear is to the river or to the to the lake uh it's consistent with our neighborhood and to the front we are consistent with the neighborhood Corridor if you take a look looking down South edgmere we are absolutely consistent with the properties to the south of us and terms of how they're set back from the street it is the character of the neighborhood so I don't believe we're impeding on would we need variant relief to plant trees in that location no and we could plant 10 oak trees in that location well we can't put a BM that would require variance but we could plant oak trees or any trees as long as they're not in a hedge and that view is not protected by the ordinance is what I'm saying that's correct can you tell me the height of the canopy for an oak tree what what makes it an oak tree it's species you know what I'm saying but because I had said oak trees we could do an oak Tre doties and we could do Hol underneath it that could fill in putties across the front which is a nice visual barrier is there an ordinance that limits the height of shrubs that you put on the front yard of a property only if in the form of a hedge if it's a fence they can be scattered anywhere you'd like on your property without any uh the question was to the planner well I indicated you're asking me questions too I I asked if it was okay only to the extent that it's a hedge we could plant across uh and create uh again the trees uh aligned across that portion of the property in any way we'd like I would appreciate that any other questions any other questions from the public if you can uh we need you to get the microphone please and then I just have a followup question Madam chair once again Richard again I'm still at 507 Beachwood [Laughter] my question is when you consider the neighborhood are you just considering the southeast portion of West Allenhurst are you considering the southwest and the Northwest and the Northeast so I'm looking at the context again I don't know if you saw the exhibit we uh when we looked at the character so we looked at this area here in terms of lot coverage we could expand the area but we look essentially at what what the characteristics are along uh de Lake and as long as well as the uh first block in those essentially are the lots that have organically spurred because of their location to the water you've seen Lots divided subed over the course of years U so this is where we concentrate in terms of characteristics of the neighborhood you can have that copy with yeah sure uh you're being so nice the hardship any uh house which is on water is benefited by that hardship standard you have to understand we're UND sized we're oddly shaped and there was testimony that the buildable envelope because of the peculiar shape of the lot is essentially a small triangle that I believe one of the board members said you could barely put a toll booth on so when you put all the setbacks on that are required by the zoning or it really isn't a buildable area area that could maintain a home even though the lot is 5,000 plus Square ft so these maybe eight properties right as you see the two lots there that are in white um meet the coverage requirements I can't tell you whether they I don't believe uh the one lot to the South did they have to did they are they considered hardship on well that that's that's again depending on the setback to the rear and what what the setbacks are to the Waterfront and the repair rights and everything else but Andy when it's a hardship it's only he testified at the beginning it's only to a specific piece of property right the the the standard is it relates to a specific piece of property so the the short answer is not every undersized lot necessarily has a hardship the hardship is the legal standard is whether or not there's a hardship to develop it according to the ordinance standards as compared to anybody else isn't it contrary to Common Sense to say that the property is located on the water it's more valuable because it is located on the water gets the benefit greater on the hardships or on the standards on the it the same lot England would have the same hardship we just have an additional layer because of the way that the riparian buffer Cuts in so we can't go closer to the river but this lot anywhere in this neighborhood would benefit from the same hardships based on its odd shape and what the set facts are but all the Lots on the water do benefit from the hardship no I can't say that they do I I know it's only with regard to this one you haven't investigated that I I that's not part of what the proofs are under the New Jersey law for variance relief can I can I jump in and ask a question is it fair to say most of these houses in in this neighborhood these Lots were drawn before um the current ordinances were put in place a majority of the homes here date back to 1905 1910 so absolutely and so so all the rules that that the township has in place on setbacks it is kind of hard for most of these lots to you know anybody wanted to change with even just change a you know just go straight up would have to come before this board so a lot of these would suffer a hardship if they tried if someone tried want to confirm that without having looked at all of them and and yeah each lot would have to be studied but again going to your master plan recognizes that that's a situation in certain neighborhoods within the community um and it says you know when when you have that situation you try to maintain the characteristics of the neighborhood I'm just trying to be clear that's how I heard the question coming across and I don't think it's controversial to to look at this and see how the width of these properties and say make the leap that most of these would have a hardship right yeah and just a one followup question Andy as it relates to the setbacks the purposes of them are light air and open space cor and separation of buildings yes so in in an instance where we are building into an what what is what the neighborhood has enjoyed as an open Vista View into the water um the ordinance isn't protecting that in that there is no lot on the other side from which to keep away from to keep that open space correct okay correct and and when you had indicated that you could put a line we can't put a line of trees wherever we want look at scatter but we could scatter trees that view is not protected that's right um we could put a 4 foot solid fence we could plant trees behind it um so again the int the setback requirements and the front and the back certainly have nothing to do with a view on the side that's correct any other questions from the public you can come to the microphone why don't you put the mic up there Randy if you can state your name and your address and yes my name is Jee T I'm at 604 Laurel Avenue I have a question on parking how big is the driveway there that is planned and is that going to hold enough traffic that four bedrooms will produce since this is a non-conforming lot the neighborhood is a non-conforming neighborhood per se question so the we don't we no I know I'm just letting him know while he's looking we don't need a variance for parking the ordinance and the rsis requires us to have two parking spaces and I believe that's what we have we have so that's why they're expanding the driver to get we do conform to that okay so but you're saying that this this addition is not going to be a a detriment to the neighborhood is bring more traffic into the neighborhood because you won't have areas park car we we we will have sufficient area to park the cars we meet the standard four for four bedrooms yes that's that's how the residential site Improvement standard measures how many parking spaces are required because in like in that neighborhood every house no you can't testify now you're not under oath he answered your question question you'd like to come we have another part of this application where we open it to the public can be sworn you can tell the board anything you want but we we comply with what we are required to provide okay okay and we are at um we're 1 hour and 8 minutes so I'm going to ask if we can continue this because I still want to hear from our experts and then we obviously want to allow the public to give testimony um so can we carry this to December 19th without notice Let me just take a quick look Madam CH I just might not be available I mean may I suggest that we do that for purposes of notice but recognize that we may have to to further adjourn it based on schedules I don't have any you're not available anyway Mr Steinberg any issues with that Mr Steinberg any ISS for the record carrying to December 19th but without notice but it may need to carry further yeah and we'll announce it at that next one my guess is since Andy's not available on the 19th but since you don't have your dates yet for 20125 oh what's the what's the January date 16th who's telling my sister I'm not going out with her for her birthday eugina car's birthday is the 16 you were going to be here anyway for another case you won't be here okay so can we carry to December 19th without notice and then we Noti and we'll go from there okay okay our next case oh this hearing will be carried for December 19th at the regular Thursday night in this room at 7 p.m but in event that it's a conflict and they ask to carry it further so what I would suggest is Wednesday or Thursday morning contact thank you very much I guess Happy Thanksgiving yes Happy Thanksgiving Thanksgiving okay our next case case First french-speaking Baptist Church block 38 Lots 71 and 72 2795 2797 Asbury Avenue Ocean 07712 R2 attorney is Amanda Curley applicant is seeking preliminary and final major site plan approval to construct an approximately 14,960 [Music] is requesting a conditional use approval where several bulk variances are also [Applause] required doing the best I can here to get out of here sorry thank you so much though well I was gonna ask that like I was GNA ask ask him like what's on cover like 15 aing this out are at this look at this when you don't col and that's why I was like it's nice you showed in green but let my court reporter set up and the rest of are thank like that lot [Applause] okay Miss Curley okay good evening Amanda Curley from da Pitney on behalf of the applicant the first French speaking Baptist Church if you recall we are here in January so this is a continuation of that public hearing we are seeking to have preliminary and final major site plan to construct a house of worship on property located at 2795 to 2797 asroy Avenue also identified as Lots 71 and 72 in Block 38 on the tax maps so we're here on the the 18th of January which was a very long time ago and since then we made some big revisions in um basically in response to the board commentary and and public commentary we still require a D3 conditional use variants but now we the only condition that we do not meet is for minimum lot depth so that is it that is the only item that we do not meet otherwise we meet all the conditional use standards and we do not meet that minimum lot depth due to the irregular size and shape of the parcel as well as the existence of a paper Street to the rear and with that paper Street there just simply we will always require that that variance for the D3 the property is located in the R2 Zone and then we need a couple other variances some we eliminated and some we still require so just as the Highlight Reel of our revisions for you know the boards to catch you up on it so the first thing we did is we moved the driveway further along East on Asbury as requested I know we spoke a lot about the the location of the driveway to service this house of worship then we did a survey of all existing members of the current church and we figured out how much parking we needed and then we reduced our parking to meet that demand and then increased the residential buffers because that was a big Conversation Piece At the last meeting that also brought our impervious coverage into compliance so we no longer require a marians for impervious coverage and we're under the maximum required we also really installed a robust landscape plan to put lots of trees and other kind of plantings to again further kind of surround the use from all the residential uses located on either side and we also eliminated the Basin in the front yard uh that was also a concern so we added in Porous pavement and kind of redesigned our storm water management system which our engineer will address tonight and then we relocated the garage and the dumpster so they're not not in the rear anymore so we no longer have a setback issue there uh there are some other revisions and Paul's going to go through through them and then just so we can go through the sea variances that we still require we require a variance for a gray change we Exceed 2 feet at 3 feet we need a variance for the curb cut in where it's located for the driveway again we can make the driveway comply but I believe the board wanted us to move it more East and kind of away um and your variant says it has to be located at the LA the one3 portion and we've moved it based on concerns the board have with crashes and location uh we need a variance now for parking because again we reduce the parking in order to provide more buffering so we propose an equivalent of 218 spaces where 251 are required we also reduce the amount of EV stations because that also seemed to be a concern um we lastly I believe we need a variance because our landscape plan was not prepared by a landscape architect and I believe those are all the variants that we require so it's the D3 and then those C's and with me tonight I have our engineer Paul Anderson I believe he was previously qualified so I don't know if the board wants to if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I do okay any change in your credentials no all my licenses are still current okay so for the purposes of the record I believe we entered in give it a one last time can we Mark I'm sorry can we Mark the packet yeah we Mark the yes and then I also have the original Green slips if you'd like them okay you only did it last time1 I believe so I looked at the transcript okay I okay right that sounds correct great so we'll start with A4 tonight okay and with that Paul um well good evening everybody and thank you Amanda for that I I have very little testimony now um so let me uh put up the next second sir I'm sorry question should we be reading Mr hiin report before this or we with us tonight and it's part of our packet and been available to us okay a live plan I don't think we're going to reach through planning this evening I fully I hope to get through Mr Anderson and if we can Mr duly so we're going to mark this as A4 okay so A4 is the colorized version of the new site plan um at our last hearing uh there was a lengthy discussion about parking and buffering there was concern about the uh buffering of the I'm sorry A4 is what revised plans revised plans rendered the coloriz it's a rendered site plan colorized site plan it doesn't have aevision it still has the original date 1624 it's not it's been revised it's been revised yes it doesn't have a revision date on I did put a revision date on it one would date it August I think our last let me look at the plan it's we can put today's date on let's put today's date document control 101 do November 12th well you can't change the date on a submitted plan that's for the whoever signed it this is new that yes that's me that signed it this wasn't submitted previously submitted but you're going to date it tonight when was it done it was done yesterday when we colorized it yesterday and we didn't polarized it is that the plans you submitted to us yeah tonight's hearing and that was well it it it is you never redated it date the the plan you have it's a it's not 100% of the plan there's certain things shut off there are certain other things turned on that are not on your site plan it was prepared for this hearing so it's prepared as an exhibit of the site plan to give the general orientation site plan that you gave that we're going to be voting on what is that dat that is last dated August 14 August 14th 24 so this is a this is not the this is just a it this is a new exhibit it's a rendered drawing so it's a totally new drawing to the extent that it was prepared for this hearing and not previously submitted correct so there was an extension of testimony about or a discussion about the buffer over to the residences on Sharon Drive uh we had met the uh setback requirement of 25 ft and we had a row of parking that came off of this parking lot over here where I'm tracing in red on the east side of the property uh based on the traffic study that we had done which identified what we believe is the ratio for this applicant which our uh traffic engineer will testify to later uh he came up with a higher ratio your current ratio is 2 to one uh you know one car for every uh two people basically and um and we found a higher ratio 2.56 I believe is his number so we didn't need as many parking spaces uh so we have taken out an entire row of parking here reduce the impervious coverage increase the buffer to the Lots on Sharon Drive to 45 ft from their property line to the uh near to the curb line from 25 um we now have 206 parking spaces when we eliminate uh that that row 206 physical spaces we also have 12 EV parking spaces technically that gives you a credit one of the discussion points that we had at the board meeting is we had all of the EV spaces near the building all the prime parking spots and uh the board seem to indicate that they should be located more remotely so so that those Prime parking spots could be used regularly now we have moved those to the outer parking area with exception of the two that are right here because we wanted to provide uh ad uh EV spaces for Ada parking uh also there obligation to to provide it for both Ada spaces as well as regular parking spaces uh so that gives us uh 251 spaces were required 218 are proposed uh with this additional Green Space we were able to increase our uh tree planting which was another uh concept that was discussed to increase the number of trees we now have 350 trees proposed 78 of which are deciduous 272 are evergreen uh the same number of trees are proposed to be removed 168 qualifying trees as noted by your ordinance uh and as uh Mr Higgins your your planner had indicated that uh he would be looking at all the trees in the field and if there's some that could be saved in these areas he would save them so there so that number is likely to come down but he wanted to leave that get the relief with a number that we have and take care of that in the field and if the number changes and the the uh the uh tree fund donation changes that would be resolved during construction all right so so Paul for the record we meet the tree replacement ordinance and we no longer require relief we do require uh relief but a less uh less significant relief believe it's 38 uh 38 trees all right one of the other things that we did is we had the uh back here we had in this area here we had a a storage garage and a dumpster and we moved that here uh that was to get that out of the front yard of this paper street so now that is in a conforming location and that doesn't create an additional uh element for the D3 non-conformity um U amand had mentioned that the driveway was moved closer uh farther to the east we had the longer discussion about this there was an accident history and a discussion with the board engineer and board planner prior to our initial uh submitt it was recommended that we provide additional space from The High Point down here on Sharon drive all the way down here because there was a fatal accident there and we felt that additional sight distance would make it a safer uh condition for the driveway it was farther away from that high point so people could see people pulling out uh so we have moved it there at the first meeting there was objection because we had it in this location that it was uh overdone so we moved it and now we are I believe uh 90 uh uh 75 feet from the sideline to the center line of this driveway and the middle third starts at 92 ft so we're slightly off of the middle third still uh but not not not quite there but that lines up well with the rest of the on-site circulation uh one of the other items I want to let me I presume this will be five A5 this is a colorized version with the same date issue as the last one uh this shows the additional planting where we've added an additional row of evergreen trees along this entire buffer area and added some deciduous trees here to uh have a more of a vertical element Along on in this in this buffer area so we've really substantially beefed up the buffer area and uh the planting on the interior has remained largely the same uh what was also mentioned is the storm water management Basin that was in the front has been removed so now we have uh tree planting in there but it is limited by the site triangle for the driveway so we had to uh not have a complete planting of that area but we have to make maintain uh the site triangle as as clear which is part of yourin six this is utility plan this is directly from uh the set this is last 8424 uh so with the since the last application we had uh soil testing done on site to justify the existing soil conditions previously we had used a soils report that was done for a subdivision that was uh an application prior to this and it had uh a lot of soil data but uh there was concern from the public that there was standing water on top of the soil all the time uh and and that they didn't think we were going to get the permeability that I was noting we expected in our drainage design uh so we did that testing we found that there was a a layer at the top of a a syy material that indeed was not permeable so the neighbors were correct but immediately below that material was a beautiful Sandy material is very permeable so our drainage design has been modified to have a forest pavement system on the east side one on the west side and one in the front here that controls the storm water from the site in accordance with the state standards it's using Green Technology with porest pavement systems uh it meets the recharge requirement it meets the uh uh discharge rate requirement and it meets the water quality requirement so it meets all these things discharges to Asbury Avenue as has in the past the benefit uh that came out of this is we had that large deep base in there and there's a concern expressed by the uh least one or more members of the public about that being a hazard to the children in the neighborhood that they could get in and maybe they would drowned or something would happen to them so that Bas is no longer there visually it will also look significantly better it'll be a mild slope up from the street to there which would all be grass but with the trees that I showed on the last exhibit that shows there's planting in the back to provide some buffer canopy so this uh additional testing and redesign of the storm drainage um has been a nice modification in terms of the overall appearance of the site as well as the function and we demonstrated that the function of the basins will work in accordance with the standard with with new testing uh then the uh last element I'd like to discuss is talk just in between I want to talk I'm talking in transit this is an exhibit that uh it's going to be D7 yes it's also dated 81424 it has it has not been submitted this is the result of a meeting that we had with Mammoth County MTH county is was concerned about the entrance to the site um and and they they suggested that we look at uh either a left turn lane or a right turn in and a right turn out both of would which would be acceptable the left turn lane would require extensive improvements up and down the street uh the left turn in and I right turn in right turn out would be uh safer would be within the property limits with the same road improvements that we proposed before same location that I just discussed just a few moments ago go is just a little bit wider at the mouth and uh this would this would function this has been designed in accordance with uh Mammoth County standards uh they have not reviewed it yet but that's an ongoing conversation we're having with them with regard to the access to the site Aven County yes yes I'm sorry excuse me thank you jurisdiction corre that's correct that's correct so so that that is uh that change and that would be uh if the county is acceptable is accepting of this change it will be incorporated into the full set of plans that we have so coming east well this is this is an organization that has people that come to the site every day it's not a shopping center that people are coming for the first time so when they come on Sunday and they know how to get there they're going to come so that they can turn right in and then they're going to go outright and they're going to find their way home from there uh after the first time they'll be repeat customers if as you might think it just makes it difficult for people it it well they do have to find a different path it's not the most convenient path but uh it's probably a safer alternative which is why the county would like to have it and that's correct and we will have a traffic engineer the next hearing to speak to Grant it that I will say that county has the jurisdiction over obviously the a left turn lane or the right in right out but they are not necessarily considering how somebody's going if somebody's going to bypass the site coming east and where are they going to turn around so um I think there's probably more question for the traffic engineer but that's that's something that we'll have to discuss yeah I I I think the traffic engineer will go into more detail than I did with regard I I do believe it is comes down to people knowing how to get to where they want to go but I think he'll have more detail on it than than I than than that statement okay uh we I I've looked at the uh report prepared by the board's engineer and uh the things the mounting analysis and maintenance plan are fairly standard requirements and we will be happy to do those and uh and so I I really have no objections to his his comment letter the CME Associates review letter dated September 25th 2024 it is is item 6 A and B oh this I know A7 what are we calling it County driveway so it's County okay so it's Mel County planing board driveway exhibit yes okay all right and that's all I have for this evening any questions I have two questions um s on the previous exhibit you noted the driveway moving I guess it was 75 ft from is it the Western Property Line mhm and the requirement would be 92 yeah I think that's what what the numbers are that's correct yeah and so is that the the west side of the driveway is that what the measure uh that was to the center line of the driveway that's that's why when I said this is approximately the same place but it's a little bit wider at the mouth uh at the at the street Frontage uh that Center Line position is the same but the left side is obviously got it farther closer to the property line and then the second question on the porest pavement you noted that the Geotech or what borings or whatever you did that there was this layer of of silt yes is the intention to remove that layer and then yes do the pavement yes in fact we have uh there is a certain element of it that has what's called soil replacement which could be done with soils on site and that soil you know as long as the soil uh actually tested to meet the permeability requirement so they would strip off the uh the the silty layer stock pilot somewhere away and then bring in the appropriate material from either from on-site or import it whatever they had to do most likely on-site though okay thank you sure other board members or experts with questions your buffer you say you're at 45t right now NE that's correct was it before you changed it 25 yes the other question I have is uh you talked about the EV spaces yes I'm not sure if this is a question of you or not but have you contacted the electri to make sure they can supply the proper um electric that they need to to power these stations and will it will it interfere with the residents that live locally uh I I have not contacted the utility company it's probably not something that is in my court to do uh in terms of doing that uh these EV stations normally do not when you have 12 of them is not going to take that much power where it impacts the neighborhood well I think I think we should look into that I think that's something that I would like to request to make sure that we do have enough power to power them uh because I know of other areas that um and I I know of two two uh other areas where not in Ocean Township but the power company has denied supplying power to EV stations because they said that they couldn't handle it so and that was with just two so you're putting 12 in so I think it's important to contact them and make sure that we can do it all right we'll put that on our list okay um just a follow-up question to that so last time we year we had them all in the same area and the board didn't like that would you prefer them to all be by the building because we can do that I'm fine with wherever you put them I just want to make sure that uh we we we can accommodate and it does not interfere with Supply and power to our neighborhoods that's what's important near and Zer to my heart one of the things I always suggest the boards and Mr Higgins will probably be back next time fire departments when they're reviewing them get very concerned about how they place them so what I would just say is while you may want certain areas I I don't think if this applications approved to be stuck to this I would say that it would be conditioned upon approval of the fire department if if they approve and and and you have specific spaces I think it should be almost you know Illustrated but we'll try to but it really should be ultimately approved by the fire department because we I've had other municipalities I represent get very concerned about certain locations that they have well yes Ron I I I understand what you're saying I have had applications where there's under building parking and the Fire Chiefs are very concerned because if cars that start on fire do not go out and so with the modification that we've made uh to the plants we are somewhat protected from that the building they they are moved to places that are remote from the building and that's a and that's a good thing but you know ultimately you never know I mean I had a case in in municipality I just came here but the fire department actually they were still over parked so it was good but they wanted a little extra width in this certain area that that you know it was just too tight so they did lose two spots but it didn't affect the approvals because we still had more than enough paring so we can field change have you sent these plans out to the fire department or they review the prior ones yes these revised ones in August a August 1st these are RIS August 14th yeah so could you just send theet with ju a location from July to August I I don't know I don't recall but you know obviously whatever the fire chief recommends we're going to do we'll send out that so so whatever whatever he says or she says then then fine okay any other questions and you'll find yes I do have another question uh total amount of trees to be removed you said we're 168 is that correct that's correct okay qualifying trees and there were 38 trees for Relief can you explain what that means go back to my calcul in the plant and I just want to clarify for the record the tree is actually a design waiver not a variance correct Paul I I yes that's correct thank you that's correct also all these trees will be marked and Jim will U field check them if they can stay open this would probably be the worst case scenario I that setting up and he has to pay for 38 trees basically it it's it's actually 36 I have off by two uh so there are certain uh credits you get the Trees of the 350 trees I noted many of them are classified as buffer trees and you don't get credit for those buffer trees when you look at the remainder and you subtract them from subtract the uh 168 minus the 132 that we provide we 36 trees short so that 36 is the current number that we would have to uh pay for to the tree fund and uh or PL or well those that 36 that we haven't found a place for you find a place if if if if Jim finds a place for 36 more then we'll plant them and if he finds ones that we don't want to take out that are qualifying trees and that'll change the number two but what I was mentioning before is that's all be done during construction where you have these little tweaks to what is the donation to the tree fund if anything thank you I just have one more uh question back to the uh buffer um for the residents he went from 25t to 45 ft um and um have you considered making that buffer any bigger than that to accommodate the residents because 45 ft is really not much for such a large complex being built on such a uh you know this is is a massive project it's not small okay you have a lot of parking spaces 206 of them and you're going to have a lot of traffic because from what I'm seeing here this is going to be um seven days a week this is not just on Sundays for Sunday mass or Sunday worship um this is for every day so I believe a buffer um my request is that we need a bigger buffer cuz 45 ft is not enough for the residents that have been living there um you know taking into consideration that um you know it is the house of worship and we understand that but we also have Quality quality of life for the residents that have been living there for such a long time their whole lives basically so I think we need a bigger buffer than 45 ft I I understand your point we uh 25 is the requirement and we we almost doubled it and uh we need the remainder for parking the parking is now a variance that we'll have to prove that we do provide sufficient parking and I but I think we're at the point where uh we can't really provide any significant addition to the buffer thank you other questions no okay questions from the public if you can go to the microphone and again these are questions for Mr Anderson's testimony and if you can state your name your address and then you can ask your question sure stepen Maxwell three Sharon Drive there's is there 206 parking spaces for the facility that's correct okay um and it's anticipated that's going to be right in and right out on asra Avenue that's correct do you anticipate with 206 cars trying to leave the facility onto Asbury Avenue that everybody's going to adhere to the right out turn in all they have a traffic expert testify okay that he may give you a better quality of answer and I assume that there's some information and I wasn't that how things are are scheduled and how different different times of different people leaving and going and coming correct no our our next expert will go through the building use and the house of worship use and then we'll have a traffic expert that will then tie it all together yeah okay so maybe that great thank you it's this expert would answer but I just just to respond briefly Paul there will be a mechanism within the driveway to prevent people from making a left term for there is there's an island that strongly encourages you to go to the right it makes it difficult for you to turn left all right thank you okay other questions for this witness you can go to the microphone and if you can state your name and your address and you may ask your question question hi Nick Lord I 13 Sharon Drive um I had a question with respect to um this exhibit here okay so and it's not with respect to traffic I'll hold that up for later that's a70 point2 so and this has to go with drainage um Sharon I'm sorry Asbury Avenue floods right here why why you put it up why pull it up can probably use the exhibits right up here on the board too but uh okay and speak into the microphone looking at the proposed diagram I don't know if you've taken into consideration that Asbury Avenue floods right when you have D and I know that You' created more impervious uh drainage but um it floods right there and anybody who drives down Asbury Avenue when we have really heavy rainstorms you can see the county the county puts out cones to warn people of the flutter area like that so my concern is that ask a question your question is have you taken that into account onen we we do have a new Inlet proposed right in that location where you indicated the uh low point is and that would be have to be approved by mon County and uh and so that's that's what we're doing with it so you're putting so has that new Inlet taken into consideration what the standing water is is there during heavy rainstorms it it doesn't uh really address that it it it it uh it looks at the drainage area to it but what you should understand is the drainage system on site which does contribute to that puddle you're talking about uh is going to be controlled we discharge for like what would be a common storm that happens on a frequency of every two years at half of the discharge rate I believe in this design it's even less because we're recharging just about everything to the ground well so there's so there's almost no runoff from this site so it's actually improving the drainage circumstance there and then we are providing an inlet at that point where you're talking about uh there being a a puddle uh when the utility plan was presented uh one of the comments that was made was um the water will discharge to Asbury Avenue as it has in the past so if the water does discharge Asbury Avenue has it has in the past um will we still have standing water I I you will have an improved condition from what is in the past now when I said can you present evidence that we will have an improved condition because I have my drainage report indicates that the drainage that has in the past come to Asbury Avenue is reduced which is part of the ordinance requirements for for the community so we have in the development of the site controlled the storm water discharging there so it can only improve the conditions at that point excuse me you just said it would be reduced but if we still have flooding on Asbury Avenue wouldn't any discharge on to Asbury Avenue contribute to additional flooding no it would it this is if I think I can help you with this one thank you Bennett um so in in the existing condition and Paul correct me from uh everything is draining off of the the property over land into the room and then it flows along the gutter line to a that exists on Asen in the proposed condition there is perous pavement and Stor Water Management of inlets and pipes and everything and the the storm water that's being discharged as aen is Going Underground so you're not having the same running off of the site that is going to be standing water so when you say It's Going Underground underground into the soil beneath the uh it's to be routed through a pipe Network to the same existing Inlet that it makes it to right now it's just going to be going through pipes when you say to the same Inlet do you mean the storm water discharge on Asbury Avenue or do you mean going into the uh land below the it there's a significant recharge capacity where goes into the the the Sandy layer of soil that was dry all the water was kept at the top because of the clay layer so now the water will because of the porest pavement and the and the the tension system will soak into the ground so there'll be less actually going to Asbury Avenue during the more severe storms like the once in 100-year frequency we will have discharge and there is a pipe system that actually comes down to Asbury Avenue so if we have flooding rather frequently wouldn't that be more than one in 100 years yes it's very likely to be although I don't know okay the particulars of it so I don't I don't know how you're coming up with one in 100 years then if we have flooding that more frequently well first the applicant is meeting the ordinance by reducing the discharge from the site okay he in as a result of that my questions are can I finish what I'm saying thank you so much as as a result of that he is improving the conditions of storm water on Asbury Avenue as his part of of this if there's an additional problem there that's really a County Drainage problem maybe they have to build something extending way down the street but this applicant is doing everything that's required by ordinance and the net result that you should see when this is done is less puddling in the front if it isn't completely eliminated for some storms okay is there a storm water I guess pipe that runs along Asbury Avenue yes there is I think there's some confusion it's not just running to the road it's going to a network part of the problem is that there's not enough drainage that it it backs up if you could look at the storm Source on Asbury Avenue and uh there's no outflow coming through them I know I live right around the corner from there is there another question I we could is there another question it's a question that's his answer okay you may not like it but that's his answer that's fine um you also mentioned earlier that uh there was a survey conducted by the church uh to reduce parking could you expand on that a little bit more what that survey I'm sure Paul actually was Paul that was that was me but our traffic engineer will be happy to go through that when he's here at the next meeting yeah it it I did mention it uh in in my testimony but it's just in passing that is a detail that the traffic engineer will go into in detail and you can ask him your questions then there's also it's in the report if you go on file and riew it um last question with respect to the uh buffer um there was discussion about the trees and the types of trees and a number of trees has any study been done with respect to a combination of the buffer the trees as well as lighting to see is the buffer actually going to protect the residents from noise and lighting and just the sight of the property um at night or are the because when you look at the diagram it's hard to tell because there's just trees sort of spotting all over the place it's not clear if the trees are going to be large enough wide enough and enough of the trees to provide a buffer we we have a dense buffer that is in accordance with actually it's one and a half times what the town requires they want a double row uh alternated evergreen trees planted at a height that will within a few years be taller than any light fixture that we have a triple row that's proposed in addition to that we have deciduous trees inside of that our light poles are 16 ft high they are in conformance with the ordinance there in terms of light intensity there is no light spill onto the neighboring properties uh at at the property line there's there's zero light on the ground from the lights proposed so uh I believe the design with the landscaping and and and so forth is uh sufficient to you know protect you from uh light glare on the site in addition to that we've had discussion in the past and it has not changed that when uh the church is done for the evening when their last class or meeting is over the lights are going to be turned off so it's not going to be left on all night long um last question there was a question raised earlier about the 45 foot buffer not being enough um and one of the responses was uh that you need the remainder for parking and it cannot provide any more uh buffer um for the public um what if the building size was reduced uh would that provide you uh additional parking and buffer or is that a question to be brought up later the I'll just say the the buffer exceeds the ordinance requirements so we're already going above and beyond so we don't have a Duty or we're not seeking relief to make the buffer any larger we required a 25t buffer and we're giving a 45 foot buffer well so but can that can you answer this question because you brought up the comment that we need the remainder of the parking and not provide any more for the public based upon uh the site requirements if the building size was reduced can that give you an additional buffer and less work this is not relevant we're not going to reduce the building size we we comply uh there's no F issue there's no impervious cover issue so we will not be reducing the the the building size okay thank you okay are there other questions from the public for Mr Anderson if you can state your name and your address Terry Maxwell three Sharon Drive you want directly along the so my concern is a buffer my entire backyard um when I looked at the plans the other day it did say 25 was this new 25 is the required so the required line is shown and then the actual curb line is shown as a farther distance okay so from my yard back it's 45 at that 45 feet buffer is that where you will start planting trees no the no so from your property line to the curb line on is to the curb line on the property is 45 ft and what will be there within between the uh let me because we're going to pull up the plan with the Landscaping so you can see it so you can see the plantings are in the buffer area in order to screen it it's still very confusing if you can use the microphone my house is here right here um my house is here okay and when I sit on my patio the 25 ft I could probably say hi to parishioners as they come in um so my concern is the buffer I know it's 45 ft but what will be then what so these this triple row here these are these are evergreen trees those are those are ever triple row of evergreen trees and you see how they're staggered so that the gaps between them are filled in by the one behind it okay so we have a triple row of evergreen trees then we have deciduous trees you know that will become higher and higher canopies and and then you have some shrubs and then you have so there will be no fence no there's a fence right here there's a so a fence first then the trees corre so that I will be looking at a fence correct would you say that when I sit in my yard I'll be looking at a fence versus looking at a nicer buffer you'll see the buffer sing well but I'll be looking at a fence can you tell me what kind of fence that would be it has to it's in that area'll be Sixt high and it will uh transparent enough where you can see some okay so they're really I wouldn't call that a buffer would would you say that is a buffer because or what do you consider a buffer wouldn't that be something where you can't see the other side what like if I have a buffer between me and my neighbor I can't see what's going on in their yard I can pull up the ordinance definition of a buer okay if you'd like because I believe the ordinance they they meet the ordinance requirement of a buffer okay we in our ordinance what a buffer needs to be now as stated would you say can I answer oh I'm sorry in our ordinance it says how big a buffer has to be how wide and what it must consist of they meet that requirement and then some um but would you say that this land as said by the planner previously should fit the character of the neighborhood this is correct does that fit the character of the neighborhood this is not he's not a planner oh yeah he is he is our planner as well but but no this is a we're seeking different relief than the other application all right totally different Rel still about character the neighborhood um now agree so I have some other questions um who qualified the removal of the trees it will be the board planner Jim Higgins will go and do a S sidewalk we haven't done that yet okay all right and then the rest is I guess that um because are you aware that most people do not follow Right Turn Only out of a the traffic engine traffic question the traffic engineer based on that okay you'll have an opportunity and I knows this ask each each witness a question and at the end of their case can come up and talk to the board and tell them anything you want any other questions from the public and if you can state your name and your address and remember questions for his testimony um I'm Michelle I'm an adjacent property owner my unprotected under Daniel's law so unless you want to redact it um I could tell you my address privately um okay when you make the minutes I don't know what the preference is it's okay it's just okay um the um I'm sorry I don't even know which one's up the the 2 well let me say because you're the engineer and the planner only saying but now with no landscape architect do I ask you landscape related questions at this landscape related questions at this time um so the the buffer I know it was increased and I know I can't say my comments right now but um and I'm sorry I'm sick well and the air quality um is it this one so you go here if everybody can hear me you increased here but then it didn't increase here it still went double and on 2801 border it went back back down to double and I didn't know if there was a specific reason for that it was double to begin with what we did was we did not increase the number in in the front portion after the jog in the sideline uh that has not changed the location of the driveway there has not changed and in fact the buffer is probably more than 45 ft in that in that particular point no but the question was would the reason is just because there's so much grass there that's why it wasn't that's just if that there was no reason or if the reason was because there's some large deciduous trees that are also being taken down which and I understand that that some of that has to happen but I just didn't know if it was considered at all to go from three and keep it then if you're going to increase the volume of visual and Evergreen buffer visually between the neighbors for you know I would say maybe 90% of the surrounding properties were it not to be able to go that last maybe 20 feet on both sides um where it was increased for so many other neighbors well we do have some space there we could probably add some additional trees but we already have significant number of buffer trees I don't know that it's necessary there we do have uh a nice space there uh in that and then uh the house is farther away from that property line also no I'm understand that there's also a Shrubbery row there also um and I I can't classify so I know it's not yet it's for uh sound and stuff sure that's the reason for the question um the other this pole here yes I have it written down the number but the eastern most the property has three traffic PS on it utility polls that I believe all three are going to be moved back more Northern right is there a I I don't believe you have the final say but that goes to the utility company yeah I can show a location but they're going to put it where they want um when you plan the your proposed and I know you don't have final say but has it been addressed where if the poll that's here gets moved Northern like I don't know in of the plan um the angle then that the would be moved out so the wires are supposed to may be running uh exactly parallel to sidewalk may end up being at a slightly different angle and whether the angle of the wires now going from the pole that's over here um will then begin interfering with existing Landscaping on the adjacent property has that been explored at all it has not and and quite honestly I don't think that uh I have any part in that decision-making role I think the power company will determine where they put it and um I don't think that they'll put their main lines over a private property unless they have an easement uh they'll put service lines into the property but they won't put that over the property line but that's entirely their decision not mine in your experience and if you can't say that's fine but do you do you believe it it would it would generally move it gross out of line of the other existing poles that are are along a main Corridor like that no we're actually I think we have a small widening in here to to ma match the rest of the the roadway with uh in that area so I I think it it's probably not going to be a significant change like a matter of like a few feet would you think well it's yeah it might be more than a few feet but uh but I you know I don't think it'll be a radical change that's going to create issues that you're concerned the the utility company has their own design team and set of Engineers and they'll they make the determination it might not just be the the poles that are in front of this property if if the you know the wires are um on too sharp of an angle they might have to move the next pole down the line a little bit it's up to them how they do that and uh like Paul said it's it's not um it's not typical for them to have their wires extending over private property but so the likelihood of them like decreasing over I can't have to phrase of this question I'm sorry like it's more just with other trees being taken down in the area that additional ones on my property wouldn't have to come down also was just the concern I was asking you know that it would be moving over so it's not likely I I can't say for you know what the what the utility company's going to do but I would suspect that they're going to impact your private property they would notify you and and discuss that with you um I guess I all the top of my head because even with my reading last I can't see it I think it was something like there's 205 Norway sprues um as the buffer and then other ones there was there any consideration to to diversify the the species of Evergreens that are going to be surrounding it and throughout the property um our our Township planner will review the final landscape plan and make that decision and determination whether not some of the species have to be changed and he's more more experien okay I am and that has been the plan since the first meeting we we've talked about that and changing the species now is they're just placeholders okay Norway spruce is a very nice tree but 205 of them will probably get changed and Jim in general recommends several different species get diseas something that and the applicants in all these type of site ples have have a bonding issue of of retaining the site PL and trees that are die have to be replaced there's bonding there's a lot of other stuff to protect the town so the site plan remains as approved for many years um uh the other question I have is um the conditional use uh portion says that the building um within the residential area where the just about 35 ft above grave um I understand the building has two fronts um the northern front of the building this he didn't testify anything so we're not getting that's not or get to that at the architect part or then where where would I ask that well I probably testified the building height in my fir in the first meeting and that has not changed we have an elevation plan which we didn't have well the architect can go over the elevation okay so we'll get to that later but we don't I don't think the only reason they need a D3 is a conditional use variance because they don't need the depth required because of the shape of this lot that's the only thing the only thing they don't meet we meet all the other requirements I well V visually per the ordinance requirements we meet it we meet everything okay so the ordinance is 35 ft and I understand that the two stor 35 ft the Practical usage front of the building is the parking lot side of the building the north side of the building correct is that that's where the that's where the main entrance is yes correct okay the southern side of the building is the most visibly two neighbors and passers by are and visitors to the community um that side from the sidewalk unless I'm misunderstanding this have just and I understand this this year but we have just a a sidewalk and then 37 ft from this side it's 35 from here but it's 37 from this side straight up with no front planting I didn't know if it was considered um to add any decorative planting to the front of the building I think that that's a more appropriate question for once you see the elevations and you have someone testified as to the elevation going to do that the AR architect there's no landscape architect that that's one of the variants you're requesting I prepar the plan I'll ask yeah it's not a conditional use VAR so that's I asked that question when I don't want to I don't want to the Landscaping plan is presented well we're presenting the landscaping that's my this is it you know I I my office prepared the landscape plan we we do have a sidewalk right up against the building we do have the trees out in front we can add some additional shrubs along the the front roadway but not necessarily right up against the building uh we I don't want to pull the roadway down towards Asbury Avenue I want to keep it where it is uh and and I think that when you see the elevation of that side of the building you'll think that it's an attractive front of the building that you can look at and and the buffering that we have with the four deciduous trees and other uh small flowering trees will be enough to highlight see the front yard it's okay that's the other part and I don't know if this is the approprate place either again the signage I don't know if that's you bu that's going to be the architect so the architect is going to walk us through the building use what the building's going to look like what's going to be in the building and the sign any signage or any decorative features of the building F that's that's this guy okay I know there were questions last meeting um and I don't think we still have I believe the letter said there's variance request regarding fencing is that still the case no we're good it was it was requested out of an abundance of caution when I do my notices I put in whatever I think might pop up but we do not need any variants right now for the fence is this still a plan fence that so we had we had a fence there because a basin was going to be there the Basin has been removed so planted that's correct and then this fence is all then it turns to four it's going to be there after after that's four going to the front go four yes this is allet M and that's because it counts as it that's because of the ordinance we're following the ordinance dictates how tall you could put a fence and where so it's allowed to be 6 feet where it's 6 feet and it's allowed to be 4T where it's 4T is that because it's a side yard yeah in front of the building has to be a lesser height so from the front face of the building forward I'm sorry this one's still for yeah of the building yeah this is going to be a foot fence and we still haven't decided on a final design of the fence they comply with the or it's just to be transparent you know it can't be a solid F I know but the last meeting it was also they would have been discussed chain link and then the township said no chain will not talking about like a a like aluminum like aluminum picket F yes it has to be it has to be spacing in between a minimum of like four or five in I think yes but we're definitely at 4T here 4T there that time required no no I last time it was we weren't so that's while you while you double check on is the idea to keep the fence consistent along that neighboring property uh by looking at that map right that that's where it juts towards the building and then out to the street yeah it's just from that corner down yeah so I just wanted to transition I could have transitioned from the other corner and kept it six uh the other way but you know it was flip of a coin really I and I and you're right I think that the consistent along the frontage of that lot at four four feet is is you know maybe the reason the better choice if the neighbor thought hey it would be great to have six foot on that one side would you be a if they want six here fine it's still compliant with the ordinance and we could do that yeah I feel like yeah it's the same distance from the the tightest spot I mean I understand the 25 goes here obviously don't but yeah so so if you you wanted to make that change there's no objection to that I mean I mean this is the 25 you know and then right Onre like about and then here it's and I know that in theory it's 45 it's it's one of the smallest buffers there areas so that's six foot how would you how would you describe that the engineer that would be the uh that would that actually it's actually the southeast uh sideline Corner uh you might want to say it's uh the corner of lot 73 which is an adj which is the adjacent lot six fence which is compliant corre correct in the area they're requesting it it would still be compliant comp would move that up okay um and I believe there's just a gring change here is that you yeah yes okay it is there's a grading change here where it goes slightly downhill um I believe it only decreases about a foot which is very very minor but I believe that grading is resulting in possibly the removal of a few additional live trees if that could be just very quickly about the trees Jim is gonna walk the site so if Jim goes and says this tree is alive we love it save it it will be saved um so so there is po so and that to to what Amanda is saying if we get out to the field and I have a nice flat grade right and there's a beautiful oak tree behind it that Jim says we want to save then maybe we can make it steeper and get up to grade and save the oak tree and but that is something that is done in the field but that's something that would be done in the field and that's part of the the the the minor changes that would be done with the board's planner in the field sorry so so use well I given the time I don't think we're getting to him tonight but we have an architect he's going talk about the building use the building is going to look like and all of that then we're going to have a traffic engineer who's going to talk about the traffic impacts of the driveway his 7 on parking and then Paul will return again to do tie it all together with planning testimony okay this is and I don't they don't know this is a question that's it's probably like a shot in the dark with this whole I know there's there's 36 possibly trees has it ever been done has it ever been considered where as opposed to you're then dropping into a tree fund you then if a neighbor agrees planting those trees nearby where they had previously exed I don't think that's permitted by it's it's never I didn't think so but it was just something that I thought um he other questions and I guess just you go over just restate your name and address florid 13 Sharon dve could you go over what the next experts are going to be talking about because we sort of went over you mentioned several of them yes we have several experts and they all have submitted some sort of report or plan that's on file with the par department so next we're going to have Robert Julie who's our architect he's going to walk you through the building use um what the building is going to look like and the elevation so to speak he'll also discuss Heights then we're going to have Lee Klein he's our traffic engineer he's going to discuss uh the traffic report that he did the parking study that he accomplished and the driveway and then Paul is also our professional planner because he's licensed in the state of New Jersey and he is going to put on the proofs for the D3 here we're seing a D3 for failure to meet one conditional you standard which is failure to meet the minimum lot depth that's the only D3 portion of this and then we have a couple of C variances that he will also be testifying to okay um I didn't hear lighting mentioned Paul Paul his is that now or is that later well I I well it it is and I I mentioned in the question to answer to one of the questions just previously is that our lighting plan is completely compliant it has 16 foot high poles it might have been you that I that I that I yeah so could you so so one go ahead as a resident I'm concerned about the ambient lighting up in the sky draining over or going over into the residence area uh that could be alleviated with respect to trees and or or more down different types of lighting these are downward focused lights nighty night sky compliant has any study been done to see how much leakage of lighting gets over into the residence from this there's a lighting plan in the set that shows the spread of what lighting intensity be what will it will be at each point and at the property line there is no light projected from these lights onto your property okay okay thank you you're welcome if you can state your name and your address my name is deah p 30 Blair Court I just have two questions with the when the with the buffer right with these plants right here how tall were will they be when they're planted and once they're full grown like how many years will it take for them to be full grown and how tall will they will they be once they're full grown well they're as we mentioned just just before is that there might be some substituted species by the board's planner all right but we're currently have on to plan Norway spruce planted at 6 to 10 foot high okay okay they grow when properly planted approximately 2 feet a year and they a Norway spruce can be you know 30 ft high and you know and and have a plenty of height and the spacing that we have them set at is a spacing where the the lower branches will grow together and it'll be almost like a solid wall okay and then I have a question about lighting can I ask that as well sure okay with the lighting where will the lighting be in the back exactly cuz I'm over I'm on I'm over here okay uh [Applause] moment so the nearest lights to your property are in these planted Islands here so you'll have a 22 uh 24t wide driveway and then the 25 foot minimum buffer over there so they're they're approximately 50 ft away from your property line and they're just like in amongst these these PL trees there right and what are the times and hours of operation of the church and how long will these lights be next next witness the next witness will discuss the operational hour next witness but the lights will not be on all night I mean this is this is a church they're not I know but in the winter it's dark at 4:30 and and and yes so they might be on for 4:30 if the last class it's at at 8:00 or something last the door and then there will be there will be security lighting to the extent necessary lesser they wouldn't be the exterior of the parking lot okay if you can restate your name and your address Terry Maxwell 3 Sharon Drive I have a question on the lighting um when I read on the plans it said that the lights were on Dusk Till Dawn so are they not going to be on Dusk Till Dawn then those parking lot lights they will be off after an event ends they can be off and what we're saying is that Our intention is to shut them off okay well that's or a portion of them that you know so that you can have site security but you know around the building there's lights so somebody's trying to get in you can see them sure but I mean you know the higher parking lot lights that shine down the ones in the exterior of the parking lot obviously are not necessary like the ones that is uh the last person was asking about is way back here there's really no reason for those to be on why is this a different color is that the porest a oh okay right so your answer it's a plotting error I didn't know what it meant a plotting error you almost got away with it very close sorry the teacher and noticing the detail yeah you did you caught me are the lights in this I was confused when I did look so are is that where these are those are those are all planted Islands there is there's one light in here there's one intermediate in in between spaces like in this area and then there's the next one is in the next planted Island way over here so then they're 16 high now when my last question I did look at the ligh in numbers although it was not quite sure but it did show a little overflow in my yard well I got a oh I guess that's not my yard your yard starts here you see that that's a zero zero it is it is okay close enough but thank you very you're welcome any other questions from the public C can I just say something regarding the LI um so one of our it's in our report that um the parking lot illuminance and this is right from the ordinance should be reduced to 50% upon the close of the building provided a minimum of 02 foot candles is maintained there was discussion about certain light fixtures being shut off entirely and and maybe some staying on um so that you can get the security lighting I don't think we can figure that out exactly right now which ones have to be shut off uh but maybe like a a condition of of approval would be that uh a new plan would be submitted for that uh overnight security lighting yes to to maintain that not problem that's a reasonable request okay if you can come to the microphone and state your name and your address hi darling Sandlin 11 Sharon Drive so a couple of my questions might be for you or they might for when Jim comes for the with the tree analysis um so just so you know Jim is not going to do that here Jim is not gonna analyze the trees here if if I oh I understand he's not going to do it here but he has to do the study before it can be he no he's going to do it during instruction when they Li when they going to if the plan is approved and they line everything up and show them where the survey is and where the the markers are and everything will then go out into the field oh so once everything has been approved clear approv no no no before clearance before they clear it but they will they will Mark the property where the building's going to go and whatnot and he will go actually out to the field and do all this it's done it's like a preconstruction right that's the word thank you okay so he'll check the trees before it's cleared that after it's approved correct so typically in all these cases after uh something is approved if there's a preconstruction meeting with the town you meet the professionals and you kind of go over Logistics it will all be done in that process okay yeah I've built the site so I understand that part I just didn't clear any trees because I want we're not going to be clearing any trees yeah until Jim walk through with us right okay one of my questions so I'm going to go back to the lighting um because I am concerned about it also since I am an ex um the the down lighting that you're talking about you're saying that the spread doesn't go on to the neighboring yards I understand that I think one of the questions that Nick asked that I was also concerned about is the ambient lighting so even if it's if a light is shining down onto the ground I understand there is a an area it falls on what about the light that it gives out the ambient light um has there been any kind of a lighting study of of the ambient light or is that included on the plan that I can read that I could actually understand since I'm not a lighting engineer well it you don't actually see the lighting element the bow itself which so you're so it's like if you see one of these like Acorn shaped fixtures and like you know you see along the street that's G to have lighting that just you could see it from a half mile away our fixtures are up here it's a big it's a shell and then there's a a light in it and it shines down only I understand that so I mean I have a kitchen with high hat lights and they shine down and the whole kitchen lights up I'm talking about the ambient light that is given off because it's 16 ft up in the air it's not Spotlight like a laser that shines down the ground it provides light which is why you only have certain number of Lights in a parking lot because there's ambient light that it gets off right and that throw what they call the throw of the light how far it goes horizontally is in the model that's on our lighting plan and that's how they determine what the intensity with the overlapping ambient light as you're calling it at at various points and eventually it gets to zero and the way designed is at the property line it's zero so if I'm standing at my property line and your lights are on the parking lot I will not see them you'll see the parking lot that's my point right that's my point if you're standing in the parking lot that's the ambient light that I'm talking about okay it's not like it goes from your line to my line and goes from light enough to light the parking lot to darkness which is what I see now right uh yes that's I think that's the concern that we're talking about it's not it's not the area of ground that the light hits It's the ambient light that is thrown out that beyond that point it's Darkness well when the trees are initially planted at 10 feet high uh and the lights are at 16 you will see them until the trees are larger depending on the angle that you're looking you're in your second floor if you're in the second floor of a house and you're looking down you will see them too until the lights are turned off and then what about the security lights is that on the plan like how much light that's what uh talking they would want to see and how much ambient light is that what part of the um yeah so the the ordinance requires that there is security lighting and it it requires that the lights should be um dimmed to 50% when the the church closes um and and it has to maintain a a minimum Illumination in the parking lot for security purposes so the the request that I had was that a plan be submitted so which indicates exactly which lights would remain on in order to achieve that and because what the the previous neighbor that just came up you know there was discussion about turning off some of the lights that are closer to the property lines um so that that's where we it has to be determined But ultimately they are complying with the ordinance technically by turning off some completely around the outside it's probably you know not providing all the security lighting that the town ordinance requires so I think that's probably why the board here wants to see it so everybody understands that maybe the exterior parts of the parking lot are not lighting standard mostly because of the sensitivity of the neighboring okay so we have to decide between the safety of our neighborhood versus the light pollution is basically what what we have to decide or what the Board needs to decide because if it's dark and there are people coming and going and EV spots there that are probably going to require full lighting we have to decide if it's safer to have darkness which is preferable visually and for our quality of light or light pollution that's is that our is that what we have to decide think there was some discussion depart me that the EV facilities are not going to be operating 24 hours that's correct yes at the last hearing there was a lot about the EV stations we're putting in because it's required we're not doing it to to make money to Market them market so when when the church is closed they're closed so there won't be somebody at night is that using that is that once that is determined is that um is there any way of like in the future knowing that it's going to continue to whatever is approved which would be inclusion as part of the approval that e stations have to close when the church closes for instance okay okay that is a permanent part of the determination of the board okay it's part of the resolution okay and the applicant to comply if the applicant doesn't comply then they can decide it for zoning violations and ultimately it's a state mandate the state mandate supersedes anything locally so whatever the state mandate is Mr Anderson are you proposing live evsc or make ready uh we were talking live live because this the standard is that they they are not required to put evsc in they they can put Make Ready in which means basically put the conduit and everything ready and they can light it up after but they're putting they're going above and beyond what they're required to do yeah residential developments have to put in live that's a difference any non-residential they only have to make it make ready and there there was also um an earlier excuse me version of the plan had more uh EV spaces uh because they can uh take credit for um the EV spaces to reduce their parking requirement um but after discussion by the public and in a meeting between the professionals it was you know we we've determined that it was better to limit the number of e EV spaces and reduce that uh parking demand uh reduce the amount of parking that they were taking credit for um in order to alleviate the concerns so this application goes back to January when you first asked the yes okay just one thing the the DCA put out something called a frequently asked questions memo about edsc is clarifying I joke that half of the questions were from me Ben knows they were um but anyway one of the one of the argum that came came from this is that the credits can only be taken on the evse EV spaces that are required by by Statute so in essence if I'm required to put 20 in but I put 30 I only get credit for the 20 10 is above and beyond you only can get for that's how it's written like the credit is based on what's required by Statute okay any other questions yeah now I'm distracted um okay that is for later um oh back to the EV thing because this kind of concerned me with your answer to the EV this fire regulation I think that you brought up um and you would made a comment like the EV spots are going to be they're marked on the plan he can Mark you can show them they're staggered throughout the parking lot well I can I can ask a question without that build so my concern as a neighbor even I'm on the other side so I don't have to wor about it but I think there are neighbors here that might be concerned about the whole thing it might be far from your building but it's not necessarily from neighbor so I agree with the fire you know it's just something your pointed is a little different concerned I understand I'm concerned about the entire project if the fire chief comes up with a safety concern we're going to address it okay and just so you know they used to all be next to the building and the public didn't like that so that's why we staggered them so if you wanted to put them back we'll put him back um well let's see what the next question is next you have another question I'm not trying to I'm just noting that that was something that was that was a revision made in respon public commentary I understand because I understand but you don't have to get okay so for the drainage and the trees I was going to wait thinking that the walk through was going to happen maybe before the whole site was but since that's not happening um I've read some articles about now you now you're testifying which you'll have a chance to do later question I'm trying to yeah but we you have to just ask in a question for in your drainage plan did you consider not just the um drainage going through the silt but the absorption that the current that the existing trees absorb yes yes there's there's factors in drainage calculations uh uh in the programs that we use that indicates the condition the surface condition of the site this is considered a Woods in good condition which indicates all of the trees and their ability to utilize rainfall that comes down in in addition to roughness coefficients on the surface for how fast the water runs in any particular direction so yes because it it just surprises me that even of course parking lot and building can absorb more water okay now now you're T that's not a question yeah okay um person okay I think that's all thank you any other questions from the public and if you can state your name and your address I Joe torsa 2801 ASB AV directly west of the site and you're please make sure you have questions I do okay okay so number one of the the curb cut um how far from the West property line will the Curve cup CU I know it's not going to be in the center third anymore correct so like from the actual property line to the entrance yeah so I I believe I testified it was 73 feet to the center line uh soer line is like the middle of the the middle of the driveway as opposed to the edge of the driveway so is probably 60 ft from the curve line on the west side of the driveway to the property line but there is a slanted property line there so it tapers you know so you you have a driveway that's straight and this goes out like this you know so so around 6 around so yes that's what I'm saying just okay around 60 ft gotcha um okay so um and the 45t buffer that that is not for the West border is that only for I just don't understand like it's the 45 foot buffer is was added to the Eastern side of the property uh the buffer on the western side of the property had some additional tree planting but was not changed uh graphically or the the curbs weren't moved okay so 20 25 foot buffer from the Western border well it exceeds that but yeah 25 yeah but we didn't change it from the last submission okay um okay so also um if um why why would why would a burm not be considered or maybe not be part of the plan if it could not eliminate but alleviate like noise Visual and runoff all those types of problems like so cuz I mean I think there's predent for BMS being built around when I say BM I mean like you know I guess literally just a hill of soil that then the trees will be planted on top of it it's possible but it towards the property that you towards the W towards the west side you're going downhill so you have a limited you know ability to put a burm there there there's also the the ordinance um there's an ordinance requirement that you're not allowed to change grade by more than 2 feet on site and the installation of a burm does exactly that so that the the township ordinance really kind of um does not encourage Burns ni okay and just the the trash dumpster um do we or is this the right time to ask sure when what time of day would that be emptied or is it is it like a couple times a week is there going to be that loud metal bang at like 500 a. couple times a week or I I don't know that we know that answer yeah but we usually we do usually condition approval that that that usually has to be doing week days although we have to find out what what they do during the weekends but not before 7 a.m. in the morning and things like that we we can't condition some of some of the timing of that but they they deal with the private part yeah understand you can't give me like an exact time no no we usually I I think we say 7 a.m. I think it was 8 I think it was last time we had something like that was like after 8 a.m. after 8 A.M so so it would be yeah dumpsters 8 a.m. before 5 p.m 5 P.M we can't really do Monday through Friday on something like this but you know I don't know maybe we'll have testimony as to when they plan on D issue but we can do an 8 to5 situation so that we don't have a 6 in the morning so that could be put into the be part of the approval that would be okay um and then they have a private they have a contract with the private party guy they can't come out you think you can get my recycling live to get on board with that or I don't know we've done that there before the residential area Township truck the town I know comes early but at least okay so and is it I don't know if you could tell me this now just last question I guess the dump the trash dumpster would be um like why can't it be closer to the to the building now I understand it can't be in other words like um I think the legs pulled out anymore the there you go perfect all right the trash dumpster can't because I know it was like being moved around at the last meeting um months and month months ago and it was like in front of someone's property and they didn't like that and now it's kind of closer to to mine or to ours and um so I guess maybe um can that be moved closer to the actual house of worship building or does it have to remain on on the peripheral and also um if so is it is it because they would expect it to to be emitting lots of oder um I don't mean it I I don't mean I'm not trying to be factious but really um because only because I don't know how far it's going to be from my property line right where I have a swing set right there like where I think it's going to be going and um well do you see where it is on the plan right there yeah it's right by the garage on the opposite side of the garage so it's if your house is the house down right here so it's on the opposite side of the garage for you we put it on the opposite side of the garage to be farther away from your home and here this so so it's going to be more like0 from the dumpster which is on the opposite side of the garage so so we thought yeah yeah so that's that's how we thought it was a good location that balanced distance from your property and distance from this building thank you you're welcome any other questions from the public okay and we are at 103 minutes for um one expert so I think that we will um conclude tonight one moreck question please and I'm not sure if it's uh for you will there be an outdoor PA system it's not for me okay thank you okay so Mr Steinberg I believe this is the same continue to December 19th without notice back because she told me that full on the 19 oh okay it sound like the applicant before usely not proceed on the 19 I believe the 19th 19th is good I have shoulder surgery on the probably need a driver I have one yeah I like I can read the transcript for my planning testimony yeah I mean just saying Colleen you're needed to the front of the room we're not talking about the application just here that be the I don't think that's coming up want to carry it but don't do we carry without notice and do the same give the next date of January 6 two go up I don't think they will no I would very much appreciate car to the 19th one of witnesses that night take5 that so carry to December 19th 7:00 p.m. without notice no further notice it beeting the 19th you want to call the day before in case something changes okay and a motion to adjourn all in favor any opposed