##VIDEO ID:wx3zefI46mI## e e e e e e e good evening everyone welcome to the old Township Zoning Board of adjustment meeting September 19 I'm sorry October 17 2024 adequate notice this meeting of the Albridge Township Zoning Board of adjustment has been provided in accordance with the open public meetings act at least 48 hours prior to the commencement of this meeting by prominently posting in the municipal complex an announcement giving the time to date the lo location the agenda of this meeting also by mailing such announcements to the home news and tribune filing a copy of such announcement with the municipal clerk and posting the agenda on the municipal website Mr hollahan will be sitting in a secretary this evening he's wearing two hats and he's up here on the deis with us would you please call the RO sir yes Miss Anders present M Chevalier here Mr ISO here Mr scagno here Mr Stoner here m t is absent Mr Victoria is absent Mr Singh is absent and chairman solvent here thank you uh just some housekeeping issues uh this meeting is being live fed on CV 15 here within the township also uh it's being simultaneously sent out on YouTube live should you ever need to review the meeting you can find them on YouTube uh I would ask everyone at this particular time to please silence your phone or turn them off in deference to those are going to be tested testifying we have a rather large schedule this evening I would ask everyone please cooperate I'm going to try and move uh the initial business through quickly that leaves us we have two uh two C's and three d's for the attorneys they know what I'm talking about um that'll probably I'm hoping I can if I can get all of those in and I'm going to move up the other C I'm going to take the first two C's and then we'll go to the D's uh hopefully by 8:15 that'll leave an hour and 45 but I'll stretch it to 10:15 the B board rules are we shut down testimony at 10 and then we take uh any uh public information or questioning till 10:30 I'm more than willing to go to 10:15 on that that means we have to chop it up so you have there's three of you so you have 120 minutes I'll give each of the applications 40 but in reality it has to be 35 so we can turn it over so if everybody cooperates we may be left with some extra time I don't know but uh that's my plans going forward all right having said that I'll move forward on the minutes board members say to September 19 2024 I hope everyone had a chance to read them and review them there's any questions or comments for deletions or additions if not please someone mooving for memorialization CH move it second scog moved in second roll call please miss Andrew yes M Chevalier yes Mr ISO yes Mr scagno yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman sovin yes we move on to resolutions it's item four on our agenda this evening uh there's four of them counselor so I'm going to start in order 11-202 24 Z Carol Baker C and D variants Mr Cheney thank you Mr chairman y uh resolution granting D4 use variance and bulk variances uh to Carol Baker for 180 Amboy Road mwan New Jersey also known as block 11 23813 and lot 1.13 uh public hearings on June 20th in 2024 and September 19th 2024 applicant proposed to construct a second story Edition with a new basement and construct front and rear coverboard porches no public comment uh was offered try to keep you quick tonight so we can keep on pace so that's that's all for that one that was quick that's every other line right yeah okay the board members you've heard the resolution please someone move it for adoption CH move it is there a second ISO roll call please miss Andrews yes Miss Chevalier yes Mr Rizo yes yes Mr scogna yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman tvin yes uh 54-- 2023 Z conserva irrigation major preliminary and final site plan with c and d variance Mr Cheney thank you Mr chairman uh yeah D1 use variance both variances and preliminary and final major site plan approval uh cons to conserve a irrigation for Block uh 12301 lot one also know as 4291 County Route 516 Albridge New Jersey a public hearing was held on September 19th 2024 applicant proposed to retain the existing building as office space for an irrigation Sprinkler Company and erect additional improvements including expand reconfigured parking area white final fencing along the boundaries and an 1850 ft outdoor material storage area area uh public comment was received by AA bar car uh in speci concerns regarding storage of certain equipment outdoors and those were remedied by the applicants condition of approval thank you Mr chairman board members you've heard the resolution so move for adoption please is Mrs Mr Rizo and Miss Andrews roll call please miss Andrews yes Miss chevier yes Mr ISO yes Mr scagno yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman svin yes 36- 2024 Z Shandra P panod it's a c variance bulk variance reliefed chra panod for 25 hibis Court Old Bridge New Jersey also known as block 7128 Lot 12 and Mr Holland I just want to note for the rec I do have a clerical error here in the first whereas uh 65 Greenwood Avenue should be 25 habiscus Court that's my error I apologize I subed to a public hearing on September 19 2024 applicants sought to uh erect a six- foot vinyl solid fence in its front yard and uh a gazebo Inus front yard as well uh no application was open to the public and no uh persons provideed testimony thank you Mr chairman thank you Mr channy board members someone move that for adoption please will move it is ISO second yes Lo call please thank you Miss Andrews yes M Cher yes Mr ISO yes Mr scogna yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman svin yes 38 dish 2024 Z Michael and Julian pacero variance Grant bulk relief to Michael and Julian pasero for 16 Jasmine Road mwan New Jersey also know as block uh 12.21 and Lot 8 public hearing was held on September 19 2024 uh applicants saw approval to construct addition on their existing house uh no public uh public no public comments were offered thank you Mr chairman Mr Cheney board members someone moveing please ISO Mr Rizo is there second Andrew thank you roll call please miss Andrew yes M chalier yes Mr Rizo yes Mr scagno yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman solman yes putting you back to work again Mr Cheney we're going to swear in the professionals we have Mr Eric plorn professional engineer Edward Fox professional planner and we have Dan hollahan who's the zoning officer for the township gentleman can have you each raise your right hand thank you do you Solly swear us the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide I do thank you gentlemen thank you well gentlemen alrighty uh as I said earlier is um Melissa and Richard Rodriguez here okay you're going to be right after I'm moving you up on the agenda you the first one's going to be uh Lewis bachio and then you'll be next okay so it wasio here come on up Sir so lady next you want to testify as well no okay you can have a seat and I'd ask you to either one no no no at it's a table Yeah right in front of the microphone you can pull that microphone towards you and if you would be so kind there's a button on it please push it and when it turns green you're good yeah it's a directional mic so you need to talk right into it not you don't have to choke it but yeah gotcha all right uh we have an application we know that uh you're here on a driveway expansion uh this is at 75- 223z it's block 15586 lot 706 243 thock Lane in Albridge this is going to require a a design waiver the applicant uh proposed to legitimize an 11x 53 driveway expansion the driveway was installed 1.5 feet approximately from the sidey yard where 5 foot minimum required what I'm going to ask you to do sir is just tell the board in uh your own words what happened uh what you did why you're here sure we may have some questions of you I'm going to ask the professional why you're here for this design waiver uh I'll have to go to a public portion see if there's any one who objects or agrees with this and we'll proceed at at that pace so in your own words you can start sir in real quick can you raise your right hand thank you do you Solly swear as the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide yes thank you and just for the record uh leis pucho right and l o u i s b r t u CCI iio correct thank you sir you can proceed now sir um guy came by told me he had extra black top a very common thing um I said oh great it's a great price I guess I got a crummy job I said do I need a permit for this no you don't we're just going over your driveway way but we'll make it they measured the lens I didn't even really ask they did it which I said I wanted the other driveway so I got it done paid him cash to get a good price of course and I got grass growing out of it a little bit now so not the greatest but one thing in mind I went to my neighbor who has her black top done in a double driveway and I asked I said when you did your black top did you um get a permit for her she goes no no I didn't ask her when she did this so when I came back into the court right here to talk about this when I got the you know the to find out that I needed a permit to do this uh the year she did it two right was before the year that changed when now you need a permit to do black top the time prior I think it was 2015 or earlier she got it done there was no permits required to do black top then so I didn't know that till after all this but I trusted her that as well as not the guy that did the work and that's basically where I stand and I didn't know what to do in the end so I went for the variance before I tried to get this guy to chop up it proves one thing right all all good deals aren't necessarily good yeah I mean it's pretty crummy this this happened before uh many people haven't uh they don't normally check and on on some home repairs uh we're familiar now with what you did how far off the lot line are you do you know I approximately on off of what the rules I know approximately 3 feet not over my line there's a 5ft mark on three of the five that I'm supposed to be so 3 ft would have to be cut off to make it right before I came here okay would that be uh would that affect you economically should that uh happen be a hardship I'm sure it's going to cost me well let's see what the board says first sure but yeah I would and who knows where this guy is in a sense who took my money all right uh these used to require an actual C variance they now require a design waivers to it's 5 foot from the property line right did you have any discussion with your neighbor as to uh 100% the neighbor I asked about doing it with a permit or not neighbor yes she's the closest to that yes and she didn't have a problem with absolutely not she's like why are they doing this I said this is the law this is the rules okay all right let me ask Mr hollahan with what's going on okay Dan uh thank you chairman yes so the applicant is here tonight just kind of going based off what he said um he's here for a design waiver for a driveway that was previously installed without of permit uh driveway was installed about a foot and a half off of the sidey property line where 5 ft is required uh therefore requiring a design uh waver relief from the board okay thank you uh board members on my left questions the applicant no on I right go ahead sure where you parking your driver mobile home uh yeah that's a drivable mobile home correct uh at times I have a trailer there as well sorry jay uh so you have a mobile home and you have like aamp trailer at times yeah the the mobile home is drivable registered and insured correct and then and I have a a duy truck my truck and trailer so was that in your decision on the driveway because you had to get that mobile home in there this is part of that and as well I'm not going to lie to anyone here um I've been parking on the lawn for the last 15 years there was no more lawn so when the black top guy came through I said hey it's better than the two div it looks terrible even my neighbors like it looks great now with this meaning this is over 15 years now but if you didn't have that three feed your tires would be oh or close to the edge yes yeah right and another thing to correct things which is better I'm only a foot and a half over I thought I was three meaning they just said it was a foot and a half I thought I was three over no you're thinking the opposite he's backing it off got it you're you're going yep extend I got you sorry guys I didn't know yeah but yeah on my right Miss Andrews anything counselor all right uh so this would fall under a hardship of see no we wouldn't even we don't even have to worry about that it's a design waiver only let me go to the public on this matter okay sure uh once again uh 75223 Z the physical locations 243 Ro Morton Lane anyone to be anyone wants to be heard on this matter please raise your hand or stand seeing no one I'm going to close the public portion any final comments no okay this is uh it it it does frequently happen I always say to people uh and those watching at home if you go on the township website and you go into any of the zoning areas or the or the building codes they'll tell you what you need permits for it's always it's always better to check and do it that way but this does frequently happen people have been expanding their driveways as a matter of fact I looked at an overview your your neighbors and I think probably 75% of them have done the same thing yes okay and we're homeowners here too so we understand that all right uh this is for a design where someone want to move it in favor or oppos is move it you move to approve yes is there a second roll call please as to the design waiver for approval miss Andrew yes Miss Chevalier yes Mr Rizo yes Mr scagno yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman San yes at least you made your neighbors happy with the getting rid of the dirty the be barar lawn yes all right you got your design waiver I think uh he has to come in and get that in writing correct yes so the next meeting the board will memorialize the resolution Moren will send you a copy of that once you get the copy of that go back to the building department file another zoning Perman application for the driveway I'll review it and approve it based off the board's recommendation and it'll be done just s c because I know we have a weird with having a special meeting on Monday the next regular meeting next regular meeting I can somehow if I get it done then I understand yeah I understand all right thank you okay thank you for appearing sir okay okay we're going to move on to the next one it's 32223 Z it's Melissa and Richard Rodriguez this is this is uh R six Zone block 1558 lot 307 physical locations 27 Gerard Avenue this applicant proposes to legitimize a deck in a patio requiring SE variance you would be Melissa Rodriguez yes okay board attorney will swear you in first do you Solly swear as to the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide yes thank you and EM Melissa Rodriguez m l I SSA Rodriguez r o d r i g EZ yes thank you and you live at that house that's property yes you live at this house okay thank you anybody else that's going to be testifying with you this evening you have any documents or pictures or anything that you're going to show the board no okay again uh as a lay person uh you're not you don't have an attorney we're just going to ask you to do this in your own words there are certain proofs that have to be put on the record for the board to be able to act favorably or unfavorably either way so just tell us what happened what you did why you did it what's there now I'll again go to Mr hollam we'll find out what the zoning officer has to say okay so when we moved in we had a split deck um it was a split deck so we have two level and it started coming up kids were getting splinters constantly kneading nailing back down so we ended up ripping majority of that up we put papers and cement there and then and there was a part by the pool that we put new wood okay when did you move into the property when did we move in uh 2018 January 2018 thank you how far do the pavers go out I don't have the exact measurements okay I'll look at the survey uh anything else you want to tell us right now no no Mr thank you chairman um yeah so this address is here seeking I believe two separate SE or just one uh variance for the deck um so the deck in these zones if you guys are familiar the setback is turned on the height of the deck uh so at 44 in the setback required for the deck is uh 11 ft um where is proposed I believe 2.6 2.6 thank you than you um yeah so the deck is proposed 2.6 ft from the side yard property line where 11 ft is required um and that is the only variance that they are requesting tonight just for the deck yes that is correct okay board members questions on my left is there a fence yes between the deck and what's on the other side of the fence the neighbor's property neighbor M so there's no walkway it's just house house yes uh yes there's sidewalk or no passage way yes do you overlook does your the height of your thing look into your neighbor's yard you have to really like step up to look into their yard it's not like you can see directly down you have to attempt to really look over you get along with your neighbors obviously nobody made any complaint correct Mr Jenny were you gonna say something yeah you say so it's a six foot six foot fence I'm assuming based on what you're saying yes am my right Miss Andrews did you have anything okay anything else you want to tell us no this does happen frequently just like I said to the gentleman before you and uh once again I'll advise those watching at home check and and you can find out about these things online it's a lot easier than wasting your time coming in here so uh we appreciate you doing that however uh I'm going to go to a public portion on this and see if there's any comments 32-h 2023 Z location 27 Gerard Avenue it's for a legitimize a deck which is uh 2 foot6 from the line we 11 required anyone want to have any comments on this matter please raise your hand or stand seeing none I'll close the public portion any final comments all right uh again this has happened frequently I'm glad that you're a good neighbor you have a fence around in anyway you don't impose on your other neighbors and they don't impose on you right uh let me just see if someone on the board will move this for approval okay anyone on the board favor moving legitimize the deck to C variant uh 2 foot6 we 11 required move scog second M moved in second roll call please miss Andrews yes Miss Chevalier yes Mr Rizo yes Mr scogna yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman sovin yes all right thank you for coming in once again at our next meeting there'll be a resolution and then at that time uh you can speak to the building department right yeah come see me Morin great okay thank you all right looks like I saved an extra 15 20 minutes so we could roll the dice on that gentleman whoever were let's move on to the first uh application this evening uh 28-22 Z interbel automotive this is for an amended application uh Ed 1 Zone block 21 laot 25 and6 physical location 1706 Englishtown Road use car dealership license this requires D variance Wayne Miller Esquire representing the applicant please be seated Sir Mr chair members of the board Lane Miller on behalf of the applicant interbel Automotive this is a return to the board for a modification of a d variance unfortunately um dmbb has required us to Triumph for over substance when the applicant was here previously he testified and you'll hear from the applicant today he's in the business of dismantling cars selling the parts overseas in order to acquire cars from um auction he requires a used car dealership it's required by the auctions he applied to this board for used car dealership Li uh the ability to have an operation be used car dealership on site so that he could get that license so he could acquire the cars sell them over take them apart sell the parts overseas no intent ever to operate as a true used car dealer is we generally conceive it with the advertisement you know the big flags the blowup balloons waving um DMB unfortunate well this board granted the application on the requirement that there be no sales on site when he applied for his DMV application had to provide proof to the DMB that it used car sales operations were permitted by the town that he gotten a varant etc and the zoning officer properly noted on the bottom of the acknowledgement that car sales were not permitted on site as had been stipulated by this board and agreed to by the applicant I submitted with the application the correspondences from DMV which said you're denied because you have to be able to conduct all activities of a used car dealer which includes selling on site you can only negotiate on site and you have to have at least two cars able to be shown not actually showing but able to be shown on site accordingly the intent for which the use variance was obtained last time wasn't able to be realized because of the damn we're back here today trying to remedy that and meet the minimum requirements of the DMV you'll hear from the applicant he doesn't intend to change his business model at all has no intent to advertise and will agree not to advertise for used car sales the two spots that he needs to be able to show cars there has to be two spots available to show cars for sale he is willing to stipulate will not be visible for on the street there are two locations on the site that seem appropriate one is right next to the building shielded from the street or at the far back by the pond distant from as distant from the street as you can get um I have two witnesses one is Demitri vasr did I pronounce it correctly the owner of the property operator of the business and we have a planner po Paul gleets he's standing in for Allison coffin who was unable to make it tonight due to a conflict so he stepped in at the last minute for us so unless the board has questions of me with regard to that generally I would call up Mr basen Means yeah come on please would you like him sit here or it doesn't matter why don't you sit over that the stenographer breathing room yeah and you have to press the button so the mic lights up when it turns up here perfect once again you've testified before but U stay close to the mic it's directional not not that close just so they pick it up okay new one yeah Miss sir you somly swear us the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide yes thank you and can you say your name for the record uh Dimitri vren I mean you you spell it uh d z m i t r y v a z g r y n as a okay now Mr V you sorry the last name one more time on the last last name v a z g r y n as a n thank you now Mr ven you heard me describe the nature of the application the intent and purpose correct yes and did I state that accurately absolutely can you tell the board the nature of your business uh so we buy uh damage cars from different type of auctions we take it apart we load into containers and ship it overseas so let's say I am moving bad cars bad parts out of a country okay uh I mean damage cars which are usually not usable at all so essentially Salvage cards absolutely almost always okay and you you've been operating in Oldbridge at this location for how long now uh since 2018 okay almost 6 years and You' gotten permits and approvals for the operation of your dismantling and sale yes I believe of same year okay then there was a change in operations which occurred as a result of world events in particularly the Ukraine war correct yes you know I used my like foreign accounts you know so I'm I'm originally from Belarus from Minsk and I use a Bel Russian company to buy cars here at the auction they accepted like foreign countries but once the uh War started they closed all accounts belong to Belarus and to Russia and now I have to use uh like somebody else account and that cost really a lot of money and because of the tough like economical situation that's really affect me and you know it's not uh so convenient you know at any time I could lose this for example that accounts you know so I ask you guys to just so the board can understand I'm going to slow it down and back it up a little bit since the loss of the foreign license and right to purchase you've been using another car dealer's license to purchase the cars on your behalf yes I mean it LO let's say Brokers which cost a lot of money yeah and involves transporting the cars to numerous locations okay and you're asking the board to allow you to have a license so that you can purchase directly yes okay is it your intent to run a used car business as we normally conceive and understand the used car business to operate not at all okay will you agree with the board that you will not advertise that this is a used car business and a US lot under the DM requirements is it your understanding that you have to be able to have two spots available to show cars for sale yes we're going to have cars and I described to the board that you're willing to make sure that they're not visible from the street we will designate two spots at the board's discretion and whim any place they want on the site but nowh they pick on the site would be visible from the street yes and the two spots that I suggested were perhaps next to the warehouse building where it be shielded by the building from the street or in the very rear of the lot where on the current plan is marked as storage spaces back by the pond yes any spots board okayest in connection with the DMV requirements you also have to be able to have sales on site and that's one of the things we're looking for from the board correct is it your intent to actually sell entire vehicles on site not at all L okay we had in the application said in order to alleviate some of the concerns of the board that in addition to only having up to two spots available for showing cars you would agree that no more than one retail customer could be on site at any time yes do you currently have any retail customers come to the site for any purpose no no no all my business is expert only and is that's what you intend to continue yes and one of the concerns raised by the professionals was how do we monitor that you're only going to have one person on site are you willing to agree that anybody if there were to somehow be a used car retail purchaser would be on site by appointment only yes and are you willing to agree that as a stipulation that the you used car operations could only be run in conjunction with the dismantling and off-site sale of Auto Parts yes um because you're not going to in fact have retail customers on site just as you no longer you already don't have retail customers no change in traffic nothing no TR change in Impact nothing okay now you did acquire the property next door to the current location correct yes and there's reference in the professionals notes to a meeting that occurred in March concerning your use of that property is that correct yes you're not seeking any ability to use that property as part of this application correct no that's a different case but I'm not going to sell cars anyway okay and that's what I was getting to there is going to be separate application that's going to be coming in front of either this or the planning board whichever is the appropriate board relating to any use of that property and that would be dealt entirely separately but in no instance is there going to be any desire or intent to seek yes ability to sell used cars there um no other modification is being made to the property no you're not putting any additions you're not putting new signage no other changes no sign nothing okay I have no further questions this witness at this time the plan are you going to weigh in on this Mr Fox yes thank you Mr chairman um I think uh the applicant has addressed all most of the concerns as uh pointed out by Mr Miller uh one thing that we need to address is how are those two uh display vehicle locations going to be are they're going to be marked or signed or things like that in case someone from DMV comes down and says where these where are these display cards we could have some sort of pulled sign or some other type of Marc that we can honestly until I saw your comment earlier today had thought through that because I think the DMB just needs to see that it's permitted so as long as they get an approval that says um car sales are permitted on site they're fine the thing that flagged them last time was specifically and again not improperly accurately the statement that car sales could not occur on site I see and we immediately got a response well if you can't sell on site you can't be a car dealer but if the board desired that there is some sort of designation yes these are the car areas or if we wanted to um designate in the resolution these are the only areas that the cars who that are for sale can be located yes we're willing to do that and as I said the places that in my looking at the plan left to mind were in front of the warehouse which is shielded from the street or the very far back but making clear the intent is really to satisfy the DMV but not have people walking on site to buy cars I understand thank you and uh I'm getting the impression that if someone walks in any two cars anywhere could be for sale that is correct even though as you've heard from the applicant I don't think anybody want to buy the cars he's not so yes uh so Mr chairman that's all that we had I don't know if Mr Miller wants to ask the applicant to provide the testimony for the D1 use fa your professionals uh we're going to address that through the professional and in terms of the the D1 you'll hear from our planner we we're looking it this is a D2 a modification of an existing because the ability to have the used car lot was granted previously but he will provide D1 testimony it really is just going to mimic the D1 grant that was testified to by m coffen at the last here understand yes okay thank you Mr pluck do you have anything uh no you can proceed Mr Miller okay thank you Mr chair let me just ask the board you have any questions of the uh owner obviously he's been here before us mike always the mic this area a lot what size is it it's 4 4.65 Acres 4.65 acres and in the edo1 zone it has a number of specifications I don't see you hitting that Mark um The Market Force are you're talking about going down to one um employee oh no no no up to One retail customer for used car purchases his business doesn't involve retail at all but we have to do that to satisfy the DMV I understand and it talks about uh increasing the local rateable are you for the township it talks about the the job base Regional job base we're not changing anything with the job base this is an existing operating business that merely needs this license to continue to exist and operate the way what are you doing for the residents in other words you your vehicles get shipped out right you ship them out of the country actually I ship parts not Vehicles yeah you ship them to Ukraine you ship them to Kazakhstan so what do you do for the residents here in Oldbridge because the edos clearly specifies a balance of residential support okay if I may this was already a permitted use the only change we're seeking is in the existing approval for the lure it's not a new Edo application so everything that would have applied and I can go through how many employees he has what it's done to the rable base because he's made significant improvements to the property since he acquired it and the like but you are in the edo1 zone yes and that clearly specifies certain things that you must meet and I would are you familiar with the Zone yes and I would S I would suggest to the member on the board he met those qualifications when he got his original approval and he continues to meet those qualifications I can go through them I did not touch upon those issues because this is not an application for new non preexisting business or use it's merely a modification to permit the licensure so he can continue what he's doing if I may you currently have a um supplier third party that you're using now you you currently have someone who's you can get the cars with now though yeah that's Brokers here but you know they I pay a lot of money for them it's it's not so convenient it takes a lot of time money and fors you know right but that but you but you can still operate your operation now it's very tough you know so like rates are high you know I'm paying so much money I'm almost almost at the age you know so it's it's really too difficult now really yeah and you know it's they could close my account at any time because you you use like a middleman you know so who knows tomorrow he will closee his business and I just got stuck I'm I just really haven't heard that you needed you know to have a license to buy cars at an auction before I I can only state that we tried to do it wouldn't be back here if we didn't need to um and I did not bring those documents with me but Mr basrin had provided me statements from different dealers and um we actually sought from the town trying to deal with one of the dealer one of the car auction companies a request stating that he didn't need any additional licenses to run his business as it is which is the dismantling and sale and um we weren't able to get the language that the particular auction wanted I'm not sure why but the town had no obligation to provide that letter but it was not provided and that's one of the again the reasons we were here um in connection with the issue of he's able to get it from third parties in terms of the dmbb regulations them buying and providing to him for sale is really in a gray zone of the regulations even in it what's attached to um the response from the dmbb that I attached to the application here one of the things they prohibit are purchasing for sale off your particular site so realistically a dealer who buys a car is not supposed to sell it anywhere except on their site so there's so I can argue it both ways I'm a lawyer but by sending them to Mr vasen to take a part and sell off his site could be cited as a violation by that dealer who acquired the car which is one of the concerns we're trying to play by the rules and by the book unfortunately the DMV book is quite restrictive it's tough all over thank you Mr Andrew anything my concern is this um I'm assuming a new resolution would have to be made with regards to this to go to the DMV now in that resolution would they not have to specify that he's only going to have uh two cars and that only one person isn't that going to go to the DMV and say well we're not going to accept it that way because it looks like you're skirting uh around the issue that's that's just how I'm looking at something when the gentleman there said something about the dmbb coming and just looking and check I I find that to be quite uh feasible because if if I read something like that well we're only going to have two spaces only one retail customer that that's kind of Spooks me a little bit I understand but that's up that's just my my concern I'll just say that a yes A new obviously a new resolution would yes be if this were approved yes would be prepared but I'll otherwise okay and it's a multi-level answer one is yes I fully anticipate that's what the resolution is going to say however our experience last time with the DMB is they did not ask to see the resolution they merely wanted a something from the zoning officer saying that the car sales were permitted activity on site and it was on that letter and it's a form from the DM MB on that letter the um zoning board officer excuse me zoning officer had noted that car sales are not permitted on site wasn't a copy of the whole resolution it was just that check off box and he put properly Car Sales not permitted on site that triggered everything however assuming that the DMV did want to look at the resolution and did want to visit the site there regulations and I attached the response from the DMB inspecting officer to the um application says you have to have two spots available well we check in that box we met it you have to be able to sell cars on site well he can sell cars on site and he can have up to One retail customer we've checked that box those were the two objections now do I intend to send them the entire resolution if I don't have to no if they ask for it I'm going to give it I'm not going to hide anything but what I'm going to do is as we did before have the zoning officer fill in the check off the box and when my new witness is coming up I'll see if I can find the form from the time we applied last time I believe I have it here in the file and I can show the board what that shows and says we're not trying to be disingenuous with anyone and that's why I started with we're really Tri it's a triumphal form over substance cu the applicant wants to do exactly what he's been doing but there's a particular reviewing officer and a particular rule in the DMV that Pro says even though you don't want to actually do it this way you have to be able to in order to get the license so hopefully that addressed the question but I'm going to look for that form if it gives the board any more Solace and Council just so I I just so I think for for clarity sake I I think what you're saying also is that DMV doesn't really care how profitable your business is from a used car dealer standpoint they just care if it looks like a used car absolutely if it looks like everything else it was supposed to we're okay check the box can you sell cars on site yep okay you're good Mr Fox Mr chairman on page five of our letter number 16 we have a group of you know subsequent approvals LIC bu and permits and things like that Mr Miller do you would your client be amendable to have as a condition approval approval by the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission when you say approval by the DMV you have to get a license by the Motor Vehicle Commission right oh the approval here being subject to them approving yes in theory no no problem how's the Zing officer going to know that the motiv Vehicle Commission approved it well that's where is we we'll be happy to provide proof thank you that's all okay but my only concern there is in order to get the license we need to hear show proof to DMB that it's an approved and allowable use and if it's only an approved and allowable use if they have approved it as well then we're sort of in a catch 22 because each approval is dependent on the other well my 39 years of being in this business and we've had lots of conditions approval on state agencies I I don't see why that's a problem at all okay um I just don't want to have to come back if they tell me no I was shocked when I saw this quite honestly your zoning officer Damien Gil was shocked when the DMB denied he said this is ridiculous I've seen this tons of done didn't matter I'll defer to ouro Sir on that so whether that should be a conditional approval or not I mean c i mean certainly it's it can be in terms of how we always word these in terms of Outside Agency approvals um I I do I can appreciate that you know strictly appi applied it might create a little circular uh so maybe I think it's about when it's approved by the MVC you give a copy to the zoning officer and that absolutely no problem and what I was going to throw out is maybe the zoning officer can be can state in the when we send in the check off the Box form that I still haven't located he could say yes it's an approved use so long as dmbb grants the license I I think that works but I'm more than happy when improved you know I to say you know two conditions there but yeah yeah sorry to complicate I just want to make sure Y and I fully understand you don't want to Grant the use if it's never going to be used or not for the purpose intended so Council you have another I do and that's going to be Paul gleitz he's I do have a question real quick I do have a question putting on the zoning officer Hat real quick um there is a deed restriction currently on the property that was filed with the county going to get into that later a little later on hear from the other W okay no problem okay I'm going to ask for Mr GLE to come up and in terms of that deed restriction it is in place and one of the things that we would have to ask for is the ability there is an ability both in the ordinance and in the deed to change it if this board approves so he'd need to have the board allow that change as well but I think so far the DMB doesn't know about the Restriction but so that doesn't become as to the four so sir can I just have you raise your right hand do you Sly swear as to the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide yes thank you and can you just s your name for the record Paul gleitz glei TZ and then can you just State your credentials briefly sure I'm a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey I'm also a member of the American Institute of certified planners I received my master of City Regional planning from the blackstein school at Ruckers University um and I've been um testifying in private practice for over 20 years accept his credentials thank you sir so I think um we're all familiar while we're here I won't go through the whole um recitation but just to keep a clean record we are talking about 1706 Englishtown road which is County Route 527 block 20001 Lots 25 and 26 as mentioned earlier the site is 4.56 acres and we are in the Economic Development opportunity Zone one there was some discussion about the purposes of the eod1 Zone um small uh scale uh uh mix of office retail and light industrial uses to allow Oldbridge to attain the goals of accommodating Market forces increasing local rateable base expand the local Regional job base providing a more diverse mix of goods and services to Residents and businesses within the municipality and the region achieving an improved balance of residential and non-residential development within the municipality and utilizing suitable land for development in a more efficient functional aesthetic manner etc etc um there's a long list of permitted uses um um in the zone a mixed of retail sales um Retail Services um galleries Studios Offices Medical and professional um restaurants uh Daycare animal care educational mini warehousing and self- storage and as well as um uh you know contractor sites and and storage um there's also a number of conditional uses including gasoline with convenience retail convenience with fuel um drive-thru facilities um and other services um including uh automotive repair and maintenance and uh religious or organizations our existing use is the car dismantling facility the proposed use is a car dismantling facility with this used car dealer license um to the north there is a con U Construction Company Paving Company to the South there's a single family home and then what was the trailer retail Center to the West um is another single family home with some large vehicle storage in the rear and then woods and then um to the east there's a big patch of woods and beyond that along the corridor we have this mix of single family homes Farms contractors garden centers wooded areas those types of things all along the corridor um I think the relief we're seeking tonight is a I'm looking at as a D2 expansion of a non-conforming use um and then the uh we're also looking for the relief from conditions of the prior approval um I think uh in reviewing the uh master plan re exam from 2022 um you know the current Edo zones have a purpose of encouraging development of business and non-residential uses uh the land uses permitted in the edo1 O3 zones should be studied to determine whether they should be expanded to creat um greater flexibility and diversity that would strengthen the local economy and benefit the township um and so I think a brief note in terms of the D1 versus D2 relief necessary for this application I would just note that you know your planning me uh memo that was received this morning states that the uh as the applicant has requested that this condition approval and a joining deed restriction be modified to allow the auto used automotive sales a new D1 use variant shall be required for the use specifically permit the Automotive Sales with the existing junkyard we would say you know car dismantling facility um and approved that was approved via use variants the uh 2002 approval finding a facts clearly states that you know the applicant seeks a use variance pursuing to the D1 standard to utilize a property uh with an automobile parts and sales license um the functionality and operation of the site will not change the applicant agreed that as a condition of approval there will be no customers or sales taking place on the property um and being able to utilize the auto sales license of the property allows the applicant to sell directly to customers and not through third parties um you also found that you the the grining of the variants can occur without substantial detriment to public good it will not impact the Zone plan on the zoning ordinance and the applicant agrees that as a condition of approval there would be no Active Auto Sales on the property the same would be memorialized by way of deed restriction will shall be incorporated into the resolution the functionality and use of the property shall not change in any way whatsoever and on page three the final wearz States in order to have the Restriction released the applicant or future owner must apply to the board for amended variance relief so I think the board at that time recognized the fact that you'd have to come back and amend your variance not seek a new whole cloth use variants so by looking at this by adding this this license um I'm looking it more as a D2 expansion which has a a lower threshold um in terms of the uh uh you know in terms of the medich proofs you know in terms of particular suitability and master plan Rec reconciliation um and that you know the special reasons for a d variance may be found in the fact that if it's granted you could either minimize the non-conformity or make it more acceptable in this particular setting and there's a number of court cases K V faon and kingward V Board of adjustment and the uh Burbage versus Mine Hill case I'll talk about how there's a relaxed standard for these it's an existing use that's been functioning at for some time and that ways to just improve the site improve the operations on the site could be considered a you know special reason under that um D2 standard so and again this is there was some discussion before about how are we making things better another standard this is really kind of a combination where I can address the overall proposal on the site as it's been operating and as was testified to in 17 and in 22 that this type of operation on the site even though it's not permitted meets the intent of the The Zone from a number of of standpoints um this additional licensing is really just you know taking off the lid and adding a few more Marbles and putting the lid back on it's not trying to justify a whole new use in the zone so I still think that you can rely on the finding of the board from 2017 and 22 under those prior approvals to justify the uh uh D2 I think there's also under the municipal land use law purposes of zoning um both um option G of the M milanus law in terms of sufficient space and appropriate location for commercial purposes to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens subject to applicable environmental requirements um this prop proposal provides a use needed by New Jersey citizens it's not the the end product may be going overseas um and the sale May OCC you know the the but the um managing uh salvage vehicles managing the accidents on our roads and finding a secondary market for those Vehicles helps the local economy in that way you're generating taxes you're generating jobs you're generating economic activity um and if you get into a car accident and your car gets tot your car has to go somewhere and be somewhere and turn into something else so that's the or when we have a natural disaster and cars get wiped out and you those cars need to go somewhere and be processed this kind of an operation helps that overall process with these cars that can't be driven anymore um Additionally the site's location on the parcel is already developed for the purpose and it's an appropriate location for that use um and the the license is needed to purchase these you know salvage title or wrecked vehicles you know um and that's why with the the applicant as you heard before is seeking this um additional relief um also um purpose o of the municipal lus law talks about the maximum practical recovery and recycling of recycling materials from Municipal Solid Waste um so to meet the goals of the state U recycling plan um complement Municipal recycling plan so again like I said before storage dismantling and sale of vehicle parts from these wrecked autos um the secondary Market removes all of that from the waist Stream So what actually goes into the waist stream in terms of a salvage yard is less and you've got more value taken out of these vehicles prior to final Recycling and Disposal um and then again I think it promotes the general welfare of your own master plan and your own ordinance because the underlying use um does create um uh an increase in the local rable base the expanding of the regional job base the local job base you have a diverse um mix of services in the area so those items you were talking about are still accomplished and in fact the the more efficient operation of of the the operation the more efficient um and costeffective operation of this through the owner having his own individual license is going to allow for continued success and continued Improvement and you know um making sure this business succeeds we don't have an empty lot with waiting for a new use at some later time um under the negative criteria um you know the site has been developed um so I think that's the positive aspect of the the D variance requirements under the negative um it's been in use this site has been in use since 2018 it was it used to be a towing and a recovery yard an auto body an auto shop uh um I think it was an auto paint the whole mix of uses back there so this has accommodated existing previous Auto related uses there's no physical change to the site or the operations at all the surrounding uses and some of adjacent uses have been around for a number of years um and so they're not going to be impacted anymore by this particular you know request before the board now and again um the surrounding uses aren't going to be impacted by adding this this licensing to enable him to just better operate his facility um so the relief can be requested without causing any substantial impact to the public good or the Zone plan um again the current site was in use were approved in 2017 and 2022 um it advances the goals of the local plan and the ml well and it has no NE negative impacts on them um if you don't buy that and you say no we agree with our planner and we have we need a full D1 I'll just for builts and suspenders here um the other two things under the medich standard would be particular suitability and then the re ciliation between the its absence from the zoning code and why this is here um again under particular suitability um you found the site particularly suitable for the use twice in 17 and in 22 it's been developed as such and has been working um in operation since 2018 no physical changes are proposed you've got a bus depot construction and Paving other types of you know larger storage uses around the area um and the existing site design buffers all the activity behind that main building all you see from the site is the main Warehouse building in the driveway and then so that's why this site is a great use it works well it's been functioning well um and it it doesn't have any external impacts around the surrounding properties and in terms of the reconciliation um it's not inconsistent with your master plan it's not inconsistent with the m land use law you have your prior approvals and you also have the 2017 resolution recognized the use as a unique business for dismantling discarded Vehicles removing Auto Parts and shipping those to others so this really this use wasn't anticipated by the governing body and the drafting of the permitted conditional uses because it's kind of unique and your ma your recent master plan re examination report and um talks about the need to relook at your um eod1 and three uses to see if it should be expanded based on New Market forces and new new development in the area so I think under the enhanced medish standard you could also just see this all as a as as a D1 as well and that kind of concludes my direct us okay thank you Mr Fox thank you and thank you sir for the testimony uh to cover one's but I would suggest that you look it as a D1 use variance um it's hard to tell the difference between what is an expansion of the site if if um nothing is really changing right I just I think the permitting is the only expansion is that you're you know this this licensing and the Rel you know kind of like in a in a raspberry sense removing the one condition is an expansion of the use I are there going to be any additional cars put on site with this new business no well then it's not an expansion is it if I it's a new use if I can suggest okay the fact that you're now allowing the car sales on site is the expansion it's a new use I don't I think no I think this is the exact same use from 2017 and 2022 the expansion is this relief from the prior condition to go ahead and allow for a Ed car license to be operate on the site um but at the same time I think like and you know you could also support of finding of of a D1 in support of this application I just don't think we need to go that far but again my that's my analysis I don't need to argue any further Mr plucker and anything Mr hollan uh not for this witness sir thank you I think I am having some similar mental gymnastics uh as Mr Fox uh when this was a previously it was a D1 we previously had so this was a use that was not foring use and so how do we get a D2 is typically reserved for non-conforming pre-existing non-conforming not for something that received D1 I think you can find it under the case law that with when you whether it's once you gave the use variance it is a permitted use under the variance and so um it wasn't a pre-existing non-conforming which is what the D2 is typically reserved for there's also some case s that says if it's granted by variance it's treated the same but either way I think you could find a D1 but I I just think that the relief we're asking for is um this licensing that allows the individual the just the operator to make his own um sales own purchases from these Auto Auction sites which which wasn't allowed before and that and it's a we're in this weird Mingo round of trying to satisfy two check boxes on a DMV form um and that's why we're here where nothing else is changing so it's not a new use you know uh in in that sense it's really just an existing use granted by this board um that needs a little more relief so that it can function properly and function efficiently but it appears that was a that this is a material this was a material condition that is now seeking to be removed I you know I was not here at that time but by you know by own counts it seems like that was a material condition for a reason and obviously you know these uh these conditions are added before a reason so in adding that you know we do have to reconcile that as well in how this is can be treated as a D2 or D1 I think certainly it feels like in or for a D2 we's doing a lot of shoehorning here where if this were really to be kind of handled as a D1 it seems like this might be all more cleanly and professionals please feel free to uh you know intervene at any point if you like so say for example if I I'm gonna ask you to to stop now because I've already offered we started at 750 uh it's now 30 40 45 minutes uh I did say I was going to hold people to their feet to the fire on the time okay uh I don't know that we're clear on this and you're not you don't have any other Witnesses right we do not have any other Witnesses but if I could just well I I going to weigh in on this okay and it's going to take a while so you want to come back another time but I'm going to call uh the time out now okay and we'll reschedule this okay if we may um before we do if we if I can oppose on the chair two things one we're willing to either go into the D1 or D2 I am not wed to either I think the D1 was established before I also found the check the box form from the DMB I don't know if the board wants to see that I referred to it earlier and at the bottom there's a provision that says you know is it allowed and then are there any stipulations the stipulation stated before is as per the variance no Auto Sales permitted on the property we'd anticipate that if this is granted when the form's filled out next time it would say as per the variant no more than two cars can be shown at any time no more than one retail customer Etc um Mr chair would you like me to offer this to the board or because we're coming back I want to offer it by all means but I was here for all three of these and you weren't the attorney of of record on the other uh and Mr In fairness Mr Cheney wasn't either yep uh so some of the members on this board sat through all three of these the professionals here also did not so I think we got a long road to Ho yet okay understood completely I just wanted to offer this because I'd found it I can submit it bear in mind he already has an approval to go and get a license with a deed restriction on his property understood you're here now asking us to make that go away I don't know that that's going to happen but what I'm going to do is I'm going to uh cancel this now and continue because I've already taken time away from the other two applic understood completely with all due respects I did say that at the beginning I appreciate that you gave us the opportunity I am going to be away um October 30 through November 13 so I just ask we not be rescheduled in that I don't know if D Dan are you doing the scheduling or should they call the office that probably call Moren and then will give you the next secretary is is on vacation a needed vacation with her so you know her I'm sure so why don't you contact her for a further date and we'll certainly entertain the rest of the application I will do that thank you so much I appreciate the time Mr chair members of the board all right this matter if you're watching at home uh is going to be continued the date is up in the air at this point uh there would be no further notice on this uh this is a 28- 2022 Z interbelt automotive for an amended uh D variance all right to be continued thank you sir all right do you need a quick break we'll take a quick break for the stenographer uh five minutes okay five minutes please no longer thank you we we stand in recess e e e e e e e e returning Sor turn the microphone on right uh we're returning from Recess uh we're waiting for one board member to come back uh on the day and uh he should be momentarily uh I would ask for a roll call at this point Mr Allan Miss Andrews Miss Chevalier here Mr Rizo here Mr scagno here Mr Stoner he's the one that's absent the restroom and chairman suvan here Mr stone is back in the room for the record uh counselor this is uh 8-h 2024 Z brickmore Oldbridge LLC this is the regional commercial Zone this is block 5000 lot three physical locations 1030 US Route 9 tency change with restaurant to a salon major preliminary and final site plan uh it was Miss Smith but counselor for the record good evening Mr chairman my name is Howard Jenis law from the law firm Gibbons PC Jennifer Smith was double booked tonight so I'm standing in for her on this application you say your your last name once again sir jennis law GE n s l a w thank you sir by all means proceed I'm sorry that I held you up I'll try and feed a little bit more time on to you okay thank you Mr chairman good evening members of the board I represent brickmore Oldbridge LLC and we're here tonight on a fairly simple application to ret tenant some existing space I'm sure many of you are familiar with the Oldbridge Gateway Shopping Center at the southwest corner of Route 9 in ernston Road Shopping Center has been there for decades it consists of a total of approximately 257,000 Square fet tonight's proposal is to retrofit an existing tenant space within the center consisting of 7,724 square ft was previously occupied by a restaurant and the proposal is for it to be occupied by Phoenix Salon Suites which is a salon and spa facility that will sublicense 46 individual Suites ranging in size from 108 to 170 square fet and the purpose uh of the application or the business I should say that Phoenix Salon Suites is in is to provide U barar and beauty and spot type Services those are permitted uses under the zoning ordinance they fall under the per the personal services category which is defined as including but not limited to barber shops and beauty salons so examples would be hair stylists makeup artists um estheticians Barbers Etc the proposed use will not Encompass anything that the zoning ordinance doesn't permit uh specifically personal services are defined to exclude tattoo and microblading and uh permanent makeup Services massage so none of those are proposed as part of this application the application involves internal building modification only there's no changes to the site that are proposed it's simply a change in tendency parking for the center is based on the total square footage at five spaces per thousand square feet and so parking is not a function of of who the different tenants are it's a function of the total square feet of the center so from a zoning standpoint there's actually no change in the required number of parking spaces in initial discussions with the zoning officer there was a concern about the intensity of use and how it might impact parking and so therefore the matter was referred to the board for site plan approval which is why we're here tonight we submitted a parking study the parking study demonstrates that the parking demand for the proposed Phoenix Salon Suites is less than for the restaurant that it replaces so therefore the existing parking Supply will continue to adequately accommodate the overall parking demands of the shopping center the approvals that we're seeking tonight our preliminary and final site plan approval we did apply for a c variance for parking if deemed necessary for the reasons I just described since parking is based on the overall square footage we did not believe it to be necessary and the uh review memorandum also confirms that technically a parking variant is not required so basically we're here for site plan approval so that is a basic overview of the application I intend to call our traffic engineer who prepared the parking study as our first witness I also have a professional planner who will further address the intensity issue so unless there are any questions for me I would proceed to call my first Witness by all means counselor thank you Mr chairman I'd like to call Alan Lothian as the first witness do you somly swear as the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide I do thank you sir and can you spell your name for the record it's Alan Lothian a l n l o t h i a n Mr loan would you describe your qualifications for the board please yeah I'm a I'm an associate principal with Langan engineering I've been a traffic engineer there for over 26 years I have a bachelor's of Science and civil engineering from Ruckers a master's of Science and transportation from NGIT I've I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey and I've testified before dozens of boards throughout the state including this one I do recognize you sir and I recognize your expertise thank you thank you Mr chairman Mr Lothian did you prepare a traffic statement in support of this application yes I did and could you please describe for the board what your study entailed and what conclusions you reached Godly um so as you heard from Mr Janice law we have the Gateway Shopping Center I think everybody's familar with it I'm I'm I'm going to refer to the asilt site plan cs100 I don't know if we have to mark it since it's part of the site plan application that that's something that was submitted it's not changed anyway mark it up right you want to do it I mean it was already submitted it it has been submitted yeah oh okay it's part of the pack part it's part of the plan said it has not been modified has been modified at all um Gateway Shopping Center uh there's 2 57 7,685 sare ft plus or minus there's access via Route 9 ernston Road and then there's also the connection to the Oldbridge Square to the South uh none of that is changing as part of this uh there are no as you heard previously there are no site plan changes the only thing is the ret tenancy of the 17,000 724 Square ft space that was formerly a restaurant uh now it's proposed to be a salon um so when looking at this site trip generation is based on your overall square footage of the center as a shopping center that will not change as part of this uh application the parking requirement as Mr jenisa had indicated does not change as part of this it's five the requirement is 5 per th000 the site had previously been granted a variant a parking variance uh in 2020 for uh 1,89 parking spaces uh hold on 1,50 Spaces versus the 1289 that would be required again there's no change to the intensity of the overall shopping center use what I was asked to do is look at the potential intensity of the salon versus the restaurant so I I took that out of the shopping CER Center itself looked at them as Standalone uses and then uh there is a table in my traffic statement table two actually it just says Standalone comparison but it should be uh table two it's on page 405 and that indicates the 7,724 square foot restaurant peak hour trip generation peak hour parking demand and the ordinance parking requirement if it were Standalone versus the proposed Phoenix Salon Suite Salon same size what the peak hour trip generation is peak hour parking demand and ordinance parking requirement is the difference between the two between the restaurant to the salon -47 trips -7 occupied parking spaces at any one time and negative 103 spaces required by ordinance for that particular use so all of that together uh leads to my conclusion that it's a less intensive use than what was formerly in the space when you say negative parking spaces explain what you mean by that so I'll I'll I'll go with the ordinance parking requirement so ordinance parking requirement for a 7,724 foot Standalone restaurant would be 155 parking spaces the proposed Salon would park at because it's because it's a uh service use it it is one space per 150 for retail or services that are five or less stores so again taking it as a standalone it would be one per 150 instead of the one per 200 which is required for the shopping center with more than five stores uh so it it's looking at it as more intensive that would be 52 spaces so when I was saying there's 103 less parking spaces required as part of this use that's the 155 required for a restaurant 52 required for the Sal for a standalone salon so that that's where I get my negative 133 spaces so as a result of your analysis do you have a conclusion as far as the intensity of what's proposed versus what was there before so again looking at as an overall shopping center I I I would conclude that there's no uh change because there's an integrated it's integrated between uses in in a shopping center there's different types of uses different different stores different restaurants they all work together they create a certain trip generation there there's uh shared trips between uses there's shared parking between uses so when looking at the overall Center I don't I I don't see a change if I take them out and look at them as two separate uses then I I conclude that there is that the salon is a less intensive use compared to a restaurant of the same size and do you have an opinion about whether this change in tency and change in use um will result in there being sufficient parking within the center to serve both what's already there as well as the salon use that's proposed there there is uh as I testified to at the previous uh variance request there is is sufficient parking on the site compared to what the anticipated parking demand is for a shopping center of this size thank you I have no further direct questions for Mr Lothian Mr plorn nothing sir Mr Fox uh thank you Mr lithan uh I agree with your and thank you for all the information you provided I think it's very informative uh showing it both ways and it's it's indicated by the solicitor that um parking requirements are based upon the total square footage of the area and the area already got a a bulk variant for Less parking um so therefore there's no parking requirements in there I should should also excuse me there's no parking Varian is required um there were a few other items that we had which we can talk about later there's been no testimony about that regarding for example um how much water is being used has this facility versus the restaurant use what are the hours are they different that sort of thing number of employees that sort of that's it's an operational if you can provide some testimony about the yeah I mean we can we can provide some discussion I I have some of that information that I can provide either now or if you'd prefer to go through the report after the next witness that's that's fine also um thank you Mr hollan did you have any questions at this board your comments uh no chairman thank thank you counselor Mr lo real quick can you just uh re reiterate the uh we said 47 trips less and then the spaces less okay uh yes so it's 47 less trips during peak hour 17 less occupied parking spaces and3 less required spaces per ordinance for Standalone use thank you nothing further you g anything further from the witness there are um a few traffic related comments in the review letter there's some other operational things so I thought I would move on to my next witness to finish up the planning testimony and then we'll bring Mr Lothian back if need be when we work on the report okay board members on my left of the of this witness no done uh it it's a beauty so it was testified before it's uh hair and nails uh there's a variety of different uses there's 46 individual Proprietors that that could be doing a variety of uh Services that's my understanding yeah I mean the the unique thing about Phoenix Salon Suites is that rather than having a single Salon it's actually 46 individual spaces each one of which is leased out to a professional or a practitioner who basically runs their own business and so they're they're able to run their own business in their own space without having the overhead of a larger store without having employees so each one is essentially doing their own thing so you know you might have manicurists hair stylists Barbers um you know whoever wants to to Le space there how many employees will that be well well there's 46 individual spaces and what about the parking for them well the uh actually that's that's probably more for Mr Loi and but um the each of the spaces will have a license professional um they don't necessarily all work at the same time they can set their own hours that's another one of the advantages of a use like this uh that each proprietor decides when they want to work they set their own hours um and they're independent contractors just to be clear right that's they're basically yeah I mean it's a it's technically a sulic Arrangement between Phoenix Salon Suites and the individual person licensed professional practitioner whatever you want to call them who will be operating within the space and they they basically run their own business um and the the parking standards in the ordinance are are presumably designed to accommodate both employees and customers just like they would for the restaurant that was there before and all the other uses in the center so those spaces were in your calculation they were yes okay thank you so the idea the concept instead of like a food court at the mall this is a cosmetology Court that's a good way of describing it um in in many places like this uh someone would be renting a room for one day a week and not for a full day they would work on an hourly basis so that would mean in many instances there would be more than one employee in a space I'm not saying it's going to be for everybody but there's there are people who share a space maybe once or twice a week I I only say this because I know what goes on in other states right well the it's it's interesting because the the regulations governing this type of activity are actually quite extensive in New Jersey so the the Board of Cosmetology and hair styling is what it's called has a set of regulations that govern these types of uses and they require that there be one what they call an an E eppl I believe it's called which which is an experience or excuse me ELP experience licensed professional that has to be in charge of each space they have to have a certain number of years of experience uh anyone who's operating one of these businesses they have to apply to the state for a license for the space in addition to their own professional license if they happen to be a barber or cosmetologist so um they really can't just be renting out a chair or a space for you know an hour or a day it doesn't work that way in New Jersey although it may well work that way in other states would they be would they be having besides estheticians acupuncturists I know no no tattoos but acupuncturist as well as estheticians you know I think if it's permitted by the zoning regulation as a personal service then it would be a possibility I should I should also add that in order to get the license for the space that's required one of the items that must be submitted to the board of of Cosmetology and hair styling is a zoning certificate or a letter from the town saying that they don't require a zoning certificate so ultimately the town is sort of a gatekeeper if you will on each one of these applications to the state for the license to occupy the space because if someone proposes something that the town doesn't believe is a permitted personal service then the zoning officer I was thinking of many Spas Med Spas um I'm not 100% certain again I think it's if it's a permitted use within the zoning then it could potentially be something that someone might want to practice thank you Mr chairman if I can just say this because this reduces time in the future many of the the comments we have in our letter regard to similar issues like this and as the attorney explained these are issues that are licenser issues by the state also the county department of health and also building code which are not site plan issues particularly and as the parking is based on the square footage it it doesn't it doesn't pertain to parking as Mr luian had testified thank you sir do you know who's to the left of you and to the right of you what businesses they are in I believe Dollar Tree is Dollar Tree is to the left if you're looking at the storefront uh and the uh clothing shop is to the right um I I can't remember what the name of thething shop is those are the two uses on either side is it inspiration I think inspiration is there a landlord on property or a manager of some sort to control I mean the access well so each each person who operates in one of these spaces has access to the facility you know there's a break room there's restrooms there's utility room you know things like that um I don't believe there's someone who's necessarily resident there at all times but there's someone who would be available in case there are any issues that arise right in the event of emergency there would be an supervisor or some super pendant or some right I mean there's there's not like a receptionist or someone who works there all day every day it it's basically each independent contractor which is the term that was used earlier that occupies their space they maintain their space they decorate their space so they're responsible for their space we'll hear about the hours of operation coming up well the hours are basically whatever the individual practitioner chooses to practice um they can set their own hours do do work I mean theoretically I suppose they could typically it's business hours you know you may have an occasion where maybe someone's getting ready for a wedding and so they want to come in in the evening the night before um but it's for the most part it's business hours okay and is there a at least generated by Phoenix to each individual there is a suc agreement that would be between Phoenix and the individual I haven't seen that document because I represent brickmore the landlord not Phoenix the tenant but they would enter into an a sulic agreement is what they call it correct in representing the owners would they have control over the hours I'm sorry would would who you represent the owners of the of the shopping center correct correct have are they going to impose ours I think their view is that Phoenix can operate or the practitioners can operate during the hours that they choose so long as they're Within whatever is permitted under the Township's ordinances okay we'll hear from the next wi little more information okay then in that case I would thank you Mr Lothian and our next witness is Shan morony who is a professional planner who I'm calling simply to tie up some loose ends as far as the intensity question do you somly swear as to the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide I do thank you sir sir and can you say your name for the record it's Shan San morony m o r o n s Ki Mr bronsky could you please present your qualifications to the board yes um I have a masters in urban planning from New York University member of the American Institute of certified planners a New Jersey licensed professional planner since year 200000 um my license is current and in good standing appeared before many boards a little my first time appearing in Oldbridge welcome we accept your credentials thank you Mr chairman thank you Mr baronsky the sort of central theme starting from when the zoning officer was first first approached up through the comments that were issued ahead of this hearing had to do with intensity of use so I would like to ask you from a planning perspective now that we've heard Mr um Lothian talk about intensity from a parking perspective if you could please address the intensity issue from that well there there are a couple of um aspects Mr Lothian did go through the um traffic and parking aspects which obviously are the the most prominent thing that shows when you come onto the lot and based on the um ex anticipated uh trips and parking demand of a restaurant of the size of the space approximately 7700 ft as opposed to the uh Salon use the personal service use that's being proposed that use has a lesser intensity um I would also note that a restaurant is more likely to have more passby traffic more impulse whereas um the individuals who are licensed in cosmetology or hair styling are more likely to be appointment driven which I I think that means that there's they can only take a certain number of people for a certain amount of time so it's much more structured and regulated as opposed to the the passby impulse nature of of a restaurant of that size so in terms of the operations in terms of the operations affecting the site overall and in terms of how the business operates I believe from a planning perspective that's what's being proposed is less intense than the restaurant uh use that could be located there and had been located there thank you I have no further questions from Mr morony Mr Fox Mr plorn go to board on my left it's 46 suits yes that could operate anytime um you're comparing that to a restaurant if he closes at 10 if he he's open during the day he closes at 10 46 individual stalls or SS I think it's the opposite I I think uh you're going to have more traffic well that's assuming that all of the Suites are active at the same time and each individual operator May operate their own hours um you know I'm sure the operator if they had all 46 suits at one time that would be a great thing but that's not always the case whereas with restaurants you have peak times peak times at dinner peak times at lunch depending on the type maybe even at breakfast time time um whereas with this particular use you have a steady more orderly use and it is appointment driven given the nature of the professionals and the and the activity uh profession they engage in appointment so if 46 weats allocated an hour per person you're evolving a lot of people well that that assumes that assumes that everybody every slot is going to be occupied throughout the entirety of the workday and even from a traffic and parking perspective there are peak hours there's up there's ups and down times people take breaks um for lunch people may not have appointments at a particular time and this particular use grants the professionals the flexibility to set their own hours now most people will likely work in the normal typical work hour spect say eight or 9 to four to 5 to six but what this use does it gives them the flexibility to be able to um cater to a customer for example a bride or a wedding party that may need um they you need work uh beforehand or some other or some other use Mr iso's question I think it how many in individuals how many talented people are we talking about you're talking about a hair stylist you're talking about a nail salon what else a masseuse no um as um Mr jennis law noted uh the operation the use has to comply with the local ordinances and This falls under the definition of personal services and personal services excludes several uses including therapeutic massage that is distinct and separate so what are the others what what else do you have um so I mean you can you can have a variety of things you can have hair stylist you can have barbaras you can have manicurist we talked about a stylist Nel Nel Salon what else I mean think look think about in your own life right most of us have you have 45 of these cubicles right and traffic we're talking Mr iso's point was well taken who are you putting in there I don't never see a salon with 45 people in there well again it's a function of are all the spaces leased and are are all of the professionals working throughout the day every day right I mean when you're run your own business you have the luxury of setting your own hours and so you may choose to work only mornings only afternoons you know only early evening so we're limited to hair stylist and nail salon that's all you know cos a cosmetic makeup it could be cosmetologist it it could anything that meets the definitions within your code typically it's going to be personal stylist hair stylist Barber and think about in our own lives we all have probably a preferred hair stylist or Barber that we go to right even if it's a larger shop that might employ five or 10 different people you typically go back to the same person because that's the person that you're familiar with so you may have multiple people practicing the same profession you know there might be multiple Barbers but it doesn't mean that they're all going to be operating at the same time every day so in reality it it very likely is much less intense than the existing or the former restaurant right you know when you could have tables fully occupied at the dinner hour you could have people lined up out the door if it's a popular restaurant and if the operating hours are a concern I don't think that there's is any realistic expectation that these practitioners are going to be coming in at 3:00 in the morning and if the board is concerned about that then the board can impose a condition that would prohibit overnight operation um right I mean who's coming in at 3: in the morning to get their haircut that's maybe no one but I think representing the landlord you might have more interest in the operation operational hours than we would although from a safety aspect you know don't I I don't know it's in the best interest when all the shops would be closed in the mall that one one of 46 operators might be you know performing a Beauty Stylist or or some other function uh might be not only for their own safety but for the safety of people arriving at the mall again I don't know what the restrictions I don't think there's any restriction by licensing I think barbering or cosmetology I don't think they prohibit ours but I would think from repres presenting the I I would have a concern if this were opened overnight and understood and it doesn't I don't think it needs to be open overnight I think the the practitioner but I would agree with you that there might be a wedding in the morning and they might want to come in at 4:00 a.m. to get their hair done all the Bridesmaids and off to the wedding at 8: a.m. so I I understand that but I just don't know that it should be so loose that everyone can everyone obviously has a key to the front door or some access code to get into this property and there's 46 different salons I mean it's it seems like if it's wide open it's kind of ripe for some crime or something nefarious that may occur I'm I'm I'm suggesting that the that the property owner might want to regulate that Mr Fox your as Zing officer pointed out to me there's actually a section that um 24-hour businesses with certain exceptions are conditional uses ordinance under 250- 44 JJ um and this particular use uh if it's within 250 ft of a residential property or Zone which it is it cannot be open 24 hours a day unless it's a conditional use VAR yeah and and that's more what I I don't want to deter people from from running a business I think it's great small business is the lifeline and and blood for that turns our economy but at the same time I I fear for Public Safety I just thought the mall owner the property owner would take that into consideration and perhaps regulate this at some hour unless it's an emergency or uh there was some reason as I brought up perhaps the bridal party wanted to get there at 4:00 a.m. uh I don't know or maybe uh they wanted to get there at 11: p.m. I I don't know I mean I think those are the sorts of of examples of flexibility that are desired I don't think there's any desire or expectation to be open on a regular basis during late night or overnight hours I think it's for exactly the kind of situations that you're describing on a you know an occasional basis right and and I think we have something covering that anyway but when it says can't be open 24 hours it doesn't say what specific hours right do so it could be they could work from midnight till noon the next morning uh okay well I I I don't know that I really think you need a condition but I would hope that uh understood maybe the home owner the uh property owner would probably take that into consideration I don't want to see people subjecting themselves to something happening that most of the people in this business maybe certainly in Nails is usually all women uh I don't see a lot of male nail teexs and perhaps hair stylists probably be both but I I don't want to see a couple people in there at 3:00 in the morning getting nor do we right so point point well taken so that that would be my concern right so maybe if we could kind of do something there without you know maybe there's the exception that somebody they understood could do that but it seems like they're going to have free roam to the property would I be correct you said there's no superintendent or there's no landlord or manager on property right so each each practitioner can access the building has a right they would only have access to to their own space right and and presumably also the common areas the restrooms the break room things like that but not access to the space of other practitioners security measures that that would be um could be put into place after certain hours that the card card holder who would have to greet someone to allow them to come in um I'm sure there are are some sort of key card access got to be a card that everybody's going to get to use they're not going to hand out right and my my understanding is that the the the doors you know the front door if you will is not just left you know open it's generally open during business hours you know maybe 8:00 a.m to 6: p.m. and after hours it's locked and so as you're suggesting the practitioner would have to admit someone who is coming in at at other than regular business hours and maybe that's the solution to address the concern yeah and I'm just looking at from a public safety issue I think it's a great idea uh to to share share the Suites to you independent contractors perform their uh Beauty culture but I I do worry about it if it is 24 hours or you know if it's going to be overnight so that would be my only consideration understood anybody else this is your only witness right this is my last witness correct um I have go ahead Now's the Time every one of those Suites uh by Health standards will have to have their own sync that yes that's actually required by the Board of Cosmetology and hair styling but that's much more than a restaurant I know the restaurant use a lot of water but I I happen to come from that industry and the amount of water that's used uh is tremendous we're we're actually excuse me adding adding a dedicated Water Service a 2-in water service which does not currently exist in order to provide sufficient water and and I'm being told that that it's been approved by the MUA so that's that's already approved um so I have nothing further for Mr morony I think we touched on a number of the questions or comments in the review letters I know there were some relating to do related matters um one was requesting that we seek a letter of no interest I understand our Engineers have spoken with the Township's professionals and we've agreed that we will apply to the do for a letter of no interest clearly since there's no physical improvements to the driveways and no change in square footage there should be no reason why the do would not issue a letter of no interest uh we will also seek the approval of the middle sex County planning board because technically ernston road is a county road again no physical changes to the exterior so that should not be an issue um I I think the other do related comments given that there's no dot jurisdiction here are probably not really relevant but if the board or the professionals would like to hear a more detailed response to that I can ask Mr Lothian to come back up and address those items individually I don't want to be a stick in the mud but I have one quick one just because of what was raised with the 24hour if it's a 24hour as long if I didn't hear that incorrectly don't we kind of get pushed into that it becoming a conditional use I mean to me it didn't sound like it was you know an optional thing it was kind of if you're 24hour you're become a conditional use so just we might need to find a little way of working around it right but I mean we're not 24hour I mean there there might be occasional late night or early morning use as we talked about for a special occasion but that's not the isn't it technically 24hour like I I I I think it it's 24hour just by Way by way of that well then of how you're describing I which I just want to make sure we don't accidentally back into a C2 use sorry into a conditional uh into a conditional use and then create more issues here because if something is if you can go in at any time 24/7 then you are 247 I I can appreciate you know how you're trying to shape it but I mean just because someone has access doesn't mean they're doing business 20 24 hours what your what your advertisement do disorderly coun the floor if it's a concern then we can establish um regular hours maybe you know open no later than midnight no earlier than 6:00 a.m. except you know on an occasional basis for a specific type of it just needs to 247 I which you know 23 237 you know I I don't think it even needs to be that unless that works I think you're getting to it right there uh at your last uh offer if we could come up with something that maybe it doesn't open before 6:00 a.m. and doesn't stay open until past midnight uh I guess there would be an emergency situation but as long as there's some limited flexibility for the sure sure occasion when there's a need for services based on a you know specific circumstance this Phoenix they hold the leases right not the not the uh property owner bricks Moore would be leasing to Phoenix and then Phoenix subl licenses right to each one of the individual practitioners correct but they would be they would be held held accountable for what the landlord would say correct correct well you're saying the practitioner it would be in your sub it would be the suing agree or your agreements it would carry on Phoenix would subl license with the practitioner so that that would not be a direct relationship with with my client that's between Phoenix and yeah just from privity yeah right exactly do we have any problems with the the list here do we go through this Mr Fox or Mr plorn or councel do you agree with everything was in here well a number of the things request testimony so I I think we've addressed a number of them on a planning aspect we just had two things one if a condition approval that any new signage comply with the ordinance which I'm sure you agreed to that's fine and that to the extent that uh any new improvements uh are consistent or applicable under the the townships affordable housing residential development fee affordable housing that you'll comply with that as well to the extent anything is due of course that's Our obligation but seeing as how there's no change in the square footage of the building I don't that's that's not what the ordinance says it's the the equalized assess value of the property right so but I mean simply renting space I don't think changes that equalize ass value of the property but ultimately that's up to the tax assessor right thank you that's all they hador so we're comfortable with everything in the memo authored uh by uh well no there there are a number of things relating to the do which we don't really think are relevant since the do doesn't have jurisdiction but we're going to Hash these out tonight and and again only because I'm coming now I'm coming to giving you 45 minutes you got five left uh I think we're close so I think we can I'm are you looking for a vote tonight we would like to have a vote tonight okay let's have she out quick okay Mr and I don't mean to be rude sir but uh yeah no I understand I appreciate I'm trying to help you and you're helping me Mr Loi and if if you could run through the do comments briefly and I'm going to consult with my client for a moment on the erors of operation issue while Mr appreciate that well he wants me a stretch but uh there there is no change in square footage the uh the dot is going there's nothing that triggers a DOT uh permit at all because we're not changing the access we're not changing circulation we're not changing the size of the uh size of the building so uh we anticipate we fully anticipate gang letter no interest which also really isn't necessary since it's it's just going to be showing that there's no change in uh no change in trips but we will obtain that and that pretty much takes care of the majority of njdot comments uh there are a couple of uh site condition comments on there that that we already discussed with the with your board professionals that we would address with them um as compliance items should you should you uh should we give approval those those are going to be worked out correct correct with your professionals correct we had that discussion they we we agreed to work those things out on all right uh you have a comment no no no from the fire department that's our favorite one that's that's the best one right exactly um Mr Fox I need anything else I'm uh searching here that's all we have we got it yes sir uh would you work out with the professionals as to a time frame for safety purposes I think we can agree to 6 a.m to midnight we just see if the board de well with you anybody have a problem with that if if that comes up Mr you okay go ahead Miss I just want to know uh Phoenix uh Salon is it a franchise is is Phoenix a franchise um well when you save I mean it's not are they in are they in other states and are they in other areas how successful are they they have about 400 locations across the country there are currently uh 21 roughly in New Jersey the closest one to hear are Cliffwood on Route 35 Woodbridge on Green Street and East Brunswick on Route 18 and they're relatively successful well they have 400 locations so well they they're closing a whole bunch of targets and so I I I I just want to know because I hate to see empty stores if something doesn't work out and they're all independent contractors and that's um that's going A Step Above what you'll see in most salons many of your salons today that you see people rent a chair and it's much cheaper to rent a chair than it is to to be responsible for a whole Suite that's why I asked you if they were going to be able to sublease to other people for a day or a or two days because that becomes more traffic becomes more people okay that's the only reason I'm asking if understood thank you uh final thing go ahead Mr Scott one question the advertisement will it have the times that you discussed till 12 well what advertisement whatever advertisement you're going to be putting out well we don't have I mean Phoenix Salon Suites will rent to individual practitioners and then it will be up to them to comply with that limitation when they're scheduling their appointments yeah advertisement to the residents who want to come in for a hairstyle or Nails would they get an advertisement how would they get that I I think it's really up to Phoenix and the practitioners but at the end of the day since it's appointment driven the time frame will be in advertisement that's what you're saying well I don't know if they're going to be advertisements but they would be restricted to that time frame think as long as the building's you know accessible from those times and not accessible from the times where it's not supposed to be that's should solve all problems I would yeah I would think so I I don't know what kind of advertising Phoenix undertakes okay so I it's important they put the time if we agree I mean being that it's appointment driven iint I don't know that we can put that on Phoenix they probably have the right to do their own advertising what we're concerned with as the landlord if we're granting the the site plan uh has agreed to close between midnight and 6 a. right and at the end of the day as I said earlier the zoning officer has to sign off before they can file for their license to occupy the space with the state so the zoning officer could specify the hours in that certificate if advertising here anyway it's indeed rare rarely male uh uh I'm going to go to a public portion and I'll come back to the board for final comments and and of course from you sir thank you this is uh matter 8-22 24 Z perck moral bridg LLC this is a physical location is 1030 us9 commonly called Gateway Shopping Center this for tency change from restaurant to Salon major seeking major preliminary and final site plan for a change in tency anyone here in the room tonight uh have any comments or questions please raise your hand now or stand no one has I'll close the public portions let me just see if the board has any problems then I'll let you wrap up thank you let's settle all the problems now because we're you are going to call for a vote so uh anything on this side guys no Vice chair no I'm good all right and miss Andrew counselor nothing on my all right I'll hear your final uh CL Mr chairman just really one final um comment about the uh consultant reports that talk about the minimum square footage so there's a concept that the Board of Cosmetology and hair stylists recognizes a called a mini Suite which is 100 square feet for one practitioner and all of the proposed spaces here are between 100 and 200 right so the 350 square feet that's referenced in the in the comments that's for a larger facility that can have more than one practitioner so the the mini Suite is what these would be and uh so I just wanted to make that that clear that we wouldn't be complying with a 350q foot requirement but rather a 100q foot requirement which is recognized as a mini suite and with that I thank the board for your cooperation and your attentiveness tonight I I think this is a great application to reten in some space in the center and uh we look forward to Hope having that facility open if the board sees fit to approve it tonight thank you very much thank you counselor and the worst thing you want to see in a shopping center is an open open business so I'm glad and this space has been vacant for a while as I I understand I'm I'm familiar with it and and and I'm glad that someone is coming forward to use that spot it's it is a great location and if if it's approved I certainly wish the uh all the uh operators in there the best of luck because it is a service that everyone uses and it'll be probably very good for the community uh counil this is simply for I thought I read there was some bulk variants in here no there's no bulk variances not at all okay okay so it's merely for a major preliminary and final site plan right let's do uh major preliminary first someone so inclined is to move for move this for approval sh will move it this there second roll call please miss Andrews yes and I wish you the very best of luck because I like the idea of it thank you Miss Chevalier yes Mr Rizo yes Mr scagno yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman svin yes uh final site plan someone want to move that will move it is there a second second Stoner roll call please miss Andrew yes Miss Chevalier yes Mr Rizo yes Mr scagno yes Mr Stoner yes and chairman svin I stand on my yes I stand on my previous comments I wish them the best the luck thank you for you and your Professionals for your presentation this evening and cooperating I'm sorry I tried to rush you a little bit but we reached the end that's okay it means we all get home sooner thank you very much uh five minutes please recess uh the final application I'm going to extend to you the fulltime I don't think we have anybody in the public tonight so I'm gonna allow it to go to 10:30 if that's okay with you counselor we stand in recess five minutes please no longer thanks next e e e e e e e all right we have returned from uh recess Mr hollan can I have a roll call please miss Andrew here miss Chevalier here Mr Rizo here Mr scagno here Mr Stoner here and chairman s here uh when last we left uh we have one more application board member for the evening it's 29- 2024 Z enh management it's in the 801 Zone block 20 Lot 10 physical location 10 Pleasant Valley Road mini warehouse bifurcated D variant applicant proposes a 12,540 foot uh square foot mini warehouse with Associated site improvements such as parking driveways and sidewalks Lawrence saaks Esquire representing the applicant counselor yes uh good evening Mr chair chairman members of the board uh Lawrence Sachs on behalf of the applicant enh management uh this property is located at block uh 20,000 lock 10 18 Pleasant Valley Road it's uh the corner property at Pleasant Valley in Englishtown Road uh the property is located in the uh it's actually a split zone property so portion of the property is located in the edo1 zone uh and a small portion is also located in the R40 Zone um where're seeking approval tonight on a bifurcated basis for a use variance uh to operate and construct a 12,540 square foot mini warehouse which will be devoted exclusively to the use of Arctic air which is actually uh the uh the property that which is across the street and the owner and the contract purchaser of this property uh so it will be strictly used by Arctic air um we require a use variance uh we're bifurcating this hearing so if the board acts favorably on this application this evening uh we will come back to you at a later date hopefully very Bri very shortly uh with a site plan application I will state that we have provided a fairly comprehensive site plan already uh in order to satisfy my two favorite cases the house of fire and Scholastic bus case that so the board at least has enough information to know about what's going to operate on this site and how it's going to operate uh but we are only seeking a use variance this evening um I do have several witnesses uh I do have Mr Ross Albert who's seated to my right who is uh the principal of Arctic air uh our engineer is Ryan McDermot uh we have our traffic engineer Justin Taylor who's here if uh there's any traffic questions our architect is also available uh Mr Mike Testa and we also have our professional planner uh Colleen mcer uh who will uh be our last witness uh so Mr chairman with that said if we can have Mr Albert sworn in uh he'll briefly explain the operations and what's going to happen at this particular Warehouse sir do you Sly swear it's the H do you Sly swear it's the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide yes thank you sir and can you just state your name for the record Ross Albert r o s a l b r t Al B RT Albert sorry thought I said that go ahead than than you Mr Cheney uh so Ross you're the principal of Arctic air that's correct all right if you can give a little history briefly of what Arctic air does uh what occurs at your Lo your present location and what's going to be uh the use of this property across the street on 18 Pleasant valleyway so Valley Road yeah so so I'll start first start talk about the business right so we're a 48-year-old Family Heating Cooling Plumbing electrical business uh my dad started this business 48 years ago he was a high school math teacher from Staten Island needed a job to supplement his income start this little family business we moved to Oldbridge in 2008 um we had a very small business at the time we tened outfitted that space at one Pleasant Valley Road for a period of time and we quickly outgrew that space uh in 2022 we purchased a piece of property in marbro to leave Oldbridge and build a space that was 50,000 Square ft but then when the property came to be across the street we had very good findings and um we were super happy to be a part of Oldbridge and service the communi so we vacated that space in 2022 um sold that property and now want to move back to Oldbridge because it's much better more conducive for our business to be housed in a very similar location for across the street which my father owns at one pleason Valley Road and the application that we have here tonight for be across the street so what's going to actually be at at at that location is our installation Division and Warehouse so um as you as you know when we have uh 45 employees in the space that's there we're going to need ample parking ample spaces for for trucks and vehicles and then warehousing of heating cooling uh equipment to be housed in that warehouse in that location um it's important for us to move back to Oldbridge and continue to stay here in Oldbridge um it's been uh it's to run a business in this town is it's amazing to be here so we're just so grateful that the property across the street came to be and um we appreciate your time and I just want to say thank you for this evening okay and in terms of that new building that's going to be constructed the 12,540 Ft building uh part of it going to be dedicated to office the bulk of it will be for storage of HVAC parts equipment you're also going to use it as a training facility for your technicians all right um are you going to store any hazardous materials in that building we are not all right and in terms of the hours of operation uh what will the hours of operation be at the new facility so Monday through Friday it's from 7:00 in the morning to 8:00 in the evening and then on Saturdays and Sundays it's from 7 in the morning to 6:00 in the evening okay and in terms of the vehicles that are going to be on this site uh what types of vehicles will be parked in the parking lot so they personal vehicles there are like four Transit Vans or uh GMC vans as well and 15ft box trucks all right so in terms of parking that's going to occur they're nothing larger than a 15ot box drive that's correct okay and in terms of deliveries uh how often do they occur uh once a day once a day and how and what type of vehicle brings them in uh 53 3ot tractor trailer all right and you have and I know our engineer will talk about it but there is a loading dock at the rear of the property that is correct okay um Mr chairman I don't have any further questions of Mr Albert uh I know our engineer can give you a nice layout of what's being proposed here but certainly he's available for any board I'll just see if the professionals have any personal questions or before we get into anything technical no questions from the planner no questions no you give me the the operating hours one more time so Monday through Friday it's from 7 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. and then Saturday and Sunday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. thank you thank you questions on my left no the principal edo1 indicates uh to permit a small scale a mix of office retail and light industrial uses small scale what part of the large scale is that going to the other Zone the r um R3 the r the R40 Mr SC my planner will'll talk about that but the the only thing that's going in the R40 is parking that's it the building itself is going to be in the ed01 Zone on the ed1 yeah and that's permitted and you know what you just raised a question I had one more question for Mr Albert are you going to do any maintenance of vehicles on this site no okay I know that was a question that was raised report okay you no longer have property cross the street right we do oh you still have you have that as well correct okay my father owns that okay that's all nothing else thank you okay thanks Ross thank uh if I can call Ryan McDermot and we'll have him sworn do you Solly swear as the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide I do thank sir and can you just spell your name for the record sure Ryan mcdermit r y an m c d e r m oot T thank you sir right Mr mcder if you could give the board the benefit of your professional education and background absolutely uh licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey licens is in good standing I graduated from ruckies University with a bachelor's of Science and Engineering principal Dynamic engineering I've been with the firm for about nine years now um over the course of that time I've managed design dozens of commercial industrial residential projects uh I was last before this board in December of 2023 your recognizes by the support and we'll accept your credentials thank you very much thank you Mr chairman Mr mcder I know you have uh some exhibits that you're going to testify to but if you can just give us a brief description of the site and what's being proposed absolutely I'd like to start with existing conditions if I could for that reason we've prepared this aerial map exhibit with today's date prepared by my firm for General orientation purposes the north Arrow points towards the top of the page the property is centrally located it's a unique l-shape if you could follow my cursor here um it has approximately 480 linear feet of Frontage on Pleasant Valley Road across the top of the property there and approximately 207 ft of linear Frontage on Oldbridge Englishtown Road off to the left side here the property is about 3.75 acres in size as you've heard it is split zoned with the edo1 Zone on the North side and the R40 Zone on the Southeast portion so this first chunk here along the top is the edo1 this rectangular shaped portion here split by that blue line is is the zone line This is the R40 Zone down here under existing conditions the property is developed with a twostory dwelling in the northeast corner a masonry garage located south of that dwelling and a shed on the Westerly side along Oldbridge Englishtown Road the majority of the site is cleared and consists of gravel serving as an outdoor storage use and parking area which is largely surrounded by fencing along the frontages and along the perimeter a portion of the site at the southeast Corner in the R40 zone is wooded and contains freshwater wetlands the wetlands have been delineated and the applicant will have to file for a letter of interpretation with the D to verify the extents of those Wetlands as well as the associated transition area existing access to the site is provided via a full movement asphalt driveway located along Pleasant Valley Road at the northeast corner of the site with respect to the surrounding area and adjacent uses to the north is Pleasant Valley Road with the Arctic air conditioning headquarters across the street and the garded school beyond that to the south and east is a mix of commercial and residential uses with wooded area Beyond to the West is Oldbridge Englishtown road with a truck service and repair facility on the opposite side of the street and wooded area beyond that Mr cheny if I think we probably have to mark this as A1 yeah we'll mark that as A1 it's aerial aerial exhibit or aerial map exhibit and that's a this is a colorized rendering of the site plan Mr mcder that's correct this is a site plan rendering again with today's date prepared by my firm it is just a colorized version of sheet three of the use variant set again for orientation purposes the north Arrow points towards the top of the page here we're here tonight seeking use variance approval for the construction of a mini warehouse building with Associated parking loading driveways and other site improvements the applicant has decided to bifurcate the application again so it's just uh the use variance approval tonight no site plan portion of that the mini warehouse which is defined as being less than 15,000 square ft is a permitted use within the edo1 zone but not in the R40 Zone the principal structure associated with the development will be located in the ed01 zone and the only improvements proposed within the R40 portion of the site pertain to the accessory parking area the premise of our application and the reason we require that use variance approval is because of this overflow parking area here as you here tonight throughout our testimony we exceed the number of parking spaces required not because we're trying to maximize the development area but because the property is uniquely positioned directly across the street from the applicant's headquarters he's looking to expand his successful business operations here in Oldbridge you hear that he entertained a site in marbor but decided to drop that when this property was listed for sale and he knows exactly what this facility is going to require in terms of parking the mini warehouse building is 12,540 ft and consists of 2,250 ft of office space primarily in the west side of the building and 10,290 ft of warehouse space for Access we're proposing one full movement driveway along Pleasant Valley Road in the northeast corner here and one full movement driveway along Oldbridge Englishtown Road in the southwest corner of the site here we're proposing a total of 57 parking spaces where as 15 are required we are also proposing electric vehicle Make Ready spaces on the west side of the building in accordance with state and local standards there were no comments from the Fire official regarding the preferred location of those charging stations however if necessary we could locate them in the landscape Islands on either side of the parking row here and here I do know that was a comment which came up in the uh planning engineering and traffic review letter with respect to circulation and loading we're proposing 24t wide drive aises around the building and an oversized aisle east of the building to allow for turning Maneuvers associated with the loading operations here we're proposing four overhead loading doors along the easterly facade and each has a 13 1 12x 30t loading space adjacent to the door we're proposing 17t long loading space adjacent to an atg grade loading dock at the southeast Corner that's this notch in the building you see here and the site has been designed to accommodate a WB 67 largest tractor Trail on the road of New Jersey while the smaller overhead doors are intended to serve an su3 box truck without interfering with the adjacent drive a so as those vehicles are staged in their respective loading areas it will not interfere with the adjacent Drive aisle to address a few of the review letter comments related to circulation one comment suggested delineating the drive aisle east of the building with additional pavement markings just because it is so wide another requested no truck signage adjacent to the parking areas to make sure truck are not entering the parking area on the west and North sides of the building um there was also a comment about providing vehicle circulation plans including one for a fir truck we have run the fir truck we have one of the large tractor trailers they can all fit here uh the applicant would be happy to satisfy each one of those comments um as part of the site plan application comment 32 in the letter discusses the site triangles in relation to the Stop Bar locations so ashto requirements actually say that the site triangle should be located 14 1/2 ft back from the edge of the traveled way uh regardless of where the stop bars are located however even if we were to take our site triangles push them back to be 10 ft behind the stop bars as the letter suggests none of the on-site pavement areas none of the on-site circulation parking areas would be located within that site triangle so I still I still think we would have a safe turning maneuver at those driveways this comment also requested that we show a sight triangle for the Stop controlled intersection west of the building right here we anticipate this would be a very low trafficed area and one which is only traversed by employees again this is not a commercial facility so it's not like you have customers coming in who are not familiar to the site um however to the extent that there are any encroachments upon that site triangle we would look at reconfiguring the drive aisle slightly just making tweaks just to make sure that safe turning Maneuvers can be provided with respect to refuse and recycling we're proposing a 10x2 trash enclosure east of the building it will contain a 6-ft fence and would be surrounded by evergreen trees around the perimeter to avoid the need for variance relief from section 250- 54f I know that came up in the review letter so did just want to put that on the record trash and recycling would be picked up by a private hauler on an as needed basis but that's usually once or twice per week this layout does necessitate some bulk variance relief which I will touch upon here and will be covered more in greater detail by our planner later on we are seeking variances for maximum front yard setback along both roadways 99.2 feet is proposed along Old Bridge Englishtown road while 60.9 ft is proposed along Pleasant Valley Road a maximum of 50 ft is required and this sort of ties into the street buffer relief that we're seeking a 15t buffer is required along Pleasant Valley Road whereas 10.9 ft is provided to the parking spaces and a 50 foot buffer is required along Oldbridge Englishtown Road whereas 27.4 ft is provided and again I'll refer back to the maximum front yard setback requirement of 50 feet and a minimum front yard buffer require of 50 feet so there's sort of contradictory here it would not be feasible to satisfy both of those buffering and setback requirements um so we attempted to strike a balance between those two lastly we require variance relief from section 250- 54d one for non-residential buffer a 50-ft buffer is required for non-residential uses when adjacent to existing single family uses whereas the proposed development provides approximately 25 A2 ft to the southernly property line which is adjacent to lot nine under existing conditions that buffer is about 26 ft so approximately the same as it will be under proposed conditions and we haven't uh we haven't put together a grading plan that would be put together as part of the site plan application that will determine our limit of disturbance but we would intend to keep as much existing vegetation here along that southerly property line as we could to the extent that some of that needs to be cleared for grading we would plan to replant that and keep a dense vegetative screen to lot n to the South we're also proposing to remove existing improvements including a driveway and a garage from the 50-ft buffer from lot 11 on the easterly property line so we're removing those improvements and providing a 50ft compliant buffer to the east now as well there was a comment in the review letter about verifying the non-critical area while there's no such requirement for the edo1 Zone the R40 Zone has a maximum non-critical area requirement of 65% excuse me a minimum requirement of 65% and this area includes areas which are not freshwater wetlands or buffers floodways lakes ponds and steep slope areas the amount of non-critical area just in the R40 Zone under existing conditions is approximately 37% under that 65 however because we are not proposing any disturbance to the wetlands or the wetlands buffers it would remain as an existing non-conformity under proposed conditions as well so it's an existing non-conformity we're not touching that critical area at all moving on to design waiver relief there are a few related to the architectural elements both interior and exterior which you will hear about from our architect Mr Testa we are seeking relief from section 250- 381 a7e related to sidewalks so regarding the on-site areas we have sidewalk along the Westerly and Northerly facades of the building however because this southeasterly parking area is not directly connected we do require that design waiver relief again not a commercial development so it's not like you have customers trying to get to the front of the building this is Warehouse employees they they know what they're doing they know where to cross they know when across regarding the frontages and starting with Pleasant Valley Road based on aerial imagery there is no sidewalk at all along Pleasant Valley Road that's from our intersection here with Oldbridge English toown road all the way down east to marbor Road I did not see any sidewalk along that entire stretch of Pleasant Valley as a as it relates to Oldbridge Englishtown Road between our site here this intersection and down to Texas road which is about 1.3 miles south there's only one property with sidewalk in that entire stretch and it only extends about 100 120 linear feet so for that reason along with the prevalence of the wooded area in the vicinity and the lack of commercial developments which are catered towards pedestrian traffic the applicant is not proposing sidewalk along the front edges at the time section 25073 D6 requires Landscaping adjacent to facades in the public view while we do not have Foundation plantings up against the building during the site plan phase we would intend to provide Landscaping along our frontages in those buffer areas with a mix of trees and shrubs to soften the visual impact from that public view so in these areas here we would intend to provide vegetative screening which would serve that same purpose of breaking up the visual Aesthetics of the building from the public View and then finally there was a comment in the review letter about barbed wire fencing there is existing barb wire fence in a portion of the southeast area here the majority of it is located in the wetlands and the buffer area so we're not proposing to remove it except where outside of the regulated regulated area where it's in the wetlands or the wetlands buffers we can't touch that but to the extent it extends Beyond those areas we would be removing the barb wire fence um that is all I had for my director all right Ju Just a couple questions Ryan um I know there was a comment uh in the uh staff report about noise uh the only activity that's going to occur in the parking lot is actually just parking of vehicles and and obviously once a day loading and unloading perhaps by a tractor trailer uh at the loading dock uh but do you feel that will be compliant with the uh State noise requirements in terms of decibel levels during the daytime and of course we don't have to worry about nighttime because we don't have any evening hours that's correct okay um and in terms of the uh Memo from the Bureau of fire prevention Fire District 3 uh dated September 25th 2024 uh do you have any problems uh in complying with uh any of those uh issues raised in that memorandum no problem at all as I previously mentioned we did run a firet Tru just to make sure it would work on this site um and we we can comply with all those comments okay uh Mr chairman I don't have any further questions of Mr mcdermit uh obviously uh if the board acts favorably on this application we're going to be back in front of you on site plan there could be site plan considerations uh that your staff may come come up with at that time uh but certainly you know we've given I think we've given you enough at least with respect to this plan understood thank you Mr plorn uh yes Mr chairman I just have one comment regarding the access onto Oldbridge Englishtown Road uh that's a county roadway has there been any discussion or contact with the county about that we haven't filed that application yet that would be filed along with our site plan application but we fully recognize we would need their approval okay thank you Mr Fox anything of this witness um we have some testimony on regarding number 30 on our letter how many employees would be involved in this facility um Ross can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's 45 correct you talked about the hours of operation and the operations facility you going to have any uh material stored outside the building no and uh no hazardous materials I think Mr Albert testified too um and there'll be no activities outside it's just obviously the outdoor area will just be for parking thank you Mr chairman we uh our letter has a lot of different comments regarding site plan issues and we and things like that which may or may not change some of them for informational purposes only and we've had testimony about this uh to the extent I'm not sure to what extent other than the use variants and the bulk fance requiring we're talking about for example you'd ask about questions regarding uh getting waivers or variances from sidewalks or the design of the architecture of the building that sort of thing do you really want them now or should we should we wait till site plan for that well certainly you know we I we'd like to have the design waers now I think the variances certainly can be granted as part of this application uh and certainly if something arises during site plan you know we if if a new variance is triggered we certainly can can deal with that uh but I think the design waiver we're really the primary design waiver really deals with the sidewalk I mean we're going to provide the Landscaping as part of site plan uh but certainly uh there are no sidewalks really anywhere within the vicinity so we would request that waiver uh Mr chairman that's I'm sorry Mr all comments I had right now at this time oh okay chairman no I have no comments thank you councelor nothing at the same thank you if that were to be granted uh it would be conditional correct I mean yes you still have to come back for cying that's true good Mr Fox okay all right board members on my left of uh the professional engineer satisfied excuse me on the D variance I'm familiar with that but the bipoc D doesn't that call for a separate application we're going to have to right we'll have to file another application for site you have to file another application and that application is for prelim that would be for preliminary and final major s okay thank you and what about lighting and signage that would all be part of the site plan thank you Vice chair I have nothing okay uh Mr chairman I have the architect Mr Mike Testa sure let him briefly show you what the building will look like and what the floor layout will be do you s me swear the truth of the testimony for which you are about to provide I do thank you sir can you set your full name for the record sure first name is Michael last name Testa teest thank you sir Mr Testa if you can just briefly give the board the benefit of your uh education and professional background yes I'm a graduate of New Jersey Institute of Technology 1991 Bachelor architecture um licensed architect since 196 1996 in good standing principal architect of Michael Vesta architect manala New Jersey since 2002 and I've had the pleasure of testifying in front of the board numerous times yes he's he is recn and uh we accept his expertise thank you sir thank you Mr chairman all right Mike if you don't mind I know you've got a couple exhibits which I believe were part of this submission uh so if you can go through them and identify what's being proposed great the building we have in front of you like we indicated is a small Warehouse building it's um 12 12,540 square ft with a 2,250 square foot component of office space on the um Oldbridge English town side of the road we have this left side here facing rout 527 and Pleasant Valley Way going across here um as you can see the building is pretty simple we have office in the front the rear is going to be uh storage training um and all other aspects of of the business that Mr uh Albert indicated as you can see in the back here we have four overhead doors for the box truck loading and unloading and in the recessed area of the building we have the larger overhead door with a man door access for loading and unloading uh for the larger trucks it's going to be an open steel frame building um non-combustible I don't believe a sprinkler system would be required for a building of this size if it is required we would um provide that at a later date when we design the building um I'd like to move to sheet pb2 which is the building elevations okay the elevation on the top of the drawing is sheet pb2 which I'm calling a front elevation is the the elevation facing um Pleasant Valley Road the building to the right is Oldbridge English toown Road we have a continuous cultured stone base on the building with a corrugated metal veneer both complimentary colors this will be a earth tones of like a Light Beige and a darker brown blend of stone at the bottom we'll have a white trim on the building with a different color roof we have uh trim elements around the windows and doors throughout the building the same treatments are are carried across to the um Oldbridge Englishtown Road elevation which is a little more ornate with storefront glass ornate trim around it and again with a corrugated accent metal we have signage located up above the um main entrance to the door that would be conforming with the local ordinances and again if you go towards the rear of the building where the overhead doors are you can see it's broken up with multiple doors trim cultured stone and Earth Tone color metal panels and again throughout on the back side of the building with the same materials that working the building is going to have a ridge in the top of the building a high point which is 30 ft above grade it's going to slope left and right to gutters on either side it'll go to an underground water detention system that'll be designed by Dynamic engineering um other than that it's a fairly simple building and there's really not much more to the design that I can elaborate on unless you have any questions T just just one question for me uh on uh I guess it's a comment number 30 1 on page six uh there's a comment about U uh section 250- 73 D3 requires that all major entrances to buildings be properly identified with architectural elements such as recessed entryways projected overhangs and porticos none of these elements appear to be proposed uh do you have a solution for that yeah we can clear this is the elevation we're talking about the main entrance this is your main entrance door here we're discussing earlier is putting a canopy like a flat metal canopy in accent color with with uh angled rods back to the building with some illumination underneath to illuminate the sidewalk into the building I think that would satisfy that request okay Mr chairman uh pretty simple Warehouse building I don't have much more of Mr Testa you would work with the professionals uh on on that matter correct yes we will uh Mr Fox no further questions luor no questions and Mr holler no question chairman counselor nothing on my left no question I have a question um do we have any sprinkler system in this building of this size I do not believe that requires a sprinkler system if the code does require we will have one it's a non-combustible building under uh the square foot requirement for the type of use so I do not believe it requires one but again when we do a full code analysis and it does deemed to require one it will be fully sprinklered anybody else on my left Andre next WT us thank you Mr chairman I have uh I have my traffic engineer here I don't believe unless your professionals want to hear from our traffic engineer I can there were a few traffic comments but uh I'll leave that up to your professionals want to go with the planner first we can go with the planner let's let's do that okay that's fine good evening evening counselor you Solly swear us to the truth of the testimony for what you are about to provide I do thank you can you say your full name for the record Colleen mcer MCG K thank you Miss mcer if you could give the board the benefit of your professional background in education yes thank you um I received my masters in urban planning from Boston University in 1996 I then uh started my current planning mostly from the municipal end um I opened my company swi Stalin mcer in 2019 I have since testified before multiple townships including Monroe uh East Brunswick matachin to name a few did you miss no I did actually that was the very first time I testified okay back in 2010 before I started my company with Jonathan hurn um my license is current and I'm a member of aicp thank you accept her credentials all right M mcgar I know uh we require a D1 use variant uh also some bulk variances and design waivers if you could give the board uh the benefit of your analysis as to that okay thank you um in preparation for this testimony I have reviewed the Land Development ordinance the Oldbridge Township master plan land use element adopted in 2011 and multiple master plan re-exams uh the application the use variance plan by Dynamic engineering architectural Plans by Michael Testa and board professional reports and performed a site inspection subject property located at 18 Pleasant Valley Road is a corner lot located at the intersection of Pleasant Valley Road and Oldbridge English toown Road AKA County Route 527 block 20,000 Lot 10 is 3.75 acres and is developed with an existing two-story residential dwelling accessory structure with an addition a shed and a large gravel parking lot it is located within the ed01 economic development opportunity Zone District which was recommended in the 2011 master plan and adopted by or in 2015 The edo1 Zone permits many warehousing including self storage and flex warehousing limited to 15,000 square ft and mini warehouse and office for electricians Carpenters plumbers woodworking cabinet makers and similar traits therefore the mini warehouse is a permitted use but the proposed parking lot expansion consisting of 23 stalls would be located in the portion of the property that is within the R40 residential zoning District therefore the proposed development requires a D1 use variant the purpose of the edo1 zone is to permit on a small scale a mix of office retail and light industrial uses to allow Oldbridge Township to attain the goals of accommodating Market forces increasing the local rateable base expanding the local and Regional job space providing a more diverse mix of goods and services to Residents and businesses within the municipality and region achieving an improved balance of residential and non-residential development within the municipality and utilizing suitable land for development and in a more efficient functional and aesthetic manner while controlling and managing Highway access and traffic congestion minimizing impacts on adjacent and nearby residential development and protecting environmentally sensitive areas that's how it's defined in the Oldbridge ordinance the applicant is proposing to demolish the existing non-conforming residential dwelling and accessory structures and construct a new two-story 12, 450t mini warehouse facility the property would include the pay parking lot for 57 vehicles five loading spaces Landscaping three EV charging stations two Ada handicap spaces and a 10 X20 trash enclosure the new facility will be utilized by Arctic air directly to the north which needs additional space for the existing business to properly function and expand the surrounding uses consist of Arctic airs Warehouse office space and GD daycare center to the north residential uses and a recycling center to the east residential uses in a wooded area to the South and a Truck Trailer Repair use and to the West the southern portion of the lot lot 10 is adjacent to Lots 4 and 5 which contains A&M LLC a farm which consists of five or six accessory structures and a residential dwelling and firewood is sold from this property I have a short PowerPoint uh PowerPoint presentation if we could put that up just showing this computer doesn't have a PowerPoint license oh my god really we can dispense with that okay well it it showed the aerial and a lot of the uh commercial uses and Industrial uses and their appearance um which is not going to be as attractive as this proposed use so yeah I was going to say you can use that yeah it doesn't go as far down um you're gonna have to bring the mic with you is there portable up there yeah thank you uh it this doesn't show as far down on 527 as my really amazing PowerPoint presentation showed but um this uh is a recycling center there's a dentist office across the street there's a couple of what appears to be residential uses but the back is clear with a lot of vehicles but it doesn't have any business registered um uh there's another commercial facility over here um and further down there's uh an automotive shop there's a the farm that I mentioned um there's thae Landscaping which is I think this lot over here has thae Landscaping um there's peterscape land clearing and recycling I mentioned that outdoor living in Water Gardens Reno construction Levan Raphael Inc ctt's trailer Center all further to the South all very industrial looking commercial uses you m Miss mcer before you sit down hi I'm Med Fox the planner could you define or describe or Point your finger on where the Edo zone is and what uses are in the Ado Zone versus what aren't just on the property or you're not going to get picked up unless you use the The Zone like not just the property what's in the zone well that the testimony that I just gave was to give a an idea say what was in the zone versus what is in another Zone and the application form didn't identify what the zoning district is okay well just this property is in the edo1 zone and then it that zone continues up to the north there's the r120 zone and the R40 Zone surrounding this area about across the street to the left what zone is that in uh off the top of my head I don't recall I think it's how can what I'm getting to is how can your testimony say that this is compatible or not compatible to other uses in the zone or the purpose of the Zone if you don't can't explain where the zone is I was giving a character of the area and that there's a lot of commercial uses in this area but no this this lot is the Edo Zone edo1 Zone continuing North and then the surrounding areas at the r120 zone and the R40 Zone just for some context I I I do have some knowledge of of this particular area of goldbridge I could tell you that the uh property that's across the street uh where there appear to be a lot of tractor trailers and trucks parked that's also in the Edo zone so uh so directly across the street from Mr chairman it's just incomplete information it's we'll get to a little B later but the the Edo Zone does continue there's a portion of the Edo Zone further down on 527 also can we get you don't happen to have the Z Z map I don't have a zoning map no I I know a good portion of Engish my PowerPoint dis I can I can put up chairman thank you m MCG while we're pulling that up why don't we continue on with with the testimony and talk about the justification for the D1 use variants [Music] okay okay well a little more description the proposed parking area is 48.3 Ft from lot 9 and approximately 58 ft from Lot 8 which are to the west and 55 ft from lot 11 which is to the east these three lots are residential and would be most impacted but there are significant setbacks which reduce or eliminate any negative impacts and uh as you can see you saw from the use variance plan the rear of lot 11 is mainly wooded no special reasons D1 use variants can be granted without showing that such variants or other relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and the purpose of the Zone plan and zoning ordinance there are sufficient special reasons for the granting of D1 variance under two broad circumstances when the refusal to allow the project would impose on the applicant an undue hardship Andor when a proposed project carries out a purpose of zoning this application advances several purposes of the ml Municipal land use law purpose a to encourage Municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote public health safety morals and general welfare the existing Arctic air business is in need of additional land to help the business function and be successful it is a permitted use in the Ed D1 Zone and is similar to many of the businesses in the area purpose C to provide adequate light air and open space the applicant is proposing the construction of a new building which will provide adequate light air and open space to the site and surrounding area and will maintain a portion of the lot as undeveloped purpose G to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural residential recreational commercial and Industrial uses in open space both public and private according to their respective Environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens the applicant is proposing to utilize an existing underdeveloped lot the development will have little to no negative impact on the surrounding residential and Commercial neighborhood the proposed use will provide an adequate buffer to the surrounding uses and the uses will be able to function as intended in their respective zones any environmentally sensitive areas will be protected and preserved popus I to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design and Arrangement the proposed development will provide a better layout the gravel parking lot will be paved gravel Lots do not conform to the ordinance and require a design waiver the existing structures are older and in poor condition and will be replaced by a well-designed structure and Landscaping purpose n to promote utilization of renewable energy resources the applicant is proposing to install three Make Ready vehicle charging stations in medich versus BPR company the Supreme Court singled out promotion of the general welfare as the purpose that most clearly amplifies the meaning of special reasons as per Co versus mayor of and Council of fairon made clear there must be a finding that the general welfare is served because the use is particularly fitted to the particular location for which the variance is sought in the context of the positive criteria site suitability is not concerned with ordinance zoning criteria but is instead focused on why the location of the site within the municipality or region is particularly suited for the use despite the zoning Andor what unique characteristics of the site itself make it particularly appropriate for the proposed use rather than the permitted use this is a corner lot on a busy County Road the portion of the lot that exists within the edo1 Zone has roadway access from both County 527 and Pleasant Valley Road which is ideal for commercial use the portion of the lot within R40 zone is landlocked only has access through the commercially Zone portion Le withd and due to the configuration is not well suited to residential according to miichi versus BPR company the first prong of the negative criteria requires that the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good in this respect the statutory focus is on the variance of effect on the surrounding properties the board of adjustment must evaluate the impact of the proposed use variants upon the adjacent properties and determine whether or not it will cause such damage to the character of the neighborhood as to constitute substantial detriment to the public good it is my professional opinion that there will be no negative impact on the character of the neighor neighborhood or the adjacent residential uses as the applicant has taken steps to mitigate any potential impact the applicant is proposing a new building that will comply with the majority of the Zone requirements this type of use is a low intense use will not produce noise disturbances and is viewed as compatible with residential uses since the township zoned it edo1 in 2015 the southern portion of the lot which is still zoned R40 is landlocked and encumbered by potential environmental constraints and the proposed parking area which only takes up a small portion of the lot most of which is currently cleared will have little to no negative impacts and the remainder of the lot will be left in its current state wooded this is a good solution to a lot that is split zoned which is never ideal the second prong that must be proven is that the proposed use does not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and zoning ordinance the majority of the development is within the edo1 zone is a permitted use the r portion the R40 portion again is landlocked and would be difficult to develop as residential in further support of the use variants Cox States and I quote hardship may also arise out of a split lot zoning this occurs when a zoning boundary runs through a piece of property so that for example the portion of the fronting on a street is zoned for commercial use but the rear portion of the lot is Zone residential if the effect of such zoning is to render unusable the rear portion of the lot say so as to effectively Zone it into idleness hardship exists sufficient to support the grant of a variance subject however to an appropriate finding as to the negative criteria it goes on to State AMG Associates versus Township of Springfield the Court held that the owner was entitled to use the rear portion of the lot to provide off- street parking required for office uses with regards to the master plan the 2011 master plan land use element first recommended the Edo zones with the purpose of providing more diverse economic activities which this development will accomplish it states after examining the emergent land use patterns along County Route 527 in the southern portion of Oldbridge and analyzing these areas for development potential it was found that they are right for stronger and more diverse Economic Development activities and uses the areas along Route 527 are situated near growing residential and Community commercial areas the master plan recommends changing the zone to ed1 for the portion of the lot which fronts on Route 527 approximately 9989 sare ft and the back portion is 63 63,000 373 ft is in the R40 the 2013 master plan reiterates and affirms the 2011 master plan goals and object objectives by stating the 2011 land use plan element includes recommendation for improving jobs to housing ratio significant changes to non-residential zones and addressing needs for goods and services I.E Economic Development opportunity zones this proposed development meets these goals for Oldbridge Township it is my professional opinion that the proposed mini warehouse which is a permitted use in the edo1 zone and the raising of the existing non-conforming residential dwelling will promote the intent of this Zone by improving the jobs to housing ratio and providing needed Services it is merely the parking within the R40 Zone portion of the lot that creates the need for the use variant relief but would not be in disharmony with the surrounding area other uses are permitted within the R40 Zone which require parking lots such as a daycare or a school so it is something the township has contemplated we're also providing an adequate buffer from the parking area to the property lines of the residential uses this use has limited hours with a close of business at 8:00 p.m. during weekdays and 6 p.m. on weekends many of the other permitted uses such as retail and restaurants would have a greater impact on the adjacent Residential Properties therefore this use which is a less intense use is well suited to the property the granting of the use variance request would not be contrary to sound zoning principles or planning I can get into the both Vari yeah just briefly if you don't mind in order to justify the bulk variances requested bulk relief can be granted based upon C1 and C2 analysis the C1 analysis deals with hardship related to the property the physical aspects of the site the C2 is a weighing test do the benefits outweigh the detriments the ordinance requires a Max front yard setback on both Pleasant Valley Road and Route 527 of 50 ft whereas we are proposing a front yard setback of 60.9 on Pleasant Valley Road and 99.2 on Route 527 in order to provide adequate parking for this use the Mac setback requirements work well with retail and personal services but not as well with light industrial or mini warehouse type uses also the existing setbacks are 10.2 on Pleasant Valley Road and 357 on Route 527 neither of these setbacks meet the ordinance since there is also a minimum of 15t requirement our proposal is more in conformance with not only the use but the bulk variance requirements also required is a 50-ft residential buffer and a 15t RightWay buffer where we are proposing 45 to 48 ft for a small portion of the parking area within the southern part of the lot for the residential buffer and 25.5 ft from lot 9 where the drive aisle is proposed proposed uh and a 10 foot Point 10.9 ft for the right of way buffer um additional Landscaping can be proposed to mitigate the variances it should all be also be kept in mind the landlocked access of the lot lack of depth and its l-shape presents difficulties in meeting ordinance requirements which is a hardship and I could discuss the design waivers yeah just in terms of the design waivers I know you heard the testimony of Mr mcdermit regarding the lack of sidewalks in the area so certainly um that would be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and could be granted by this board yes okay and there were a couple other design waivers dealing with bicycle racks and other amenities this is not a retail site this is a warehouse which is going to be utilized by the business across the street uh which is their main building um and again is there any issue with the board granting the design waivers that are requested no this type of use we're not proposing any outdoor amenities uh the bike racks would not really serve any practical purpose the employees are going to be driving to the property no customers all right and to go uh just to jump on the question I know Mr holahan took the ed1 ed01 zoning map up but I'm glad he had it up there because I don't know if the board saw it but maybe you could put it back up for a second okay great um so miss mcer I know you're familiar with the township of Oldbridge uh intimately familiar with it uh so you see where where the edo1 zone is uh sort of in the middle of that zoning map correct yes all right and and in fact Englishtown Road runs directly through the edo1 Zone that's depicted here correct on 527 all right now the portion of this property that's in the edo1 zone is really the bulk of what we're proposing which is the building and probably 80% of the parking 75% of the parking correct correct and the only reason we're see we need D1 use variants as relief because we're putting an additional 23 parking spaces in the R40 Zone yes all right my question was whether or not there are any other uses in this Zone similar to this or what I believe would be perhaps more intensive but looking at the aerial I I didn't ask that question question if it's more intensive I just said what are the other uses I'm sorry iot okay maybe I misunderstood the question but I thought you were looking for other uses that are compatible in the edo1 zone yes okay um the road service and Truck Repair which is directly to the west across route 527 okay so that's directly across the street there's a fairly intensive uh use more more so than the 12,540 foot Warehouse that we're proposing um even this evening Ms mcar I think it was on your agenda uh item number three interbel Automotive Corp located at 1706 Englishtown Road you're aware that that is a warehouse building that's probably four or five times larger than what's being proposed here yes that's that and that's the exporter of auto salvage vehicles correct yes all right um obviously there's not a lot of warehouses in this area but the warehouses that are in this area are much larger and the businesses that are located in the edo1 zone are they much more intensive and what's being proposed here yes there's one at 1701 route 527 that is a warehouse and there's several other businesses right adjacent to that that are commercial uses okay I don't have any further questions of Miss mcar Mr chairman thank you Mr Fox Mr chairman I would have about 20 minutes to 30 minutes to ask the planner questions and I know it's 10:30 okay shall I proceed uh I would prefer not I can make okay we're here we're here now I mean why don't you just ask the question you're not going to put another witness on tonight no in terms of the traffic I I just I don't I don't for the LA for just to save some time here I know Mr Taylor's here but uh in the traffic uh comments 40 and 41 there was a question as uh an explanation of what psh means he advised me that means Peak Street hour and that was for the traffic study um and in terms of uh uh I guess templates will'll certainly provide that uh during site plan but we have provided uh that is a WB 67 can maneuver on this site as well as as a firet truck so Mr mcder put that on the record yeah we put that on the record Mr Taylor would just State the same thing so I'm going to dispense with that uh certainly Miss if if uh your engineer has your planner and engineer have questions we certainly can entertain that sure Mr PL Corney I know you didn't author this but uh yeah regarding the traffic I have no questions okay thank you for that uh Mr Fox go ahead thank you um so we're here for the use variance because the proposed accessory parking lot goes into the r R4 zone right correct and the parking lot goes into the R40 Zone because of the way that the site is laid out in the ed1 ed01 zone right yes so if if the building were moved or relocated the site was redesigned you may they may or may not need that extra parking to go into the R40 zone right the lot configuration the L-shaped lot and the lack of depth uh I I don't know that it could be Rec configured to provide the amount of parking the applicant needs well the applicant is asking for parking for an off-site use as well as the onsite use right yes so that's actually another variance right I'm sorry having parking to off-site use is not a permitted use in the zone well it's all one lot though just split the the testimony was that some of the parking is there because of the use on other properties across the street right no the the uses are being are separate uses there's the use across the street is not going to be utilizing this for parking so what I I I I that that's not the testimony that I heard I heard that the extra parking is for other employees for business expansion no I don't I don't think that's the testimony I think the testimony was is that service vehicles are going to be parked on this location uh they're going to use the warehouse to store HVAC equipment HVAC supplies and to use it as a training facility okay I stand corrected thank you so I I had the pleasure to work with the person that Drew up the ed1 Zone I talked to him about it and I'll ask you to look at page three of nine in our letter regarding the front yard setback minimum and the front and the maximum front yard setback right so the minimum is 15 and the maximum is 50 correct can you imagine why it's that uh I why would we want to have zones in our Township that are in the ed1 zone that have this unique maximum front yard setback and a minimum front yard setback which doesn't happen in other places in other quarters right in a Township why is that uh well what's the purpose of zoning in this case I do not know I did speak to the township planner and I did not there was no rationale given to me uh I would see that as something that would function well with a town center type development or retail where you don't want the parking in the front correct you want encourage you don't want the parking in the front you don't want you want to encourage walkability no we don't want the parking in the front you can't put parking in the front effectively with this uh system here so if you're request if the applicant's requesting a variance from the maximum front yard setback to be almost double in the case of Englishtown Road you don't create this type of neighborhood or node system of development similar to the shopping centers across the street from the municipal building it has um it meets the minimum front yard setbacks you can have parking in the rear and that's what I believe the township is trying to achieve in this but this has parking in the front and that's why the part the building is set back also I didn't hear any good reason why any of these buffers are being violated for the RightWay buffer or for the minimum arterial buffer or the single family use buffer what's what's what's the compelling uh what's the benefit to the missp how would we not substantially impair the intented purpose of the Zone planning zone ordinance in that way well there's a hardship present because of the shape of the lot the lack of depth uh and we would mitigate any negative visual impacts by additional Landscaping based upon the location of the building right if the this all presupposes the building has parking in the front again I for this type of use I don't see uh any negative impacts for parking in the front there is no pedestrian walkability in this area we don't have customers visiting it's for employees isn't that the case of every business in this neighborhood in the Edo edo1 Zone um well the the existing businesses look like this business or are much more saying is should every business be this way should I park in the front well there's there's literally there's no sidewalks in this area there's no sidewalks going down Pleasant Valley Road so I I don't see the negative impact for this use I'm not going to speak on any the other proposed uses that might be in this area and and the reason for the so that's that but how about the buffers why do we have buffer standards and your your testimony was it's not necessary here it's not that they're not necessary but we will certainly propose additional Landscaping to compensate for the lack of buffering it's an attractive building where's that going to happen on top of the septic systems no I'm talking about along the frontage of both roadways yeah we're talking about on Pleasant Valley Road and Englishtown Road um in fact I think we've indicated already that when we if when we come back for site plan approval we will obviously be buffering uh The View on Englishtown road which the use across the street happens to be a large Trucking operation uh and we'll also buffer uh the view from Pleasant Valley Road uh which is uh owned by Arctic air which is going to be utilizing this particular 12,000 ft Warehouse um let me ask you another question Miss mcgurk um he brought up a point about the fact that uh there's the maximum 50 foot buffer uh in a you know uh is there a 50- foot buffer on the other side of Pleasant Valley Road where Arctic air is located uh between uh the building and the parking area and Pleasant Valley Road which by the way is in the same ed01 zone is that correct there is not okay thank you because that's an existing building that was put there before the edo1 to place it is it is and so the purpose of zoning and having things is that when changes occur you can ply yeah okay Mr chairman I don't want to Bel because of the time of the matter here but we've been promised that if if this use variance is granted that we'll have additional buffer and I I find it difficult to put more plants in there to supplement the the having of the buffer on the roads I I would professionally feel uncomfortable in granting a bul variance without seeing this additional this Landscaping this property is completely surrounded by fences yes and it's not going to go away no and there's an existing dwelling there it's a fairly open area right now in fact after after the development if this is approved by the board uh there'll be more buffering uh between any residential structures to the east on Pleasant Valley Road right now talk about buffering to the road between the building in the road and obviously we could propose more mature plantings at a greater height that we increase the buffer Mr Fox and again it's going to be an improvement from what's there that's a lot of faith and I I'll leave it up to you all the building Frontage towards English town is 99 ft yes and you have did that for what purpose could you have moved the bu building closer would that have served any purpose if you move if you shifted the building we're looking North if you shifted the building West would it serve any purpose well again this is not a commercial business it's not a retail business people don't need to see the building it won't increase walkability or accessibility or pedestrianism well it was chosen so that it can be circulated exactly it's it's for safety and circulation around the building that's what I was asking so moving it to moving it to the West would serve no not serve any purpose Mr chairman I have nothing further I I don't know if Mr Fox is done I'm done thank you Mr plorn anything let me see if the board members have any questions the witness okay I'll start on my left no sir no I have none okay thank you uh you're not going to use another witness right no we're we're we'll rest Mr chairman I got to go to the public anyway so why don't I do that now this is uh 29-2 24z physical locations 19 Pleasant Valley Road from mini warehouse anyone here in the courtroom this evening wishes to be heard in this matter please stand or raise your hand I can't see anybody over there but I don't I don't think he stood to raised his hand I'll close the public portion uh I'm assuming you want to seek a vote and you want to seek a vote on on the use variant and the design waivers and the bulk variances and the bulk variances that's correct uh and that would be if there was an approval all of that would be conditional well not the use variants but all the other design waivers and the bulks would be conditional on agreement with the professionals correct yeah that's correct and U we still have to do a grading plan we you know and that That Could That Could somewhat change the plan I although I don't think it will uh but yeah we're going to come back to you and certainly the issue of landscaping I'm sure is going to be addressed at greater length by your professionals lighting is going to be addressed at that point um but um that's acceptable Mr chairman um and moving the moving it 90 from 99 fet 40 foot to the West would serve no purpose it's not going to serve any purpose and and you know again I might as well sum up at this point if you don't mind Mr chairman uh you know this is a use that's only going to be utilized by the uh owner of the business across the street which is Arctic air uh the layout of the building was designed uh to accommodate its needs we want to make sure we have enough parking we want to make sure that we have adequate circulation and but for the fact that we have 23 parking spaces in the R40 Zone which is uh you know on the southern side of the property we would have been in front of the planning board because it's a permitted use um we probably still be seeking bul variances but uh that that's the only reason Mr chairman um so you know with that said yes I would request that the board uh consider a D1 vote and a vote on the uh bulk variances and the design waivers okay Mr CH it would be D1 if that survives then we move on to bulk uh the bulks and to then finally the design waivers I'm doing all the design waivers but know originally when we started off it was yeah they're all they're all listed in your report in the staff report okay so we start the D yep there's a motion if uh everybody feels comfortable on voting on this tonight then I'm going to ask someone to either move it for approval or move it for denial Stoner is there second ISO moved in second I have a roll call D1 miss Andrew we open the public we open and close the public I'm sorry Mr sex okay roll call please was Miss Andrew yes Miss chevier no I have to agree with Mr Fox Mr ISO yes Mr scagno I'm also agreeing with Mr Fox no Mr Stoner yes chairman Sullivan yes that's four yeses two NOS okay thank you Mr chairman did not survive therefore it is denied thank you and your Professionals for their presentation this evening we have no further applications is there anybody in the uh audience this evening have any public comments that they'd like to offer please raise your hand now no one has I'll close the public portion okay someone want to move for recess there all in favor all in favor okay we stand adjourned for e