##VIDEO ID:u4bQQEh6NsU## you are on record meeting of the township of precip Troy Hills planning cour for Monday October 21st 2024 7:30 p.m. announcement is made that adequate notice of this meeting has been given that it is being conducted in accordance with njsa 10 4-6 at SEC of the New Jersey open public meetings act nor would you call the role please mayor bararia here Mr D here Mr dipierro here councilman McGrath here Mr meth pres Mr Napolitano here Mr Shaw here Miss Smith here Mr stanel over here chairman denmore here we have our board planner Miss Winters we also have our other planner Mr Zoo our board engineer Mr kiano and our board attorney Miss steinley if we could stand for the Pledge of Allegiance please I Al to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liy and justice for all all right this meeting is open to the general public is there anyone here that has an item they wish to bring to this board that's not on tonight's agenda hearing and seeing none uh we've got to go through some resolutions first we have a resolution for application number 24516 and 24515 is there any discussion or is somebody willing to move that there there were some minor revisions from the originally circulated draft but they were not substantive so all right do I have a motion uh for 24515 Mr chairman Mr the should I do both together or um yeah I don't see why not all right so I motion to approve application number 24 col 515 Aon Bay Community Inc one campus Ry block 202 lot 3.7 three campus R Block 202 lot 3.12 7 Campus Drive block 202 lot 3.8 amended preliminary and final major site plan to relocate unit types utility room light poles and plantings remove screens and Gates and parking application number 24 colon 516 Avon Bay Community Inc 2 campus drve block 202 lot 3.2 four campus drrive block 202 lot 3.2 1633 little drve blog 202 L 3.1 amended preliminary and major site plan to relocate units remove patio doors remove screens and Gates and parking do I have a second second all right nor would you call the roll please Barbaro yes yeso yes mcrath yes math I think I missed the meeting with this happened uh I know it says I'm aot but I don't think I'm aot I don't know napalitano yes Smith yes Delle yes den Mo yes there you go all right move this on sorry in our agenda right now what's showing on our agenda is a closed session I'm going to turn to our attorney and ask her how she wants to go about this so Nora put it um put the resolution in the agenda just that I'd like to speak about potential litigation matters with the board um but no p no action will be taken in public or in the closed session it'll just be a brief discussion okay then that move moves us uh to application number 24 col 522 the district at 1515 urban renewal LLC 1515 Route 10 block 200 Lots 1.4 1.05 and 1.06 preliminary and major and final major site plan with C variance for two permanent outdoor dining structures and signage Mr chairman I'd like make a motion wait go into close session first just yes so I would like to go into close session before we hear the applications tonight both of the applications just the one just be before the district at 1515 so if you want to hear the mogr one first it's up to you well then hear the MOG Ross one first where do you want to get rolling with this yeah let's get rolling 1515 because they were here from the last meeting yes all right I'll make a motion to go in a Clos session do I have a second second all in favor any opposed all right we're going to ask everybody to leave what about the video Don't we stop may you stopped it you can stop it I will stop it okay good thank you want to go to my office or we can go into mayor's office I mean instead of making everybody he leave well not a lot of people here you know it's probably better cuz I don't know if you all can fit in that one session but I don't want nobody hearing our discussion okay yeah Miss here stel up here chairman D here all right so now we're going to call follow up for application number 24522 District at 1515 urban renewal LLC uh preliminary and final major site plan with C variant for two permanent outdoor dining structures and signage case was carried from October 7 2024 good evening Mr chairman and members of the board my name is Nicole miac m a g d z a k for the record of the law firm day Pitney here this evening on behalf of theen by way of just some brief background we appeared at the meeting on October 7th in connection with this application for amended preliminary and final site plan approval conditional use and C variances we are seeking approval related to the mixed use project which is currently under construction at what was formally identified as 1515 Roe 10 as we presented through our expert testimony at the meeting on October 7th we're seeking approval for two structures which will be attached to building uh C over outdoor dining so the outdoor dining was previously proposed and shown on the plans these two structures would provide shade over that outdoor dining um we are not seeking approval related to the actual operation of that dining but these structures themselves that are attached to the building we're also seeking relief um related to the signage for the tenant faes in order to provide both a logo sign and um word you know the name of the tenant on both the front and back of building C and also on Building B these signs are only one sign's permitted per Frontage unless you're a corner tenant in which case you can have one over each door and there's also signage that is permitted on the back side of building C facing Route 10 but smaller than what we're proposing so we're seeking variance relief related to that just a little bit of additional background we had filed an application to same applicant in December to this board seeking a relief or not relief but proposing amendments to the Redevelopment plan and asking this board to evaluate them and and see if we could get support for that effort we were seeking amendments related to seven different items we presented in January and February to this board this board issued a letter of support to the council recommending that the Redevelopment plan be adopted no action has yet been taken on that um we are still seeking those amendments to the Redevelopment plan but these two particular items of those seven are part of this pending application as a result of just the the timing of construction these are really critical components to get tenants leased up in Building C and to continue with construction of the the project if you drive by the site you would notice that buildings A and B are really far along at this point but C has not started yet so um since these items require C variance relief they are items that we can get relief from this particular board for in connection with the development of the property so that's why we had pulled out those two items and and applied for with this application at this time they really are critical components and will really help the project be a success in order to gain tenants particularly those two restaurant spaces we're hoping to have two upskill and really quality tenants in those spaces and the outdoor dining covers are really important we also previously presented testimony from all of our experts our civil engineer our architect our traffic engineer our planner and you also heard from the applicant representative that concluded our expert testimony related to this application we did adjourn for 2 weeks until this meeting and and as we had represented at the October 7th meeting we did reach out to the township um mayor your office and also the business administrator the attorneys related to the tax peel and Redevelopment and the township attorney and Miss steinley just so we had everybody connected in one correspondence to set up a meeting to discuss the tax peel and pilot those items were brought up at the last meeting though they are completely unrelated to this particular application and shouldn't be considered in in the decision that's made on this application we did you know we heard the feedback we we do think it's important we are pursuing a settlement of the tax appeal unfortunately we weren't able to have an all hands meeting because of some people being out of the country and then um unfortunately some people being sick so we are still working towards that we are here tonight to hopefully conclude this particular application we did not hear any feedback that was um it you know counterveiling testimony by Boards experts or the public as to the items that we are seeking relief for so we don't have any further testimony to offer this evening um we do appreciate the feedback of the board so far and as we said we are working towards those items that are unrelated resolving those items that are unrelated to this particular application but are here seeking the amended site planine approval um conditional use approval and C variances this evening Mr chairman if I may there are proposed temporary signs have there testimony on those will you present those tonight or we are not going to present those that would be part of a separate application in the event the applicant seeks to move forward with that signage um for the board's information we are working on contemporary signs related to leasing particularly of the residential component of the project which we've been working through the zoning office with there was an identification that by the zoning officer that some of those signs and um the planner's office that some of them may require variance relief to the extent that the applicant is wanting to move forward with those signs we will file a separate application specific just to those temporary signs um that would be processed in the normal course of board application should I participation okay if that's everything board MERS all right so that's your case at this point you're just okay thank you I'm just going to ask right now not that I expect anything if there's any member of the public who wishes to come forward and speak on this matter at this time either for or against hearing and seeing none this closes the the public portion of the evidentiary portion of the of the proceeding um do we want to go into conference and have a discussion or do we want to just go to a motion and a vote I'm f with a motion and vote do I have a motion to approve Mr chairman Mr a motion to approve application number 24 col 522 the district at 1515 urban renewal LLC 1515 Route 10 block 200 Lots 1.4 1.05 and 1.06 preliminary and final major site plan with C variance for two permanent outdoor dining structures and signage do I have a second second are there any uh items that should should have been included as amendments into the or as conditions I should say so there were some conditions that were agreed to at the LA prior meeting that the applicant will submit revised plans regarding the change in the pipe slope I think that was my notes um or change back to the original uh the applicant agrees to work with the board planner to address additional screening as needed regarding the relocation of the Transformers along Route 10 applicant will add bubbled notes to the plans regarding changes in the architectural footprint of the building and will provide line by line sight changes in a list um to compare the prior plans to the current plans um in accordance with the comments from the board engineer the the applicant will also provide a list of all previously approved and proposed signs with the areas and provide some sort of alpha numeric designation with diagrams to the uh Township zoning officer um gas in the buildings is natural gas would would need additional approvals I'm not sure what that note exactly go I'll clarify that one um with the applicant attorney and then the applicant will have to comply with all oh okay that was for the heaters if they're not natural gas if there's heaters in the outside okay then they would need additional approval but if they're natural gas heaters then they'll I think that would be F that's fine because they'll be tied into the building um the applicant will comply with all ABC requirements for alcohol licensing um the applicant will provide trip generation updates to the board engineer um even though they've been reduced just provide that for the record the applicant will show the updated circulation in revised plans and just generally it was agreed to that the applicant would have to obtain lure from the township regarding operation of outdoor dining and renew it in accordance with whatever ever the Township Code States okay I think that was everything all right so the motion and the second included all of those um Mr Mary yeah um before I we go to the motion to vote on it um I wasn't going to bring it up but since you brought up to tax appeal I re a recommendation to contact tomorrow immediately to try to straighten this tax appeal out I wasn't going to bring it up but since you did it's um something that's been hanging over our head and I don't want it to hang over much longer thank you yes all right we've got a motion in a second nor would you call the r please barbari yes the yes Deo yes meth yes napalitano yes Shaw yes Smith yes Andor yes thank you very much all right we are changing planners here we're going to go to Miss Christine winter Mr Z as we chk what to your all right we're now going to call application number 24 colon 511 malagos 383 3835 Route 46 block 136 lot 66 spot 03 minor site plan with C variants to legalize in addition building mounted lighting and a container storage yeah give me a on the waers good evening Mr chairman yes my name is Keith lman from Law Firm aminaa Taylor and once again it's my pleasure to be here tonight um tonight we are seeking amended site plan approval with bulk variance relief as the chairman described for the addition of an approximately 1,140 total square foot open dining pergola attached to the existing structure a storage container and lighting we require several SE variances with this um application so I'm going to just go through them right now and we do have a planner who's going to to testify as to the justification for it first uh minimum front yard set where 80 ft is required 78.1 ft is proposed from laana Avenue yard location for accessory structure for storage container permitted inside rear yard to be located in front yard minimum parking spaces 127 are required 126 spaces are proposed proposed minimum setback for Monument sign along Walsh Drive 15 ft required 2 ft existing and proposed no change and finally minimum driveway setback to building 5 ft required 2.3 ft proposed we also have uh a number of pre-existing non-conformities on the site um with no change proposed but for the record I'm going to go through them really quickly minimum lot area where 120,000 Square ft is required 95,000 977 squ ft is existing and proposed again no change minimum interior driveway width 24 ft required 23.2 ft existing and proposed no change minimum front yard setback for off street parking and loading 30 ft is required 27.8 ft on Route 46 11 ft on Walsh Drive 29 ft on laana Avenue is existing and proposed no change minimum sidey yard setback for off street parking and loading 10 ft is required 0t existing and proposed no change maximum sign height for freestanding sign along US Route 46 15 ft permitted 24 ft existing and proposed no change and finally minimum signed setback for freestanding sign along US Route 46 26 ft required 19 ft existing and proposed no change uh we have received the review members from your board professionals including your planner and engineer and are prepared to address all comments and fully comply with all requirements we also intend to restrike the parking lot as was recommended by your engineer with me tonight is our architect Joseph denado who will discuss our plans and we also have professional engineer and planner Kyra also with me is the applicant owner who's available to answer any questions so if the board May I'd like to call my first witness just a moment do we have any waivers that we need to go through we have a handful of waivers um they're mostly related to the existing nature of the property so we've got uh waiver for existing Propst signs existing post storm drainage design location and description of existing post Landscaping Solid Waste Disposal um regarding the description of proposed use including employees propos shifts Etc uh temporary contractor's construction structures and again exting in propos sence um we don't have any objections to those most of those are existing and expect some testimony as such all right so do I hear a motion approving the waivers as outlined in the uh plannner report of uh what's the date on there September 27th 24 I'll offer the motion do I have a second second all in favor say I I I any opposed all right thank you um I'd like to call Mr denado you can be sworn you please raise your right hand you swear affirm that that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do yes please state your name spell your last name and provide your address for the record my name is Joseph Tado D ATL located at 144 West Riv R here Mr Donado can you please provide your credentials to the board sure uh I hold his Bachelor of architecture graduated 1985 from New York Institute of Technology uh received my New Jersey license to practice architecture in 1992 and I've held my own practice through New Jersey since 1995 and your license are current yes okay thank you we'd ask that Mr denado be accepted as an expert in the area of architecture any questions on this uh witness's uh qualifications tearing and saying none counselor thank you um Mr denado can you please describe the applicants plans for the property sure I'm sorry can you please use the microphone there's one sitting right on thank you sure thank you so the board uh the plans I have mounted on the boards are the plans that were submitted uh for tonight's meeting and there's two sheets sheet A1 is a floor plan of the partial restaurant with the proposed outdoor seating and Sheet A2 is uh views elevations of the structure and a section cut through of the actual structure uh so the existing building which is the malr restaurant is located uh on three streets it's located on Route 46 laana Avenue and wal Drive uh the building is kind of located in the middle of the uh property with parking all the way around and the front door entrance which I have on sheet A1 on the left side that's the main entrance that actually faces uh laana uh Avenue and so the existing restaurant is or the existing building is a one-story building approximately just under 10,000 ft uh no basement uh so we have half the building is toward the back which is Kitchen storage and the front area as you can see here you got the entrance you have dining that wraps around a Center Bar uh currently inside the building uh the building is actually prior approval for seating was 300 uh 382 seats were approved for uh dining tables and Par SE the owner what he does I've designed many restaurants for him he tend to spread the seats around so that it's not so prowed currently what he has with bar seating dining dining tables is just about 250 seats in the existing bar uh so all that will remain intact we really nothing's proposed for the inside but what we're asking here what we're here for tonight is an outdoor covered glass three-sided glass structure with a roof uh overlooking the laana Avenue uh part of the property and you can see here the entire structure is 67 ft 8 in wide by about 16 ft 10 in it's going to be one story we're proposing it to be three sides of blast and I'll show you the uh sheet A2 is I have the front elevation which faces kanana Avenue you could see the main entrance doors to the left of it but again it's all glass even the sides all glass uh and and a set of doors uh exiting and entering the uh the structure uh again it's a three-sided glass structure I have seating in here what uh we're proposing it would have uh access from the building uh there's an existing door that would have access from the existing building to the proposed proposed covered area and we would have sliding doors also uh from the existing area into the proposed seating area you can see we have seven tables with four uh seats per table we have a little workstation and two little two separate uh two seaters so we have a total of 32 seats proposed for this one-story enclosed glass structure uh again it's it's about this area is just about under 1,140 ft it's uh again it's one story overlooking uh basically it's overlooking a parking area uh adjacent to laana AV and it's also screened pretty well and hidden from the street uh it's a it's a lot higher the engineer can go over exactly how far off the property line it's located but it's very well screened that you really don't notice this this one story glass structure so basically it's a like I said it's a 1610 x 678 one story blast structure thank you board have any questions of this witness there any members of board you go ahead Nick next Nick sure all right um did you say you can get only in there from inside the restaurant so I so we do have doors just erress but really the the main you would still come through the main entrance right you're not you're not seating people from there no exactly so they got to come in seat you outside and and honestly I I've done many of his restaurants and we're not expanding like the restaurant this restaurant specifically doesn't get to 100% capacity it's really this type of dining outdoor which attracts people and it just uh makes for a more dining experience but we're not asking for more people to come into the restaurant but yes the doors are really exiting okay and not entering than Mr Matthew had to so you're seeking variance relief for 1.9 ft for the setback this I believe the engineer will set I believe it's this location front property yeah just to support the variance relief is there a technical reason why the size of this could not be reduced by 1.9 ft I'm just looking for any reason why it has to be the size it does so what happens is the existing area that this is proposed on it was a previous uh walkway Landscaping there's a retain is's a retaining wall this structure goes to the outside of it even though it's 1610 the clearance inside the uh there's like a little landscape area there's a wall it's about 14 ft so by time you put your tables a walkway and other tables against the area it's pretty much used up hey thank you and and also this is the side and again besides the parking there there's a pretty heavily uh land treat area so it's really hidden off the the street any other members of the board have questions hearing and seeing none this just a couple um can you repeat on the parking table it said 382 existing but you're testified that it's 200 what is existing parking Camp 250 uh no no uh not parking I mean not parking but seating currently the way he sets it up kind of spreads the tables out more it's 250 250 is the existing and then the proposed is another 32 correct correct okay um and then with the increased square footage was this increased square footage of the building area so this this this uh posed is 1,100 39 squ ft just about 1,140 ft one story there's no addition here it's all one level okay so you're below the 382 seats that you that were previously approved is that what the testimony is that's correct corre um and then in followup to Mr Met's question this structure exists there today it was built exactly just so it's correct it's it was built I'm not going to go into why or how but it currently exists yes it currently exists and then um okay that was it thank you other members of the board our professionals have any questions any members of the public have questions of this witness on this testimony at this time hearing and seeing none councelor thank you um I'd like to Now call Ken dyra Ken is our planner and also engineer so um we could have some sworn in please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm the testimony that you're about to give be the truth all truth and nothing but the truth I do please state your name spell your last name and provide your address for the record all right Kenneth thra d y k St 21 Bowling Green Parkway Jefferson thank you Mr Dyer just for the fent of the record could you establish your credentials as a professional planner for the board and then we'll go engineer second okay well I'm I've been a licensed professional planner for about more than 20 years um uh basically I became a planner after being an engineer so the way it worked is uh Professional Engineers could apply and become planners uh uh rules have changed now now you actually have to take uh take some classes and things but in in that in those days I was able to just file the application become a licensed planner so so I've been an engineer for he's very humble but what's your educational background you do have one yes yes I'm I'm a degree degreed civil engineer from ruter uh I'm a actually New Jersey licensed professional engineer planner and land surveyor so I have three licenses they're all valid uh I've been handling projects in site plans and subdivision projects for actually pushing 40 years now in New Jersey and have testified before many boards including this one over you know over the the last 30 years so I'd ask that Mr Dyer be accepted as a uh expert in the area of planning and also engineering I hope I didn't screw that up too much are there any members of the board of questions on this uh expert's qualifications hearing and seeing none counselor thank you Mr dyra if you could um please describe this project from a engineering perspective and then also um in whatever order you want to go also give justification for the variety of uh variances that I had read in the beginning yes and the uh the colored version of the site plan uh is just that it's the exact plan that submitted except we've added coloring to it just Mark that one as exhibit A1 then and this is the uh plan noted site plan at malagos restaurant sheet three of4 last Revis July 29th 2024 thank you all right well I think the the attorney gave a pretty pretty good description of uh all the relief we're seeking at the beginning um but I I'll point out that uh uh this was formerly the TGI Fridays restaurant for many years and uh it's located at at the with three front edges really US Route 46 lacana Avenue and wal Drive um and access is uh primarily from Walsh Drive although there is a access through the adjacent site from uh Route 46 uh the the adjacent site they that's uh they call it the Hilltop Plaza now it's a it's a a three-story uh office office building you know although the lower level is now a gym I noticed tonight and uh you know it's with many of these Office Buildings it doesn't appear to be fully occupied um just what used to be one combined site about I think about 2020 we it was subdivided so basically uh a lot line was struck between the the restaurant and the office building and it went right down through the middle of the parking lot and there's a combination of uh easements cross access easements uh easements for water and sewer utilities and and the like U so really the only thing that has changed is uh there is uh we're seeking the approval for this uh this addition that was uh placed on the property the 1140 Square ft um you know really that triggered the setback variants to U lacana Avenue and uh and I would and the architect was correct there is an elevation differential the uh I mean that the location is really you can't notice the 1.9 ft relief we're seeking 80 fot setback is required from the lacana venue right away and we're proposed at 78.1 FT uh it's basically increasing coverage there were sidewalks and other things there so the coverage uh change was was relatively minor 733 Square ft impervious um still keeps us way under the uh uh requirements in this Zone we actually allowed 80% coverage and uh the site is now covered at 72.8% and building coverage were way under the uh 20% that's allowed I think that's you know we're building coverage is uh 10.8% at this point where 20% is allowed uh so that's the main point of the relief the other thing that happened is uh there's a storage container there for uh which is necessary for the restaurant uh extra tables and chairs are stored in there and uh that took up one parking space so technically um we require relief for one parking space uh 126 now exist if if you take away the space where the container is and uh the ordinance requires 127 but that's based on that 382 seat count that was approved for back with the TGI Fridays and uh you know the applicant's not actually using that many seats although he you know does want he doesn't want to lose his ability to have 382 seats if he ever has the need but at this point uh we're probably under 300 in terms of actual needed spaces or seats rather uh so so the relief is in my view di Minimus it's only 1.8 ft it's not noticeable uh I think allowing this uh promote the general welfare uh we want our restaurants to be successful and uh that uh outdoor what kind of it's It's got glass so it's actually an indoor space but it's like a sun room a very nice space that's a desirable and makes the uh helps the efficiency of the business and the uh and the patrons apparently like this space a lot so uh so I I see no detriment to to you granting that variance whatsoever and uh there's really no impact to the neighboring properties I mean across the street across W drive you have basically loading docks and trucks uh they they would have no I'm sure they have no objection uh the parking lot has uh like more spaces than are needed um you know I was out there tonight not that it's a full night but uh you know there not even a third of the spaces are being used um the other thing is uh there's a sign out on W drive that's actually in in the municipal right away and we're going to shift that sign back turns out that sign's not even for malagos that's actually for Hilltop plaz of the adjacent building but we're willing to move it back or have that them move it back out two feet from your right away so we're going to move it it's right now it's in the right away but about 5 ft and we're just going to slide it back and have a create a actual twoot set back I think 15's required but uh nevertheless it's right now it's in the right away we're going to move it back and have it clear it's it's a relatively small unlit sign so I don't think there's any uh any reason why you shouldn't grant that variance uh what sign is that you're ref there's a sign right over the the driveway access from Walsh drive that's the free standing sign yeah it's a freestanding sign that's your uh your business sign not it's not a directional sign it's Hilltop Plaza it's not our business it's for the adjacent building could you point on the map where it is yes this is not talking about the freand standing say mro's fre standing is on Route 46 that's already it's higher and but that's an existing pre-existing condition we're not changing that this is the uh basically it's a small unlit sign to poose to the ground it's actually pretty so it's on the malr property and you're moving well it's on the town property it's uh it's on both it's actually on malagas property but these this was originally one property fairly recently and there's easement to allow that as I understand it okay so you there's cross easements for Access and driveways and Sewer drainage and that sign as I understand it so that's the monument sign that you were talking about in as your variance relief that you're requesting yes and it's actually it only recently came to our attention that it's not actually our sign it's not a it's not actually a monument sign either it's a sign on two posts I don't recall that if that sign had per to begin with I don't it may not have I'm I don't know it's not lit or anything it's a relatively you know it's not a high level sign let's put it that way it's it's it's not lit it's not large and uh that's a possibility maybe never had permits I don't I don't know it simply says hiltop Plaza and it has the address of the adjacent building well it's on Google Maps so that's well yes all right so the other thing we have a variance for the accessory structure in the front yard and that relates to the uh the storage container can you point where that is that's on the uh the west police side of the building the wash Drive side so we have a property that has three three roads so you have basically three front yards so that's why it's technically in a front yard you can't you're not allowed to have an accessory structure in a uh front yard area only a sidey yard so the only alternative to have it not in a uh front yard would be to have it on the south side of the building but that's that's a that's a bet that's kind of an important customer parking area so we don't we prefer it where it is that's near the uh the enclosure for the uh the dumpsters so that's the proper place for the uh storage container in in my opinion and that storage container contains tables and chairs I I I didn't look inside but that's what the applicant informed me of yes okay okay I hate to go all day Styers on you but if you could just point north east west and south on that map because I North arrow is the way by this direction it's north okay toward towards M container is where it's on the uh I guess I'll call it the southwest side of the building okay that's so not on the you wouldn't see it from 46 you won't you won't see it from Lac drive you you could see it from wal drive if view the property from that direction which way to the do the the doors open do the doors open towards the parking lot or towards the building of the of the uh trailer I think the yeah towards the building right the building yeah yeah there's a sidewalk there and it opens towards the building thanks you're welcome so that's that's essentially the case uh those are the variances the other conditions were existing conditions that were already mentioned councel that's all we have for and this trailer was there when you bought when when U lers took over this building no so you guys put it there well the applicant did the applicant did all right any questions by members of the board there was a note in here about that wasn't there Jennifer is is there any possibility of putting a shed on the property and not having a storage container uh as the zoning officer and director in town storage containers are becoming people are popping them up all over the property well why can't I have it he has it why can't I have it he has it and they're they're starting to be in all the properties and popping up and they're they're not permitted in any of the zones they're considered a temporary storage container we were wondering if there was any way to make it look less like a storage container since it's going to be permanent one of the suggestions that we had was if the board would you know think that this would be an acceptable compromise due to cost concerns the afin did not want to install a an actual you know freestanding you know shed but the applicant would be willing to paint it a color like a green or something that would make it less visible we don't think it's that visible as it is where it's located um but the applicant would be willing to paint it BR if that would be something the board would be amenable too you me like to match the restaurant colors so like so it fits in with it yeah well the building's red brick and the containers red I right but have some of those container labelings on it it didn't have that more is it is it your is it your container or is this like you're renting it or something like that it's the applicant's container I say make it look as as close you can to to the building you know get R all the other stuff on it I mean looks like we would agre we would agree to that you know I'm sorry what was the the the suggestion from the board was to paint the container um to remove any markings on it so it's the same the red color would that be acceptable that's two guys I think but I mean something where it um Blends up with your restaurant more and theme and stuff we'd be agreeable whatever color you guys want I that' be a good idea is the you said it's next to the dumpster enclosure enclosure so the dumpster is enclosed is it a fence or yeah the dumpster's a entirely enclosed in the fenced area yes so this is outside of the fenced area it's in a parking space it's parking space yeah could could you extend the fencing or something to Shield it more well we prefer to just paint it but uh certainly fencing could be extended yeah what we we do want to have it buffered from public view is really what we want as well as having it look nice understood okay so fence fencing would be acceptable to the applican there other members of the board have questions on this witness on this testimony at this time Mr kiano yeah just on the the shipping container I mean you're asking for Ving chili for it and it's a temporary structure that's not really allowed in in in in in the uh per code um this board normally asks for heavy screening and heavy buffering um of something like this as well wouldn't uh have it be in a parking store so uh normally a heavy a very elaborate screening of of vegetation maybe a solid brick uh uh enclosure around it you go and stick with a container um this thing's sticking out in the parking lot um yeah in the front yard well we're willing to and I'll point out that the uh that whole dumpster enclosure in those technically in the in the front yard also um but we could push that the container further back and adjust the sidewalk and then have the enclosure go entirely around it that's up to the board I just wanted to that's the that's what that's what we're recommending that's what we're offering at this point yes the enclosure is honestly when you drive through the park it looks good like you don't notice the enclosure so much it Blends in the container kind of jumps out at you so what's already there you're right is in the front yard but but it it it looks good like it Blends in where the container people see it and say well they have it so yeah so we're going to the container is going to be there but you're no longer going to see it once we move it move it closer to the building and uh how high is that fence do what you think uh well it cover it closes all the dumpster it's got to be at least 8 ft okay so the height would need a variance and how high is container you know it's a that's I don't think it's over 8T 10 10 it's a typical uh SE container I'd have to look it up but so it's going to extend over the top of the screening no it was just out there I don't think so hold on me no the the the I think it's below it rightow it yeah that's right I thought it yes so so we would just need the variance for the height cuz fences are 6 fet but yeah that that would definitely cover all right so we'll uh yeah so we'll I guess there's existing variance for the fence height already then on record so we'll just expand that variance to cover the container and our notice contained any and all variances or waivers that the board deems appropriate so we're happy to make it uniform we think that's a good suggestion yeah and would you agree to work with the zoning officer and maybe the board planner to confirm that the shielding and screening is acceptable absolutely and there is vegetative screening of arbiv and different plantings around the screening that that should be added as well okay um I have some regular engineering questions yeah I do I did see a report just before we move on just want to make sure that we got this accurate we will work with obviously you to make sure that it's properly screened but one of the the applicant um brought up that if we add more screening it would impact the parking spots more so the parking deck more deck not that well you're under Park Ian you have more parking than you need that's true that's true so we'll work with your office and you well I think the planner is is proba the best suited then we'll work with you just one question though is there any possibility of moving it within the existing enclosure or is there no room for that that looked quite full when I was out there today but we can move it closer to it there's a little bit of space there oh okay yeah all right he's right right there but but we're going to take the fence out and wrap it around yeah better to lose two spaces and make it look good all right so we so we'll expand our parking rele then too byy one more space just to make sure we get this buffered properly good Andrew did you have more yeah I had some uh my comment uh regarding um the increase in puras area I think there's 700 33 ft increase that's right what is your plan to mitigate and meet the uh storm water management the minor storm water management requirement well we were uh we were I thought it was a relatively minor amount of increase and we were hoping not to have to put a drywall in for that space that's exactly why the ordinance is there I know it's sweet spot 3 in 3 in well I the other thing I thought about uh was to uh we have deten Basin right nearby we may be able to just enhance the volume of that a bit rather than trying to put a drywell out there that's up to you but we asked that the not asked it's it's a requirement to do storm water mitigation for anything over the 400 sare ft right but this doesn't have any uh any leiter drains right this is just just if you read it doesn't have to be of that loc to read the ordinance no I did read it yeah I did check it because I saw that in your report yes I checked that earlier today um also um on your sheet four for the lighting plan I'm just confused on what's proposed and what's existing and what you're trying to do with the lighting we're uh we were just documenting what's existing we didn't uh we're not proposing any new lighting the lighting that's around the top of the building that's almost like an LED that was a that was going to be a zoning violation once zoning was a Co enforcement officer was about to come out and do violation notices but you submitted the application so then we never sent them and you put on your application the concerns that we had so we never sent anything so there was something that he had about lighting along the top so if you could legalize that that way um yeah yeah along the along this the top of the building there's these lights they're really low intensity I was looking at them today they don't uh they just give the building a nice look that really don't they're not intense lighting they're just subtle lights that go all the way around the building to define the roof line yes that's we'd like to legalize those of course yes so is again to clarify you have a lighting plan on here but this does not is this is not proposed lighting it's represented to be existing lighting that that's right all I would say for but it doesn't it doesn't show those uh perim those roof perimeter lights that we just talked about no but it but it has uh lighting photometrics and and hook candles and and all kinds of uh uh right items that this would have been part of a prior approval um are you suggesting you going to be changing the lighting in any way no the reason that was in the completeness reviews that we had to produce a lighting plan so that's why we created the uh existing conditions lighting plan existing lighting plan I clarify that that it's existing lighting okay um so are is is any new lighting uh po lighting or building mounted lighting uh being proposed I don't believe the new enclosure has any any proposed lighting right so so no other than the lights that Define the the the roof of the building the roof line of the building that we were just discussing but those aren they're not ped night no but they that's right um yeah revise your plan to making clear that those existing that's existing lady okay yes we will um I don't think I have anything else that was it thank you you're welcome thank you any other questions I do have a question actually for the board and that is we seem to be being presented with something new with regard to lighting that does violate certain parts of our ordinance and yet it's different than what our ordinance had anticipated with the lights higher and different how do you how do you I I'm just trying to make sure that we don't start doing things on an ad hoc basis that we'll find ourselves up the creek with some other applicant that we don't like what they're doing so I'm just I'm just looking at our engineer yeah what is there's no lighting proposed as of now what are you talking about well the question really comes down to the the the roof perimeter lighting that we I don't it's not shown on the plan this Ro no no it's just there I think he called them Christmas tree lights they're kind of like they just they they're a kind of a close space thing and they just Define they just Define the roof line of the building I don't know you know if you went out there at night you you very very become a very common thing it's uh it's actually very attractive on this building and it's not they're not uh in my view they're uh they're they're not high intensity and uh it it's attractive so can you add those to the plan when you revise the existing lighting yes I don't know what the ordinance it it doesn't it doesn't would seeking to add it to legalize it and propose it so the lighting is not permitted you're proposing it and you're asking the support to give relief on well I'm not it's not that it's not permitted it wasn't approved and that's why there was going to be a violation right the ordinance is not permitted that if it's considered neon it it's supposed to be no neon so no I don't we did amend our application after your office flagged that we amended our application to include that as well as the storage container those were two things that were not originally part of our application and that's why this application had been filed a long time ago so we then amended it to come back because we wanted to memorialize the fact that we did have what we're calling permanent Christmas lights along the top of the building um they're more they're decorative in nature yes that's right so that's the purpose of it and we requested all variances associated with that we don't even know what kind of relief we're giving well this is why I brought up the question because you know M Smith what what are your thoughts on lighting like this because you have to it can be done and look really well and it can be done and be glaring and in violation of uh the ordinance when done correctly it brings attention and and it looks really well this is a site where it it really does look very well but I have other sites where it's so glaring that you think there was a cop car like in in the lot with them um we've seen where this is not we're the the zoning officer and my department are looking at this as considered almost like the neon so we're not permitting it but there have been many applications that have gone to the board of adjustment to seek approval while there were other approvals as is this so we're asking applicants on a caseby casee basis to come before the board and be approved because some are okay and some are not so depending on on on the that's why we asked them to add it to legalize it and to give it the appropriate variances you know it's I and the autobond society have problems with hot spots because hot spots bring Birds into conflict with human developments and I like what they've got but what I'd love to do is I I guess we need to have a discussion or a or some sort of a of a uh uh program to look into what is a good form of this that would be enforcable give people who have good plans a good lighting plan and yet not have the hot spots that I've discussed where where uh a person could be driving along and it just there's that bright spot over there that distracts them or distracts wildlife in some way uh where allowing ones that simply look good and draw attention appropriate attention to a commercial Enterprise that is enforceable and not an ad hoc thing they're very common in Windows in store frames they're trying to bring attention but they can be done and be very glaring and bright and we get complaints but there there's probably a lot of businesses in town that probably have this already along the edge I'm trying to think um on Route 10 the um the restaurant on the corner of 10 and 202 when they came to the board they asked for the lighting around and it it's the same thing it's it's subtle it makes it look good and they got a variance for it that was years ago is is there a difference in the amount of Illumination that's coming out of each one perhaps some are extremely bright and blinding and others just give it enough attention to make it look good but not be glaring so just like our sound ordinances we could have an ordinance specifying just how bright the lights could be yeah we definitely do that we have a bunch of ordinances we're working on now Christine's working on some and I'm working on some that to make some changes and we come up to make changes right now we're not permitting it we're telling applicants they have to apply depending on where it is and what it is to the boards because I would love this board to find some enforcable uh ordinance or whatever proposal that we could send to the council and say give our zoning office some guidance as to what would be acceptable and what's not well what is the wattage on each B seven Watts 10 watts I I don't know it personally but you have to go with the amount of alumination that comes off I mean Andrew yeah I I I Can Shed a little light on this I mean the ordinance 430 258 glare and the term hotspot or glare the the the light shining out is with the glare ordinance is is is about and about 3/4 the way through the paragra after lighting of any sign building exterior fountain or decorative F fixture shall be placed in such a manner that it is direct it toward the object and light does not disseminate glare out so it would require I mean this light is the Chairman's point is pointing out it's not lighting the ground it's not lighting the building it's not lighting a sign and as as the ordinance reads it goes against what the ordinance allows but it's not producing I think unfortunately for industrial areas within the performance standards I don't think performance I don't know that is it's in it's in 4308 it's not it's in the regular Zone in ordinance 430 okay that's what we use that's what we've been using yeah and we're using in the in the design ordinance the no neon I can get you all those sections if that helps what I would I would love to get would be a good engineering perspective on just how bright something is not by wattage but by the amount of of light that is perceived off the off the property Lumen sir Lum Lum Etc well part of the problem is the way we measure lumens if you me try to measure the lumens from this you may end up with with next to nothing and that's fine but you'll ever also have have others where the the the measurements show a lot less than actually is perceived by somebody who's driving along next to it or by the wildlife that's distracted by it well I'll say this we have to amend a lot of our ordinances as you know uh Jen um lighting is changed over the course of decades and I can tell you I drive by this uh building and I don't see it as a bright spot hot spot I don't see it as that I it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb um other areas like Lake KYW do stick out like a short thumb and very bright um so I mean I don't know what the what the the bottom Line's going to be with this uh project but I don't see any light pollution whatsoever so I know what ordinance reads you know you explain that but we will need to start revamping some of our ordinances and um that's just my opinion uh so cuz I could tell you LED lights as opposed to soft lights a lighter light I know when you buy the white soft lights they're bright as can be but when you get the other ones that are more like the traditional it's not as not as a you know so I mean I don't want want to get stuck on this over lighting well I just wanted I just want but I I I I see where you're going with it because there are spots in parity that are like you can see from a satellite yep all right I just wanted to bring it up and see if we could get some more information on how to prevent others I don't have a problem with this particular application uh but I was thinking more for the board's consideration down the down the way because there are places where you see these lights that are not so nice and I don't know how Jennifer can measure them and I agree with you I I notified Jennifer on a um a business property that was lit like a I I actually thought there was a fire in the area cuz that's you when you get your fire trucks they light everything up and it wasn't was the building so I I'm sorry if I distract you from this particular application on this but that's always been a bit of a thing for me so all right that's our case um you know we appreciate all the board's comments this is a little unusual situation but in a way or in a lot of ways because it's already up and the lights are already up so we know you know what the impact is and you know we think the property looks good and we hope the agrees and with that go to the board all right are there any members of the public who have any comments or objections to this particular case at this time one speak in favor hearing and seeing none this closes the evidentiary portion of tonight's hearing uh What uh before we go to uh moving a resolution what uh have we agreed to here that we need this conditions yep the applicant agreed to comply with the board professional letters for uh recommendations and comments the applicant agreed to restripe the parking lot to fence um the storage container to match the dumpster enclosure um and to work with the board planner and Zoning officer to confirm that the shielding is acceptable um and include Landscaping as necessary um and possibly painting the storage container and I believe it was discussed that if the landscaping and shielding requires the removal of an additional parking space that would be acceptable um and there the applicant is also requesting relief for the existing Lighting on the roof and would we require extra variance for the the height of the ex uh extended fence yes any any relief necessary for that would be a part of the application I'd like to add U on the the parking and the seating it's uh SED like you need a reduction of two spaces that your proposed parking count would go down you have you need one space or three seats your your existing approved seating is is it 382 yes so that would go down by six spaces and you're your your six seats six seats rather six seats and then um so that amend the application for the proposed seating to be so that eliminates our parking variance right so okay it's fine do I have a motion to that effect 376 Mr chairman I will uh make a motion to approve application number 24 colon 511 malr 38 uh 3835 Route 46 block 136 lot 66.0 3 for minor site plan with C variance to legalize the addition um an addition building mounted lighting and a a uh container storage along with all of the um conditions outlin just prior to this motion do I have a second second all right nor would you call the roll please barbaria yes yeser yes mcra yes yeso yes sha yes yes yes yes thank you very much Lu anything else that needs to be brought to this board at this time I think uh Mr dinmore you were looking for a a Clark W Griswald orance I think that's where you were going from okay do I have a motion to adjourn I wish move