Philipsburg land use board meeting January 25th 2024 act by posting the notice on the bulletin board and municipal building by publishing in The Express Times And The Star Ledger the official papers of the town of Philipsburg by posting on the website of the town of Philipsburg filing set notice with the town clerk of Philipsburg as well as Furnishing said notice to those persons requesting it pursuing to the open public meetings act as advertised action may be taken at this meeting um board policies uh of the town of Philipsburg land use board not to hear any new cases after 10 p.m. and no new Witnesses after 10:30 p.m flag salute I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation God indivisible liy and justice for all all the new appointees please step out to the [Music] center please raise your right hand I state name I do Solem we swear or affirm swear and affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and the constitution of the state of New Jersey that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same that I bear true faith and allegiance to the same and the governments established in the United States and the governments established in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people and that I will faithfully and I will faithfully impartially andar and justly perform all the duties of the office of land Court yeah that was pretty stretched [Music] out Kelly roll call Mr Bond here Mr Branch here Mr brodman here Mr Duffy here Mr Hannis oh person Mr mole here councilwoman paus here Mr Penrose here may Piaza here Mr turnball here Mr zra here and Mr slipper here okay Mr zicker would you please take over yes nominations for chairman like to open up the board like to nominate Bill Duffy I'll that any other nominations for chairman any other nominations for chairman that being say forward just all those in favor all those any again there be no Mr chairman would you take back thank you thank you ladies and gentlemen I appreciate it nominations for vice chair I'd like to nominate Keith Swicker I'll second that any additional nominations all those in favor congratulations I'm going to nominations for board secretary that be Kelly second okay any other nominations all those in favor recording uh appointment of recording secretary Motion Kelly again okay and you second Dave yes okay any other motions okay all those in favor I I well we're going to skip the next two uh nomination or motion to appoint the attorney like make a motion to appoint the existing attorney and the assisting engineer okay if that's right you have to do time I don't think we have to do one at time I'll second you second any other okay all those in favor say I any against I have it Timothy join us Scott join us thank you very much everyone thank you okay did everybody get a chance to look at the dates the upcoming year okay I need a motion for adopt the scheduled meeting dates and time [Music] Mo any questions or comments on the motion all those in favor say I uh the next one a Redevelopment committee assignment I'm going to ask uh Vice chair Swicker to chair that and to report next meeting on whose the members are if you'd like the be on it please talk to Vice chair I need a motion to make the official newspapers The Express Times And The Star Ledger motion motion second any questions on the motion all those in favor say I I I need a motion to adopt the Robert Rules of Order as parliamentary procedure motion second okay any questions on the motion all those in favor say I I okay okay okay that takes care of reorganization um resolutions we have none tonight completeness we have none tonight hearing 170 Howard Street um I am going to recuse myself for this just a real quick Point yep before we get there minutes from the last meeting or we Tak did I miss it they're at the they're going to be towards the bottom changeorder on a little bit yeah next time it'll go back to the normal sorry okay do we have any other recusals okay any anybody else two recusals you got that okay thank you okay good evening um Brian K here on behalf of bra Construction LLC and we're here for the preliminary final site plan approval for the construction of a 328,000 328 227t warehouse this is in your uh veral front Development Area District 5 property located 170 Howard Street approximately 31 Acres um and by way of background this is amendment from a prior approval wherehouse was 420,000 ft it's an approximate 100,000 uht reduction um notice was published and um and served all proper 200 ft and tonight we by way of witnesses we have robbed the beer who's going to give a little bit of history on the on the project and it's been before you multiple times we have Brad bowler who's going to do the site plan testimony we have John witner who's going to do the traffic testimony uh John teina who's going to do the planning testimony John monino on the architecture plans um Mr O'Brien prepared a uh review letter December 22nd of last year um it was a long letter and we worked our way through it to try to comply with everything that we could so we're going to comply with everything in his letter and in a man to make this more efficient bowler put together this five-page letter which was handed out to you earlier tonight I'm going to mark that A1 for the record and the Witnesses are going to use this five-page letter to go through their testimony to address testimony explanations clarifications anything that needs to go a little bit beyond the things that we're automatically agreeing to in Mr O'Brien's letter um with that being said um would you like to square all the witnesses at once sure um can do you have another copy of that letter yes never mind here we got we got it botom prob just not tell so uh so yeah all the witnesses identified please come up SW in raise your right hand you swear affirm that the testimoni you give this matter will be the truth to best your ability so be got thank you you're first um Mr de give you just a brief history of that we got here T thank you hello everybody happy New Year um so as Brian said I I'll kind of just give a brief uh summary of how we got to this point and then turn it over to the professionals so we can go through the technical review um some of you may remember me from uh this plan rep the board on a number of occasions for the new folks morning congratulations um so as Ryan said the Haro project site um we're here for an amended site plan approval um this board uh previously approved this site for a 420,000 ft uh Warehouse along Howard Street uh in the time since that approval uh uh we had entered into a an agreement to sell this property in 2022 to a national Cold Storage operator uh that operator had a requirement to for a rail connection uh as as the some or a portion of their business are going to be served through rail uh because of that we are we went through a fairly laborious process um with our engineering staff as well as the bell railroad who operates the short rail connections to the CER line um working to make sure that we had a consistent grade and and to get everything um technically and uh from an engineering perspective to be able to make that connection uh once we got to that point and we had that resolved uh we had submitted this plan that's before you and then the subject of this review letter from Mr O'Brien um in the intervening times since 2022 to now uh unfortunately we're no longer under agreement with that user they have a located their 330,000 ft Warehouse elsewhere uh however uh but we are uh presently in discussion with a similar user type um not under agreement but uh you hoping that that that comes to fruition um as Brian said we are in receipt of the review letter um we had a chance to meet with the professionals Mr O'Brien as well as the fire chief uh went through these sort of in a a line by line um by and large uh we are able to comply with just about all of the comments that are on here um what we wanted to do and as Brian said uh our office prepared sort of an a bridge letter uh that identified those sort of areas that we felt were into discussion or requireed testimony per Mr O'Brian's letter uh so what we like to do is go through the technical review uh answer those questions provide that testimony uh and then certainly if there are any questions from uh the board and the public we'd be happy to myself or any of our representatives to come up and answer them so um that's sort of the the brief history how we got here to seek this amended site plan approval um and I turn it over to Mr B rad B so with respect to qualifications and then you have the CD um and that you testified before absolutely I would recommend that therefore I recommend that we stipulate to Mr B as an engineering expert thank you do this morning is say um Ex two yes Mr B's CV is at 82 this will be a right and then you can just identify for the record sure first exhibit is um an narrow exhibit North to the top of the page the site uh is currently shown in red uh on the guess the bottom half of the page and Howard Street shown along the north side on top of that that red area just for orientation purposes and this exhibit stated today's date which is the 27th of uh of January uh similar exhibit to the last application we had prepared so um the site is identifies as block 2102 Lots or lot 20 sorry 202 uh address is 170 main U sorry 170 Howard Street again it's in District 5 of the uh r five Zone it's approximately 31 Acres um again just front on Howard Street um there are two other uh intersections that come into the site Stockton is the West about middle part of the property and then you have the KE Street which is at the corner of the right side of that property so for orientation purposes uh generally the the area in this location is industrial area so nor north and east there's industrial uses in that location uh on the West Side uh just to the left of the plan is the gun range that's down that location and then uh the park that's just to the uh the South or the southwest of that location uh currently sites generally under there was previously development on the property you can see old foundations if you go to the property uh there are a number of access points that do enter the site mainly gravel driveways and Cur brakes but nothing currently um active on the property uh we we do have an lsrp for the site so one of the items that we we go through with lsrp is they they guide us on environmental requirements for uh our development whether that's plantings capping Etc and they're providing guidance during the development process uh from a a topographic perspective the site does slope uh pretty well from Howard Street down to the river so down Del River um and uh there currently is generally a wooded area but uh a buffer that's required along the the Park area that's part the ordinance or Redevelopment code um we'll get into that when I show the the uh the exhibit but we are uh removing some of the portions of the buffer and reestablish and as part of our our development uh so the next example I'll show is a A4 and this is just a reference point for the board and it's the the previous approval so again nor is the top of the page Howard Streets On Top as well and this is not for the application tonight this is just for reference for the board uh tan is the is the was the proposed building you have uh gray areas where are aspall or sidewalks and then um Green Space and Landscaping shers plan again this just shows the orientation that we previously I'm just going to leave it up I guess at the bottom of the exhibit so that the board can see what we previously proposed so the record is clear make sure we've got overall site plan L c301 what's the date on that 82523 thank you all right then my next exhibit will be the uh actual proposal for tonight A5 and this exhibit stated today is date thank you 12524 so similar um orientation for this this uh this exhibit as well North the top of the page you got how Street running uh east west on the top of the page same uh color configuration as well so the building to tan f asphalt areas are gray concrete areas are gray then you have landscape areas the brown areas on this on this uh exhibit are bio retention Bas so that's like mulch uh that would be shown there uh just for orientation purp so that's a really good way to identify where the storm water basin would be for the the project so for this proposal uh it's 328,000 ft on industrial building as a as a reminder for the board the previous approval was 420,000 ft uh the main change to this building was because of the rail access we actually had to flip the building so uh the previous approval had the the truck boards facing down towards River we flipped those around now and they now face towards Howard Street um that is a variance as part of the Redevelopment plan as part of our orientation but this is the only way that we can get uh the rail access to the site uh and the rail axis is on the south side or the bottom side of the building so from rail perspective uh you can see like light gray area that comes up along this side then comes back in the rail sighting is the bottom of the building at that location so this is only access by by a train at that location from a sighting perspective the uh building set about 170 ft from the from the Howard Street front yard that's a compliance set back from a ordinance perspective uh we have 139 ft uh to the Delaware Rivers side of the property that's also compliant and then we do have a park setback of 57.9 Ft that is a variance uh again with regards to the 100 foot step back part the park The Guiding Factor on that is just the kind the rail access for that that layout and that's a new a new variant that was required by the new code um we will we have outlined the design guidelines for engineering purpose uh practices on this development and we intend to meet those criteria so from a guideline perspective and that's uh code section 51012 we would meet those criteria as part of our our application uh and then this project is is slated to be built in one phase and In One Construction cycle you know that one of the requests from the from the uh the engineer to identify that as of right now we we intend to build the building as well as majority of the site work if not all the site work at one time and not phase the project uh from an access perspective for uh traffic uh cars and trucks we have two driveways one is to the west side of the building and one is to the uh east side of the building the east side of the building driveway aligns with M Street so it's a a T intersection as proposed and the Western driveway is a is a nor normal driveway into the site the widths of the driveways are 35 ft wide that's to allow truck traffic to enter into the facility uh we're 30 ft allowed from a code perspective that was a previously granted variance for the uh for the application and then the uh the width of the overall driveway itself where the curve drop is so where the curve hits the street it's 140 ft wide at at its biggest spot where 40 ft is uh is uh what was allowed again that was also a previously granted variance as part of the application uh from a pedestrian perspective access to the site we do have a side on the entire Frontage of Howard Street that's maintained from their previous approval and we have uh Ada accessibility into the property from two locations so we allow for pastri to be able to walk into the facility access the office space on the site um we don't have um necessarily some uh some sidewalk along the car parking areas and that's design W that's required and that's mainly because of uh the addition of uh Trees and Landscaping to to enhance those areas uh the board wishes we were happy to put those landscape back or sorry the sidewalk back but we we thought the land was a better option for us uh at that location and then finally we have a a fire loop road that goes around the back side of the of the building uh and working with the fire department they asked for a paved surface around the back so that's the gray area it runs along the bottom side of of the building 24 ft wide as proposed uh that is a design waiver from uh the code we 30 FTS allowed we spoke with the fire department and they're okay with that uh that that that deviation mainly because this is Chained off only the fire department has access to this area or the police if they need to get back there but there's no uh customers there's no employees driving back from that location it's purely just for emergency access at that location uh we have two parking lots for the facility a car parking lots for this facility uh and they're on the east and west side of the building 215 parking spaces are are proposed at 9 by8 ft uh where we need to we have a twft overhang where landscape areas are so that's allowed and uh provided by code uh the parking space requirement is a variance in this condition however it's 368 parking spaces are required for the warehouse and office uh component so we have that deviation from last time I would say this is a new variance because the calculations have changed with a smaller building but uh and a little bit less parking spaces but uh regardless it's still a variance that we're requesting um there was a request to understand we had a variance previously granted about uh whether or not the parking lots will be completely completely uh constructed prior to to occupancy I would suggest that the car parking spaces would be constructed for use of the staff members maybe a visitor that maybe come to the facility but uh a tenant that might come in here might ask us to um base pave the uh trailer spaces that are to the west side of the property in the event they have to do some modifications from a tenant perspective so that was how the the variance was granted last time and we're requesting that variance again from a a parking perspective uh from a loading perspective again we mentioned the loading spaces or sorry docks are facing north on towards Howard Street um similar to the last application the loading spaces range between 4T below grade on Howard Street and 15 ft below grade so the the actual loading docks are lower than the street itself um in those locations we do have 0 docks uh dock positions potentially for this facility where five are required uh the size of the dock spaces is 13 ft wide by 60 ft long uh that was a variance that was previously granted because the code requires a 15t wide uh loading dock so this is a standard requirement for industrial buildings at 13 ft wide uh so we would request the variance again um and there's another variant for loading spaces because there's no dedicated space for uh fed EXT truct something along those lines to uh load these locations again variance that was granted last time but we're asking for it again we do have theoretically have loading spaces for the industrial building but a FedEx truck would park in a parking space or in front of the front door temporarily while we uh drop off packages um from a storm order perspective um this is an improvement from the the previous application we uh went from 64 and. half% coverage down to just about 55% coverage for the facility so we are proposing about 10% less imperious coverage for this facility uh in addition to the reduced basing uh sorry reduced building side we do propose to meet all D criteria um for uh the uh stormw regulations for reduction and uh water quality we also proposed to meet the BMP manual which is the best management practices manual the DP regulates uh as part of that process there were a few clarification items that U Mr O'Brien requested from the D so we're working towards that to provide that to Mr O'Brien but uh we would work through that as part of our condition of approval with the engineering side design one of the other requests that we had was to provide a uh hydrocarbon filters as part of the inlets and the truck areas and we've agreed to do that as part of our approval as well uh just in the truck location areas um from a utility perspective service to the site is via underground utilities electric gas water sewer um there's a Transformer proposed the west side of of the building so it's in between the driveway on the west side of the building there's a little T box hard to see I'm sure from from that far away that's a Transformer location that we propos for this facility another Transformer it was required we would propose it similarly in the landscape Island to the east side of it as well uh this will be dependent on the the U utility company but the request from the fire department and Mr O'Brien was to me to keep those Transformers away from the building so that they're not they're not next to the building and we would accommodate that request um from a water perspective we still propose an upgraded system along Howard Street one of request of uh the fire department was to provide a larger uh water man along Howard Street that would be designed by the water company we agreed to to uh for install that that service and we also have a loop around the building as well from a service perspective from a fire access and that provides hydrant uh in accordance with request of the fire department uh the fire department and their review letter has indicated that our hydri locations have been approved as well so uh we're we're acceptable there uh and then finally we have two uh fire department connections similar to last approval remote from the facility and that's um at the upper left hand corner of the building and the Upp Rand corner and they're near fire hydr so the the partment can connect in pretty pretty easily at those locations um I'll jump into lighting and then Landscaping the as my last section um from lighting perspective we have similar lights that we had last time they're uh 30t High LED lights on uh freestanding lights uh we have houseside shields those are the shields that ribit the light from spilling over the property lines um along the lights that are on the border of the property the building mounted lights are about 26 ft high with similar uh fixture so they're both LED fixtures as well um for design we have no spillage uh of any kind of light along the entire property so it's the park itself start with the park on the left side there's no light spillage along that property line uh along the the rail side near the um the Basin on the bottom of the plan no Village and that wraps around all the way up to the driveway uh at the driveway we do have light overlapping uh to promote safety at those locations so we do have a design waiver from a light uh spillage at the driveway itself within along Howard Street as well similar situation no light spillage along Howard Street until we get to the next driveway where we have another light there for promotion of safety at those locations as we do have crosswalks and uh Vehicles interacting uh from a landscape perspective we do propose over 700 trees on the site uh as part of the development uh about 97 shade trees 615 evergreen trees and over 2300 shrubs uh for the facility um all those uh landscape material will be maintained by the owner as part of our uh part of our development um there is a again I mentioned before a small area that we are replanting from a buffer perspective along the park and uh if you look at the air uh rendering it's the the Basin just to the west of the uh frow building are clearing that area and we are proposing ever green trees and theous trees in that area to re to reestablish that buffer as part of our development um with regards to the parking uh Landscaping uh we do have about half of our trees within Islands as best we could uh but we do have a couple of spaces along the western side where we have sidewalk and lights we couldn't put deciduous trees in those locations so we do have design where we from providing all the island with trees um in those locations uh with regards to a request by Mr O'Brien uh there was a minutes Rose Street and ask to uh provide additional deciduous trees along the uh Western parking lot where this green space here we can agree to add more dis trees there and then there's also a request add a number of additional evergreen trees along the Eastern portion of the driveway I'm sorry the the the frontage so that provides additional screen for the loan dock so we we're happy to do that as well we work with Mr O'Brien to kind of nail that that down and figure out what the trees will be there and work through location so that there that we can fully screen the the loading areas uh and then finally uh there was a note about this uh the wall sign being uh non-compliant we would uh withdraw that request if you have a non-compliant wall sign we propose a 1,400 ft wall sign one W sign this point and that would be compliant with the code uh from our perspective um besides that um we did review the latest fire department review letter it appears that he's agreeing with our meeting but we would agree to comply with all those comments with in that in that letter uh and then from an engineering perspective in Mr O'Brien's letter um we noted in our response letter the last page of page five there's four comments that we were asking the board to uh allow us to Waiter on from a common perspective one is to provide Ada accessibility to the trailer parking spaces typically this is not accessible route we just had a regular conre curb sidewalk and crosswalk that location with the proper size but we didn't put a ramp or trun do just because it's not really an accessible uh route and then there's three comments about uh the Howard Street extension and we don't have a proposal for that on our plan tonight so we would request a waiver from providing those comments as well that's all I have for direct testimony um Brad so for Howard Street it's more that it's not included in this but potentially applicant has a condition of any future Redevelopment agreement and address our street improvements that required yeah so uh so similarly to the approv plan in um that we had for the original 420,000 ft building um our plan as you see it does not propose the Howard Street Extension um as a matter of fact we we don't own that property we don't control that property we don't have an ability to compel the seller to provide us that property to make it part of this uh because we are not proposing to do the Howard Street Extension that's why we uh acquired two additional properties at the corner of South Mia ke Street 560 and 562 which is part of this plan which shows uh traffic improvements we can make to that intersection to allow appropriate uh traffic movement so all of the uh planning that's been done here in the traffic testimony is based solely upon this site being access uh with the existing public streets that exist in town um if Howard Street was to be built would there be accommodations made with site Provisions to accommodate the design needed for Howard Street Extension if that's something that ever happens and we are able to help offset like you said the storm order or if there's room on the site we would be amendable to doing that but again that's not something we're proposing okay one of the comments just has to do with the grading proposed to theal coun thank you um right for the you can just clarify who's making rro improvements into the site oh sure so uh we we schematically have a design uh worked out with a rail company basically once the tant comes on board and they they're asking for rail the rail company comes in and builds their own rail line so we'll cre it provide the uh the ability to have them install Their Own Line but they install everything they do their own work uh they actually even do their own uh uh design for it so we just show it schematically right now but it's been designed and approved by by the rail companies hasn't been finally construction document ready and that's being built by the rail company and if I can understand to it so we we were having an agreement with the Dell uh which is the local operator uh as Brad said we we worked pretty exhaustively with them to make certain that we had a rail design that worked both from an engineering perspective from our site but also work from a practical perspective for the end user as well as for the rail company and that um that when this gets built presumably by us as part of the the construction of the overall facility uh they would then uh in agreement that with operate that and essentially take whatever products or you know trains that come off the site that allow us to then connect to the existing North Southern Network thank you you want to offer the fire chief letter reference the latest letter I have from the fire chief is January 19th of this year we'll make A6 sure just aoup check notes Qui and as the looking Tim just to confirm again that A6 will confirm that uh on record that we F this can you just provide testimony as to the status of the flood Hazard permit in terms of amending the site layout uh we have correspondents today with d it sounds like they're getting ready to issue the permit but um as of right now we've gone back and forth with a few minor comments on some calculations and I'm hopeful it gets issued in the next 6 weeks clst my well he's put through that I just want to clarify with you so we get if you look at page seven of Tim's letter under variances if you agree he's he's listed 13 potential variances they' got a through M every every would you agree to everyone except for G as a variance that you need to Pur you're asking for she me one minute yeah yeah y I i' leave it up to Tim to say that f is needs a variance um believe we had it last time but if we were able to address that it's fine I'm I'm happy to ask for that again G agree with you we provide a testimony on that and then L we agree that will not need a seek a variance for the signage that's on page n yes okay thank you for just clarification just you had previously been approved that VAR so carry that forward from this appliation thank you and then on the design waivers come correct it looks like you're seeking a permanent waiver for number 2A on page nine yes and B and C yes all three of those are previously granted yep and then not again until okay uh permanent w i don't believe we need waivers for FG h j okay okay and how about the last four you will take care of L so that will not be a waiver for M I believe we're complying but that may have been a grant previously w a waiver so if we can address that we ask the board to Grant if we can address it we will certainly do that you provide a testimony for you may not be able to comply 100% time right if we can comply we'll try to do that but otherwise okay and the rest are waivers that we we were asking for yes okay that's all that I have thank you I don't have any further questions question next okay so for our next witness is John witner for traffic I believe you also have this CV yes again Mr Vice chairman good evening John wner with McMahon of Bowman Company I think Mr de good job in kind of stepping back a little bit uh regarding the history of this project uh from my perspective I have a very similar history uh when we did the uh traffic impact study for the previously approved project the building was 420,000 sare ft uh we had a traffic impact study we applied trips to the surrounding roadway Network we looked at levels of service and and intersection uh efficiencies and uh we we developed um a number of improvements that were discussed as far of the last application as Mr deir mentioned there are two properties that have been purchased at the intersection of mck street and South Main Street to allow for uh easier attorning movements for uh anticipated vehicles uh along with that were uh some because of the physical widening of those of that intersection some pedestrian and Signal upgrades and then lastly as was discussed uh with the board um during the previous approval there was uh the proposal for a no left turn on a Northbound approach of mcken Street for trucks into into the rest of the Town making them all perform a right term movement of course the applicant does not control uh that sign that would obviously need to be as part of approval from uh the town uh here we are with a building that's 328,000 ft so the building has shrunk 22% the trips have been reduced 22% uh the only thing that that has not been reduced uh are the improvements the off-site improvements those are still a part of this application the purchase of those two properties uh physical widening to allow for uh right term movements uh a ban of of trucks making a left term movement from the Keen onto South Main and then also uh pedestrian pedestrian signal improvements that were related to the physical geometric improvements there at that corner as part of the traffic study the updated traffic study that was submitted uh no surprises less trips less impacts but keeping the same improvements uh we're showing adequate levels of service at the intersections within the study area um just in terms of some numbers uh because the building has shrunk 22% again the trips have have shrunk 22% so in the previous application we had about uh 350 vehicles coming to the site and then 350 Vehicles exiting the site again 22% reduction with a smaller building 279 entering Vehicles 279 exiting Vehicles over the course of the day um similar to trucks uh in the previous application approximately 125 126 trucks entering the site over the course of a day 126 trucks exiting um with the reduction in the building uh we're now under 100 trucks uh per day entering exiting the facility uh one of the other aspects of the traffic study um that uh to me indicates that the traffic study is is conservative in nature still works from a level service standpoint still providing those improvements but as Mr uh bowler had testified to uh was the introduction of the rail spur to the building um our traffic study because the rail usage is is relatively speaking tenant specific um we didn't take any credit for uh less trips and more rail usage as part of this traffic impact study inherently with the usage of the rail uh there would be less Trucks Than I just even indicated uh but that is one of the benefits of this new plan that we see here uh before us tonight uh also with the with the traffic study and and I'll kind of go through some of um uh Mr O'Brien request for Testimony um on a number of different items typically went through typical industry standards for the traffic impact study we do counts of existing intersections we apply growth factors to look at Future traffic conditions without the site we uh we had studied specifically uh the peak hours of 6: to 900 a.m. and 3 to 6PM those are actually expanded peak hours uh to capture School traffic and other traffic in the area typically we study 7 to 9: a.m. 4 to 6:00 p.m. that's the traditional peak hours that we studied we we're still finding that the peak hours of the roadways in in the in the study area are falling between four 7 to N9 4 and six but we want to expand your hours uh we we uh we then apply the trips from a distribution perspective to the roadway Network to determine uh future with development conditions we then are able to compare apples to app future without the site versus future with the site um and we uh we we apply letter grades much like in school a being the best F being the worst to you to these different intersections and movements uh for each of the intersections within the study area we're at level service see or better on all movements um at the at the intersections um in addition as I mentioned uh from an operational standpoint that increased radius and uh right turn movement on North HP bound the Keen Street onto South Main Street really intended for trucks to head over uh to the east in in conjunction with the no left turn uh truck band that was be that was discussed in the last application um as far as um some other items as I mentioned uh we do not take any credit for the rail uh for the rail um existence um again very tenant specific but we wanted to make sure that even if there was Zero rail that our traffic numbers or traffic comparisons uh still work um in terms of some other um uh questions regarding uh the traffic signals within the study area that that Mr O'Brien had um we uh with there there are U pedestrian combinations the what we what we like to call industry the handman indicators for pedestrians Crossing intersections um we would certainly have the intersection of M ke Street and South Main um those would be would be uh revised and upgraded as part of some of the geometric improvements uh as we get uh the design approved and the traffic signal design approved at that inter inter section um in terms of uh onsite queuing on-site maneuverability I did review the site uh from a truck maneuverability standpoint the ability for trucks to get in and out of the loading docks uh very comfortable with that design uh there are currently uh no uh security gates or or any other uh Gates on site um uh which would prevent uh vehicles from Howard Street getting on the site on the site still such time uh that they're that they're waved on that may be a tenant specific request and but there is um an opportunity on site further into the site to place any kind of uh uh guards or um or Gates so Vehicles do not queue uh on Howard Street that's certainly something that uh uh Tim had made a point for and we're designing to avoid that situation and then likewise um the queuing uh for exiting vehicles uh is adequate with the uh with the design the on-site design um there are um as as part of some other items that Tim had asked us to address um we uh we do have a county approval process we are in receipt of a county review letter uh much like any other project uh that is an outside agency that we will be uh working with the county on uh to address their comments as we move forward through the process um and um and as Mr uh deir had mentioned um our traffic study uh utilizes uh existing roadways as well as the improvements that the applicant has part of this application at the intersection of South Main Street and mcken Street um the uh the forementioned Howard Street Extension as Mr de mentioned you don't own the property we don't control the property we're not doing anything to preclude um should the our Street Extension uh go through um and want to work with uh with with anyone that may come in um if if that was ever to come to fruition but certainly not doing anything to preclude it our analysis our levels of service our turn UNS can all be accommodated with the existing roadway Network as well as uh the improvements in South and uh and Community um I believe uh those are those are the items that Mr O'Brien had asked uh to be presented here tonight via testimony there are other items in terms of clarifications uh in the traffic study that we certainly uh going to be complying with upon uh upon sing that request and materials uh to his office so Mr B I guess I'll turn over you and give you a chance to ask you ask any questions thank you can you just clarify that the total trip presented was over a 24-hour period or was that a peak hour I'm I'm sorry the the the the number of trips that I mentioned 279 in 279 exiting that's over 24 hour period if we drill down to a peak hour perspective uh we are looking at approximately uh 63 trips in the morning uh that'll be 49 entering 14 exiting um not surprising because of some uh of the of the morning shift there so about one vehicle per minute uh in the afternoon peak hour approxim 18 uh trips entering 48 trips exiting for about 66 uh trips during the afternoon peak hour um again coinciding with with anticipated ship changes and again approximately one per minute that's a combination of cars and trucks that is a combination of cars and trucks um specific to trucks in the morning peak hour uh a total of seven truck trips three entering four exiting in the afternoon peak hour uh 10 truck trips five entering five exiting again those tend to be uh tenant specific uh but all the uh all the uh data that we had used uh and we are we are required to use uh the industry standard of the cons Transportation Engineers trip generation manual uh they have done uh dozens and I I'd say upwards of 60 to 80 sites of existing uh facilities across the country and determine those uh those statistical rates for anticipated trips for for po sites uh and again those numbers that we were talking about here were certainly higher uh last time we were here these have now been reduced about 22% because of the uh uh the square footage being reduced uh 22% over almost 100,000 square ft there wasn't any analysis on train operation correct because that's being proposed by others that is correct the Train the train design um and operations are uh would be done uh by others should um or you know I guess when a tenant identifies the use of that train um I would I would sayate that uh any uh any usage of that rail uh inherently would take trucks off the road so you know one additional uh train per day um and there's a lot of white papers out there what between 10% reduction 20% reduction the trucks um again very sight specific so we didn't we wanted to be concered in our traffic impact study take into account those those rail operations so Tim the rail operations that would be the line that's coming from Pennsylvania in not the line that goes through Union Square right don't have the details may be able to clarify if the rail operator provided information I I don't have that information no understood yeah I mean we're just driving the traffic if the if the rail route is through Union Square then we have different issues right um that stops all the traffic in your square and there's limited there potentially is limited jurisdiction of the town over the rail operation at that signal um yeah so as part of as they indicated they didn't provide an analysis for that understood but if it is connected to that there's potential that you could have train cars come passing through there it's unclear how often or right I mean right now it's what once every other month or once maybe a month I know on the Washington secondary they're running trains pretty often every day now through that the other line goes from where old rail station green rail station Bridge which doesn't affect anything right the only other comment I have is just um the County did County's traffic did not Bridge potential Bridge replacement down the future without an exact date uh the route they proposed the board would not find I would recommend to the board not to utilize that route proposed by the county they did ask that the developer work with the both the town to develop any potential future detour outs as Bri yes and I think that does come down to a timing issue the county doesn't have a time frame you you know for their uh for their Bridge Project um so it's hard to kind of match up you know with with unknown timing on the county side but yes uh as we as we previously discussed uh the app would work with uh the town um there was a more desirable uh mainten and protection of traffic plan that that the town wanted to uh present to the county and we do work with that as well thank you they address all my comments related to Traffic comments just one question where are your trucks coming in from there East or West uh from a distribution standpoint we have a modeled them all coming in from the East uh not through not through the town from the East what order would you be uh that would be South Main it eventually kind of gets down to uh new Bron 22 and then using the team as the that that is correct which was which was which was precipitating some of those improvements that the applicant was taking upon themselves for those uh the morning trips you said were how many trips uh approximately uh 49 entering uh Vehicles 14 exiting Vehicles total 63 about one trucks and car that that is the addition of trucks and cars specific the trucks uh three entering four exiting thank you thank you okay next we have John manino for his the architect testimony and again I believe you have the CV you can mark that exhibit and again Mr Vice chairman I'd recommend that we uh the board stipulate his expertise and that's number we're up to eight yes seven or eight eight Mr wner was seven your CB is eight so that be nine we'll have n okay so hello everyone I'm John manino um I don't know they they did a great job I think Brad did a really good job explaining really the the changes from the original application that was approved to this current revised proposal um what I'm here to kind of show you is the um the Aesthetics of the building just talk about the generalities about the building as a whole um on the easel is the previous building as it was Invision on the original proposal when it was 420,000 ft you can see the positioning of it um is much closer up to Howard Street uh as the dock loading docks were on the south side of the building during that application and Brad had showed that site plan previously um just showing this as as a reference this was provided in testimony during the original application I'll leave it down here similar to how Brad handled aners so exibit A9 um or A10 I should say uh this is the revised uh building r as it's currently being envisioned smaller footprint 328,000 Square ft you can see that the voting dock area is now on the north side of the building uh facing Howard Street so the building has been pulled back away from Howard Street um and you get a better sense of the uh how the building sits down below the Howard Street elevation um the touch on the building as a whole the aesthetic the design the construction is is identical essentially to what had originally proposed insulated concrete panels uh painted in various gray tones with a red accent same design as what was originally proposed um we have two office entrance points that are envisioned uh one on the east one on the west and as uh previous testimony noted 80 loading docks and two driving doors along the north side uh and then have rail side along the south side of the building um the building is single story there is no second floor or meeses proposed it is a fully suppressed facility uh in fact it's considered with an esfr system which is an early sensing Fast Response fire suppression system which is common for these type of Warehouse facilities uh the building is going to be providing 36t clear height um which again is what the market demands uh inside these buildings for these type of users um aside from that the we've articulated the par pits and we articulated the facade to help break up the massing um so it's not one large plane facade through color and variation um and as alluded earlier currently we're just going to propose one building sign on the building building that would be compliant at the, 1400 ft um uh permitted permitted size beyond that um some there are some touch points that came up in Mr O'Brien's uh review letter I believe um Mr B Brad had had already alluded to the FDC or fire forment connections um there would be one on the northwest corner um as well as one a northeast corner and in addition to that as part of our standard practices um we would also have fire department connection at the building where the water enters into the water service room water sprinkler room um so often you would have your fire department connection there as well we designed that as part of our fire code and buil code standard um with respect to exterior building lighting um again I believe uh Brad had alluded to it earlier we have a wallmounted uh sight lights to provide General illumination to meet the site lighting requirement in addition to that on the architectural side we do have a requirement to have small dual head uh light fixtures at every man door for egress and Ingress that is required by code so you have these little lights above those doors or adjacent to those doors that would be required uh no additional lighting is proposed beyond beyond those circumstance um was a question that come up regarding green aspects to the building as I alluded to these are uh highly insulated concrete uh panels whether it be tilt up or pre-cast uh the building's designed to meet and exceed the current uh energy code requirements uh a white TPL group is proposed certainly the design is is is uh the building has been designed or would be designed to meet solar ready requirements for for warehouse facilities at B New Jersey mandate um so as far as other improvements that can be considered they they would be looked at at a tenant fit up time so when we do have a tenant options for lowlow toilets LED lighting other factors can be considered as part of the fit up work uh at that time um there was also a comment regarding noise and odor and again there is no tenant at this time so you know really no noise or odor really anticipated um but certainly the regulations and ordinances that pertain to noise notor would be the responsibility of the tenant to ensure that they you know meet the those ordinance and or provide plans to uh mitigate any any odor or noise nuances that that may uh that they may be introducing um I believe that kind of touches on you know everything that we needed to respond to on the architectural side Mr O'Brien certainly if there's anything else you like to like to ask as it pertains to architectural building but um no some anything thank you thank you [Music] okay so for a Final witness uh John teina our planner and again I believe you have the CB so we can that will be exhibit a correct and again Mr Vice chairman I'd recommend the board stipulate to his expertise thank you very nice um nice to be here here to talk about um the variance in design waiver relief for tonight uh as all the other Witnesses the one thing I really do my testimonies I don't do things twice so Brad and and the other wit really did a nice job of of laying out all the leaf laying out which for me new versus old um the two specific variances that are quotequote new are the uh provisional loading docks facing Howard Street and the park setback at uh roughly 59 7 ft as opposed to the required 100 ft both of these um variances I consider to be C2 variances are um or the benefits outweighing any potential detriments the benefits of both of these variances are they facilitate the rail service and uh the rail Service uh really provides this building with many benefits both for the town as well as uh as well as for the project as a whole um you heard John talk about the um reduction in traffic that's going to come from the rail uh that is critically important in terms of reduction of trucks through the town reduction in traffic overall uh with all the previous proposed improvements uh still proposed uh secondly uh it also provides this 320 20,000 ft Warehouse uh the opportunity to differentiate itself from all the other 328,000 ft warehouses that exist qu quite out the Hinterlands and uh with how they're being built these days kind of all over the place having that differentiation of rail uh is a very valuable asset and a valuable asset for the town because uh when belal has customers uh other customers are going to be able to be serviced on that Rail and provide additional benefits uh from a transportation standpoint from a planning standpoint uh to your industrial customer base directly implementing some of your uh master plan Redevelopment plan and uh goals and objectives so um in terms of the relief it's certainly reasonable and appropriate from a planning perspective the design we is requested again are reasonable uh complying with the would present somewhat of a hardship um and Brad did a nice job of kind of differentiating between between the two that could be provided with but um really it's a better represents a better planning alternative if the relief is granted um and then the final variance I guess the changed was parking Supply um it has been changed from roughly the same variance that you granted before to a just new numbers um that number is uh is still high frankly um your ordinance at 1 per th000 is uh is fairly stringent uh for a parking requirement industry standard is is about 1 2500 um and you typically don't double count the office space so uh your your standard is very conservative and um we think that even at at the proposal we're well exceeding what be required for the building which is Clos to 130 or so so uh we're very comfortable with the 200 plus that are that provided and we think that it is more than uh sufficient and that uh the benefits of granting that instead of having just more pavement that's not going to be used or it's going to have other stuff stuck on it because it's not used uh certainly our ways DET we rather have more landscape and more trees better management as Brad testified so in closing uh I think that all these things will Implement your master plan and your most importantly your Redevelopment plan uh which was amended for uh for industrial use here because it's appropriate Andel for your questions have any questions for their plan have any question thank you okay well that concludes our testimony and uh just turn it over for any questions with professional public do you have any other exhibits offer no other exhibits offer no we have any questions yes I have a question with regards to traffic so I'm looking uh at Main Street uh where we know it as free bridge right and the train's coming through there how many cars do you expect to come through with regards to the train I'm sorry can you can you rep question the trains that you're proposing that you would use to come through there how many trains do you suspect that beuti to come through it really yeah it really is attendant specific and and the rail operator specific but we are increasing the the flow of traffic with trains going through that that stop by using that uh service now if it goes that way if it goes right now you don't anticipate train going through Center Square yeah I I can speak to this just a personal knowledge I I know that rail it's along the river goes up to Harmony C where I live actually goes past my property and if you see one train a month it's it's it's actually a lot compared to as a kid that that's why I was wondering if it was coming from the Pennsylvania side anding up I'm 99% certain that's what it's doing because I see that rail line you know from my office in yeah that goes all the time that's that's where it's going to be going it's not going to be infringing on on the intersection it won't be okay it it should not be unless something drastically changes but it hasn't been that way for big warehouse and Bel yeah I mean that that rail has weeds gr up in it trust me so one more one more question um the trucks coming through now we we have trucks coming through how much more does that increase that uh flow of truck traffic now we have trucks coming come through there so did you do the analysis on the trucks that were previously there coming through and the trucks now we we do when we do our traffic counts we take a look at we we do uh we actually count vehicle types so we have Passenger cars and we have trucks in our uh in our existing counts we then apply adjustment factors for those types of vehicles that are on the roadway um in terms of our site we're adding three entering trucks for exit trucks in the morning five entering trucks five exiting site trucks in the afternoon um I I can if you give me a minute I can take a look at what some of the existing truck volumes are along along South Street um but it's you know three entering and four exiting in the in the morning 5 and 5 in the afternoon a minimal impact that that's correct I I don't believe it would be noticeable by the driving public but we have to account and adjust our analysis to include those additional trucks which we have done uh and therefore uh are showing adequate levels of service bear with me while I TR getting pages and pages and pages and these these analysis were recently done or over what period of time uh we had utilized uh historical Counts from when we originally did the first application we counted in 2021 uh we then compared that to historical NJ do data from uh preco and we looked at adjustment factors and then we and then we apply additional percentages by that population growth uh to get them to we we had completed the study in September of 2023 so we utilize 2023 traffic volumes as kind of our Baseline and then we look at uh when we look at uh future conditions We compare future without to future with so uh 2025 without versus uh so you're saying what uh 2% impact 10% impact U uh we don't necessarily I I can get those numbers as well we we what we like to do is we you know we can't necessarily say that 2% is good or bad we we analyze the intersection from an operation standpoint and we look at delays at an intersection so what I'll what I the industry standard is is comparing delays of that a driver experiences so um in the traffic study on and I'll give you an example um on table 1.2 so after we go through all of our analysis with traffic counts we apply our traffic we apply adjustment factors for trucks we looked at at the green times at all the different signals at along the study area uh and I'll pick a peak hour at the intersection of mcken and Main Street um without the development in the afternoon peak hour the average vehicle experiences about 13.5 second delay that's that may they may be hitting the intersection on a red light they may be slowing down and take a turning mve and things like that with our site um they would be experiencing about a 15c delay so it's about 1.5 seconds of that impact between no build versus build conditions uh and that would still remain level of service B which is certainly an acceptable level of service so your peak hours are two peak hour times right n yes we we correct we studied uh 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and then 300 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. now when we studied those intersections we have uh determined that at many intersections um for example stockt in the Main Street the actual peak hour is 8 9 p.m. in the morning 4:30 to 5:30 in the afternoon um at mcken and Main Street the morning peak hour um occurs between 7:45 and 8:45 a.m. the afternoon peak hour occurs between 4:45 and 5:45 so what we're required to do industry s is uh count a wider buffer of time and then look at what is the worst hour in the morning the worst hour in the afternoon and in fact because of some of the uh other adjustments uh that we're required to take he actually look at the worst 15 minutes in that worst hour over the course of the day yep you're welcome um the the peak hours but what was the volume volume of truck traffic for I look at I'll take I'll take a particular intersection so as an example at the intersection of N Street and South Main Street at the uh Indo in the morning peak hour there's a approximately 35 trucks during that peak hour uh and we'd be add three entering and four exiting and this so there is no tenant so we don't know if it's a 24hour operation or not so what is the is there a estimate on the truck traffic per 24hour period or 12 hour period the the estimate that I given was over a 24-hour period obviously if if you know ours if the tenant uh chooses to run only one shift or two shift those trucks would typically be low anyone [Music] else to the Public Public comment anybody can come forward I got three minutes is that right sure um David morset five Fair Heights Phyllis book New Jersey um as you know I do not think the warehouse is a good thing for Philipsburg and I think you as the residents care about Philipsburg and I hope you see it the same way the reason for the warehouse being built some of you may not know because you're new is because there was a plan to build residential down there Heron construction came to the conclusion that because that area is an undesirable place to live and sell homes because of a gun range on one end and a junkyard on the other end the solution is is to put a warehouse down in the flats my opinion is the warehouse will lower the value of the homes in the flats and it will lower the quality of life the warehouse violates the state Warehouse guidelines it's not close to any major arteries the warehouse is going to be built in an already in an area already suffering from disproportionate environmental harm the warehouse will be built in an overburden Community exactly what the warehouse sighting GL guidelines discourage the warehouse is going to be built next to a protected resource the Delaware River the warehouse is going to be built next to a Green Acres Park in fact I believe I heard there asking for a variance perhaps to build closer to that Green Acres partk in terms of making a left-hand turn off of mcken I don't believe that's something the town's going to be able to appr Ro I believe the dot will have to be will have a say into as to whether truck traffic can be blocked on South Main Street and I don't believe doot is going to agree with that based on what happened with the uh current plan for the truck traffic Route nothing can stop trucks from going down South Main Street trucks coming into the warehouse can come from the free bridge up to mcken Street and and make a right-and turn there's nothing to stop from I'm confused with the counts the truck counts um and the truck trips I heard a reduction of 20% and truck trips with on the 420,000 Ft Warehouse the numbers were 200 something a day uh it came out if you multiplied it it came out to some number around 92,000 20 % reduction in truck trips I heard and that comes out to about 20,300 um I'm sorry 20,300 reduction that still leaves 71,7 truck trips I heard another figure of 100 truck trips today 100 truck trips a day is 36,500 truck trips a year so what is the actual number yeah the fact is they don't have a tenant so they don't know um in terms of trains and truck trips out when you have box cars coming in that merchandise has to go out when that merchandise goes out it most likely is going to be going out on trucks a warehouse this size it doesn't make sense for it to be a train transfer station so you're going to have more trucks going out than just a couple trucks an hour um please consider the residents the residents I've walked and I've knocked and the residents of the Flats on practically every door I've knocked on with the exception of two or three do not want any type of a warehouse down there thank you very much for your time and uh welcome to all the new members it's great to see you and uh glad to see the uh professionals back on board last name and your address Rita CI c o d i r o l address 380 Warren Street Philipsburg New Jersey um I'm not familiar completely with this this is the first time my husband and I have been to one of these Town meetings but after hearing the presentation I am concerned that there's a lot of unanswered questions it seems like the traffic report is only taking into account South Main Street and mcken in that area but what happens if there's unintended consequences with more traffic are they going to be coming in from the free bridge are they going to be coming in from 202 because if you guys remember recently there have been a lot of accidents on 22 a lot of accidents we don't need any more of that not to mention they don't even know where the trains are coming from or going to um seems questionable and freight trains aren't really the safest thing anymore um depending on what kind of they're carrying they could derail and explode so I kind of think that maybe there should be more research before the decision is made thank you I have a quick leg question techically [Music] have I just have a quick legal question uh technically for record Lee Clark 98 South Main Street Philipsburg New Jersey now technically we have three council members in the room by me commenting would that be a violation of Sunshine Law before I even go forward no you said yes you said no who said yes no it's not this public comment this is a public comment go ahead you can you're not going to violate the sunshine act okay L but all right um yes so Clark so I'll keep my remarks short um it's it's never easy to take on an issue that you know you're going to lose all right but being elected it's not about doing what's easy it's about doing what's hard uh personally I just don't think this is right I'm not against Warehouse development I'm not against capitalism or making money I honestly believe Done Right Warehouse development can do a town good it's just location that just doesn't work and we hear the residents every single day complaining about this we heard it in 2022 we heard about it in 2023 we hear about in 2024 I hear them every single day when I'm walking the streets I live in South on South Main street I hear my constituents complaining about this because they don't want a warehouse and I know you know I'm telling the truth because my constituents are your constituents you hear the same thing around town you heard tonight there's a lot of un unanswered questions now I'm all for bringing jobs ever since I was elected or even as a resident I'm for bringing Jobs Here by bringing new reeven Rue but there's a right way to do it and I want to work with these redevelopers to bring the right stuff here to Philipsburg there's a lot of stuff that we need to develop we need new parking structures to accommodate a growing population we need a grocery store there's so much opportunity so that's all I'm going to say about that I personally just don't believe that this is the right thing you're adding more trucks the roads we're trying to work to reduce the amount of trucks on these roads and at a time in Warren County and throughout New Jersey where you see towns fighting against these warehouses day after day I am good conscience cannot put my name behind a guest boat for a warehouse I certainly hope y'all can't either thank you I look forward to the Facebook troll thank you uh Keith Kennedy 898 Hill Street um I voted yes uh for uh this project back when it was the original cold storage facility because I sold proof that uh the rail service was in fact going to be used uh my main concern has always been traffic and uh the figures I was shown then for previous cold storage facility it took care of a traffic issue for me that's why I voted yes that's no longer the case we don't know who the tenant of this building will be you could put the rail spur in and whoever the tenant is they can decide they're not going to use it so again you have to refer to this traffic study and um the traffic the copy of traffic study that I had on uh table five on page 5 this is showing uh 197 trucks and 360 passenger vehicles for a total of 557 vehicles and now going uh refer to Table 6 Table 6 provides the vehicular trip generation breakdown with a heavy vehicle conversion per Warren County ordinance per Warren County ordinance one heavy vehicle is equivalent to five passenger vehicles so on table six this is showing a grand total of 1,3 45 Vehicles so again my concern is the traffic um my other concern is there's a proposed Warehouse uh on Edge Road and Route 122 so now you're talking you're going to have heavy truck traffic possibly all the way from 22 all the way to mcken street now what do we tell the people that have reside in delare Heights is his only access in and out of town is Carpentersville Road that's my concern that's always been my concern with traffic if someone can tell me and reassure me that the rails is going to be used I'm all for the project until then I camp thank you Randy p on mer Street here in Pittsburg uh I think I brought to up once before that uh I I'm already for this project back there uh I don't know if anybody who's done any real estate value studies down there as far as what kind of an impact it's going to make with this warehouse but one time at a council meeting I made the remark we had a lot of people in here coming up with suggestions on what to do with that property back there and I told them to buy the property F off the guy we have two other public officials back here we haven't heard any ideas from them as far as what they would like to see in place of the warehouse they keep saying no Warehouse what do they want this gentleman over here has been trying like hell to try to get something going here in town to try to you know try to bring this town around and we've got people that are just keep constantly saying no what kind of a town do you want you got two public officials that are sitting back there that just keep saying no they keep going against everything it makes me sick thanks all right any else good evening uh Michael Peri um uh Washington Lane uh Bethleham Pennsylvania I grew up in Philipsburg spent most of my life here um I fought that property back in I think' 05 and for 18 years I tried to make it a residential development it had been industrial and I was the genius that tried to and got got it to residential and for 18 years we spent millions of dollars um C to 20 30 different home builders um we just could not get it going um I've listened to everyone throughout um we did have a cold storage project Mr marett filed a lawsuit that tied the property up for a year and a half and that cold storage is in Allentown Pennsylvania right now um I grew up in peber I listen to all the wrestling matches I go to all the peber uh football games on occasion U I'm not going to do anything that hurts the town I grew up in okay you have my word on that this project we reduced it to 320,000 ft because some of the councilmen wanted rail I'm telling you the rail doesn't go through Union Square that only goes up to beler there's nothing there it all comes off North Co sou um with the mcken street I if you look at Atlantic states and everything those trucks can't make the turn for mcken in South Main Street they have to go around the whole South Main Street all down the flats we bought that house to knock it down so not only will our trucks be able to turn right but all the other trucks there will be able to turn right and no one's going through South Main Street do is never going to allow that the town's never going to allow that and and if you talk about the residents those districts down there voted for the council people and mayor that were for this project I think it was overwhelming as as I recall so I've been down there I've talked to a lot of people if we could create 250 to 275 jobs at $25 an hour at $55,000 $60,000 a year we've done a great thing in my estimation because I think the best social program in the world is a job and we were an avid District right we were one of the 30 poorest towns in New Jersey and when I grew up at inol rant everybody I knew that DS uncles grandfathers worked at Engish it was a great great town and they left in the middle of the night closed the doors unlike betham steel which uh was a good was a good Community uh Advocate if you go down to 22 and where angr Hall ran those millions of square feet that they built just sit there pull over the side of the highway watch how many trucks come out there's millions of square fet there there just holding any trucks coming in and out of it okay this is 320,000 sare ft um like everyone's blowing this everyone that's opposed to this is is blowing this out of proportion creating jobs is a really good thing for this community and I'm very proud that I've been in Philipsburg and I will never ever hurt this town thank you I got a question Mike you're not against the the master plan about extending how it f be if it if it it comes to no I I we have no control of that we're not involved with that that's up to the town and the state I mean if you turn on the King Street you're only in F start 1,400 ft you hello everyone my name's uh Rob col TR I own LMR disposal in town um I live at T Court c o n t r LL thank you you're welcome I own uh amp Holdings property and I also own SMP Trucking it's at the corner of mcken in Howard Street um and uh Mr peruchi as he stated uh I think personally I think it's a great idea that place is been vacant for so long as a business owner I totally understand paying a tremendous amount of taxes and not really getting any benefit for it so I totally get where he's coming from um you know I am not for the Howard Street Extension it's going to go right through my property okay so uh I will tell you that uh SMP trunking and transportation I bought from uh Stephen M pal okay um and at one point in time at the corner of mcken Street in hamard street he ran 60 flatbed Trail tractors and trailers out of that location with the current infrastructure that it has today without the house being knocked down so uh you know I would totally say from my opinion being in trucking I mean I think he just made a very good point and it's a realistic Point go there and look at inera ran and count how many trucks come in and out of that place I mean and their millions of square feet this is a much reduced with the potential of rail uh I don't think your impacts are going to be anywhere near what some people may think but uh at one point in time I'm not looking to uh have my property cut up and divied up uh for his benefit either if that makes any sense so uh you know I think the plan that he's got to put in place I think it'll be very successful because again if you look at historic views of that property it's a fet street we call it uh 17 mcken street it's directly across the street from uh the scrapyard you will see how many trailers were ran out of there and they were making that tough right hand turn onto South me street so um you know I am for the project I think it will create jobs it'll clean up a you know there's homeless people that walk through my property that go to his property to put tents there you know like realistically who wants that you know let's develop the property make it look good it'll increase your tax value and ultimately you know you take those ta that tax value and you turn it back into schools good things happen when people have jobs I'm all about jobs and you know trying to create value in a town that that particular area needs to redeveloped we bought that S&P property cleaned it up and uh you know that's what we're trying to do as well me and my partners so uh you know that's what I that's what I can say and you know I just I'm totally against the Howard Street extension so I think he's got a good plan I think you should stick to [Music] it anyone else Mr Vice chairman I just want to make it clear so that people think public comment is not stifled there is no sunshine act violation when uh public officials are number one acting as private citizens they're allowed to speak at a public meeting there's no limitation on that the sunshine Act only applies when a body a quum of a body is acting uh secretly quietly and not at a public meeting and they're conferring about certain things so any public official uh is welcome to speak as a member of the uh of the of the public at a public meeting like this thank you good great anybody else yet I'm closing public comment uh we don't have any further testimony no further exhibits and we rest our case at this time okay Mr zwicker I would uh know I like to do these in parts and I think the best way to start would be take a liit if anybody's interested in a vote on the six permanent waivers that were discussed today design waivers a motion for the six can you justment real quick again sure sure please absolutely looking at Mr O'Brien's letter we have on page nine 2 a 2 b 2 c 2 m 2 N and 2 O good with that I'm good thank so I need a motion I'll motion it need a second I'll second and before we go any further I just want to make the record clear too that we have this is a n member board uh we have two alternates by the way identify the alternates for the record yes okay the alternates are Mr Bond and Mr Branch okay and because there's refusals they can step in nine call call the uh U four members and then uh by optim first you count first we have done it done okay and then it goes down it goes down the CH so like the vice chman SL he's BL don't is there any discussion oh any discussion on that motion sorry Mr Bond yes Mr Branch yes Mr brodman yes Mr zra yes Mr Penrose yes Mr Turnbull yes Mr n yes councilwoman paain and vice chairman scker yes okay we have two refusals uh next Mr Vice chairman you would be looking to solicit a motion for uh 11c variances that are set forth in the uh Engineers letter con Engineers any questions on those variances if not a need motion Bernie second I'll second John hold on discussion oh ask there discussion well there was no questions before I didn't think there' be okay I don't know you got you got to ask no problem Mr Bond yes Mr Branch yes Mr brodman yes Mr zra yes Mr Penrose yes Mr turnor yes Mr Mr n yesil is up and vice chairman is Wier hold on ask her if she want me to ask her even okay thank you and then I um lastly would be a potential motion for amended preliminary and final site plan approval any questions on that solicit a motion motion I think uh we had a discussion with your engineer that the amended term should be taken out because the Count's is seeing it as just a preliminary final site plan okay for drawing title purposes only for drawing title purposes only so from an approval standpoint I don't know how still amend it just we're going to part of the letter was to allow them to remove the word amend it from the project title to comply with count request not to change the application I I I don't care how we do it as long as we're on the same page this is technically the Second Amendment right yes so I don't know how we want to couch that because the board is you know 2022 you know two on the on the car plans it says bold amended primary final the county has asked them to drop County w review it so they make the note in the general notes that this is an amended I just want to make sure on the same page because in January 27th of 2022 the the preliminary and final site plan was approved and then in September of 202 an amended sight plan and this I think would technically be a second amended I just so we're all on the same page I don't care how we couch it so it's just it's just Chang it's not changing the title of the application it's just changing on the cover sheet we typically indicate the type of the type of we we think it can be couched as an amended plary final site plan approval and then we'll deal with the paperwork of the county yeah separately okay I think that's probably the best way to handle it because to you it is an amended plan yeah and I think I want to make it clear in the resolution that this is a second cuz I'm going to reference the January of 22 in September of 22 so I'm I'm going to ask you to call the second amend okay we can figure out the housekeeping as far as the county is conc a motion I'll make a motion move second second roll call hold on discussion discuss this any discussion no Mr Bond yes Mr Branch yes Mr brosman yes Mr zegra yes Mr Penrose yes Mr turnball yes Mr n yes councilwoman paus and vice chairman zwicker yes thank you very [Music] much [Music] how are you been keeping the board yes yes it's it's wonderful [Music] me [Music] [Music] connect I'll sent you we can [Music] do next thing on the [Music] agenda is the uh new business uh we need to direct van CLE to review the 540 Marshall Street Redevelopment plan that Council has sent over to us no you can't consistency engine doing by appointing you as an engineer we you as Scott by confering that's what I heard that's what I heard okay because we threw it all together okay a great so uh can I have a motion to direct van CLE to review the 540 Marshall Street Redevelopment plan the council sent to us motion second question yes speci so this is the third time rewing the asking have re yeah um we go ahead this is pre in in calendar year 23 the board and the count governing body of the Town determined that the property was in need of development correct the state approved that designation and now you have to set the zoning standards or the Redevelopment plan for that uh need area of need to Redevelopment council at their last January meeting uh did the first reading on an ordinance to designate the zoning standards um and then they will they have to refer to the land use board to provide a consistency review about those zoning standards because it has implications towards uh conforming to the master plan last time was if it wasap deap yeah correct that was the area of need to Redevelopment we red the state criteria to to see if it complies correct okay so this is just an extension this is not an extension this is to set the zoning standards of what type of uses will be allowed there to facilitate the Redevelopment in this ordinance the Town Council passed on a a first reading they put in what they believe the zoning standard should be as a required by law to send it to this board to make sure that uh this board is of the opinion that those standards are consistent with the master plan and open ordinance as a whole thank you and typically this board refers it to our expert plan y That's all that needs to be done and in the consistent in the ordinance it covers but not limited to type of uses the type of setbacks and coverage and essentially other B for special standards that may may apply or relief related to variances okay you had a question mayor yeah I need to recce myself as well due to a prior uh involvement in in uh my previous SE Council MH mhm okay I have a motion I have a second is there any further discussion roll call Mr Bond yes Mr Branch St Mr brodman yes Mr zegra yes Mr Penrose yes Mr teral yes Mr n yes councilwoman paus abstain Vice chairman Swiffer yes and chairman Duffy yes um there's no old business uh the minutes from the December meeting um I need a motion a motion okay Mr second second Mr Bratman um are there any additions deletions or Corrections in the minutes now the only members that can vote are the people that were here in December all right so I have all right okay I I know Mr Bond was here yeah Mr P yes uh Mr braxman yes Mr was Mr um Vice chairman wicker yes and chairman Duffy wasn't here and we weren't here motion passes okay motion passes um at this time we will accept the public comment anyone from the public has any comments for the board please step forward state your name and address not seeing any I'm closing public comment does anyone have anything for the good of board um again if anyone wants to be on the Redevelopment committee please see Vice chair Swicker after the meeting so he can put together that uh that committee for next uh meeting and um just so everyone's aware our process is we have a completeness hearing one month we have the hearing on the site plan whether it's final preliminary or both the next month and then there's a resolution from the lawyer the following so it's a 3- Monon process you'll be seeing um projects on your agenda for three months okay I encourage all of you when you see the agendas and you see the um letters from the engineer at least go around and see where the Project's happening look at the neighborhood before you come to the meeting okay that's all I've got uh do I have a motion for adjournment all those in favor say I any against guys have thank you apprciate