##VIDEO ID:Z2_ZDZ9CAxQ## e of this meeting was provided in the following ways notice published in the ker news notice posted on the bulletin board and the municipal building notice made available to the Township Clerk notice sent to The Courier News in the Star Ledger Miss Buckley would you please call the role mayor Waller pres councilwoman K here M corkran here Reverend Kenny president and Madam chair here uh Mr Barlo would you read the open public meeting notice sure Madam chair and keeping with the guidelines that have been disseminated by the Department of Community Affairs uh the planning board is lied with same with regards to the open meetings act in addition uh any application that will be heard this evening has had the log on information for the online meeting platform put forth in their notice members of the public who wish to be heard will be forwarded an opportunity as if we're in an actual physical space and it's appropriate to go forward in this fashion thank you um you can see the flag over my right shoulder can we all recite Pledge of Allegiance at this time I pledge you Al to the flag to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice all um can we swear in the professionals sure I believe we got ma Ron and Jim Clarkin you all raise your right hand you swear the testimony to give before the support this evening will be the whole truth so you got I do do I do thank you thank you do we have any changes to our agenda tonight yes Madam chair number 17 deie Communications which is 24 pb21 12v um preliminary and final site plan for 1034 Stelton Road um the notice was defective um they are going to have to correct that and ren notice if they correct their notice issues they will be heard on the September 11th 2024 meeting if anyone is here for Deanie Communications you will be getting a new notice in the mail but that matter will not be heard this evening and most likely will be on the September 11th meeting number 18 I'm on video what are you saying excuse me yeah you can not be behind me hold on I don't know who's talking sorry okay um so number 17 is off DE Communications that they will Ren notice number 18 24 pb8 09v lrn Properties LLC both variances minor subdivision that's been postponed till September 11th 2024 was carried at the applicant request because of a conflict there will be no further notice for that matter if you are here for number 18 lrn properties which is 60 Normandy Drive that matter will be heard on September 11th 2024 and there will be no further notice those are the only two changes to the agenda Madam chair you um members of the board uh can I have a motion to pay the duly audited bills uh Madam chair I'll make motion um miss kahill you made that motion Miss clran did oh miss thank you uh Ro um can I get a second please uh Madam chair Reverend Kenny I'll second it thank you roll call please mayor Waller yes councilwoman K yes Miss corkran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes item number eight adop option of resolution to memorialize action taken on July 10th 2024 well none uh item number nine adoption of the minutes from the regular meeting of July 10th 2024 Madam chair Reverend Kenny I make a motion adoption of the minutes of July 10 2024 can I get a second a second cor thank you roll call Mayor wallet yes councilwoman K yes Miss corkran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes item number 10 discussion to discuss whether the property designated is block 2011 lot 1.01 and block 202 lot 42.0269038 South 2 Avenue meets the criteria to be determined as a non- condemnation area in need of development good evening members of the board can you hear me yes we can all right so uh James Clark and a foresight planning I will be um delivering this report to you this evening um first before we get started a quick housekeeping item um last night so I'm sharing it right now uh the council passed resolution 24307 um and um Mr Barlo do we need to mark this as an exhibit before I go forward uh if not that's fine did you hear you I'm not sure but um if not we can do that later but basically it's updating resolution 24268 which was the original one asking the planning board to investigate these two lots um and this updated resolution is adding and you can see it in this bottom paragraph here it's the 180 linear feet of South 2 Street which is about 12,000 sare feet it's just lying between both of those lots and it's a County Road um but we do want to include that in the study area so that's one contiguous lot um so that's just the sorry go ahead never mind I thought I heard someone uh yeah so that's just the quick quick housekeeping item so my uh study does include that area uh so I will get started um so I'll start with the study area description um so we have before us two lots block 202 L 42.2 which is the larger of the two and then block 2011 L 1.01 and then that uh 180 linear feet of South Second Street I just mentioned um if you want some contexts there is a map the end that shows both or um the whole entire study area together um and then for further context this is uh in the northern part of the township so right where the border is with the burough of denan and actually both of these Parcels are at the dead end of South 2 Street and it's actually the dead end of the of that street is actually the physical border between the township escat and the burrow of denell um and with from a zoning perspective block 2011 lot 1.01 is in your M1 manufacturing zoning district and then block 202 lot 42.2 is within the light industrial zoning District um and also for the record these two properties are 1776 and 1791 South 2 Street um let's see here so yeah so when you combine these two lots plus that portion of the County Road we're talking about 14.5 Acres so block 2011 lot 1.01 is only 1.65 acres in size it's much smaller than the other lot um and this one is uh closer to the railroad tracks for context um and I'll go over the photos later in my report but really this area can be accurately be described as basically an outdoor storage area uh for vehicles equipment and junk and based on our review of the building Zing records it does not appear to ever had an approved use um so really uh looking at historical Aerials it's always been some sort of parking or storage lot over the years uh there's no improvements of any kind um and as I said we didn't find any building or zoning records for this lot we did find one police record for criminal mischief with damage that occurred this year in 2024 um but other than that there was no uh significant reports related to this property um and as I said the photos will give you more context of the current conditions that are there so across the street is the larger lot lock 202 lot 42.2 12.7 acres in size and actually has three large structures standing on the lot so tonight I'm going to talk about them as the Western the middle and the Eastern structures so the Western structure is a two-story building with loading docks and it actually straddles the border of Scat and um and in my research I found an April 2023 study from dellan planning experts saying that they found this structure on the dellan side to be in need of Redevelopment uh when I visited the site did not appear to be occupied um and definitely was in a state of disrepair which I'll get into more the middle structure is an operating one and a half story Warehouse with some loading spaces some improper outdoor trailer storage and other outdoor storage and then finally there's an Eastern structure which is another long one-story Warehouse very similar to that middle structure um oops far um so for this there are actually a lot of police records uh just some examples include simple assult in 2005 several thefts in 2006 theft IM movable property property in 2009 um a couple citations for outdoor garbage and illegal dumping in 2011 and 2018 so so um as I get into the photos you'll definitely see the current conditions and how some of these um police records could occur um especially with the violations related to garbage and illegal dumping um because I was when I was on the lot I saw um evidence of damage vehicle storage and storage of large dump dumpsters as well um so yeah I will get into that as we get down to the photos so just last housekeeping item I think I already mentioned the um 12,000 square feet of South Second Street not much to say about it it hasn't been improved in some time uh no sidewalks um nothing no other really existing conditions of note for that portion of the study area as always we take a look at ngd P's records for these properties so we do the normal review for Wetlands contamination anything of that nature so there is actually a stream that runs to the bottom portion of this study area so that's block 202 L 42.2 um it runs from east to west but it's really only the bottom portion and so that is really the only area of the property or the entire study area that had records of wetlands um it was only a small portion so it's likely that if Redevelopment moves forward either that part will not be um developed or they'll work with DP if they wish to develop that portion but a bigger note was there was that that lot is also a known contaminated site and from the information I could find it had about four cleanup cases associated with it including a C2 remedial level which is basically a known source or release of contaminant into the groundwater so definitely seems like there's some open cases for remediation for this property um which could make this a Brownfield Redevelopment which is definitely viewed favorably because we're taking an older possibly hazardous use and transforming into something more productive um so that was everything I found from an environmental perspective um so I think that Redevelopment could definitely be good for this area further context surrounding land uses so it's kind of a mix because you're um near Front Street in dellan which kind of has like a mix of commercial industrial but then also South and West and maybe even a little East there are residential neighborhoods um mostly of a single family nature so it's definitely a div diverse set of uses surrounding this property and then also Columbia park within burrowell is south of the studet area as well moving on to a Master Plan perspective you know judging by the age of the area for both Township and the burough of dellan um especially when you look at the uses along the railroad tracks it's definitely an older developed section of the township so I think that this fits in with your 2005 master plan in that as V can develop a land diminishes you know older areas will be more primed for redevelopment and I think this study area definitely fits within that context so with that background I'm going to move on to the photos so we can really get into um you know the conditions that I found during my investigation so first we're starting with a larger lot this is the one I just discussed where it has the three structures on it so this first photo you see is that middle structure um actually both top photos are you can kind of see the degradation of the pavement and some storm water ponding um then you can kind of so this was panning left from that physici so this is the Eastern structure the other warehouse and you can see that um pavement degradation there as well um on that lot I did find some storage trailers that may not be um entirely proper for the type of use but um as we move forward you can see the outdoor storage of these dumpsters um which I don't think meets code either and definitely could be potentially hazardous but as we move further these two photos are of specific um significance that I wanted to discuss so obviously you see the ponding but in the rear is more of what I really want to talk about and I think the bottom photo is a better photo it looks like some sort of um vehicle use is going on whether it's storage of damaged vehicles or some sort of shipping auto shipping industry um it's definitely not permitted use in that zone um and does not seem to be a proper use of the land and definitely improper outdoor storage couple of concerns of you know leaking hazardous material whether it's gasoline or coolant or something related to vehicles um but definitely something um to take note of and I think um bolsters the um sorry the situation with respect to in need of Redevelopment so these next photos are the Western structure so this is the one that actually straddles the border of denell and and scataway so definitely clear signs of ab broken glass broken windows actually when I was on site the alarm was actively ringing um there's degradation of the brick of the loading docks um definitely signs of disrepair and abandonment uh so some of these are some further photos of that structure um and then I think some other signs of Abandonment is just you know no one's there parking or taking care of the regular day-to-day maintenance of the parking lot uh here's a good photo of the broken glass and um the abandoned nature of the indoor portion of that Western structure all right now shifting to block 2011 lot 1.01 which is across the street from this one so this is the one next to the railroad tracks like I said there's really no improvements of any kind it's kind of this halfhazard collection of construction equipment trailers tractor trailers different pieces of uh vehic vles or junk um throughout the site um it's really just crust Stone pavement I'm going to kind of just roll through feel free to ask any questions but um it does not appear to have any improvements or be related to anything nearby uh so you see some old tires some unknown barrels storage containers yeah here you go here's a better view of the whole lot um so behind those trees is where the railroad track runs and that structure way in the back is actually uh on a different lot it's an existing um I I'm forgetting uh like a pipe fitting Factory I believe yeah so here are some more photos of the existing conditions no real structures just a bunch of trailers and junk um so with respect to applying the criteria start with a larger lot with the fre structures on it so based on the my investigation the clear evidence of outdoor storage of trailers dumpsters junk and even cars that are in need of major repair and body work um and also combine that with the police records we found for illegal dumping and garbage citations on that property I find that criteria a b and d apply so a is specific to that Western building where it's clearly in a state of disrepair it's unsafe and definitely not um you know wholesome for working conditions um and I think if it's left in its current state would represent continued dangerous conditions so criteria a applies criteria B also applies to that Western Building because um it's a discontinued use of manufacturing um and it's also I found some evidence that was bacon since 2018 according to the burough of dellan study so I think that abandonment in that vacancy has allowed the rure to fall into a really bad disrepair situation where it's really untenantable and then criteria d uh applies to the entirety of the lot and all the structures on it so it's really the misuse of the property when it's the storage of trailers the vehicles all those conditions um I find that it's Absolut faulty Arrangement and just um you know not a good land use with an obsolete layout that I think is detrimental to the safety Health and Welfare of the community so I think these three criteria apply to that lot with respect to block 2011 lot 1.01 since there's no structures um I don't think that criteria A and B could apply but I think that criteria D does apply um basically by also by virtue of the illegal and improper storage of all the chunk that's on that property um you know it's clearly not permitted and it's a faulty Arrangement excessive land coverage and really not a good land use for the community at all so with those two lots discussed all that's left is just the portion of South Second Street so um as I mentioned there's the existing conditions don't really meet any of the criteria you know it's just minor wear and tear no sidewalk hasn't been repaved in a while but I believe that um a Redevelopment may include improvements um such as that portion of the County Road and so yeah the conditions themselves are not detrimental but I think it's very necessary to include uh for the effective Redevelopment so that you have one contiguous parcel that can be redeveloped through a proper Redevelopment plan so it's my recommendation to include that portion of South Second Street should it be vacated by the county um to be included as part of the overall study area for in need of Redevelopment and then finally for the last two lots I think that the smart planning criteria H can apply we had the dellan New Jersey transit station close by so that can really um give us possibly a range of housing choices walkable neighborhoods um a sense of place or being offered via Redevelopment of the study area so to wrap it all up it's my recommendation that this board and then subsequently the township Council determine that this study area is imp fact in need to Redevelopment by virtue of um block 202 Lot 4 2.2 meeting the three criteria or four rather and then also block 2011 lot 1.01 meeting criteria D and H and then also including the 180 linear feet of South Second Street within that study area um I think this area could definitely benefit from Redevelopment um specifically the uh areas of contamination that I mentioned and um I think that's the crups of my report and happy to take any questions uh Mr Clarkin Reverend Kenny here in regards to uh 201 uh lot 1.01 did you find that those uh trucks are are abandoned or are they being used or worked on it looks like yeah it's kind of hard to say I would say a mix Reverend because like actually this photo in this top left kind of seem like it was being worked on um but others just seem like they might have been there for a long time um like this trailer here who knows if that's been moved but I think there was another photo where the hood of the tractor yeah uh like this one doesn't look like it's an engine in it so I don't think that's moving anytime soon um but this one this bottom one here the green one that looks like it was being actively worked on so there could be some sort of outdoor maintenance going on which is definitely not uh Allowed by code or um probably D either now that's what I thought because I I didn't see any plates on on any of these vehicles except for another good point Thank you another good point that's the trooper eye in you members of the board are there any other questions of this witness U Madam chair I just want to add some uh information of fact when U Mr Clark was talking about the illegal dumping going on there's actually more illegal dumping then actually was in the report because periodically almost once a month somebody drops a load in the middle of the street down there at Department of Public Works either our Public Works and bcat or jel and Public Works has to go and pick up on a regular basis okay that's for the record any other um comments or questions then let's open it up to the public uh Miss Buckley see you see if anybody if anyone has any comments or questions about the discussion item you could just raise your hand no one Madam chair thank you close to the public okay uh Mr Clarin has compl completed his testimony members of the board um what's your pleasure Madame chair this is D Corin I make I'd like to make a recommendation that property uh be designated as a non- condemnation area meter development uh do I have a second Reverend Kenny I'll second that motion and while I'm seconding the motion I'd like to thank Mr Clarken in regards to this the Redevelopment study did an excellent job thank you thank you um would you call the role Miss Buckley mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes yes M Corran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes chair just yes um out of an abundance of caution and because of the time frames involved I took the liberty of preparing a resolution uh recommending uh to the council that the property be designated in a non- condemnation area and Redevelopment and if the board so chooses it be appropriate to adopt the resolution at this time would someone like to propose a u adoption of the resolution that Mr Mr Barlo has prepared Madam chair Reverend Kenny I uh propos a revolution resolution approval of the resolution and do I have a second I'll second that councilwoman Cahill thank you roll call please mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes Miss Corin yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes um that completes that item right Mr Barlo yes madame chair okay then we'll move on to item number 11 uh amended Redevelopment plan for blocked 9201 lot 4620 also known as Rivendell Terrace zanz zanzari Way Mr way Zary way yes also will be presenting this to the board tonight thank you uh this one's much quicker um so I'm really just sharing the uh agendum I put together for this Redevelopment plan and I'm just going to go through it so back in 2015 Township planning board adopted a resolution uh to prepare a Redevelopment plan for what was then known as block 9201 Lots 46.6 4 607 and 4611 um Lester neol was actually hired to do this Redevelopment plan which I'm going to refer to as a plan from now on for the planning board um so that Redevelopment plan he put together was dated March 6 2017 and was subsequently adopted later that year by both this board and the township Council um so since that time these three lots within block 9201 um which that re that plan was prepared for have been Consolidated so now it's known as block 9201 lot 46.2 and it covers an area about 20.8 acres in size um so this is actually uh a case where the Redevelopment plan has come to fruition so it envisioned a multi family residential community of market rate and low and moderate income affordable rental units with on-site parking recreational facilities open space and then storm water as well so um it's actually been constructed it's occupied and I would considered a successful residential Redevelopment that is called Rivendell Meadows now so this is um near the border of Edison Township um so the reason for this addendum is really specific to the recreational facilities so on page three of that Redevelopment plan back from 2017 uh it specifically mentions a clubhouse building community pool including a kidy pool a Tot Lot Park area Fitness trail with workout stations and open space areas as permitted recreational facilities all that has been built um and looks to be working well and successful what the proposed redeveloper is looking to do is add to those recreational facilities as you know since this was written in 2017 some new things have emerged specifically something called pickle ball uh has become much much more popular and um yes exact yeah yeah um so the designat redeveloper wishes to build two pickle ball for s a tennis court and a half basketball court in addition to those facilities I already mentioned um they feel that these amenities would be relevant to today's public and they think the children and the residents of the development would benefit from such amenities so through this addendum I'm amending that plan to add the two pickle ball courts the tennis court and half basketball court um they do have six parking spaces planned to be built near those courts um um so this ad denim would include the construction of those parking spaces however I should know they're not required it's really more for a convenience it's not to meet the parkings um and then other things like fencing and lighting will be included what was originally proposed in that part of the Redevelopment or the uh development plan was detach garage structures um they actually already have some built so they feel that they are no longer needed and that the site can function well without those garages and that their elimination doesn't cause any parking variance issues so um I think that this proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of the master plan and of the original Redevelopment plan is really just tweaking it a little bit for these newer recreational facilities um so that that's the you know that's what I'm here proposing for this addendum and I can take any questions members of the board do you have any questions uh of Mr Clarken at this time hearing no one um Miss Buckley uh would you open it to the public or I'm going to open it to the public would you check and see if anyone in the public is wishes to ask a question of this witness okay just the orthopedic surgeons who are having a field day with all the new ACL and rotator cuff tears from all the pi PL oh they're having a ball all right okay um close to the public um members of the board what's your pleasure on this request Madam chair D Quin I'd like to make a recommendation that the amended Redevelopment plan be adopted have a second councilwoman kahill will second that roll call please mayor Waller coun councilwoman Cahill yes Miss corkran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes I believe Mr Mr Barlo has prepared a resolution you beat me to it correct it would be appropriate if the board wants to adopt the resolution at this time do I have a um recommendation that we adopt from the board Madam chair keny I'll make a recommendation that we adopt the resolution second councilwoman kill uh call please mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes Miss Corran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes okay thank you thank you very much have a good evening you too item number 12 uh 24 bb15 River Road estate LLC for a final major subdivision um good evening uh members of the board board professionals uh my name is Tim Arch attorney licensed for the state of New Jersey here representing uh River Road Estates um this is a a final major subdivision you will recall that we were back before for a preliminary um uh subdivision uh to create uh 14 single family homes at that location uh we're proud to say that we have uh I believe complied with all of the conditions of the preliminary approval to the staff's satisfaction and uh so we are here tonight uh to ask uh for uh the final so that we can um perfect that subdivision and move on to the exciting stuff of actually building the homes um so uh we do have uh I do have Eric Belo our engineer here in case there's any questions um that the board may have um but I think just a confirmation that the staff uh um agrees that we've uh complied with all the uh conditions of the preliminary is uh is sufficient so I will uh I'll turn it over to see if we can get that confirmation Madam chair and this is dor quker and they have complied with all of their conditions of preliminary approval thank you so are we gonna have any testimony tonight no uh I don't believe it's necessary to have any testimony I I I again all the conditions are there there uh we've met all those and uh I believe we are are rip for the uh for the final subdivision at this time Madam chair just so the record reflects preliminary major subdivision with certain deviations was approved by this board on November 8th 2023 there were a number of conditions of approval and as Miss Coran has indicated um the Piscataway Township professionals are um confident that those conditions have already been have been met so um we usually split it the preliminary and final just to make sure that the applic complies which they have done so unless the board your ma Madam chair of board members want I don't think it's necessary to take testimony based on Miss corran's representations and therefore it would be appropriate for a motion to grant them final major subdivision and members of the board would anyone like to propose that approval Madam chair of the application M go ahead Reverend Kenny Madame chair I would like to approve this application to go forward with the final approval and that this application move forward do I have a second second councilwoman K thank you roll call please mayor Waller yes councilwoman K yes M Corran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes thank you uh thank you look forward to those beautiful homes thank we are too if I may just question on the agenda that I had there was a discussion item that I was also associated with that I think was listed before that I don't know if it's changed from what the board has right now there's an updated agenda and it was no longer on this agenda it will be on for September perfect I just wanted to make sure around than you Mr Arch item number 13 21 pb31 Eminem at H Lane Phase 2 LLC General development plan good evening everybody it's Irina elgart I'm with wine Garten Law Firm it's good to see everybody again um oh sorry there we go so we were here last in July um I had submitted a letter to to Mr Barlo and I apologize that it was late um but getting into you today however I just wanted to indicate in the letter that we would be looking for a vote for tonight on our application um my understanding from the last hearing um in July was that the board uh asked for an extension so that their traffic engineer could take a look at our study um and I guess uh read over the testimony from our traffic engineer and provide us with some kind of review um whether it was traffic or um you know bik path related whatever it was um but we had not received that report I was surprised to not have received it I guess so that's where that letter came from um that we we looking for it we didn't receive it um my understanding also with regard to some of the items from last um last month was that when we were discussing uh cme's letter there were certain things that the applicant was going to note um you know on on the plans or however it may be in terms of like the clubhouse I I know that there was we needed to note that um and just to provide clarification with regard to that we are providing landscape buffers and things like that but I always imagine that that would be something that we would do during resolution compliance um so you know that that's one of the reasons why I wrote the letter just so that there wasn't a misunderstanding that we weren't going to put any testimony on there was really nothing further to um discuss I guess um you know in terms of the timing schedule I know there was discussion with regard to that and again I wanted to clarify it because we put in the fact that there will be five phases um we didn't put any timetable to it particularly because we are here for to find out what the vesting schedule is um without the vesting schedule we really don't know whether it's a 20-year vesting schedule 15year investing schedule um and so we're proposing five phases you know typically it's 100 units per year but you know there's that would be something that would be changed you know once we get to the first site plan um and it's almost similar to the discussion that we had about the developers agreement you know there's certain things that the Board needs to decide before you know we can put into the developers agreement and that would be one of those things um so we're here you know we've submitted all our proofs um and we believe that the project is a good project and that you know it's not going to cause an unreasonable adverse impact really that's what that's what the Board needs to find um it's zoned for exactly what we're proposing um we're not seeking variances if we do need any variances from any of the standards it's not you know we'll have to either come back and amend the GDP or we'll have to come back and and you know and get those variances through site plan depending on what they are um so I leave it to the board um and hopefully our proofs were adequate for for what you're looking for um but again this is a GDP concept plan uh we want to move forward we want to proceed with the engineering and provide even more information um as the process moved forward so thank you can I just Madam chair Miss elar just by Mr just by way of clarification then so what you're I think the discussion that took place in July is in terms of a phasing plan a more established time frame of say phase one it would be contemplated would take three years I think that's the single family homes and then phase two which may be tow houses might take two or three to to kind of give the board a little bit more Direction what you're I think saying is if the board tells us this is a 10year GDP plan we back the numbers into that like once you tell us an adopt a GDP plan of x amount of years then the applicant can say okay we got 10 years and this is a more established timeline of when the phas is might get done is that what you're saying right we don't want to represent a time period That's not necessarily going to be realistic either so you know that that's kind of what we're looking for is some guidance as to what the vesting schedule is that the board would approve okay so if if hypothetically the board gave this as a a 10-year vesting schedule for the GDP right then you're you're saying then at that point you can tell the township okay 10 years this is a a better timeline phase one we think would be done June of 2026 and phase two and understanding those are not written in stone and the GDP acknowledges if you need more time because of market conditions financing whatever else you you are more than welcome to come back and say look we thought we'd be done in three years we're going to take four for that right right so you so you need to know how long the is and then you can give the town a more specific vesting phasing schedule right I mean we know only the phases and I can tell you you know on average it's about a 100 units per year maybe you know more or less given depending on what hap needs to happen in those phases and again that's part of the the engineering that has to be done um I understand that but if phase one is the single family homes right there's 20 of them hypothetically you should be able to once you know I think that I mean the the single families for phase one we have I think it's 193 market rate units and and 14 affordables okay but I think aren't the single single family I didn't know if you were using that as an example case that's fine I just wanted corrected if if we're not using it as an example okay so I understand what you're saying you would like to know the length of the GDP and then you can give the township a more accurate reflection as to when things might get done right and I think you know three years per phase is sufficient um I'm not suggesting three years per phase I'm just just there's there's about the same number of units per phase I'm just looking at madam chair can I jump in and I I want to make a motion yes may go ahead I want to make a motion has to be five years because counselor quite frankly I want to put you folks on a tight leash you have zero credibility with me so I think five years uh Mr Barlo and if they gotta come back to the board let them explain why why do we have zero credibility I'm sorry because you do you have zero credibility how is that councelor I'm not going to get into a discussion with it my motion is for five years and I I hope my fellow board members will support that I think mayor I just have a quick question um the five years what is what is that for five years to complete the entire job five years to get something done I'm just looking for clarifications so I know what we're up against here five years that you have to have roughly 60% done and then I'm I believe two year two and a half to three years after that to have everything completed okay so I mean this is not I'm not we could agree to it I mean I guess like a tenure that's something I'm not we're not doing 10 years counselor it's not happening it's not happening I think but you just said it was it's you're asking for an annuity plan here I'm sorry it's not happening well we have every I've seen too much going on in this town with folks come in and talk a good game and then they use every excuse Under the Sun and it doesn't get done it doesn't get completed so everybody it's not just you other people are going to be on a tight leash now zero credibility take it or leave it that's what that's the way I'm going to vote well you're I mean you know if you're entitled to to vote however ever you see fit so M Madam chair if I may this is Dorne Corin hi Arena just a question if the GDP was in fact approved this evening how soon until you start filing for the formal site plan application like are we like six months out a year out like what is your timing with the filing I really can't say I don't know if uh Ron if you have an idea but you know I wouldn't want us to commit to something that we can't do so Don to answer your question you know probably if if um you know we would get the get the approval adopt the resolution I mean listen we got the approval tonight hypothetically uh we would be looking to pull the trigger to start the site plans you're probably three to four months out from completing site plans on a site this large okay uh Madam chair if I may just ask then is it absolutely necessary to um take a vote tonight on that or can the applicant wait till I don't know if we have room at the next meeting or not but um maybe just for the board to have a little more information as to this this whole phasing I mean I'm in I'm inclined to vote along the lines with the mayor just because we you know um again as he said not t specific to you but just that a lot of lot of a lot of time applications come through and then they don't get completed and what the applicant initially sort of has the high hopes to complete let's say you know aspirational things things happen and I think to the mayor's point he's just trying to make sure that this doesn't become like a generational sort of project if that makes any sense it's understood I mean you know we we would appreciate the vote tonight and you know if it's five years um you know that's something I'll have to take back and you know that's it's going to have to work right well it sounded like it was 60% five years and then like two and a half so seven and a half years um you know for the entire project which I mean really only is two and a half years less than 10 10 feels alike a lot too I mean there's a combination I'll just tell you of you know anticipation from years ago when we you know thought about having a town center here right and what that all might bring to the community um and also two is just the understanding that you know the longer this project takes the more expensive it'll become and then you know just as as Mr Baro was saying you know if you have to come back for for changes in the plan variances things of that nature just to kind of you know drop a pin on 10 years really actually probably I mean let's kind of just put it put it in practicality would if there are issues could potentially extend it up to 15 maybe even 20 years and that I think for the township wouldn't be an ideal scenario right I mean just from that perspective that's all so yeah I understand it's it's a point well taken I understand how sometimes it does get projects get delayed so we've seen it all the time and it's not to say that that's G to happen here but I think the idea that the mayor's trying to put forward and again not just with you right but with any new development is to try to figure out how we mitigate those those projects that end up going on for long periods of time and then certainly things slip through the Cs and certain things don't happen when they should have happened that are part of you know the application etc etc so some of it is US needing to do our due diligence and you know our homework to make sure that we're doing right by the resident so you know you know I'm just suggesting here maybe you're looking at it as seven and a half years with you know the hope that you do get you know more than 50% done in five that's the most ideal um but obviously your your your client has to agree to it that's all well I mean just to clarify the client doesn't have to agree to it it would be helpful it's Sor sorry they don't have to agree to it understand it's the board's uh uh pleasure based on the evidence that's been presented and and Miss elgard just to clarify you you would agree that as each phase comes before for the board as a site plan potentially the need for variances except subdivisions that developers agreements will most will be uh entered into at at during those phases I would anti I mean if we could do one you know Great And if every you know if each phase requires another one then that's you know that's what we're we're willing to do okay and I'm just going to say something here Madam chair and just say again I mean I think uh Mr albach knows this about me is that when those plans come before us again I mean the mayor has his way and I also have the things that I am fairly critical about and full transparency I've seen some preliminary elevations but I've seen two different ones I'm not sure which one's right not and when you're before us also trying to set that that time limit is because I have been very critical of certain you know elevations with that other you know uh applicants have come before with where they have to go back to the drawing board and so how much time did that add on to it you know just again just trying to rate some perspective here not that anyone's being penalized here all right Mr bar what are we going to do because we have several other applications on tonight absolutely if the board members don't have any additional questions it would be appropriate to open it to the public and then once public is closed the if it's the board's pleasure uh to move on approving the GDP we can talk about the parameters okay well does the board have any more questions of uh the attorney and uh Mr allenbach or if not we can open it to the public Madam chair if I may this was this was just another item that we had discussed at the prior hearing I know mik had brought up um concerns about the location of the Town Square and the applicant possibly looking at the redesign of that square to create more of a focal point is that something that the applicant is you know we could put as a condition if it proved a condition of this approval that they give some consideration to again that location of the the town Square that's such an important feature of this project um and M if you want to jump in please feel free but um I knew I know you brought it up you really stressed it at the last hearing um so you mean the the location of the actual square or the location of some features in the Square well the Town Square itself I mean it's surrounded by parking um it's not very pedestrian friendly again I I understand that when you come before the board for these phases is going to be more detailed but maybe there can be some consideration given shifting it somewhat more to a central location um yeah I think thank you uh Miss cochron uh Madam chair um Miss elgot I think last time we had a bit of discussion again the intent of the Town Center Zone was to create this kind of a public focal point and I think uh some of the questions again given that it's a GDP it's a conceptual plan um you know there was sparking all around it maybe you want to kind of incorporate that design more Central to your town center and discussion again as you update your plan maybe those discussions because I think um couple of discussions were also um kind of adding pocket Parks throughout the development you know creating that kind of um you know cohesive open space passive Recreation Area I think discussion was maybe the one Clubhouse which is to one side of the property maybe um adding something to that effect again we had discussed the bik path and how it's surrounding and not adjacent to the roadway which is what the uh you know the the um Redevelopment sorry the ordinance requires so I think the discussion was um lending itself to maybe these things can be worked on as uh the plans are um you know enhanced or created in more detail I think that's what Miss Cochran is um going to I mean it's hard to say that I mean of course we're going to work with the town I don't know about moving the Town Square just because where it is located appears to be centralized in the sense that you know you're going to have an entry way right there it's going to be accessible to the to the public so you know to move it further into the development I'm not so I just can't I can't agree to that you know you know in terms of actually moving it um you know I would say that I know that for a fact we will definitely work with the board and the professionals to you know make sure that it's a vision that they're happy with um but to have it as a condition I I I just I'm not sure that we could actually move it and we can work on it and take suggestions yeah you know that's for sure if I can Irena again we did speak about that mik and Dawn are both correct and you know obviously as a developer we want the best plan for not just for ourselves but for the town as well so obviously we're willing to work with the town and you know should the town act favorably on this application for GDP obviously it's going to be a collaboration as we move forward with site plans not saying I'm pulling the trigger tomorrow morning to start site plans on this layout obviously it's something that we could talk to staff and and the township and get some feedback from them some there's going to be some give and take there's going to be some reasons why we feel it's strong it should be in this location you feel strongly and there's going to be some give and take and hopefully we can come and compromise on some of these aspects but certainly we're willing to work with the township and its professional staff uh to make the best plan for everybody may I Reverend Kenny may I uh ask a question in regards to what phase is going to be done first Town Center or or the housing or I was under impression maybe I'm I'm not getting it right that the Town Center this is the the major part of this project was that going to be done last or first or when Reverend Kenny are the current plans you have before you the phasing plan uh show some residential some commercial but it also includes the public Plaza in Phase One okay you know we got phases but we just you know I've seen projects go on for 15 20 years and and the face doesn't get done and I'm a little concerned about it because I'm getting old and I'd like to see some of this stuff get done us too though so and and to defend Reverend Kenny's statements uh he currently lives where he could easily access the Town Center once it's built and I and I understand a lot of us are anticipating that and I do want to say just one other thing you know when we talk about you know approving this tonight and and Ron to your point saying you know uh if we're voting favorably on this I'm not sure what that exactly means that you're going to work with us but you know I I will say one thing I wasn't at the last meeting and I was a little disappointed because some of originally the plans were that um that the developer was going to maintain the property there wasn't going to be this a separate HOA now correct me if I'm wrong I've heard potentially that's changing so again you know antennas are a little bit up here we we've got to stay ahead of it because some of those first meetings we were told hey this is going to be a property where our main offices are going to be I'm not sure if that's really the case anymore not that that's a requirement but that's what we were told hey we're gon to you know we want this to be the best possible we're going to manage it because we don't trust anyone else to manage the property the way we would up to our snu and that's what I was told in some of those initial conversations with the town so if you can imagine the mayor's probably been doing this well longer than I have I'm just in on those first initial phrases and I am also a little hesitant because now you know hearing one thing it changing not that had to be a guarantee but understand my point of view is we questioned how the property be maintained we're told the developer was going to maintain the property that's in fact what I heard is not happening anymore that there will be an HOA I don't know if that's right or not right but it's something that I've just heard recently so again just W to be W to say and take a vote on it but also to make the applicant you also aware of the reasoning why behind we we just really want to put some things some some things in place here to protect I think part of that what you had mentioned in terms of the discussions and I'm not sure that there will be an HOA um but part of the discussions that I think you're referring to had to do with when we were discussing a Redevelopment plan for the area and which included the other another parcel which is where we're talking about our corporate offices going well that's the corporate offices but my concern more lies with the residential piece with the maintenance of those areas it was my understanding from some of those initial meetings that the um the Eminem was going to be maintaining the property of uh like the town home areas and things of that nature and my understanding is that's not necessarily the case anymore I I don't know that that is the case or not but what I'm trying to say is that those were discussions in terms of who would maintain that was the discussion had not with regard to this particular application Council kill you know our office is still moving there and I know it might it may be on your joining parcel um so is going to be our corporate our our corporate headquarters um so we do have you know um obviously an interest in the maintenance of the property no matter who maintains it because it's going to be our corporate headquarters so okay if that's any no that's a fair no it's a fair statement because yeah you'll be there you'll have to look at it every day so where are we going what are we doing is there any more discussion um personally what are we voting on what's the proposal that we vote on the whole uh GDP is there an outside date for us to complete the GDP are we going to include a first phase um goal of what three years four years I'm it's just seems so unclear as to what we're voting on fair enough Madam chair Maybe by way of explanation um basically the the GDP concept came about because developers that are going to do large projects ran the risk of the zoning change while things were going through the process and the GDP you know for for big malls projects like this over a th000 units it allows them up to 20 years and it's the board's pleasure 51 seven and a half 12 13 um once the GDP the general plan that's before you the general plan is approved the applicant is free that the township can't change the zoning in four years and and they're out of luck because their approval is only good for a certain amount of years three years and some situations two years and others so it gives them long-term certainty because they know the Project's going to take longer um but the board always is going to retain the their duties which are site plan so when they go to build portions of it I assume they're going to come before the board and for this phase one this is how it's going to be laid out this is where the sidewalks are going to be the lighting plans the Landscaping plans all the things you would normally see and the board is going to hear the specifics of it as those matters come up whereas this is just this is the general plan this is what we want to do here's our overall concept and the board [Music] can approve the the concept think of it that way you're proving the the general plan and the concept understanding the applicants going to come back before you for the specifics of it and a lot of the questions that got asked will be dealt with that site plan and developers agreement you have not seen the end of this this is just the this is the beginning um so that's why you heard 20 years because the statute says the longest it could possibly be is 20 but the board after considering the evidence comes up with either what they feel is appropriate or can just say no we're not going to approve a general development plan deny it and then the applicants kind of on their own to try and figure out how to proceed the standard just so the board's aware the standard is is there sufficient evident evidence to support a determination that the proposed General development plan would not have an unreasonably adverse impact imp adverse impact so that's what you're looking at does what I've heard so far does it have an unreasonable adverse impact on the area if it doesn't then you get into the things of how long and any conditions or things they've agreed to during their two hearings generally speaking miss elgart you agree with agree with that I do okay very very I and I there's one issue I I have to now just because it came up during the context of this hearing and it and it affects this specifically um I'm not sure if councilwoman kahill did you review the transcript of last month's meeting not no not in full so we only have five members Arena right now uh because of sickness being out of state things of that nature beyond our control um and Laura was contacting me all day trying to figure out how many members we were going to have so um it doesn't sound like Miss kahel has reviewed the whole transcript so I don't think it's appropriate for her to vote I only have four voting members well I mean I guess we'll put you on first I I don't know what else to tell you we only have four voting members it really no no but I I I would think that I would be amendable to the fact that Miss kahel knows this project um she has reviewed portions of the July transcript so I would wave that requirement and I think that that requirement is something that the uh applicant can waave as long as we're on the record I didn't want to appr an issue um Believe Me Miss kahills other than the mayor is probably as familiar as anyone about what's going on there so I I don't have any issue with that I just didn't want the record to to be unclear and I appreciate that okay with the approval of a GDP would it be accompanied by a uh an estimation of the first phase in the time um when the first phase would be completed in an estimation of the of the time period for the first phase to be completed and what it is like residential or I think Miss Arena U mentioned several things to Town Center they they've outlined what the different phases are phase one phase two that are is part of the the the plan and again whatever the board's pleasure is the board's pleasure but um within an approval potentially or theoretically it could be a seven and a half year GDP time frame with a phasing where 60% of the project must be completed within the first five years hypothetically that's something the board could do um and then the applicant would would go through their phases and attempt to you know would comply with that and if there are reasons beyond their control that they can't the statute says they get to come back before the board and say look financing was an issue or there was a covid pandemic or you know whatever else there might be that would would allow them to ask for additional time so that's what you that's what I would foresee an approval being I'm sorry this is D again just a quick question I know at the here and we had talked about a few other minor things but I things that I believe the applicant agreed to add to the plan such as like the bedroom distribution um the clubhouse as I believe Ron or Arena mentioned I think the parking plan had to be revised is this the time and is this appropriate to tie those conditions to this approval if granted I I would think for the most part I guess we would have to go through the conditions but um I believe a lot of them had to do with you know just labeling the the landscape buffer that we were going to put between the town houses and the single family um the two clubhouses you know I I believe they were of the of that kind of nature that it would be appropriate now okay so yeah I would think anything the applicant agreed to during the course of the three hearings now um would be appropriate and a lot and as Irene indicated some of them are housekeeping or labeling but they would certainly be part of anything they've agreed to would certainly be part of any General development plan approval um and Mr Barlo um just one more thing to add I think last time we had raised that one of the requirement was dedicated by claims it's understood that won't be able they are providing a bike path a multi-purpose path but it's not dedicated bike lane on the primary axis road so does that you know do we want to factor in that as a variance right now or is that something during the C and will be coming into again I don't I don't think I think you said the word variance we're not getting into variances right now or or waivers or deviations um if that's something that they're I think because I think some of the testimony was there were County Roads run or some of it was untenable I think Betsy DOL was gonna look at it and let know what existed now and so we were going to then figure out what could and could not comply with so that certainly you know think have pertain to Skyles Avenue so I think it's something that will be Revisited as the correct plans get flushed out I think everybody wants them it's just a question of what's feasible correct thank you so the mayor put forth a proposal of approval with a fiveyear we got it open up to the public yeah open to the public okay well let's open it to the public Miss Miss Baro I mean Miss uh Buckley um members of the public um you've heard our discussion uh would anyone in the public like to have do they have any comments or questions at this time no one Madam chair okay close to the public so the mayor's uh proposal was approval with a fiveyear um goal seven and a half years total right yeah so yeah again I I'm just going to try and condense it yep the board members can correct me um if if the the motion would be for a GDP approval for 7 and A2 years with a phasing plan that 60% of it would be completed within 60% would be completed within the first five years along with the all of the conditions the applicant had agreed to during the course of the three hearings um and that you outlined um earlier da this and can I also State I think it's important to mention that the only uses that are to be permitted in this development are those listed in the um Town Center zoning ordinance just want to have that on the record like we don't want to see them coming in for anything that's outside of those permitted uses and I think they agreed to that I think Ron did state that okay okay so so while I'm not on the board I think I've outlined it so Dawn or someone else wants to make that application or make some different recommendation and then the if there was a second the board can vote on could you restate I can make I can I can take I can try I have okay so as the chair woman 7 and a half years phasing schedule 60% done in 5 years um applicant will agree to add the bedroom distribution to the plans um applicant will work with staff and the board as the project proceeds um you know with regard to maybe the redesign of the Public Square um the applicant I believe had agreed to showing the off Street loading locations um the parking plan needed to be revised the clubhouse needed to be le AED as to De buffering and again just the only uses to be permitted are those within the TC Zone garments cool and I believe uh I believe Dawn also the bike Lanes on Skyles okay tie into their uh Madam chair I'll make the motion that we thank the GDP with the stipulations that Miss Corin outlined do I have a second I think that is the second Madam chair I think D made the motion and okay Council and kale second all right fine thank you well call Mayor Waller mayor you have comments or are you calling the role I'm calling the role okay go ahead mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes Miss Corran yes R Kenny yes and Madam chair yes okay we have a GDP approval thank you everybody have a good night have a good night for the rest of the summer hopefully it's almost over it's almost over one more beeting right well enjoy every moment that we have left yes and stay safe everyone appreciate it take care take care good night thanks number 14 Madam chair Madam okay thank you someone else said yeah Madam chair this is NAA I think my associate Ron reron will be joining and I'll be jumping off so just wanted to say that good night good night the record reflect that um Miss API is leaving and being replaced by her associate thank you madam bye good night good night everyone good night okay item number 14 24 pb04 AI uh for a Devi ation and block 352 Lots l103 is that L10 l no 1.03 boy eyesight Zone Redevelopment good evening everyone can um can you hear me I just had a uh issue with the uh camera oh for I hear you I don't know if I see you you just can't see me sorry about that um so thank you madam chair my name is I'm an attorney at son lot we're representing the applicant tonight um you saw we actually have three applications on for three separate properties we're here tonight to seek a deviation from the Redevelopment plan to install address logos on the warehouse buildings um I have two uh Witnesses tonight I Madison who's my client she'll go over the address logos and and all the signage and then we have a professional planner Allison tonight to give a testimony to support okay okay who you want to call First John uh it would be Madison would call she would lay the fral basis for the uh deviations okay Miss hendrik if you could state your name spell your last name for the record and give us your professional address please yep it is Madison Hedrick h d r i c k and it's 2820 Crusader Circle Virginia Beach Virginia raise your right hand swear the test want to give before this board will be the whole truth yes I do your witness counselor thank you Madison um we're going to start with 150 Old me Brunswick Road um could you give the board a little detail of what the existing uh facade signage is on the building uh I can would it be easier if I shared my screen to show it yes it would yes um the first proposed sign is to um is a it's pes's a globe and address numbers their Globe is looking to be 20 two foot 6 inches tall with the address numbers being um 15 inches tall there is a total of um two of these signs being proposed on this building um both are in both are 18 square feet total um so the first one is being proposed on the same um elevation as the Bob's Discount Furniture sign and then the second is being proposed on an elevation without any tenant signage and could you tell the board just for purposes of the record um the first photograph will Mark as A1 and the second one that says Rec in uh the second one as uh A1 is EO can you go back eo2 in the upper leftand corner and A2 I believe had eo3 thank you and then could you provide the board with the uh total square footage of the existing signage as it is right now I think it's all the Bob signs yep um existing square footage um is one of the Bob square foot is 222 square feet and then the second Bob sign is 124 for a total of um 346 and the and the deviation comes into play because under the Redevelopment plan you can only have a maximum of 150 square feet so it's already over for the Bob's signs but we're adding the additional as M as Madison said the additional approximately 18 square feet for these address logos so that's one of the deviations the other deviation is the number of signage so it be we're adding the two address logos which would be in addition to the permitted two signs already um Madison could you go over the reason for the address logos yeah um so the the globe along with the address logos are PR Lois's kind of global brand it makes it very easy for their drivers to find these warehouses quickly um from just from the entrance Road um so they're really way finding signs along with address numbers for safety hello did we get Frozen Don Madison do you have any other exhibit or that's it um these are just these are just the two elevations for the um the two proposed signage that's all we um have okay could you unshare your screen I just just looking for where John went yeah I don't think John is with us in the John is no longer with us he's not with us virtually then I have to wait for the attorney Mr Barlo we had a few other residents come on after you made your initial announcements about alanar and Deanie so maybe she want to tell them that they were both postponed one more time certainly I thank you um I didn't see anybody else check in um if anyone is here for number 17 deie Communications is 24 pb21 12v preliminary and final site plan and both variances that matter um is not going to be heard this evening the applicant's notice was defective hello John's here just hold on a second John can you yes sure sorry about that the notice was defective they will have to Reen notice you should get a new notice in the mail and if their notice is appropriate they will be heard at the September 11th meeting Elanor properties which is 24 pb08 and 09 was postponed at the applicant request to September 11th their notices were in Conformity with the statute so you will not get any further notice if you're here for l lrn properties which is 60 Normy drive and that will also be heard on September 11 2024 and John I guess you're back with us yeah I'm going to do it I don't know my my zoom just kind of froze and it's not responding so I'll do it over the phone um I I guess we left off I was asking Madison if she could explain to the board why they use these address logos um yeah so they PR just uses these um logos uh kind of as wave finder signs for their drivers to identify their buildings from a distance um since they put these logos and the address styles on all of their buildings globally so so it makes it easier for the driver when they're driving in with the semi to get to the building and recogniz the building so it's kind of a a safety issue correct uh yes okay um so I don't know if I was cut off before but I was basically going over the relief we were seeking um so with the two existing Bob signs on there we were seeking a de deviation to put these two address logos signs in there we were also seeking a deviation from the development plan where they the maximum signage they permit is 150 square feet um the Bob signs already put it over that maximum and we're only adding an additional 18 square feed with these address logos um so that's basically the the signage and the relief we're seeking for the 1 15 uh um new Brunk Avenue does the board have any questions for Madison at all yeah well does the board have any questions for Miss Hedrick I have one question M Madam chair edri uh this is Ron Ryerson the planner if I'm if I'm driving in this area and I'm just trying to find this address will these uh address logos help me in my way finding rather than slowing my car down I can see it uh yes so they're on the um they're on the corner near the entrance okay I just you know I just want to know that you know it helps us and and helps the public thank you any other questions from members of the board okay was this testimony only for one building do you have more testimony of of Miss Hendrick not for this application not for 150 but I have testimony for the other two buildings from let's open it to should we do it all at one time Mr uh Barlo and open it to the public after all three no chairwoman let him finish this presentation I believe he's gonna call Miss coffin to testify then you can if anybody from the public has any questions okay and then do each one separately so okay thank you uh yeah I would like to call Allison coffin now our professional planner to um provide testimony to uh justify the deviation okay Miss coffin if you could state your name spell your last name for the record and give us your professional address sure Allison coffen that's c ffi n I work for James W Higgins Associates were at 14 Tilton Drive in Ocean Township New Jersey you raise your right hand you swear the testimony give before this board will be the whole truth yes I do you're a witness sir yes hi good evening Alison um could you you um go through your um testimony to provide the board with um you know evidence of why or support of why the deviation is uh you know viable in this case John you want a qualifier as an expert first uh sure I didn't sorry Alison could you provide your uh qualifications and whether you appear before this board or not sure I have a bachelor's degree from Boston College I'm a licensed planner by the licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey I'm certified by the American Institute of certified planners I've had my license and certification for almost two decades now uh I appeared in front of boards in more than a hundred communities a great many times in Piscataway although I'm generally at your zoning board thank you she's acceptable thank you thank you madam chair D can you uh provide some testimony to the board thank you sure the property we're looking at at 150 old new brunsick road is a little over 40 acres it's developed with a warehouse that's 622,000 Square ft and it has uh frontages on Old New brunsick Road uh Roma Boulevard and uh to the north it it backs up to the Conrail Port Reading railroad uh the applicant is requesting deviations from the Redevelopment Zone plan to add two logo signs and a street address signs and this requires relief or deviation from that plan for the number of wall signs and the total square footage of wall signs uh the Redevelopment plan does treat this sort of relief similar to the way the municipal land use law treats uh bulk variance sea variances so I'm going to go through the C variance testimony for this I believe this can be justified under the C2 standard uh which is Justified when the the variance it advances the purposes of the municipal land use law and the benefits outweigh the detriments it's my opinion that these signs Advance the purposes of the municipal land use law the primary purpose is to promote Public Health safety morals and general welfare and the signs proposed Advance this purpose by providing for Clear identification of the building from the adjacent roadway systems for the tractor trailer drivers who are approaching the site providing that clear identification for the site and its uses promotes Public Safety by allowing drivers of the vehicles approaching the site to have adequate identification of their destination from the adjacent roadway system which allows drivers to more readily identify their destination and navigate safely and quickly to the site the benefits here outweigh the detriments the primary benefit is promoting Public Safety through the safe identification of the site uh which is a critical traffic control and safety measure for indul industrial areas and uses it's my opinion that there's no detriment to the public good that results from these variances these signs that are being added at 18 square feet are not significantly uh visually obstructive they're they're small in probably the smallest that you need to provide this uh service the signs are pass passive structures they have no impact regarding traffic noise or odors uh the only detriment you could have for a sign are Aesthetics or safety and here the signs are properly scaled to the structures in the site they don't have a significant detrimental impact to Aesthetics and as far as safety the signs promote safety they're not located in a way that causes a visual obstruction or distraction there's no illumination that would create glare uh to the roadway uh so since it's my opinion that there's a significant benefit to Public Safety and no detriment to the public good the benefits outweigh the detriment and approval of the variances would not uh impair the intent and purpose of your Redevelopment plan thank you you're welcome any more questions of this witness no I just want to ask one thing let me just get my camera open here actually know Miss coffin how are you um okay how are you oh just just great give my guards Jim Higgins because uh I I'm a substitute planner for him at Ocean a lot okay anyway conflict planner so basically it's not only for the the truck drivers but it's the public at home right right um yes for these signage and would it be your professional opinion that these signage regulations are more to advertising rather than like this is more a wayfinding uh absolutely address absolutely I mean most of the sign is the address and the the logo does allow people who are looking specifically the driver looking specifically for the prologist facility to find it quickly yeah okay so just the general purpose that's what I don't want to get out the general purpose of the signage of regulations are more for for advertising logo you know logo thing this is not a logo thing this is no okay thank you this is identification for drivers any other questions of this Witness um okay do we have another witness for this particular application uh no we do not okay um so I can open it to the public now absolutely um members of the public you've heard two witnesses regarding this application does anyone in the public have any questions of either of these two witnesses no Madam chair thank you close to the public um we going to get an approval now or should we move on to the second application Mr no no we should vote on this application Madam chair okay thank you members of uh the board do you have I'll make a motion that we approve the variation uh for application 24 pb04 um for the additional uh square footage that they need for this signage thank you do I have a second Madam chair rever second thank you excuse me we also need it for that number of signs am my motion is also for the number of signs and the square footage thank you m that would be correct thank you thank you Mr um Reverend Kenny you approve it as amended yes as amended for the square footage and addition additional two sign I approve thank you roll call please mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes Miss corkran yes Reverend canny yes and Madam chair yes yes you didn't hear me okay you can proceed with your second application let me make let me make the um my printer printed it out okay application number two deviation is 15 is 24 pb05 AGI deviation for Block 352 lot 6.02 thank you man chair um once again my name is John renell I'm an attorney at son Mar lot uh we're here representing the applicant on this matter um the address is 1570 South Washington Avenue um the applicant is seeking to install four address logos on this Warehouse building um once again I got my two witnesses um if we can get Madison up we could swear her in and move this along okay um Miss Hedrick you understand um you're still under oath and you haven't moved since last time I asked you what your address was yes okay you're still under oath you're a witness John thank you Madison could you provide the board with u a little explanation of what we're proposing to install at this property I can um at 1570 South Washington Avenue I'm going to pull up the photos for you all do you need to make these into exhibits as well yep so A1 will be the one that has E3 in the top left hand corner there are four total okay I'm sorry problem um um all four signs are um looking to be about around 12 square foot each with the Globes being 36 in and numbers being 15 um all four are placed strategically for um driver visibility while um while trying to locate the buildings uh this is the first one which was indicated as a one this is the second sign being proposed which is A2 um the third sign uh being proposed which is which will be noted as A3 and the fourth and final sign being proposed which will be noted as A4 all are replacing existing number uh address numbers on the building okay thank you Madison um I have no further questions on this one so just to be clear there's no issue as to the square footage you're just seeking four signs where two are no it's yes it's it's it's about number or deviations okay you may call your next um Madam chair if I could could could I just I apologize Madison could or Miss hedri could you put that back up again so um but it the proposals are all for existing locations of numbers on the buildings already or there were additional two I just want to make sure um all four are where there are existing numbers okay thank you any more questions of this uh witness members of the board okay you may pursue with your next witness Miss coffin I also so just want to remind you you under oath I presume your qualifications remain unchanged and store for Mr Higgins that's correct okay you're withness thank you Alison um could you provide the board with a uh de detailed explanation of to support the deviation in this on this this property so this property is 1570 South Washington Avenue it's a 21 Acre Site that's developed with a 216 ,000 foot Warehouse built building it's got at at the intersection of Centennial and South Washington Avenues and also has Frontage on a road called access road and the sign the signs require deviations from the Redevelopment zone for the number of wall signs where we're proposing for and two are permitted um as with the previous application these signs can be granted uh under what's similar to the C2 variants they Advance the purpose of the municipal land use law with regard to promoting Public Safety uh they allow for drivers to have quick and easy identification of this property which uh is a public safety benefit there's no detriment uh the signs again are still passive structures they are not going to create an aesthetic problem they're spread out on different corners of the building they cause no visual obstruction or distraction and therefore the benefits of these variances or deviations outweigh the detriments and they do not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the red development plan and the signage ordinance as uh Mr reinstein pointed out with the previous application addresses more advertising style signages and these are wayfinding signs and and as such they would not having four of them would not impede your Redevelopment plan okay thank you Alison I have no further questions are there any other questions of either of these two witnesses from the board can I get one clarification are we over the 150 square feet cumulative the uh no we not you're okay yep all right thank you thank you thank you R any other me any other questions from the board okay um I'm going to open it to the members of the public members of the public if you have any questions of the two witnesses that you heard on this application would you indicate by raising your hand no one Madam chair close to the public okay um members of the board do you have any questions or would you like to make aair this is councilwoman kahel I'd make a motion that we approve um appc okay let me make sure I say right application 24 pb05 for um the replacement of the number signs for the prologist sign with number as a wave finder sign um and that uh you know honestly Mr Barlo I'm not sure since there existing new number signs I mean is it just the square footage or is it the number of signs as it was in the last application the only relief they're seeking is the deviation for four signs where two are allowed under the Redevelopment so that that would be my proposal is that we accept and Grant that variance for the four signs do I have a second Kevin Kenny I'll second that thank you roll call Mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes Miss corkran yes M canny yes and Madam chair yes item number 15 24 pb05 AGI deviation blocks 352 lot 6.02 thank you madam chair um once again John wrencher from sake Maryland representing the uh applicant in this um matter um this is 600 Ridge uh Ridge Road um we're seeking a deviation from the Redevelopment plan to add two address logos but there's also the issue that the maximum height of the uh the signage can only be 35 feet above grade um where one sign is uh 37 Feet 1 inch and a quarter above grade and the other sign is 38 feet one inch and one half inches above grade so that we're we're seeking two deviations here for the number of signage and the height of the signs um once again I have the two witnesses um that I like to present okay um if we could get Madison back up Miss Hedrick again I just remind you you're still under oath and I assume everything else has remained the same or you are correct all right you're with us so Madison just once again can you detail the uh the proposed signage that we're um posing for this property um the two address logo signs and also I guess um confirm the uh the height of each sign yep so there are two address logo signs being proposed on this building both with the globe being 36 in and the numbers being 18 um each address sign is roughly 13.8 square feet um adding a total of around 27 square feet of signage to the building um the the the first one eo1 we will notate is A1 um which is shown here and then on the next page is our elevations showing where the sign is from spray the top of sign it is 37 feet one and A4 inch and then on the second sign um which we will notate as A2 um same idea 36 inch globe with uh 18inch numbers adding roughly 13.8 sare feet of signage um and this is the elevation showing that from top of sign to grade is 38 feet one and a half inch I don't think this picture changed Madison unless I'm E1 is the first one oh it didn't yep I can try and reshare it I apologize are we changing screens now okay there's the height 37 and one and one quarter inch Yep this will this is the first sign um 37 one and a quar inch um from grade to top of sign and then the second uh proposed sign is 38 one and a half inch uh from grade to top of sign y just Madison real quick the the height at which this is going is that the height at where the existing address is um yes it is um it's it's centered it's it's centered in the same location just knowing that these are slightly larger than the existing thank you I have no further questions thank you you you can question the next witness then want to unshare miss hedri okay Miss coffin are you up I guess I think so yeah you're I remind you still under oath your qualifications and everything else Remains the Same correct still licensed perfect I'd hate to think there was a 9:00 cancellation nope I have till midnight until I turn back to a pumpkin your witness sir thank you all right Alison um last one um just give the board the detail to uh support the uh the deviation from the Redevelopment plan yeah yeah we're we're looking at 600 Ridge Road this is a a property that is developed with a warehouse and the applicant is requesting deviations from the Redevelopment plan to have two wall signs on a facade where one is permitted and to have signs Heights that exceed 35 feet um my testimony may sound familiar to the board uh it could be granted under what is similar to the C2 variants that it advances the purposes of the municipal land use law with regard to promoting Public Safety and that these signs provide for Clear identification of the buildings from the adjacent roadway systems for uh large tractor trailers and Passenger cars that are approaching the site the benefits outweigh the detriment the primary benefit being the advancement of Public Safety and again there's no detriment that results from these signs they're passive structures uh they're not going to have any harm to Aesthetics or safety uh it's a little different from the other two and that we have a height variance but in this case the height is consistent with what's already on the building and is properly the sides are properly located on the building structure to provide the the benefit that they need to in terms of identification and as there is significant benefit to Public Safety and no detriment to the public good that results from these deviations the benefits outweigh the detriments and these deviations would not impair the intent of the Redevelopment plan as these are wayfinding signs uh they're small in scale and and they do not impede the larger intent of controlling Lar larger Advertising Signs on the structures thank you Alison you're welcome I have no no further questions board members do you have any questions of these two witnesses Madam chair I have actually have one question for Miss Corker go ahe yeah joh um because this is an older plan are we in agreement that the the two deviations that were outline but a planner is what's needed because I had raised some issues in my letter and uh if if you're satisfied with those two deviations then everything else is settled I am satisfied unless again you see something that no no no there was some there was some weird definitions about Monument signs and such and really I'm I'm satisfied with with the testimony here that they need two deviations and the rest is is satisfied with this testimony purpose okay thank you thank you any more questions okay I'm going to open it up to the public now members of the public if you have any questions of this witness would you indicate by raising your hand on the screen no I'm Madam chair close to the public um do you have any summation on your three applications no this is we're just going to prove this last appliation you have any summary on this application no I'm good Madam chair thank you it's been a long night yes uh board members what's your pleasure Madam chair I'll make a motion that we approve application 24 pb06 for the two deviations which include the height and the number of the signs did I get that correct Mr Barlo okay a home run yes no we are we are in concurrence third times a charm second do I get a second it's rever Kenny I'll second thank you roll call please mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes Miss corkran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes thank you we've completed those three applications I believe I'd like to thank everybody and everyone have a good evening you too thank you you're quite welcome thank you and good night thank you item number 19 discussion to authorize foresight planning to conduct an area in need of Redevelopment study for Block 7305 lot 190120 and 21 Madam chair the um Council has asked that we undertake a preliminary investigation for those properties and in order to do so we will need to retain the services of the planner um and we were discussed to authorize foresight uh planning to do so the board has any questions do you have any questions board members hearing no questions this is not a matter that we have to present to the public correct um do I have a motion please I'll make that motion D cor Madam chair I'll second that Council thank you R roll call Mayor Waller yes councilwoman kahill yes Miss corkran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes and Madam chair I prepared a resolution in the anticipation that the board might act favorably if the board would like to um adopt that resolution Madam chair Madam chair Reverend Kenny I'd like to adopt a resolution for for this River Prest Street that's 5160 517 thank you do we have a second I'll second that councilman K thank you roll call please mayor Waller yes councilwoman kill yes M corkran yes Reverend Kenny yes and Madam chair yes um item number 20 motion for adjournment so thank you I don't even think we need a second we're all out anyway all in favor or a j Min as yes September everybody see you in September everybody have a wonderful end of summer enjoy the rest of your summer