##VIDEO ID:1IykSbWxeWc## good evening and welcome this is a regular meeting of the Princeton planning board on Thursday October 17 2024 pursuant to section 13 of the open public meetings act adequate notice of the time and place of this meeting has been given by prominently posting the resolution of regularly scheduled meetings of the planning board of Princeton for February 2024 through January 2025 a copy was filed with the clerk of Princeton on January 8th 24 legal notice on the adoption of said resolution was published in the January 12th 2024 edition of the Princeton packet notice of this meeting also has been posted to the municipal website Princeton nj.gov calendar notice that all regular and special meetings of the Princeton planning board will be held electronically via Zoom was transmitted to the Princeton packet and the times and was filed with the clerk of Princeton on Tuesday January 177 2023 please note that this meeting is being recorded during hearings on applications for development members of the public will have an opportunity to comment and ask questions questions may be asked after an applicant's Witnesses have testified um those wishing to comment orally should virtually raise your hand by clicking on the reactions button or the raise hand icon at the bottom of your Zoom screen or if participating by phone by pressing star n oral comments will be taken in the order in which hands were raised we ask with respect that members of the public express your views in three minutes or less countdown clock will be used to help speakers keep track of time and speakers who exceed three minutes will be interrupted inappropriate public comment containing obscenity hate speech or relating to matters not before the board will be muted Carrie would you call the role Please Mr bimer miss capoli here Mr Cohen here Mr mwan here miss Nuka Mr odonnell here miss Pearl mutter here miss Sachs Mr Taylor here Miss Wilson Anderson here Mrs Wilson here we have a quorum thank you um announcements any announcements from oh let the record show that Ms Nuka is here um uh any announcements from board members or staff Justin yes thank you yes I I have a few thank you madam chair um and good evening members of the board and members of the public um so to begin uh we will have a special meeting next Thursday night um we anticipated that when we were setting the calendar earlier in this year obviously there were some holidays at the beginning of October uh so we originally only scheduled one meeting maybe that was wishful thinking um but knowing full well that we had a few uh Thursdays later in the month that we could use um so we will use that one uh there's an application for the institute for advanced study one of their libraries um just prior to that seven o'clock meeting uh the board will have an executive session at 6:30 p.m for a legal briefing uh if you cannot attend the 6:30 meeting or the 7 PM scheduled meeting please contact Carrier myself uh so also what that means is we have planning board meetings on four of five Thursdays including tonight so basically from tonight five Thursdays except for Halloween so um thank you for coming thank you for volunteering uh appreciate it and then just the last announcement I have right now is that there's a house genealogy event at the library next Tuesday from 7:00 to 8:30 it's presented by the by our historic preservation commission as well as the library the Historical Society of Princeton and the Witherspoon Jackson historical and Cultural Society um and the event is really about how you can research the history of your home um it's an in-person event at the library at 7 pm next Tuesday like I said there doesn't appear to be a YouTube live stream but oftentimes the library does that as well um so thank you madam chair that's interesting thank you um any other announcements okay uh subcommittee reports we do we have a report from minor site plan committee yes Mr Cohen yep yes so the minor site plan Committee just met yesterday and we reviewed an application from the University to uh relocate and reconstruct the um College Road Arch that um is a jent to Springdale Road um some of you may know that the arch was partially uh disassembled about I think about 20 years ago because of multiple truck impacts trucks uh hitting it as they were passing through so um university has this plan to move the arch a bit and to raise it up a little bit and reconstruct it and uh the board will be hearing this application because there are some setback variances that are required as part of the application uh but the site plan committee did recommend uh classification as a minor site plan okay great thank you um next up we have minutes we have two sets of minutes from last January um January 4th and January 18th they were were both regular meetings um any comments or suggestion edits to these minutes um I wanted to advise that Miss uh Mr odonnell brought to my attention on page seven uh prior to the closing of the public vote uh it doesn't read properly so I included the word no so being that there's no members wishing to speak and then yes that's it okay thank you thank so in sharp eyes as always um there Mr Muller go ahead just on page one of of January 4 under reorganization of the board and it says Miss capoli stated the nominating committee capoli mcowan odano pull the members of the board is it pull the members of the board um Julie or should to be members of the committee um they pull the members of the board so they can get their vote for the chair and vice chair they actually not just the committee n yeah yep okay thank you okay um no other present excuse me everyone was present that night okay and Julie were you moving the minutes yes I am thank you who would like to Second thanks Mr Cohen um uh minutes we can do all in favor right yes yes all in favor please say I I any opposed or abstaining thank you on to January 18th uh another regular meeting um any comments or corrections to those minutes yes uh Mr odonnell also advised that the vote was wrong for 21 Wiggins although Mr bimer seconded the vote he was not included in the vote so I made that correction thank you thanks again Owen okay yes thank um would someone like to move those I'll move thanks Mr odonnell and seconded by second Mr Taylor thank you all in favor please say I I I any opposed or abstaining okay thank you um next we have discussions I believe the the first item the master plan um appendix um the storm water management mitigation plan is this uh this is a hearing is it not uh Mr yeah Mr leco and and and Jerry meller yeah it it's a formal hearing and St has gone through all the requisites of providing for notice right great so so I'll turn to Mr Lesco first and then we'll hear from um uh Jim purcel and possibly Dean Stockton welcome to both of you it's nice to see you back um and um and then after the board has had a chance to ask questions Etc we'll have um uh we'll see if any members of the public wish to weigh in um Justin yep thank you madam chair um so as was alluded to uh what's for before you right now is a storm order management mitigation plan that would be adopted as an appendix to our master plan uh so we did all the noticing similar to what we do for the full uh master plan hearing you know 10 months ago um I'll let Jim cover a lot of the content in this you know really summarize seven-page document but what I want to point out is uh if I could share my screen and Jerry I don't know if we'll need to put this as um uh an exhibit you think we do this is Page 125 of our adopted master plan yeah let's make that exhibit a a pb1 okay um so I'm just showing this real quick this is the uh utility element of the master plan that was adopted last year um and particularly it's the utility element which features a municipal storm water management plan per the municipal land use law if you look within that storm water management plan um it includes this information about the mitigation plan that's essentially uh what was uh put in your packet and put on file uh that seven-page document we'll be talking about tonight um as you could see the mitigation plan was being uh produced last year when we were working on the master plan um and uh here's just kind of a brief description of uh why we need to do it and why we do it this way you know particularly as part of the master plan um and it's really so we comply with our Municipal ms4 permit which I'm sure Jim will go into more of what that means so uh without further Ado um I will hand it over to Jim unless there are any uh questions for me at this time and hopefully I didn't uh lead us down the wrong path already I doubt that you did because you had a page of the master plan up there so how could you have let us down the wrong I do want to ask quickly Mr Muller um do our Justin and Jim need to be sworn in yes thank you that that yeah definitely should be Justin and Jim if you could raise your right hand do you swear or affirm do you swear or affirm that testimony about to give would be the truth I do I do so one or affirmed okay sworn I swear go ahead go ahead Jim Purcell thanks for even planning board members uh I'm Jim Purcell I'm the assistant Municipal engineer for Princeton um and I'm here to discuss the Princeton storm water management mitigation plan um as uh Justin just pointed out uh it is a requirement um to have a storm waterer management mitigation plan in place in order to Grant waivers of any of the requirements in the storm water Control Ordinance um and uh we've been working on this for quite a while as you saw that uh we were had a draft of it in June of 2023 it's gone through a lot of iterations and uh legal review in order for us to get to this point of adoption as an appendix the year master plan um essentially the stormwater mitigation plan is a an outline um providing for criteria when mitigation is necessary and mitigation may be necessary at times for um compliance with the storm waterer uh Control Ordinance and the and the state D requirements um when a particular project may not be able to meet the strict requirements of uh water quality uh management uh water quantity management or storm water recharge um the plan is laid out in such a way that um prior to being able to U be granted a waiver uh the applicant must demonstrate that they have done everything uh practicable uh to meet the requirements on site um it is not a um a process in which uh they can simply come and say I can't do it so you must grant us a waiver they must demonstrate that they can meet our requirements um through a number of different methods one of which would be to uh reduce the size and impervious coverage on a site um or to uh identify additional areas where they could um provide for additional storm water management um and only after they can show they can demonstrate that it cannot be done on site can they then look to meet the mitigation plan the mitigation plan I want to point out does not identify any specific projects or any specific areas um that may be something we look to do in the future as we look at our overall watershed management plan and determine where we may need to as a municipality establish areas um that have um already experienced detrimental impacts that we can mitigate for um by the use of this plan um the plan sets out the criteria by which an applicant um must identify a location um identify the sensitive receptors um that are being impacted by the inability to meet our storm water ordinance on site and um demonstrate that there are no impacts on any sensitive receptors on the mitigation site um they there's uh language in there and Jim if you could just explain to the board what a sensitive receptor is in case well sensitive receptors okay um sensitive receptors could be habitat um it could be um trout producing waters for example um lakes ponds other waterways that could be susceptible to um alal blooms because of uh High nutrient content the drinking Water Supplies are sensitive receptors um waterways that already are uh um uh deg degradated um due to pollutants um that um you know could be sensitive to additional um pollutants being added uh our category one Waters um the uh Stony Brook is listed as a uh category one water um it is the highest quality uh water uh classification in the state of New Jersey and every tributary to that uh is considered category one so um any degradation of that is not um uh allowed um and then of course uh from a storm water um quantity Viewpoint uh any Downstream structures um whether they be residential homes commercial buildings Bridges culverts those could be identified as uh sensitive receptors um it's any receptor uh from an environmental instructural and infrastructure standpoint that could be harmed due to not meeting our our requirements of either reduction or quality uh quantity or quality reductions or um even our aquifers are sensitive um receptors if we cannot if a site cannot uh recharge um uh based up to what the 100% of the current recharge rate um so it lays out um the methods that can be used to do the mitigation whether it be for quality or quantity or recharge and um um just excuse me I'm scrolling through it uh and and it is it is set up so that it has the mitigation procedures that should be followed depending on whether or not you're trying to mitigate for Quality quantity or recharge um the other part of the plan that I want to point out is that uh the mitigation should um occur within the drainage area where the site uh pro project is considered and uh ideally it would be Upstream uh you would mitigate Upstream of where your site is so the applicant should demonstrate that they're F they're finding a location Upstream of their project in order to have the have that shortfall mitigated even before it gets to their project it also identifies that um even within the same drainage area uh the mitigation project should not uh discharge to a different say tributary of of this of a stream or to the branch of a stream it should be the same tributary that the site would be um uh normally discharging too uh so that the mitigation is throughout the entire reach of that branch of the of the Watershed uh and the stream uh I already see David Cohen has a a question so yeah go ahead thanks so I just I wanted to um flush out a little bit more the the fact that this mitigation plan does not identify specific projects essentially you know my understanding of what's useful about it even without identifying projects is that applicants can identify projects right so if an applicant if somebody wants to do a building and they can't deal with the storm water on their site before we adopt this there's nothing they can do but once we've adopted this they can go and try and find a neighboring property owner who might be willing to have some storm water green infrastructure on their property that help that would mitigate uh the storm water from the applicant's property so right that's all by way of asking a question which is assuming we do at some point add specific uh suggested projects and Jim you alluded to that is there a sort of an interplay between like we might want to do those specific projects for the sake of the community but then that would make them no longer available to a developer who needs a project for mitigation I don't know if I'm being clear but can you reflect a little bit about like if there's a project if there's a proposed project in the mitigation plan and the municipality undertakes it sort of of its own accord is there any way then for there to be a record of the mitigation that was done and a subsequent developer could pay sort of reimburse the municipality for work that was done and take credit for that yes let let me let me let me address that in the in the current version of this mitigation plan the answer to that is simply no however um it is worthwhile consider continuing to consider how we mitigate for the detriments that we've already seen or or may be uh an impact in the future we are considering the kind of thing that you're talking about and I and I'll use as an example um the state's Wetland mitigation Bank program so suppose that we find an opportunity to provide for storm waterer um water quantity control on the Stony Brook or on Harry's Brook which is the you know flashiest stream that we have um and we decide to implement that ahead of time I'm just giving an example de and I haven't even talked about this much um we could Implement that project and the cost of that project we could identify as a as a bank right um a future project in that Watershed could buy into that um and purchase credits or some sort of way of doing that that's not in this mitigation plan that is a future consideration um and also we may identify mitigation plans that we currently don't have the resources to construct but if we were to um set up some system where developers could pay into uh a fund that could eventually pay for that um we might consider that again could that be part of a stormwater utility per chance that could be part of a storm water utility those on the board who don't know we're currently studying the potential of having a storm water utility in Princeton as a mechanism for paying for stormw infrastructure in a way that's fair yes um so yeah that's really thank you for that question and that exchange because that's uh that's really interesting so of course it would still need to be in the same drainage area which in this case is defined as a subwat shed yes hug 14 is a subwatershed of the watersheds uh in in New Jersey and it's hydrologic unit code and the only reason it's Hydra unit code it's it's defined based on the the number that is assigned to it which has 14 digits am I I'm cutting you off but we have um no I I don't pres maybe people are interested in that uh we have five we have five hug 14s within prinstant so okay um um Art thank you very much Jim um are there questions from oh I see your hand up Freddy Freddy and then Jack Taylor Freddy pearlmutter first yeah I'm now kind of confused um I'm very familiar with the freshwater wetlands bank I practiced environmental law for a long time but I am confused now as to what would be included I now know what's not included but I'm not clear as to what somebody could actually do now for mitigation could you clarify that a little bit more well what they would have to do first of all first the first step is demonstrate that they can't do it on site I understand and there's and there's a framework set out in in this plan for what they need to do to convince you they cannot do it on site and then there's a framework in here that says you need to find a location within the same Watershed and you have to negotiate purchase easements whatever you need in order to be able to do a project and you have to physically construct that project to mitigate for the shortfall on your site so it we leave it completely up to the applicant is the onus is on the applicant to find a site develop a design that meets the criteria enter into the agreements pay for the purchase of the easements um and it will need to have a Perpetual easement on it for maintenance purposes um and and and also they cannot develop their project um and get a CO on their project get sign off on the on the final construction of their project until they've built that mitigation project as well so they have to be built simultaneously okay I understand all right thanks for that Jack Taylor yeah I found initially that it was difficult concept to put in perspective what in fact we were considering tonight so I very much appreciate David Cohen's initiative I have a better sense but still for example in the body of the document under mitigation project requirement page three there was a reference for example quote to special Water Resource protection areas which do not exist in Princeton but the standards for an swpa cannot be waved in a municipal medication plan I read that and realized that I really didn't have a clue okay what that had to do with why we were considering the document and it may not be important now but I'm assuming that anything in the document that requires a written statement has importance so excuse me Jim I thought I would ask what no about when I reread that tonight just before this meeting I said I know I'm going to get a question on this so the state you're welcome jeim the state has the ability to designate areas that are special Water Resource protection areas and although there's nothing in Princeton that is an swpa that the the potential exists and since the potential exists we put it into the storm waterer mitigation plan that if that happens sometime in the future you will not be able to do a mitigation project so that's basically what that paragraph is saying but who who sets up an S swpa is that planning board and municipality initiative the state of New Jersey do New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Justin had a question I guess yeah thank you for the question Jack do you is that does that satisfy that uh answer it okay yeah it does okay great thank you Justin yes I I don't have a question I just want to remind the board I think this is pertinent to some of the comments that have come up already um that you know the planning board can always amend change update uh you know anything in our master plan including appendices uh you know through excuse me through a process like this one um and I think as the we start to see this kind of institutional or cultural shift um to ongoing planning we will probably do that much more uh in the future rather than having documents for 27 years Madam chair if I could ask Jim a question Jim yes I saw that one of the techniques As I understood it that had to be used if others could not would be a reduction in the scale of a project but how do you grapple with that I mean let's say if it's an eight lot subdivision do they have to go down and say a one because they can't do it otherwise me it seems to me it you when when Devil's in the details and it gets a little tough here well the the ultimate Arbiter of that is going to be the planning board so if an applicant comes to you and says wants to do an eight lot subdivision they need to demonstrate either they can meet all the requirements or what that subdivision will look like in order to meet all the requirements if they can't do it so you know and and somewhere in between they're going to argue that it's economically infusible which is not an excuse to not meet storm waterer management but it's economically infusible for them to do the project at say a four lot subdivision well the planning board may I I I well I guess not I guess not it doesn't really matter um that it is going to be a Sticky Wicket that's the hardest part of it yeah um 99% of the time you're going to find that an applicant's going to come to you and say I found a place a location offsite that I can do this project on in order for them to to meet the project this provision is in here more for site development purposes where um somebody may want to come in and completely cover their lot with a warehouse and a parking lot well they can easily scale back on that project so that they can provide for the storm water management the parking lot can be reduced in size the size of the warehouse can be reduced in size so what we're trying to get here is a um a bests siiz fits-all kind of thing not well best size fits the site kind of thing um where you know you just you're not going to be able to completely cover your site with with asphalt and and roof material anymore you have to set aside some areas in order to provide storm water management and that's been happening for decades anyway where we tell you you know back when we had structural requirements you had to build a detention Basin most you know most subdivisions went with I'm going to have lots and one one other lot that's going to have the detention Basin um this is going to be kind of similar um you know you may not be able to do that eight lot subdivision anymore you may have to make it seven um and there are I mean there ways of using permeable pavement to absorb and green roofs and storm water Planters and other things that you know even on a you know heavily covered um you know what a lot that's almost entirely started starting out as impervious cover can be made more absorbent without shrinking yeah there there's overall scale of the project there's gonna there's going to be a whole slew of solutions that are going to come in front of you and my understanding is that a uh um a developer you know property owner might be able to get 80% of the way on site and use the offsite for the remaining 20% of the obligation it's not an All or Nothing thing it's yeah it's for the shortfall in meeting the requirements but but and Jim I thought you made a a really important point when you said what this is really going to compel is a lot of thinking and planning at the beginning yes yeah yeah really good point certainly improvement over the current s situation right yes because right now there's nothing that you can do uh you know if you can't do it on your site you're done yeah um Paula vuka um thanks Madam chair uh so a question um on this so the m mitigation project if it's done off site has to be on a site within the municipality right that's within the dra the same drainage area within the municipality So within the same drainage area yeah within the same municipality and so there's no I mean the drainage areas sometimes do cross municipalities right um so how would we deal with situ ation where maybe someone is at the border of town um and they want they propose something that maybe crosses Municipal boundary their mitigation great question their mitigation project has to be in the same drainage area and in our municipality okay mun so I mean I can provide you an example let's say somebody wants to develop right along Van Horn Brook which is goes into Montgomery over on close to Route 206 if they want to develop that there's a lot right there at the corner of herent toown Road and um and mount Lucas Road um say they come in with a development and if they can't meet the requirements we would require them to provide a mitigation plan and and the recommendation is because sometimes it's not possible that they would have to go Upstream so maybe they'd go to the Behavioral Health Center up there and say listen we want we need to mitigate what we're doing down here and can we purchase some of your property or get an easement on some of your property to put in some green infrastructure up up Upstream within on the same Brook so that's just an example of how they would how it would happen simplified okay and I'm just curious how does this compare to the storm water management iation plan of surrounding municipalities I mean this is a relatively new a relatively new requirement this is okay yeah so everyone's trying to Grapple with this yeah many I mean the the D puts out guidance guidelines for um creating a mitigation plan um but um I most towns I think do not have them also the FED if they've been doing something in the past they very well may be familiar with it from Wetlands the state does have the similar kinds of things but they don't have it clearly at the municipal level yeah okay I will um I I I will say that I have seen a couple of them and this one is more robust than the ones that I have seen the D um guidance is very minimal and so you can write a very minimal plan ours ours and it's taken us like I said a long time the flood and storm Water Commission took this on as their uh as one of their tasks and worked on this for quite a while before we handed it over to the attorneys to uh review it and and compare it and make sure that we're going to meet d uh requirements and to pv's question a few of us on this call were actually at a meeting was that yesterday uh convened by The Watershed Institute um with some of our colleagues in the lower Millstone Watershed um which stretches all the way up to Manville or past it uh to discuss Regional approaches which we should be doing for all of planning but especially water yeah heavy lift yeah thanks uh Justin and James uh other questions for Jim before I open up for public comment it's actually um a good segue to start public comment um there's one hand up right now any any members of the public uh and there are seven members of the public in attendance anyone who would like to speak um please raise your hand now now we'll bring over Stuart Lieberman first and then um whoever is uh on the line or in the zoom on behalf of the Watershed Institute and uh Stuart is uh a chair of the flood and storm Water Commission in Princeton Stuart welcome you know the drill you'll need to um uh unmute yourself and activate your camera and then Mr Mull will swear you in if you could raise your right hand okay I st you swear I'm I'm at a train station in Miami right now that's where I am oh you swear is it flooding is it flooding are they no no no no we're dry right now we're dry but I I just the worst part is the Yankees are losing that's the biggest thing yeah three to one makes me happy M I certify to tell the truth uh and uh and and uh and I affirm that I will do so okay we will make do with your picture thank you very much um I just want to thank the board uh for excuse me the planning board for entertaining this it's an important uh document um I know that we worked on it for a long time and uh I think it's important the and and I I who do hope that this gets approved the only thing I want to say is is that this is not a get out of jail card and the norm should not be that we're doing anything less than what the stringent dup and Princeton storm waterer regulations require this should be something that's an exception and it really ought to be a a a a almost a rare exception our storm water regulations in Princeton are very strong and we should be proud of that and of course the D regulations are strong but Princeton are really strong D changes their regulations about every three years they change them and they get stronger and stronger so I the concept you know it's not wrong to say to somebody you know what your Project's just too big and that's the easiest way to comply very often you know people don't have an inherent right to come in with the biggest biggest project they can dream of just because the zoning allows for it our storm water regulations do have restrictions on development sides and it's important that we never lose sight of it and I don't think Madam chair the board will lose sight of it I just wanted to say that it's important going forward that this is there but it's not a get out of jail card and it should be used only in the most you know the minimal it should be used in a minimal amount of times we need to adhere to our strong storm waterer commitment in Princeton so that's what I wanted to say and I thank you very much for the opportunity to speak thank you thank you for that I'm gonna C agre on all points thank you have a good trip Stuart I'm sorry there you are uh Mr pisaro Mike pisaro from the water yeah he need he needs to turn his video back on I turned it off so I'm sorry about that okay um I have to ask him so thank you there he is and uh you're still muted there you go great sorry about that uh um so this is a hear yeah we need where you went do you swear affirm the testimony about to give me the truth I do thank you thank you very much my name is Mike pasaro I'm the policy director for the Watershed Institute um I think Stuart said absolutely everything I was going to say um I do want to thank the you know flood and stormwater committee and you know the Princeton Township professionals and David for really shepherding this through to where we are this is probably one of the best if not the best uh mitigation plans I've seen in the state most of them are boilerplate um and as Stuart mentioned you know this is not a out of free jail hard and I I really do like the provision that says you have to redger your your project if it's too big and you cannot meet the storm waterer requirements on site I mean the the D rules and these this this plan talks about technically impracticable um and so if it's practical to reduce your project you could very easily see a a situation where you have that seven or eight lot subdivision and the worst possible lot to put theore storm water is the one where the applicant wants to put it uh and therefore um requiring it to go back to the drawing board and making the storm water work where it can work and living with those consequences ultimately leads to a better project uh a you know Less Problems from a storm waterer perspective for Princeton and everyone Downstream from Princeton uh and you know this would be very consistent with the Township's policies with its master plan and ordinances in place so uh again I want to thank the board the committee and the Professionals for getting us to where we are thank you um thank you Mike bisaro and thanks for everything you do with the Watershed Institute which is a really terrific partner to the municipality and noodling through a lot of these things thank you um and Mike touched on a a word that's really a that has been debated a lot over the years practicable uh which does not is not the same as practical you know it's about whether something can be done not whether it's convenient uh not whether it's you know meets someone's uh definition of of practical it's it's a higher bar than that so um it's always comforting uh any other members of the public who wish to speak I'm not seeing any hands go up we still have seven people in attendance um seeing none I will close the public comment portion of the hearing and ask if there are any other questions or comments from um from board members or comments from staff before we take action um I'm not seeing any so the action to be taken taken excuse me is um a motion to adopt this uh document as a um an appendix to our 2023 comprehensive master plan correct yes okay would anyone like to make that motion I see Mr Cohen's hand up is there a second thank you Claudia Wilson Anderson if I can just I I would just change the language they you use slightly to say adopt this as an appendex to the utility element of our Master thank you um uh carry would you do a roll call vote please miss capazo yes Mr Cohen yes Mr McGowan yes Miss Nuka yes Mr odonnell yes Miss pearlmutter yes Mr Taylor he stepped away uh Miss Wilson Anderson yes and Mrs Wilson yes motion carried thank you that's good that feels good have done that uh it really did take a lot of work thank you so much Jim um for you know quarterbacking this it was um it really is the product of a ton of work over really long time the quarterback I was the halfback what what is that make Andrew back I don't know he passed the ball to me I'm already in that quarterback is like the only position I know um on that particular playing field um all right next up we have the municipal Capital project review um Deanna welcome really uh interested to hear what you and see uh these projects okay well thank you everyone good evening I'm Deana Stockton Municipal engineer and Deputy Administrator um I going to share a PowerPoint presentation with you um which provides an overview of um the exciting Capital Improvement program in my department can everybody see that yep okay thanks David now if I can change the slides okay here we go okay um just for background so in case people aren't aware um we have um a department now named infrastructure and operations within that organization um we have engineering public works as well as Fleet Maintenance and the sewer department and you'll see the layers then that fall in under each of those groups um so we have quite a large Capital Improvement program that we manage um first I'll start with the sewer capital projects um we have a number of projects going on right now in Princeton the inflow and infiltration into the sanitary sewer system accounts for 60% of our sewer flow to the treatment plant um and so allowing that inii as we call it to continue it's the antithesis of sustainability um so all of these projects that are proposed as part of the capital budget is um to Stave off the impacts of that inii infiltration into the system whether it's impacts to our ability to serve Princeton or if it's the impact that it has at the Stony birth Regional sewage Authority um so we for this next year for 2024 and 2025 we have this list of projects Hamilton Avenue sewer um located in the middle of town is a project where we are taking multiple or parallel lines of sanitary sewer and um sewer Mains that are also in easements in people's yards and um collecting that into one new main sanitary sewer to serve that area um system 36 and 36a is a large um inii project that serves over 800 homes and that should be kicking off early next spring uh Qui question de about the inii you gave the 60% figure which is really sort of eye popping when you think about you know how much wear and tear that represents um on equipment and you know it's all filled with sediment and blah blah blah I mean I assume is that 60% of what's going uh through our sanitary sewer pipes is that an average is it is it like 80% dur when in a heavy rain and 30% the rest of the time or or do you have a handle on that yeah that's definitely an average um because it also accounts for the variability of if we're in drought conditions that type of thing so yeah it's a large amount and if you consider that's clean water that you don't need to be treating you know using the resources of energy to treat or to pump um where in some cases so I'm sorry I can't see anybody the way my screen is set up so please just interrupt me if you do have questions I'll let you know if people raise their hands thanks thank you um and so in addition to the minis system projects we um also have a a project to look at the condition of the sewer trunk line which runs along uh Lake Carnegie and um you know there's two trunk lines where looking at line B which is shown in the orange that is 90 years old um and it's about 3.2 miles that we're looking at we're doing um inspection now and that will help us prepare a plan for rehabil rehabilitation or replacement um also in the same area is trunk line C which is shown more in the purple blue color uh another that section is 60 years old and just over half a mile and and in this case we've been able to work with the university through their voluntary contribution because a majority of that trunk line c um is carrying University flows so we are working in conjunction with them on that project uh additionally in this Capital program uh we are proposing Ching currently to replace six out of nine pump stations um in 2025 that number will go up to eight out of nine because we will be uh getting a proposal for two more pump stations um many of the pump stations are located in low-lying flood Throne areas so the project includes elevating above the 500-year uh flood plane it also is building in redundancy of pumps and power supplies because often times not only is the pump station flooded but the roads for our um staff to get to those pump stations are flooded so uh that is a very important resiliency and sustainability project uh we're also looking at we have a project right now to map um the flood plane related to where our sanitary sewer manholes are located and um come up with a plan to make those manholes water typ in case of flooding um so moving on into parks and Open Space Project um rather than the dirty the dirty water talk we can talk about nice green projects so uh four projects right now in the works with our department Department micro Forest at quy Park this is a it's a resiliency project but it's also a storm water project and this is where we're taking a part of quy Park we're removing invasive species and um replanting it with under story and canopy um vegetation at a much denser rate so that it becomes a self sustain staining forest in a very short amount of time within about 3 years um also on top for us is a restoration project in community park north we had a large blowdown I think about 10 years ago in community park we now have a half a million dollar Grant to come in do some invasive species removal and again do some understory and canopy plantings um ALS Al from a historic standpoint we have a project in the Mountain Lakes preserve which was related to when it was a functioning ice um producing site there is a Stone Arch Bridge that requires replacement or Rehabilitation so that project will be moving ahead next year as well as another foot Bridge within the lake uh within the park will be replaced and lastly is the Community Park South Rehabilitation um this was the subject of steering committee meetings and Community meetings I know Freddy was there with us through that discussion um a concept plan was created it still requires some tweaks which is something that the next consultant will be tasked with first um but essentially we are looking to create three construction contracts that can be built sequentially um to complete the improvements at Community Park South so on the screen I just I have a little example of what the quy park uh micr Forest will look like as well as Community Park South and moving on next um while it's buried into the middle of the presentation this is really the uh the bread and butter of what our department does um Jim and I you know lead the the path forward on all of the roadway design so with our projects um that we work on we follow the master plan um which identifies personal Mobility at the top uh whereas personal car single occupancy vehicles are at the bottom of prioritization we also look at complete streets design principles um The Safe Systems approach as well as Vision zero and um where we have racial and social Equity um you know prioritizing those areas that um that maybe don't make the noise but they warrant the equal treatment that the rest of the community does and then with that also the green infrastructure resiliency and sustainability so with that um the bicycle pedestrian Mobility projects that we are working on at this time include the NASA streetscape improvements and on the screen you'll see um an image from our most recent presentation at Council uh we'll be updating The Pedestrian space on the north side of Route 27 between Chambers Street to Moore Street there are also um traffic calming pedestrian improvements at intersections um for the crosswalks so at the Thomas site crosswalk that will be included a raised crosswalk across the street with uh rectangular rapid flashing beacons uh we are also proposing to shift the crosswalk at T Lane Street South T Lane to make that safer as you go across Nassau Street and we're also uh doing some improvements since in front of Palmer square with the intersections um moving on we have rectangular rapid flashing beacons that will be installed on Route 206 at mansgrove road and herent toown road these are both currently um intersections with crosswalks but we are moving to add these rrfbs to make those safer um another project in the works to be built next year is the Cherry Hill Side path we received a DOT Grant of approximately a million dollars to extend the pathway from fola Drive where it currently ends up to Crest View and once you're at Crest viw you do get the opportunity to move through the neighborhood streets to connect all the way up to balport at this point um so this is a great Improvement to really connect some residential areas into the center of town um also in coordination um with a grant that we've received on turun road we are finally completing the sidewalk system so between Harrison Street and mount Lucas we will be extending sidewalks on both sides of the road and we are looking at Cross Crossings and uh safety improvements we can make there uh last lastly one of the the advantages we had with psng ripping up 10 miles 12 miles of roads in Princeton we had the opportunity to um add in some of the bicycle infrastructure that is in the bicycle master plan and so on Hodge Road we were able to add a bike lane and on Valley Road when it is repaved this spring uh we will be putting in bicycle Lanes one in each Direction um so on in terms of multimodal projects where it's just not bicycle or pedestrian focused uh we are working on the Hamilton Wiggins Paul Robison Corridor improvements um upon completion of the sanitary sewer project on Hamilton we will be coming in with an engineering project um and based upon the work that the consultant will do uh we're looking at whether we will be including bicycle Lanes or uh a shared use path in that corridor from Moore Street to lyen Lane um and within those those improved Improvement areas there will also be a traffic signal at um Walnut Lane and a rectangular rapid flashing Beacon at Mo Street and a raised intersection at Linden Lane so it's it's definitely a multimodal project where we're trying to slow traffic um incorporate bike facilities and um just improve the corridor in General Harrison Street Corridor is an is a project that we are in the process of completing a study of the corridor to see what type of multimodal improvements can be made uh but we have submitted a Grant application to at least start making improvements from nasau Street to Franklin Avenue um and you'll see later on in the presentation but that Harrison Street Corridor study will be presented to Council on November 12th so the public will be able to see um what some of the proposed recommendations are uh another project is improvements to Alexander University in Dickinson these again are um it's it's a roadway resurfacing project with improvements to sidewalk uh but we will also be adding sherrow and um making changes to the intersection of College Road and um University Place for for traffic calming two more on this list are Mount Lucas road which will include the extension of the shared use path that we had built a few years back um so we'll be replacing the existing 4 to 5 foot wide uh paved or concrete sidewalk that exists with an 8ft wide chair juice path um as well as make improvements to the road um as well and then the last project on this list is turun Road this is North Harrison Street to Grover this is a complimentary project to what was approved with the wi application for the Alice um the municipality will be building um the north side of the road which includes the sidewalk in the bike lane as well as the completion of the raised intersection with new road and um B Circle um so this is just an an overview showing all of the areas where these various projects are located in town um next we have mult Mobility planning projects going on as well Dave do you had a question yeah maybe you'll talk about this but I just wanted to ask I know that there's a major project for Washington Road as well that the university had proposed I don't 100% know what the relationship is between you know the municipality and the university are they just going to do all the work themselves or is that also sort of like the sewer project a joint effort right um Washington Road is all being done by the university we we um we are starting to have some conversations about some traffic signal projects that may be coming in the future uh but the current bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure that they're building that that's all their initiative okay and de that that project for uh it will include some elements that require them to come in front of the planning board yes yep okay um moving on Mobility planning projects uh we have kicked off a Transit study um we have about five to 10 different services that provide Mobility um services to our municipality and we have brought in a consultant to review all of those uh services to con to make sure that we are providing it in the most effective way while uh capturing the most potential writers so that project will I think will be coming out more publicly um after the first of the year to gather feedback from the public um one of the other projects that's been a little bit slower for us to work on um but it is still a council goal and priority this year and that is a complete and green streets policy for all I'm sure you're all aware we have a complete streets policy the state came out with a model um green and complete streets policy a few years back and I understand do is going to be adopting a complete and Green Street policy very very soon so uh that is one of our goals is also to update our complete streets policy to in include uh green streets and let's see here uh storm water and resiliency projects we have uh we're in the design phase for the replacement of six coverts we also have a project um to do Bank stabilization of the Stony Brook along short Quaker we are also investigating um new types of roadway safety gates that we can upgrade on Quaker Road and put in a new installation on Mercer Road we would like to partner with um Mercer County on rosale road and Mercer and Somerset counties on River Road uh to see roadway safety gates installed in those locations as well but that that's been a slower process but it's definitely something that is being considered and if I can clarify that the safety Gat serve for flood protection yes so like you see this keep motor from driving into floods yes correct so so like in this picture where you see this gate this yellow gate that's Hanging On by uh not very much soil that is a roadway safety gate um also we've been working on a storm water utility feasibility study as was mentioned we are in phase two we uh had a council presentation on it on Monday night we also will have a um our first public meeting on October 30th so we do uh ask that people will share that information and please come and join us uh we are also in the midst of a tree canopy assessment study which will then lead into um an update of the community forestry management plan so there's we've got a lot of different things going on uh not to forget our facilities um I'm if everybody has a long memory um I think the Public Works has been in the master plan since the late 1990s um for being in need of a new facility 20124 we still need a new facility for Public Works uh but we are making traction and uh looking to move into a concept design phase for a new public Works facility out on River Road um we are adding in safety fencing on the top deck of the parking garage at Spring Street um we have been looking closely at what the trends are related to safety of parking garages we saw it with the university in the stadium garage where they provided safety fence on the top level um and so we are following suit and will'll be installing safety fencing on our top level and um then we're we've also been working on a concept plan to refresh Hines Plaza it's been about 20 years since Hines Plaza was built and so that um we'll have a concept plan that is going to be shared with council at the next meeting which is October 28th so everybody is invited to attend um these meetings on the 28th at Council we'll be talking about the NASA streetscape as well as Hines Plaza on October 30th we have a storm water utility PL Public Information Center starting at 6 pm and then on November 12th at Council again will be discussing the Harrison Street Corridor Improvement and I think that's it so now I can see you all do have any questions that is so much I mean dang you y'all are working on a lot um and I I have a a few things that I wanted to ask about um other members of the board do have questions please start raising your hand um first I wanted to say I'm really excited about the microforest that's a those are um really really remarkable little um very robust ecosystems and I'll be really interested to see how how we do with that um I wanted to know on the the various traffic calming things that you described um and I might have missed this but are are there any plans for additional stop signs um either anywhere along Wiggins or um like Jefferson and mount Lucas where there's two two there two stops and it's an Jefferson and shune or Jefferson and Valley you mean no not Jefferson and Valley although I know that's a hot spot too oh the Red Hill the Red Hill Road intersection oh Jefferson and mount Lucas needs something anyway I don't want to I'm just wondering whether and I there's so much on this I don't mean to just be picking apart and talking about things that you didn't mention but um but I I am interested in the overall um whether you think that adding stop signs in a few key places is feasible as a traffic calming and just safety feature uh um the quick answer is no okay um we um stop signs should not be used as traffic calming they they are a traffic control device um okay we we have lots of people asking them for that reason uh but that's not their purpose and we can we can discuss that at another time Lou if you want to yeah one one of the things that we are doing though um if I may is that we are looking at all of our intersections and trying to improve site distances there's a lot of landscaping that has grown into our right of way we we've we we are establishing a policy where we're asking Property Owners please within this triangle at every intersection please cut back your your veget ation cut it so that it's low um a lot of what what we experience at these intersections is the fact that you're at a stop sign you still can't see the oncoming traffic so you creep out into the intersection we're trying to find all of those places and take care of it or or you don't even stop until you're all the way in the crosswalk yeah when you say you Louise who do you mean I I try to be pretty careful about that unidentified yes unidentified evil drivers do that David's are boots on the grounds he could probably like name yes absolutely and he's at a at a tough intersection himself in terms of enforcement um what are your thoughts even any fines I know you know live in Princeton we drive all the time and it's a huge problem with the tri side triangles well we do get compliance most of the time do you and you know a lot of the difficulty is that every every resident believe has has the feeling that this is my property you know and they'll plant a bush or they'll plant a tree and then 20 years later that is an obstruction and legally we can it's in our right of away we can come in and cut it down but we try to be sensitive with everybody all the residents and and we talk to them about it and uh and when it's on their property um we could also do the same thing Jerry as you know we could come in and cut it down because it's an obstruction to sight distance but we we're we're working at those most critical intersections that we have and one of them is uh um Terry Hune and and Jefferson um and I finally another accident yes distance problem oh boy big accident yesterday really yeah I was just going to say we work closely with police when there are those crashes we are receiving the crash reports and we review them to see if there is something that we can immediately take action on um or otherwise we just keep a record of it um to see if Trends are are presenting themselves over time to see what we can be doing um um but with that question about stop signs sometimes uh when you change traffic patterns that has unintended consequences as well yeah and we are cognizant of that um so it's it's a challenge yeah for sure yep one one other quick thing um are there um plans to install benches at um at bus stops that currently don't have them I I'm thinking of one in particular that I just pass all the time on foot and people frequently wait there and there's no bench and it's right on Witherspoon just north of um Paul Robson and Wiggins I'm sure you know the spot we would we want to go a step further and put a um shelter there great yes we just have to come up with um an appropriate design for that location it's a it's it's sort of tight but it it really is a heavily used bus stop and I feel so bad for the people who are just sitting on that really low wall there next to the cemetery and and and you and you probably noticed that the sidewalk itself goes around a large concrete pad that is for a future bus shelter yes and bench good yeah and we need to stop people from sitting on that wall because it's a dry laid Fieldstone wall and when they sit on it the stones get knocked out of place but if there yeah and I mean I hate to tell people stand up and you know because they've been you know just finished a work shift and are just trying to get home but if there are locations that you're aware of that are missing um an amenity like that please please let us know that's also part of the transit study uh we've done an inventory of all of our bus stop locations and that's something that the consultant will be looking at as well okay it's also a recommendation of the master plan to have benches shelters trash cans uh which I think as you saw from dei's presentation um our engineering department is using that master plan and and you know following up on all those goals in there and record yeah I appreciated the the um references at the bottom of the pages to the master plan thank you for that good when do you expect to finish the phase three Witherspoon the northernmost section of the W huh before Thanksgiving oh wow fantastic that's that's our hope there's a little bit of legal room then it may go into the beginning of December but I'm being an optimist good we had a little bit of delay so one of the big improvements on that project for pedestrians was um pedestrian level lighting yeah that we never had in that Corridor that was a big concern of the community uh when we did our design charettes and unfortunately that's also been one of the delaying components waiting for PSC and to approve the plans and purchase equipment which then takes you know 20 weeks to arrive yeah well thanks for thanks for SL slogging away at it because it's already made a big difference in the you know the other two phases and it'll be great to see good um and now we do still have an application to get to are there other questions for Deanna uh about the capital project um Justin yes I don't have a question uh and indana tell me if I'm wrong here but in that image of community park uh there were two different shades of green it's not what you think it's all gonna be grass as it is now yes that's just to show that you can fit a full soccer field and two uh softball fields without Outfield fences that sort of thing but it will be grass that grows out of the ground naturally correct good thank you for that clarification yep EXC excellent okay well thank you again um very much Deanna for for that presentation so much stuff going on and thank you to Jim for being here tonight um you can stick around if you'd like or you can go watch basball think I'll walk my dog thank you very much have a good night good night everyone good night good night jimim I did notice by the way that the Yankees pulled ahead um so uh is that I'm sorry I need to check quickly my whether my yeah my computer battery looks very low but it's charging um okay next up we have an application um this is uh from Stephen wascow I hope I'm pronouncing the his name correctly this was carried from September 5th 2024 it's a minor subdivision with variances and a lot line adjustment uh at 537 and 561 Stockton Street block 9301 Lots 11 and 12 file number p2323 368 Ms and 29 HP 2024 um M Madam chair um this was originally carried um on on December 5 to U tonight um but there has been September September 5 right I I have oh September 5 right right right um but it has been Ren noticed and the notice is proper the board has jurisdiction okay excellent yep thank you y so I see we have Mr Kennedy here on behalf of the applicant and also um uh Mr Max Hayden um and others uh I will turn first to um Justin Lesco to sort of get us started and then we can swear in um the applicants uh expert Witnesses go ahead Justin thank you master you swear affirm that testimony about to give will be the truth yes I do that's one I affirmed thank you there any other Municipal Employees or Consultants that will testify I assume Dan and Derek and uh Elizabeth Kim as well I believe yeah so why don't we swear all of the municipal folks in first hi Elizabeth hello and Derek you too if you're there and Dan Dan's uh Dan's activated his camera and so has Elizabeth Kim okay so let's go ahead could all raise your right hand you swear or affirm that testimony you're about to give will be the truth I do so swor or affirmed and Derek too D everybody was just sworn in do you yes um did you hear the oath Derek or do we didn't want go ahead J uh Jerry do Derek Derek do swear or affirm that testimony about to give away the truth so SW or affirm great thanks go ahead Justin thank you madam chair I'd like to share my screen uh you're probably used to this by now but I am going to share the publicly available said I did I be some technical difficulties okay great yeah I did I said I yeah we gotcha it's fine yep I do thank you there might be a little bit of a delay there it seems like it yeah yeah uh so I'm sharing the publicly available NJ map from Rowan University Jerry if you want to make this an exhibit yep pb1 great the subject Parcels are in the center of your screen at block 9301 and lots 11 and 12 uh and just uh you know I'll give a brief introduction to orient us to the site um it's somewhat of a summary of the first half of my report dated uh October 1st 2024 but I'll save my uh you know more uh substantial comments till the end or or more content based comments till the end um because they're not really substantial uh so anyway back to the location uh these subject Parcels are fronting Stockton Street also known as Route 206 across from the end of Quaker Road uh right next to the Stony Brook Stony Brook Bridge um and the Stony Brook runs through Lot 12 which has the address of 561 Stockton Street and is owned by Mr wascow uh lot 11 uh is adjacent to the east of uh the other site and does not currently have access to the Stony Brook its address is 537 Stockton Street and it's owned by Mr Bryant um I will probably just refer to the Lots by the applicants names just to make it easier than you know East West uh Lot 12 lot 11 um both of these Parcels are in the R2 residential zone of the former Township as are the adjacent Parcels on the north side of Stockton Street uh those across the street are in the R3 zone of the former Township ship Mr wasco's property is8 Acres which makes it non-conforming to the 1.5 acre minimum lot requirement of the Zone uh the home on the parcel dates back to the 1700s um as I stated before Miss Kim is here tonight and we'll be providing a report from the historic preservation commission's review of the application I think that report is actually technically from uh Miss capazo as well um and as both Parcels are in the locally designated Princeton Battlefield and Stony Brook settlement historic district as well as on the state and National registers back to Mr wasco's property uh I'm certain you'll hear about the way the house has been flooded in recent years uh from the applicant's presentation the house is located in a flood Hazard area uh Mr Wasco described that uh the recent flooding in concept reviews for this project at the historic preservation Commission in 2021 and 2022 um including a uh the damage and a pretty harrowing situation caused by uh hurricane Ida in 2021 and that flooding really is the impetus for this application uh moving on uh Mr Bryant's property is 1.52 Acres so it's just over the minimum lot requirement uh there's a historic home on it dating back to the 1700s and it is accessed through a share driveway with his neighbors to the east um I'll let the applicant get into the details of the application but just in brief uh this is a sub division application to move the lot line between these two lots uh so that Mr Wasco can move his historic house away from the Stony Brook and away from probably imminent future harm with our changing climate uh and more intense rainfall and flooding as we've covered tonight um the historic preservation commission has reviewed the application and approved the changes that would be made to the house including a significant addition to it um so while this is not a site plan review application per se uh the subdivision and the changes to the house are pretty intertwined um and the applicant is asking for both permanent variances and temp uh temporary variances some of these are due to additional right of way that would be dedicated to Mercer County along Route 206 uh which would put both Lots under the minimum lot size requirement uh additional variances are then required for the front yard setback on the existing building Mr Bryant's property um as well as height to setback ratio for the buildings on both Lots I should note that Mr Bryant is not proposing any changes to his home uh but with the right of-way dedication the lot line is essentially moving closer to his home uh if this were approved um there are also variance requests from the neighborhood residential zoning standards AKA neighborhood character uh for the width of the garage on Mr wasco's proposed additions to his home uh as well as a variance to allow the existing Garage on his property to be in the front yard of the parcel um in that case the garage is not moving to the front yard but the house is moving further back uh therefore the garage becomes in the front yard and as I st before there are also temporary variances requested for Mr wasco's existing home for the time between when the property is subdivided and when the house is moved if the subdivision were to be approved by the board um so Madam chair that's all I have for my introduction um I do have some comments in my report that I'll save until after the applicants presentation including uh master plan analysis um miss cam is here with the HPC report and Mr Bridger and Mr Weissman are here with their engineering and Zoning report thank you and just to follow up on what um Justin said at the staff level what we've tried to do is set this process up so that as much relief as can be granted at this point if the Bo so choose should be granted um rather than having a bif process where Mr Wasco has to come back uh later on and seek most of the variants Etc relief and we thought it was and and HBC relief in fact because the idea was originally HBC was going to review it later on but then um we asked if they could review it now they did it and you're going to hear from Emily Kim in a few minutes or Julie um but that's the way we set it up because we wanted to facilitate this process as much as we could because this is at least from the staff's point of view clearly for the benefit of the community and who knows how long it's going to be before that that house floats away um so we wanted to get that done as soon as possible um thank you for that Jerry um do we want to hear from um Elizabeth Kim uh to hit on the highlights of the um historic preservation commission memo since folks didn't get it until sort of last minute or do you I'd like to hear the applicant's okay presentation first I think okay the historic report will make more sense after we've seen the yeah all right propos all right that that makes sense to me too thank you um so Mr Kennedy welcome thank Madam chair members of the board um Ryan Kennedy from Stevens and Lee uh for the applicant Steven wascow here tonight um as you heard from your planning director um this is technically a minor subdivision but we are here to adjust the lot lines so that an historic home that was horrifically flooded and you'll see the photos unfortunately for reasons again as as Mr leco said we were reviewing here tonight that we're all working towards creating some additional capacity and resiliency on a regional basis but ultimately when that doesn't happen you have things like what we saw here on Hurricane item um and Mr Wow's been working um with HPC as as as you heard there were several concept reviews and we were there for approval um and ultimately with a plan to relocate a very special kind of historic home on the same lot but back out away uh from the base flood elevation uh you'll you'll see also that there's a sewer easement so where you you had to actually go a little higher than uh maybe the minimum necessary to get to the right correct side of a municipal sewer easement But ultimately um I think everyone that's looked at this has agreed and we very much appreciate the input from historic uh that this is the best way to respect the history of this home and allow it to continue to exist and to be uh used and and respected and um by a good very patient Steward uh like the applicant here tonight and his neighbor um who's uh allowing for the reconfiguration of the property so there's room to move this out of the the next knock on wood uh floods path as you heard there are several variances they are all essentially a function of the uh RightWay taking there's about 33 feet that's being acquired um for future use on 206 uh so while one of the home the the neighboring home is not moving at all and this home is being moved back further from the road we need new variances for height to set back and uh lot uh Frontage or excuse me uh front yard setback again even though we're moving further back or one home isn't moving at all it's just a function of the the right of way expansion now there is one variance and and much appreciated with staff um and HPC in kind of corralling this because there is a uh I'll say an interesting quirk in neighborhood character uh with side uh accessible garages that comes into play here and we'll talk about that at at some length uh we're not quite sure that this was the problem that was meant to be solved with this portion of neighborhood character uh we appreciate hbc's kind of endorsement of the plan that we proposed uh ultimately the way the garage was is more hidden and less visible than a compliant garage would be under neighborhood character uh so we we hope you agree you know the other variances are your classic hardship uh created by the flood uh and the right of-way requirement this one uh the neighborhood character one is a little bit more appropriate as a C2 and we hope you'll agree when we go through the elements uh why that is we've got three Ryan is is that for um Mr wasco's lot or for Mr Bryan's lot um for Mr wasco's lot would be this the one C2 uh variance uh for the the neighborhood character design of the new garage Edition oh okay uh so with that um we've got three Witnesses and I know uh a lot of people's eyes are perhaps on a on a on a scoreboard uh so we'll do our best to be quick here this evening you have our full attention well I can tell you a I will not reveal my baseball Allegiance but it's not one that's going to make anyone looking at the scoreboards uh uh feel any better for me but having said that we have our um first our applicant Seas to to talk about you know the reason for this what he's been through to kind of get to this point uh and the the flood essentially uh that brought us here uh we've got uh from our engineering team Ted ronic our our surveyor and then Max Hayden uh our hisor architect who will go through the revised plans um and is uh a bit of an expert in relocating these type of historic structures as as one of the few people who have done that quite a few times here in in New Jersey so with those three people uh Mr M if it's possible to swear those three folks in I would happy to do that if you good each raise your right hand do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give be the truth I do yes I do okay if you could uh each state you full name and spell your last name Steven Wasco w k w thank you Ted pivarnik p i v oov a r n i c k Max Hayden ha yde n thank you thank you much Steve before we go through our exhibits so you could introduce yourself um and you'll just briefly go through you know your connection to to Princeton and this property and you know we'll have the photos to to show it but uh you know what you've what you've done to kind of get to this point sure uh bought the house 31 years ago it was a graduate student dormatory with six people living in a two-bedroom one bath house it was falling into the ground and uh really love the house been here for a long time and subsequently over over that time I've endured three floods uh Floyd in '98 uh Irene and uh 2011 and then Ida uh 2021 each getting successively higher and higher and higher and uh didn't realize it was going to be so hard to move it with all the moving pieces but I love the house I've looked into every other possibility of getting out of the house blue acres and other things but I like Princeton I work here live here and as is my community and this is undertook this project not just to move the house and the reason I'm asking for all this uh the addition and everything else is economically with all this work it didn't make sense to move a two-bedroom house so I really was trying to do something that I could live build a house that I you know would still have equity in at some point when I have to leave at some point in my life and that's why the project is what I'm trying to make it to be uh I know everybody wants to get out of here quick I'm going to turn it right back to Ryan so of it thank you Steve if we if we start we'll have one exhibit um this evening it's 25 uh slides um if it's okay to mark that uh for me to share my screen and Mark that as our one exhibit this evening yes as A1 one second here my uh I have way too many windows open um so uh see we'll start uh just kind of orienting the board uh this is a tax map of Princeton here and that blue arrow points to you are in your neighbors's lot yes and that kind of thick black line to the left while it's kind of a Zone boundary that's where the Stony Brook is correct and zooming in a little bit further uh this time with the historic uh map for for Princeton this shows the historic district that you're in um and then again pointing to your lot I believe on the left and and your neighbor's lot kind of uh where my cursor is correct again uh zooming in a little bit further U these are the two lots in question here uh outlined in in blue yours being on the left and uh your your neighbors on the right getting a little closer now um here we have uh 537 that's your neighbor's house to the right that's the one that's not moving at all just kind of staying put right correct and then uh here when you explain a little bit about uh what we're looking at here but this is your house here at 561 correct that's my house right next right next to the stream right next to the water right next to the bridge they rebuilt you know eight years ago and uh uh yes and uh we'll see it underwater in a few few slides all right so here's some some photos in the before times uh I guess one maybe winter and and one tell us a little bit particularly about the one on the right because this this was was intriguing to me well two weeks but two weeks before Ida we had a rain event that nobody remembers but the water was all the way everything in the foreground and to the right of the bar the yellow barrier was flooded two weeks prior to Ida and then the remnants of Ida came through in those two week subsequent weeks I ordered this water fillable barrier uh 60ft barrier that up until 11:00 that night was keeping the water at Bay and then it crested that barrier at about about midnight and 1:30 in the morning it was uh uh see the French doors it was 44 in on the back on the back deck of the house there so uh that obviously you'll see in the next next slide that that barrier floated away like everything else did so next now slide seven we're starting to look at some of the things on the the night of and the immediate aftermath of Abida correct that's the water coming up on the left and that's the water on in the garage receding uh in the morning slide eight that's about that left is about Peak at about uh one o'clock in the morning with 33 Ines in the garage and and uh four feet through the the kitchen and living room and 7 feet in my television room and just for orientation purposes on the left here this is kind of standing on the high side maybe the the this Creek the Stony Brook is actually behind your home behind the home that correct and the picture on the right is looking people know the one lane road that's not snow that's the water crusting over the parit on Quaker Road where it comes out the 206 and that's uh my house at full flood on the left and the missing wall is in 5:00 in the morning when I walk down the bridge as the waters are receding from my uh television room room with a wall missing and I guess on the left here this is probably the front of your car you know in your driveway area kind of looking down as as the property slopes towards the stream exactly this is the more this is the morning after this is you know sun's coming up waters are still flowing on Stony Brook and uh uh and that's the uh the water receding and at its peak that deck off the back the water was 33 4 43 inches over that deck that's maybe closer to uh you know on the top of your grill here perhaps halfway up the yeah exactly and Mr wco the the deck is at grade uh it's elevated it's about 30 inches uh about 30 inches off the ground backyard slopes off yes okay there's another there I think there's a picture after the the picture you saw with the yellow barrier you saw the deck elevated okay it was a up a hill and then elevated correct yeah and that's the aftermath in the morning and and I know we started with a picture of this yellow blood barrier is that what we're looking at here deflated and kind of that's deflated and the and the lower right the lower right hand corner you see the uh the blue uh the blue area that's my missing wall that floated around around the house and that's three that's a three- window historic old window set that's sitting in my front yard that came off the other side of the house as the water swirled around the house and that's uh the water coming down backyard and looking you're in the backyard here this is the kind of corner porch and then looking towards the the sty Brook again correct this is the lock doors and all my front my belongings and the upper left hand corner is my kitchen table and you can see the water line on my on my computer o over the kitchen table and uh and on the right is my missing wall and uh they do them well didn't this the roof didn't collapse that night it's amazing well um before we go on to the technical detail of what we're moving where and and uh and the variances and the subdivision plan certainly um um happy to have uh the applicant answer any any questions about uh the the where and wise of this um but certain I think we I think we get the where and the why understood I mean I I don't mean to be dismissive I mean that believe me it's very compelling it's completely clear that this house needs to be moved well with that um Ted if you want to unmute yourself and U I'll give us uh I know you've been before this board uh quite a few times but uh you know a brief um reminder of your credentials and I'll have you uh AC hopefully accepted as an expert again here tonight sure uh my name is Ted pavick I'm the director of surveying at Roberts engineering I've held that position since January of 2016 um prior to that I was a principal and partner at Princeton Junction engineering uh where I work since 1983 um I've been a professional land surveyor in the state of New Jersey since 1991 so since that time I've made my live living doing uh property surveys boundary surveys uh doing surveys for minor major subdivision plans um as well as doing uh base map surveying for um uh civil engineering design plans um I regularly represent my clients in front of uh local zoning and planning boards including this board uh in the past I don't think it's been recent it's been a few years um and uh I am familiar with the property I've been out there um and I've uh the plan has been prepared under my supervision thank you we we accept your qualifications right thank you so much um so so so Ted maybe just start with the introduction what you were tasked with and you know what type of things had to go into getting a plan here that that could even be presented to the to the board because while it looks simple I know lot of work went into uh mapping some of these constraints finding the flood elevations and and figuring out how to how to make this work including some uh I'm sure frustrating trips to the state to find out how much of this uh road that they really wanted to take here well that's that's right we had a we we had a difficult time the the the survey actually wasn't the boundary survey actually wasn't that hard it was the topographical survey of the site uh because of the site conditions um getting the flood elevations and finally determining what the actual RightWay dedication is going to be from the state um I I do want to point out there's three main components to why we drew the green line the way we did um number one is we needed to get this house out of the flood plane out of the flood elevation um without getting too close to the existing house that is to remain which is that green box on the right hand side um and and we wanted to to we also had to get it across the sanitary sewer easement that really Cuts right through the middle of the lot uh there's two other components one one of the criteria was the the owner to the lot uh 11 wanted to have access to the Stony Brook so we needed to give him a way to get down to the Stony Brook and the third component was we need to do a a almost equal land swap so before the RightWay dedication we uh we calculated the areas of both lots and when we swapped the lands we made an almost square foot for square foot swap of the two Lots now that doesn't reflect in the zoning chart because the zoning chart actually includes the RightWay dedications but at the top of my minor subdivision plan you'll see a chart that says proposed lot areas pre 33 right of way dedication um that shows you that the land swap was almost before the RightWay dedication so Ted maybe just to orient the board here looking at the two existing LS this red dash line represents the current existing lot lines 12 on the left 11 to the right that's that's correct and uh in yellow that is uh what will soon become part of 206 in the state's hands that's the right of way I'm going to use the word taking and they didn't really ask us uh Dedication that they're requiring in yellow that's correct it's 33 feet from the center line of the road and so then on left to right this is Stony Brook to the left and what we've shaded in blue that actually goes to the uh I guess the the wetlands lines that were mapped as part of this project is that that's right we had excuse me we had an environmental consultant go out and flag the wetlands they were classified as state up Waters so they don't have a uh a transition area buffer adjacent to them uh the blue is all the way out to the wetlands the water is actually the actual water level is a little bit farther to the left of that then kind of moving from the left to the right this righted here that's the existing location of the historic home that we're going to move right that's correct uh then you've got uh tried to shade in here this is the absolute bare minimum flood Hazard elevation uh or at least line that's correct that is the FEMA 100-year flood line it's elevation 77 so everything that would ever happen on this site needs to be well above that including any kind of storm water features uh well well that's right uh there's actually a um uh the the engineer pointed out that there is a local flood Hazard area elevation which is approximately 81 point 81.6 so and that that runs uh kind across the driveway um so we needed to get the existing the the house moved beyond that elevation so we set the house all the way to the right hand side and then raised it up uh it's at it's about 4 feet above that 81.6 it's about elevation 85 so we're well above that so red on the left is the existing location red on the right is that is the historic house moved back both away from the road and away from the stream blue behind it is the addition that's proposed is that correct that's correct green here that's the existing garage that's going to just stay as is that's correct all right and then uh gray here is the uh driveway that's proposed um and to the left between the driveway and the state flood Hazard line is our some proposed uh green uh storm water infrastructure correct that's right there's actually two components to the storm water there're it's because this requires a D um individual permit a flood Hazard permit uh because of this disturbance in the repairing Zone the reparan zone is is 300 feet from the top of the bank so almost completely both lots are in the repairing Zone and because we're doing disturbance in that we need an individual permit um part of that requirement is is the D required us to have a total suspended solids a TSS removal rate of 95% or better so we couldn't do that alone with a rain Garden so we had to combine two separate bmps one is the the um perious Paving in the driveway uh that will have an underd drain that goes into the rain Garden uh pervious Paving gives you approximately perious Paving gives you 80% TSS and the bio retention base and the rain Garden gives you 90% well when you combine them in series you get up to about a 98% tsf removal so that's that's why they're combined in series so we can meet that that um requirement of the of the individual permit with the D and and Ted um I I'm I'm not it's hard for me to see everyone here but I do believe uh I see a counsilman Cohen's hand raised yeah Mr Cohen's hand is up David yeah I just wanted to and and I may have zoned out for a minute you may have already addressed this but I know that we adopted new uh flood plane regulations in Princeton last year or maybe even earlier this year where uh you know we had a more stringent requirement than we used to have before and I know this project started well before that so I'm sure you've been in dialogue with our staff but I just wanted to uh confirm that the placement you know that the placement of the new house or the new location for the house house uh is compliant with those latest local regulations on yes we're we're up out of that that flood Hazard area and um as far as the storm water is concerned I know we we have that correct as well the volume for the storm water excuse me so yes on the new on the new rules U yes 100% um and are you having to remove any trees to to build the basin or maybe is it a rain Garden I'm sorry if I bio retention it's it's a rain garden and there there's are a couple trees right in that area but they are dead Okay so so we weren't we weren't concerned with that area it's not there's no specimen trees in that in that area okay thank you and will move to our our next slide this is the more detailed version of the uh of the plan and and shaded though here in in yellow we want to show that separately that's the municipality's sewer easement for the Lots behind so uh not that there was any doubt that the applicant wanted to go as high as possible you know for flood purposes but we also had to be uh on the high side of that sewer easement because it could not be built upon as well um well that sh let me just point out one thing we when we went out to do our survey we actually located that line we located the man holes and we compared the manholes to what is shown on the tax maps for for Princeton and we found that the the sewer the actual sewer line was not in the easement so what we propos to do is um prepare new Deeds for this eement Crossing this property that centers the actual line the actual manholes and sanitary server line right in the center of the new sanitary sewer Ean you've been working with the town's professionals on on on how to get that information so we can uh kind of help fix that uh when we're done right yes um before I get to our zoning table is there anything Ted you'd like me to zoom in on or or kind of uh highlight as part of the the new part of the plan I know with the driveway you did mention that there's going to be a good amount of prvious pavement um uh and and as well as some portions of the existing pavement will be removed as part of the project uh anything kind of beyond that uh no no that's it the darker shading up near the road right there is where your cursor is that's pavement to be removed um and then the lighter shading in the back going into the garage that's the that's the pervious paving system the other shading on the Lots in the top left and bottom right they are steep slopes 25% or greater that's that's a requirement to show in the plane so uh finally I think our last slide for you Ted on slide 17 got that kind of reminder graphic to show where things were and are being moved the lot lines are changing and a kind of a summary of the variances that are result largely of you know moving this house further back and this the RightWay dedication or taking as I'll say so we want to just quickly go through what those requirements are and and I'll I'll just note in advance that uh uh Ted's team's been working with the town staff over the last couple weeks about remeasuring one of the existing kind of hike to setback ratio uh situations and and ultimately came out with a a better I say better both that it's more accurate and a less non-conforming condition after all after after revisiting that with them so with that said may we just go through the the highlights of what variances we need for the for the two lots Ryan before that could I ask had a question um AB one of the ideas here was that Mr Bryant would have access to Stonybrook but the there's at least according to this map um the slups are 25% or greater how does he get there how do they how does he how does he get down to the Stony Brook yeah when the slopes are 25% of great now it's it's there's a natural walking path that's been there from before I before I even when Dr Craig used to own Mr Bryant's property 30 some years ago a little natural cut there and it's just it's you can just walk down right to the stream there so it's a it's it's lovely down there I used to yeah I used to fish it down there all the time okay thank you and just real quickly since Mr Kennedy you've referred a couple of times to dot taking that property I assume do is compensating the land owners for the right of way that it's claiming is that correct oh that is that is not the the practice of the state or the county when those when those things really they don't they when they when they take RightWay they straight up take it they don't compensate when it's part of an when it's part of an application uh unfortunately yes that's what including you know it's not as common in Princeton but when those takings happen in uh uh for applications um for things on Master plans for example even in municipalities as part of an application no if they were to come by and uh need it for a project affirmatively we'd be talking about compensation oh okay that's inter that's I did not know that it's good to know thank you okay I I'll go through the chart uh pretty quickly um the lock 12 uh which is the left side of the red line already requires a a lot area variance and like I said previously is what when we when we did this land swap we tried to do an actual foot for foot swap so the lot areas prior to the dedication were almost exactly the same but once you take that those RightWay dedications and you could see that the dedication in front of lot 12.01 the green line on the left is much larger than the one on the right so that's that's part of the reason some of these these Lots need these lot area variances now 11.01 which is the lot on the right hand side uh is 59533 square feet and you need 65 340 uh proposed lot 12.01 which is Mr wasco's lot needs 335 754 so that those are two variances that are needed uh there's also a lot depth um variance for uh 12.01 which is essentially that green line that runs up the middle that's the the length of that from the proposed right of way to the new rear right corner of 12. one um the another variance that is required that is due to the the right of we taking um is the front yard for proposed lot 11.01 where it's 9 fet where you need 25 that is also where um Mr Kenny uh referred to the setback the building height the setback ratio uh just this week we went out and measured his that that house and we came up with a building height to setback ratio of three to 1.5 where one to 1.5 is required so and I think it was originally calculated at four but it's actually three when we when we did the measurement in the field um that is also the case uh the building to setback ratio for the new house on new lot 12.01 it needs the variance for the side and the um and they were pointed out in the engineers um memo uh and we agree with those numbers uh I showed the most restrictive one on my plane of 2 to 1.5 I think that's the sideline the rear line I think was uh 1.7 to 1.5 so it that was slightly over in the rear and it's uh slightly over on the side yard and I think that's oh there's one temporary easement that was mentioned the temporary easement is from the historic home location right now to the right of way dedication so uh that variance will happen to go away once the house is moved anyway so I think that's all the variances other than the the garage variance that you that you you talk mentioned earlier uh Mr Cohen has a question I I'm feeling really right now but I need to ask for more explanation on the height to setback variance for lot 11 this is not Mr wasa's lot but the other lot the house is not moving it's far from the property line that's moving and yet no it's the front somehow it's conforming now I to set back ratio oh it's because of the taking way y y it's the distance from that yellow hatching to the green hatching yep by the by the Eraser of all this front yard the the ratio has kind of gone from close to conforming to to kind of Bonkers unfortunately yeah right okay and then you can see where that could you go back to that one Ryan the the the temporary variances from the Red House on the Left To the new taking too that that's the one that will go away once the house once that house is moved got it um so with that happy to have um any any other questions for this way before we get into the architecture just as as you noted the the um uh the the other you know the the temporary variance he mentioned as well as the other one that's not on the chart is that um the exist in garage by moving the house behind it technically this structure uh which HBC has endorsed you know keeping and there's some question about whether it would but the plan had been to keep it um as is um and to keep at its current location U but because it is now in front of the house that becomes a accessory structure in a front yard setback right um any questions before we from board members before we move to architectural um testimony um uh we we Cohen yeah I think you were just gonna answer my question but is it taking for a break yeah I I you know part of me wants to just plow ahead but I know we we're probably going to be here you know maybe another hour given I just don't want a short Change things so let's do take a a Break um we'll make it 10 minutes and and please be uh prompt in in returning five minutes excuse me can we just make it five minutes um five five minutes would work for me um and I um I I understand you've uh been here a while already is five minutes okay with other board members shaking heads yes yeah okay um thank you um five minutes are as close to five as you can possibly make it it's 909 right now thanks so 9:15 see you then moving uh Guru so uh max if you want to briefly um uh remind the the board that you've testified here in Princeton many times um of your credentials as an architect and and a little bit with your experience actually in relocating historic structures uh like this in New Jersey certainly and and thank you to the board for Indulgence I'm undergoing some treatments that leave me fatigued so I appreciate the Indulgence of making the break shorter um um my name is Max Hayden and I'm an Al I'm an architect that's next night's meeting um I um have been an architect licens in the state of New Jersey since 1986 I serve as chair of the opal Township historic commission um I've have appeared before the Montgomery Princeton Hopewell Pennington hope Township Vernon Warren Township I've appeared to before many zoning boards um I've also had the extreme pleasure of moving my own house uh to get it away from the Mount Rose intersection um and um I've helped move three or four other structures and have helped elevate a few structures due to water concerns we uh we accept your qualifications thank you thank you thank you so much um with apologies for the screen jarring in a second I'll go back to our uh our presentation and start with slide 18 and Max we can start talking about the um the elevations I think of the design of the um addition of the home oh the existing house is historic it's kind of quirky uh it's vacular a term that we architect used to describe local architecture what makes the house so interesting is really the very low slope roofs and what we tried to do was not copy it but kind of do a slightly more modern take of it uh Secretary of interior standards tells you not to replicate things but to make it look different so that's what we kind of done and we're really providing the the new structure as a backdrop to the front structure uh the front structure will be remain red and the thought is to paint the rear new addition um something that will go on recede into the landscape so it be kind of a Mossy green so this on the on the the right is the front elevation that would be facing the street um you can see this is the existing historic home and you can see kind of peeking out behind it the addition correct and I I think when you'll see some of the model pictures you might begin to understand that um with the way the ground slopes towards the street that I think you will see mostly the historic structure and again you know um perhaps laziness on the architect but they're supposed to be signing on the addition and it will match if I can interrupt for a second um these are part of the plan set right they do not have to be marking as an exhibit correct that's that's right sorry sorry Max no problem and you know you can see that we have some slope issues um that part of the uh rear most garage is actually buried into the Hillside somewh and and that with the location on the lot is requiring the height to set back ratio variance floor ples here next the front piece that's not shaded in is the existing historic structure and we're I mean all the rooms are very small we are extending the left wing approximately 5 feet um to make it a a more comfortable room um we are relocating the kitchen and making it a more normally sized kitchen and a uh dining room which Steve has really a little tiny breakfast room at the moment and the two garages are to the rear we did step them back uh from each other to really downplay the massing so even though the aggregate uh dimension of the garage might it might be what's that issue the way we stepped it back is certainly triy to diminish the scale of things um there is a loft connector there'll be a little bit of a double height space um that will connect to the existing house um the existing house the ceilings at the at the rear are less than my 6 fo three height um and Steve is about the same height so um neither of us can stand at the rear of the existing house so although the addition looks big it's more due to the fact that the existing house is really quite small and short in stature uh we're adding a master suite or a owner Suite as I like to call it because the primary bath should be the hall bath not the owner's bathroom um and then there's a guest bathroom with an onsuite bedroom and a the ubiquitous walking closet that we all desire and there is a little study model Steve rendered it with the colors that we're proposing to paint the structure and you can see the Stony brick Elementary School in the back and you can see to the left how the garage does step back so it's really not um as wide as one might think that's the view uphill looking down towards Stony Brook and towards 206 and these photographs were taken on site approximate where it's being located and of course it doesn't look very realistic but it gives you somewhat an idea of what it will look like so our our our final subsi of slide is the hope to try to explain the neighborhood character variance that is needed for the side entry garage so um on the top left is the kind of form-based zoning Monopoly house that was uh adopted to try to explain we believe the the concern with this particular item which um you know for those of us who participated or or or watched along there was a a lot of discussion um at that time about uh visible but one street facing garages prominent garages and and the massing of garages that was was starting to appear around Princeton and this provision came out of that discussion and uh requires because as shown on the left the width of the garage to be uh uh diminished as compared to the overall width of the house now in our case the garage is actually completely behind and screened by the house and it's not you know I want to say front facing it it's sidef facing but it's not um visible at all and um to we we could comply actually if you see on the on the right by if we were to pull that garage Bay crowd of the house and kind of expand the house the percentage of house width that was taken up garage would actually decrease and we would comply uh we tried to in you know in the model here show conceivably what that would mean by you know kind of boxing out um what that extra garage space would be in order to comply and our uh the thinking was that ultimate whether that was the intention of the ordinance or not our design um completely hides the garage particularly you know if you're looking at this model uh the 206 and stock is to to the right um providing uh really no visibility at all for the for the sidef facing garage and is a kind of an unfortunate just function of the house being quite narrow in fact just the width of the addition is basically the width of a garage Bay um so rather than expand the width of the house to comply um we feel that the variance makes more sense here than than complying uh with the that particular requirement again whether that this was a problem that was intended to be solved with that provision or not we we we think perhaps not based on the the visual representation of of the concern uh in the neighborhood character code uh but here um our architect very uh specifically tried to design a garage that couldn't be seen from the street and and ironically complying with the provision by pulling it out would would make it quite visible um to passing cars um max anything you want to add to that as you're thinking of Designing it I know the the home is actually also slightly a skew uh from um from stocked as well which further hides it and really um tilts it so that the garage is a little less visible there will be one garage that will be visible but the garage door will be made out of U the same material as the siding so the thought is to make it blend away as much as possible that garage that is visible though is actually compliant with the ordinance it's the it's the one in the back that is one in the back right um Mr Cohen I just want to offer perspective as a member of council yeah that this provision is not in any way intended to prevent the kind of design that's being presented here tonight I think we need to tweak the wording here it should read the street facing width of the garage should not exceed 50% of the width of the house you know the street facing width of the overall structure I think that's the intent uh and you know I'm I'm just saying I'm very much in support of the variance because it's completely compliant with the intent of the ordinance much app thank you thank you for that perspective um so is that it for you Mr Hayden oh I see that it is it is thank you thank you all so much we're we're all the way to the thank you slide um are there um questions from board members for um any of the witnesses that have testified on this application um so then in that case I guess I guess I would turn now to our professionals um Elizabeth Kim Dan Weissman um and since Dan's got his hand up I will turn to you first hi Dan thank you madam chair good evening everybody um I just had one question for uh Mr pavik um and maybe Mr Kennedy um there is an existing sanitary lateral uh from Lot 12 that'd be Mr Bryant's lot that traverses across lot 11 um and with this modification relocation um staff would ask that sanitary easement also be granted uh for that existing lateral the subdivision plan does show that lateral being relocated out of uh lot 11 um but being that the subdivision will be perfected before any Improvement are done um I think it's beneficial to have that that easement be granted uh yeah Our intention was to put a new suit lateral in so there is no easement but I don't think we we have an issue granting him the the easement until that that is done so the easement goes away once the lateral is relocated removed yes okay does that is that something that becomes a condition seems like to me yeah yeah I okay um anything else uh Dan that you want to mention draw our attention to uh no further questions just a couple of of brief comments uh there was a waiver from a fire protection plan uh checklist item staff has no objection to the granting of that waiver um and then also uh there was a staff comment uh asking the applicant to confirm the dimension for that height to setback ratio for uh Lot 12 Mr Brian's house the existing house um and just confirming that staff agrees with the uh Dimensions provided today with the three to one and a half uh height to setback ratio okay thank you thank you um Elizabeth Kim maybe you can activate your camera and oh there you are um can you summarize and uh and Julie jump in um any time uh but I was goingon to ask Elizabeth to summarize the hpc's um thoughts about the um variances and that kind of thing just sort of Hit the high points of the uh of the memo as opposed to reading it start to finish absolutely Madam chair um so I mean the applicant and their professionals really provided a great uh coverage of what the the reason for this minor subdivision obviously it's intended to move this historic house to um uphill outside the flood Hazard area and they were so um grateful that the two neighbors were able to work together to make that happen that's not always the case Cas and after Mr Wasco had sustained three floods you would think that he would say okay I'm done but he's such a great Steward of his historic property that HBC was so grateful that he continued to um look for a solution that he could stay in his house and retain the storic building have an opportunity to move it uphill if your board approves this subdivision with the varen so HB you know in conclusion HBC wholeheartedly supported this application with the variances they also approved the um the future site plan development of the moving of the house and the addition and the vares that went with that uh the only other thing I would say is the the bearings for the neighborhood character they also supported that they felt that there was no negative impact on the historic property the neighboring property or the historic district um with their approval on that portion of the application um they did have some conditions nothing that I feel that we need to go into a lot of it was um if you had an opportunity to read my report there were a lot of things that um were just clean up on the plans information details things like that and the reason that the that wasn't available to HBC is because we were trying to move the application to be heard right away otherwise the applicant would have been able to address that um the one thing that they would like um that might um impact your review is that they would like a landscape subcommittee within the HBC to work with the applicant to discuss and review their landscape and their grading on site for it to be appropriate so maybe maybe the planning board's landscape subcommittee can look at it and invite members of hpc's um you know any any member of HPC that has a particular interest in landscape to to attend as well uh or are you suggesting that they work with the applicant before they come to landscape committee I just I again am wanting to not add extra steps for the applicant given that we all you know want them to be able to move forward as quickly as possible understood um I guess what HPC was envisioning is they didn't realize that they needed to go to the landscape subcommittee but they would serve with the HB with the applicant to look at the design because the design was not available as far as the rain Garden or the landscape around the property and they are concerned about the appropriate grading so the house still sits and still has the land landcape within the stor property Elizabeth well it it doesn't automatically have to come to our uh planning board landscape subcommittee and but even if it did uh the grading plan is not not part of landscape subcommittee review David yeah I mean this just raises bigger questions for me about what exactly the formal you know what we're approving tonight and what the formal process is going forward because if we're approving not just the subdivision but I guess by virtue of the zoning table the bulk table that is on that subdivision plan we're approving the variances tonight as well I'm not sure the applicant ever comes back to any board because it's a I mean but I don't I see Ryan raising his eyebrows no I mean it's a single family right uh you know project that wouldn't ordinarily if it's and if it's conforming with the setbacks and so forth you know and height to setback ratios that we've approved tonight I'm not sure why it comes back to any board so Jerry I don't think it comes back to a board I I think you're absolutely right and I know there was a little bit mentioned about site plan review there wouldn't be any site plan review it's a single family uh house so I think and and certainly the way we tried to set this up at or at the staff level was this could all be done in one shot uh and that they wouldn't have to do any further um applications before a board and if I could to jump in um there are the municipal processes for tree removals you know we fully expect that they're going to have to take down trees to move these houses then that goes through our uh tree removal permit uh you know which gets looked at by our engineering department arist um now that being said I think what Elizabeth is saying and what looks to be one of the conditions of the preservation plan approval is that the applicant works with the HPC you know I wasn't at that meeting I don't know what exactly you know was required there but I think that's very different than you know requiring them to create a landscape plan and come back to the landscape Committee of the planning board when essentially what you would be doing tonight is approving the lot lines changing with those variances which you know obviously pav the way for the buildings that they're looking to do that have been approved by the HBC but that's where the the kind of Distinction uh where there is a distinction from a say a site plan application and Justin um in terms of the the planning board landscape committee U reviewing this which would be fairly typical and inviting as um Louise suggested that the members of the HBC what what what's your reaction to it seems to me that's a good way of proceeding what do you think I mean I I don't think for a you know a single family lot line adjustment that's fully necessary to come back to it I mean I think we we have had landscape review of subdivisions before so that's not just the reason why I'm saying it um but you know for something like this uh I think it can go through the municipal processes it's not like this is uh you know he's taking down acres and Acres of you know farest and replacing them or having some sort of you know manicured uh you know Gardens or or anything like that I think if the HPC is already covering it and the uh uh our internal staff is covering the replacement then we should be fine but of course that you know that would be up to the board if you truly believe that it should come back for uh full landscape plan and review now I I I don't feel strongly about asking for a full landscape plan I would um like to know a little bit more and maybe this is why Mr Hayden's hand is up about um tree protection and and Grading and uh that kind of thing Mr Hayden thank you and we will take the necessary steps to protect the existing trees that are to remain part of the hpc's concern was the existing house sits rather low to the ground and they wanted to try to maintain that appearance as much as possible so it really had to do with the grading at the very front of the relocated house um the other grading that has to be done to move water around the house and to fit with the site wasn't really an issue was really specific to the front and you know we represented that evening that we'd be more than happy to work with them on a landscape plan for the whole property and do something that's in keeping with the structure and the neighborhood so I think we would feel most comfortable working with the HBC um on this element okay and I just want and your for our members up Mr Wasco excuse me go ahead yeah I just I just want to say if it helps your decisions I've already had Taylor sautu out two times and he you know verbally just really liked what I was doing with the tree didn't you know his his intent was you know was fine and to what Max was just saying my intent is to keep my property the existing property as much as possible the way I've always had it I you know other fulfill the requirements of replacement trees that are required by by the statute so you know it's it's I'm not looking to do anything crazy in terms of uh firms or Landscapes you know most of what's going on there is the D requirement with that water with that you know water collection area and uh I wish there was a way around that too but but that's yeah so and I T Steve away from doing the multicolored fountain that L up at night so um Elizabeth are you are you have you said what you wanted to say no I just wanted to clarify to your board that that's the the way that HPC had reviewed this and were kind of charged to do this was to review the um the the relocation and the addition so your board would be knowledgeable that they had approved it or imposed any type of design um changes that might impact the variance that they are requesting so that's the reason that we had you know we had provided that information to you and the HBC had reviewed it that way because I think everyone was hoping that the applicant would finish with your board today and not have to return again to any other board got it uh David and I ask Elizabeth question Elizabeth assuming that's the case would that include um no further review by a subcommittee uh a landscape subcommittee of the HPC well we did uh and the applicant had agreed that they would work with the subcommittee to work on the landscape and Grading right okay but it wouldn't but what I meant is that he didn't need to go back to zoning board or planning board for any other variances and hoping that your board would be able to approve all of it as part of this minor sub David yeah I I guess I'm just um wanted to offer I think that again for a conforming single family residents in a historic district HPC does have final say does have final determination and so you know it's this is a funny kind of a hybrid because yeah they're advisory to the planning board if it's a planning board site plan I know but you know so this is kind of a it's kind of a strange in between but I would feel very comfortable sort of saying you know the planning board takes action on this subdivision tonight with the variance relief and then it sounds like the applicant has very amicable relationship with HPC and HPC would ordinarily have jurisdiction over a single family home in a historic district and we're just out of it um after tonight and I would just add to that you know if there was any concern which there certainly isn't that this was some sort of bait and switch to get these variances and then build something completely different because this property is in that locally designated historic district anything that they build is going to have to go through the HPC uh you know if they were to from this or if they were to try to do that bait and switch it just wouldn't happen yeah yeah okay great uh other other questions from anybody I will um ask members of the public of there are three uh oh sorry Freddy Freddy's hand went up Freddy Pearl mutter you're on mute still I was just wondering even if we can't put any more back you know we can't can bring them back can we put and I guess this is really for Jerry can we put some conditions in the um resolution that they will conform with this and if if invited we might be able to have somebody from the planning board sit on that or I'm just making things up I don't know exactly what but are there some is there some way that we can put in the conditions um some uh since they're not coming back some way of saying that we you know we want to make sure that they are going to meet these require I know they're obligated to do it but but this is not the typical application yeah that's certainly reasonable I mean certainly the expectation in is that they presented a plan and include it includes site elements it also includes architectural elements and they're going to comply with that and we can certainly put that in the resolution yeah but and delegating to as as David was explaining since this is sort of a an OD kind of hybrid situation delegating the um and given that the applicant is amable to this the um working with a sub Committee of um HBC which has uh jurisdiction in a way when it comes to you know this issue that we're talking about makes sense yeah um uh Julie did you want to add Julie um as everybody probably knows is chair of the historic preservation commission so yeah I just wanted to say that I'll report back to the planning board if there's any uh deviation from our approval but I also wanted to really commend Mr Wasco because I think he's been through an extraordinary amount of difficulties with climate change with easements and takings and all kinds of crazy stuff happening and I really um think it is best that we finish all of the business here tonight and let him go ahead and do this project thank you thanks Julie uh and thanks for thanks for the re assurances about about reporting back I'm sure people will be curious how it all goes David yeah I just wanted to along the lines of what Julie was saying I attended a couple years ago a conference of the New Jersey Association of flood plane managers and the keynote speech was about retreat in the face of climate change and how difficult that is and I this is uh the first time that I've actually seen a retreating building building so it's uh I'm not sure that's that's what they were referring to at the uh at the conference but it's kind of interesting to yeah yeah it certainly seems to fall into that category it's the way we need to you know compared to other ways of dealing with this flooding you know where people are elevating their buildings you know 10 feet in the air or rebuilding over and over in the same flood FL flood prone Shore communities and and we all taxpayers are paying right for the insurance again and again and again to let them yeah keep on doing you know the same thing so um this is this is exemplary uh from a resiliency and sustainability standpoint as well as a historic uh standpoint yeah thank you uh Mr Lesco yes thank you mam chair and I would just like to pick up on Julie's Point uh to say that we I would recommend being careful that when if conditions are added that they don't complicate the process for Mr Wasco to go and be able to subdivide his land first and then do whatever he needs to do after so obviously if the condition was something like I don't know he's got to build the house exactly as he said it before before he could subdivide that's going to be a problem so you know I just want to point that out uh when we get to the conditions which okay probably coming up soon yeah um so I want to open the meeting to public comment if any members of the public and there are three members of the public um attending uh any any of you wish to address the board now is the time to virtually raise your hand and I'm not seeing any hands go up going once going twice okay I will close the public comment portion of the hearing and move back to the board so um I I I think the consensus the very strong consensus uh here is that we um uh do what we can to facilitate this project moving ahead expeditiously and and um haven't heard anything to the contrary um I do think that we should go through um conditions for um an approval of this minor subdivision with variances and lot line adjustment Jerry do you want to yeah um itemize conditions yeah certainly um okay just I'm going to start with the report but I there's not going to be that many of them this is from Justin um applicant will be need to file a tree removal permit subject to review I mean that's required anyway but I think we should put it in um note eight of the minor subdivision plan should be corrected it states site is not located in the historic district or historic buffer district and that would just be corrected zoning table should be updated this is from Dan and Derek's um memo okay applicant is required to file an engineering site plan review application is that right I don't think so here um Justin what do you think Mr merer if I may yeah yeah uh an engineering site plan review application is a administrative review process it's not a site plan application through a zoning board or planning board um that is typically for review of of new houses building additions um and it mainly deals with the review of storm water management measures as required by ordinance okay so we'll put that in that's your 4.0 number two um and then the applicants required to obtain an njd flood Hass area Control Act permit still correct um then I'll get to the sanitary sanitary sewer easement shall be vacated new sanitary eement shall be dedicated to municipality based on the actual lot of the actual location of the sanitary suain and shall be described in meets and Bounds on each lot um okay then we have the one for the lateral U which will be temporary until the lateral is uh eliminated um legal descriptions of the two lots um Subdivision plat shall be provided to the uh engineering department in digital format the update tax map this is typical stuff D documents approved by the planning board attorney um okay applicant shall submit to the Mercer County planning board and New Jersey D for Department of Transportation for approval has that been done and I I'll have the formal ones but yes and and that's that's unfortunately how we resulted in so much less property um yeah okay let me just go over my notes Freddy uh you need to unmute yourself sorry about that I guess they really didn't want to talk um Jerry go back back once one uh condition with the temporary easement uh well with the temporary lateral um they'll Grant a temporary easement to The Neighbor Next Door for Access until it disappears yes talk about that do you want to talk that's the sanitary sewer that's gonna be relocated outside of this subject property right and that uh will appear at some point but in the in the if I understood what they were saying in the interim the neighbor is going to need a not necessarily but may need access to the easement yeah so there's that temporary easement Brian you're on mute too Ryan you're on mute there you go I'm just nodding in agreement the the the conditions as as um Mr Weissman and and and Mr Bridger put out U Mak sense and we would um so I thought you were talking but you were just eating crackers or something is that sorry yeah I have a bowl of peanuts here trying to sorry you're Square everybody's square is really small on my go ahead go ahead Jerry um another condition would be HPC recommendation D that's the one about the subcommittee of HBC dealing with um Landscaping yeah the applicant agrees to work with the hbc's subcommittee to address certain grading and Landscape questions I mean I I think that's what we're talking about is that is that accurate yeah that's correct was not requiring a landscape plan that comes back yeah to our landscape subcommittee right right y exactly and it it also seems that that's a condition of the hpc's approval well that's what I'm saying is that correct Brian um I was just referring to the HBC approved yes yes that would be we don't have our resolution for that but that would be in there so it's already going to be covered by that right that yeah that's what that that's what I actually articulated for this correct condition so are you suggesting it needs to go in both and be worded the same or that it just doesn't need to be an hour it doesn't need to be an hour okay okay yeah okay just because I don't want that to cause any subdivision issues that's fine thank you just you and then um the applicant Mr Rosco will comply with the site and Architectural elements that presented to the board and that's it okay um thank you Julie is moving to approve this minor subdivision with variances um in these conditions uh uh lot line adjustment with these conditions laid out by Mr meller who would like to Second I'd like to second thank you Miss Nuka um I just want to Cohen I just want to make sure I don't know Jerry did you make the I don't think anybody made reference to all the variances that had been requested I want to make sure that the resolution of approval right refers to the variance the absolutely B variances that are uh documented in the application yeah yeah absolutely and the motion included the variances oh it did okay sorry okay um Miss Phillip would you give us a roll call vote please certainly Miss capoli yes Mr Cohen yes Mr Macwan yes Miss Nuka yes Mr odonnell yes Miss Pearl mutter yes Mr Taylor yes Miss Wilson Anderson yes Mrs Wilson yes motion carried excellent thank you so very much for what you're doing it is a labor of love I'm quite sure thank you Mr Hayden Mr Kennedy Mr thank you very much I hope I didn't mangle your name too bad too badly many thanks to the board for approving the minor sub from HBC yes appreciate thank you for thank you for all your work on it as well um so we'll we'll be back here next week um 6:30 executive session 7 o'clock meeting thanks thanks everybody I'm sorry Mr Cohen CL you want to do I'm ready to just fail move to a journ uh seconded by Miss Anderson all in favor I thanks everybody good night thanks good night good night