##VIDEO ID:DdpPOaUm3Vo## [Music] calling to order the Zoning Board of adjustment R in Township New Jersey regular meeting October 17 2024 the notice requirements of the open public meetings act has been satisfied by the placing of a notice of this meeting on the P bulletin board at the municipal building filing same with the Township Clerk and transmitting same to the tun Democrat Courier News Ledger and the Trenton Times Roll Call please chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer here Vice chair Miss rul dami has asked to be excused Mr Steve fario has also asked to be excused Mr Randy block here Mr Jim Ferrero here Miss lindsy K bral here miss lorett ktina here Miss Donna Drew here Mr James Miller here board professionals board attorney Mr John drill here town planner Mr Jeffrey ferella here engineer Mr KES Dari present traffic consultant Mr J Troutman board planner Miss Jessica Caldwell um she has asked to be excused Township landscape architect Mr John Morgan Thomas here board stenographer Miss Jackie clap here and board secretary Taylor vaugh here okay can I get a motion to excuse the two board members I'll make a motion I second can a vote please chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Mr R de block yes Mr Jim Ferrero yes Miss ly Co brel yes Miss Lor CA yes Miss Donna Drew yes Mr James biller yes okay moving on to comments announcements distribution correspondence and minutes having none moving on to the resolutions for this evening there are two um the first one and Township Port adjustment Louise a Pastrani Fernandez and Margarita P Pastrani block 71 Lot 10 9 Q excuse me Cole Road application number boa 03- 2023 resolution memorializing Grant of B bifurcation D1 use variants to allow a commercial use and a second principal use on the property resolution number 20 24-10 version 20 24-10 16 V3 any comments or updates nope this is a up this say all the comments I've received on it hearing none can I get a motion to approve so moveed second can you no sorry schaer BL DJI Ferraro and Co bangel are the eligible people I'll second you you can vote on this oh you can vote on this yes you can um wait a minute no she can't I have the uh no can't it's schaer oh yeah that's right I'm sorry bario who's absent let me just get this straight cretina I don't have her on there GNA add that on DJI who's also absent Drews I don't have her on there whoa Miller I don't have him on there and block and then I have to take off Ferraro Co brel so there's only three of us here it's night yeah yep that's fine you can one person can adopt the resolution okay so Randy made the motion I second it and Jim and Randy and I can vote yep Drews can vote can V also but we were at the first hearing but I think not I that's why I was confused I thought I was at these but then it looked like there were two I apologize let me let me just check hold on there were two hearing sessions February 1 202 for December 21 2023 and February 1 2024 so the December I was not at okay so right I wasn't appointed yet correct so wow so it's just a three okay let's not rely on who I have eligible to vote can you check any way of checking not right this second okay why don't we table is till the end of the meeting and we will figure this out we're going to have to check the agendas for or the minutes December 21 and February 14 okay moving on to the second resolution BR and Township Board of adjustment 207 everetts Monsanto Properties LLC block 86 blot three and four 207 ever Road application number bo- 04202 24 resolution memorializing Grant of three D1 use variances two c variance variances various exceptions minor subdivision approval and preliminary and final site plan approval to allow a contractor's yard with an outdoor storage use on the property and the construction of an Associated site improvements resolution number [Music] 2024-25 d10 version uh excuse me 17 version three right now on this one I have those voting again this was a two hearing session hearing with the first hearing session on May 16 2024 and then the second one on July 18 2024 I have schaer lock DJI Ferraro fortina and Miller as voting in favor okay I know I have on the voting block on the bottom I have Schaefer BL DJI I got to put feraro instead of fario that's my bad cretina and Miller so this one looks like it's in order okay can I get a motion to approve so mov I'll second it can I get a vote chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Mr ranty Block yes Mr Jim Ferrero yes Miss Lorette ktina yes Mr James Miller yes okay moving on to the application for this evening boa case number 22-20 22 application is executive Snow Control LLC location is block 35 lot spy 5.01 12 and 13 68 Highway 31 and 120 124 126 Pennsylvania Avenue applications for preliminary and final site plan with d variant and lot line adjustments for contractor business yard okay now before I tell you what Mr gromberg why don't you to Senter your appearance for the record then we'll do a little housekeeping good evening Madam chairperson members of the board Steven Gruenberg grenberg law office on behalf of the applicant okay so this hearing commenced August 18 2024 at the end of that hearing we continued it till tonight October 17 2024 they granted an extension of the time within which the board had to act to December 31 2024 and there were three issues to be addressed tonight issue number one was the ordinance regarding the maximum size of a storage tank which was maximum 550 gallons if it's above ground 10,000 gallons if it was below ground they were proposing and above ground had to decide if they wanted to apply for a variance or comply what is the answer on that so we listened to what the board's uh concerns were with respect to an above ground uh tank and we have revised the plans to reflect a 10,000-gallon tank underground and I think that was what the board had the majority of the members of the board had preferred okay so let me just Mark that down ground tank up to 10,000 gallons in size second issue Wastewater flow for each building there was a RT muua agency review report dated May 14 2024 which said lot five had one edu lot 5.01 had one edu Lot 12 had one edu if you add 1 plus one plus one there were three edus and Jeff raised the issue was that sufficient sewer capacity and I've heard via the gra Vine that the RTM met at five o'clock tonight and you have an update on that you have someone who could testify about that I do Mr benedetto can testify uh that application was made for additional um two edus and that five edus was granted at 5:00 today and he has a text message message and he'll provide testimony about conversations okay and the text message was forwarded to me and I forwarded it to both Taylor and Jeff is that your understanding that's correct okay so we'll wait to get his testimony on that and the last issue was um the straw pul to eliminate the residential apartment on Lot 12 has that been done yeah well the the board had indicated that there was concerns about a continuation of that residential apartment use and we're agreeable to to terminate that residential apartment use the lease uh is um good until March 31st so we will notify the tenant as of March 31st that they will no longer be able to rent the apartment so eliminate the residential department on Lot 12 as of March 31st correct and if they don't then more okay so that's the housekeeping so take it away great the the only other issue is that the the board had expressed interest in having us go to the tax assessor and confirm um new lot numbers for the lots that are being created and we did that as well um and I will have Mr benedetto come forward and provide his testimony both as to that and uh to address any other engineering concerns the board might have then we'll present M mcmanis with respect to the uh planning issues so Mr was previously sworn and if you find that acceptable y you remain under oath correct yes sir come on forward um Rob before you start I just want to make a note for the record that lindsy P bral was not here at your first hearing but she has listened to the recording and she is now eligible to vote if there's a vote tonight and just a reminder to everybody Jackie is by Zoom so everybody please speak clearly and loud and slow yes so Rob do you have an exhibit as to the new just get them to tie up right now to 5 edus of sewer sure why why don't you talk about the RTM application that was filed and what confirmation you've had that we have five edus uh sure so I confirmed with rt muua we've been coordinating um okay first you submitted an application for an additional to edus correct and uh at based on the hearing today the commercial site or the proposed lot 12.01 uh was granted five edus um in addition each of the residences will keep the one edu that it currently has okay so there's actually a total of seven you're telling me yes okay and and that's sufficient for our purposes on uh the commercial laot yes so we will receive a correspondence Mart yes okay and that is acceptable as a condition so now that we tied that up unless there's any other questions on that um Rob why don't you explain to the board the comparison of what exists in terms of lot lines before what we're proposing now and the new lot numbers sure um I believe uh we we have an updated exhibit now the PDF is a lot more clear uh I don't know if um you guys have your own copies emailed late in the day why don't you hand them out that's going to be marked as exhibit A2 which is line areial exhibit [Music] and2 don't Mark the big one you mark the big one it can be folded up was that you're looking at the second one that was submitted today there was an earlier one that had a lot that didn't belong to them on it the lot was taken off can I see that exhibit just you said two today this was an earlier one that's an earlier one let's see that's that's 92 [Music] okay I can give you another I I have an by left are you guys are good okay so Mr BTO will you please explain to the board um how the lp lines are new LPS are going to be numbered sure so we'll start with the existing conditions uh lot five starts at the residence um uh on Pennsylvania Avenue and extends all the way into the commercial site um and then there's a long uh narrow uh lot 5.01 just to the right those are being kind of reallocated to have their own residential lots and then the rest of the subject property is going to be the new commercial property so you can see over here there's uh the two resident residential lots and then the one large commercial lot um it was discussed last uh at the last hearing that there is the narrow uh portion of the lot that extends to Pennsylvania Avenue it's our client's preference to keep that as part of the commercial lot should he need to use that for site access down the road however should he need that he'll be back for the board for uh site plan approval we are not proposing any access to Pennsylvania Avenue with this application correct correct and any application would require us to come back before the board correct so you're suggesting that a condition being imposed saying no access for lot 12.01 to Pennsylvania Avenue unless and until you come back to the board and the board would approve that yes so right now the sole access is going to be to lot 12.01 from Route 31 correct yes correct just a quick question for you on the previous one you've taken off lot six yeah it's not part of the application so we just took it off for clarity that's fine thank you and that's the difference between this exhibit and the one the prior one that was sent over thank you I I didn't want there to be any confusion and there would have been the lot lines there would have been confus no I remember us discussing it last time so okay thank you okay so why don't we address the site changes that we proposing you referring to the site plans but these are have not been changed in any way correct from what's been submitted to the board they're not colorized in any other way Steve I'm having a little hard time hearing you and I'm maybe Jackie could too I'm sorry not a problem that's better I was just confirming that the plans that are being exhibited right now are identical to what had been submitted to the board and can you please uh go over the proposed the what existing conditions and what the proposed changes are sure so um the the there are a couple of minor site improvements uh itself um there's stock piles in the northeast corner of the uh commercial section that are me what sheet are you on please sorry sheet three the site and utility plan so in the northeast corner of the commercial section there's some stock piles and some Mafia block walls that are being removed uh they're just going to be flattened just to to make the space a little more usable um in the uh Southeast corner of the site we're proposing two new uh canvas buildings by britespan um again it's just a kind of frame and canvas building for storage materials I'm sorry I'm having a hard time seeing what you're trying to represent because you're standing right in front of the map yeah since for the record there's no one in the audience other than people rep uh connected to the applicant can you take the plans bring them right up the applicant's table and the board [Music] table we' said this before the the lighting in this room is atrocious yeah why don't you use a laser pointer thank you for cash why don't you pull the mic micophone off to the side you're right front of move the whole stand there okay so on the Southeast Corner we're proposing two bright span buildings again it's a uh a canvas and frame building for material storage um there's going to be some more deiser tanks uh in that vicinity there's some existing deiser tanks near where the uh smaller bright span building is that are going to be relocated as well what are you're calling us a what it's a bright span that's the name of the manufacturer um it's it's a a canvas building with a uh kind of aluminum frame and these are new buildings or the existing those two specifically are are proposed they're new okay and are they temporary or they're they would stay they're permanent perent okay does it on sheet 3 where will I find the words break span anywhere uh we we call it out as a concrete structure with fabric cover Oh by bright span Building Systems are approved equal it's on sheet yeah and what's the difference between that one and the proposed salt storage canopy the uh the salt storage canopy is uh uh on shipping containers and it has a hoop that's attached to the shipping containers um these are are a little more pre-fabricated um they come from straight from the manufacturer uh the intention with the salt storage canopy is again it's um two shipping containers with a hoop in between we want to raise that up one shipping container so it's going to increase in height by 9' 6 in and we're going to double it in length in order to store more salt underneath so this is one container high for the ends and then there's some kind of hoop structure that goes from the C the containers on both sides yes and the intention is to raise it up another container height and double it in length is it going to be two containers or you it's currently one it's going to be two containers and then it's going to be twice is not what's the height to the top of the second and what's the height at the peak of the hoop uh it's going to be a Max of 32 ft High to the top of the hoop so um again I just to clarify you just said it's existing at one so this is this an existing structure or a new structure it's an existing structure that's being modified and and you can call it a proposed structure because we're going to make it bigger and higher it's going to be a proposed structure it's replacing what's there correct correct right we're gonna not pretend but we're going to treat the application as if what's there is not there because what's there wasn't approved so they're proposing a salt storage Dome two containers High to the lower part of the poop roof and the top of poop roof is 32 ft above ground that's correct Jeff what's the maximum height of both of this this is considered an ex rebuilding yes we're part of the principal yeah if you if you deem this a principal building it's a principal building yeah you got a 35 foot height Max rather than an accessory building correct principal building ahead uh in addition um we we previously mentioned the uh fuel storage tank um that is proposed right over uh right over here sorry so that'll be 10,000 bring it back one more what are you going to be what's going to be in The Brak span building uh just general material storage and what's the height of the bra span building the 24x 24 one the smaller one will be 25 ft High uh actually they'll both be 2 2 ft High the 40 by 100 will be 25 ft high as well what's excuse me what's underneath these structures uh it's just the whatever Pavements there it's concrete pavement it's going to go uh it's almost like a pole barn in that respect so it's existing existing impervious yes I can't hear [Music] the smaller bright span building it's labeled solar salt bin concrete what's being is that being is there any solar connection is it so what's what's I I think it's just the the roof type is it's a type of product that kind of reflects the on thank you okay to move on yep um so the next again was the uh 10,000-gallon subservice fuel tank which is being proposed right here um that'll just be right there for you know trucks to to come refuel they'll have circulation as we show on a circulation plan in a few sheet uh in addition we'll be adding striping to formalize parking in the front of the site uh and an ADA space is required go on to the striping just let's confirm that the underground storage tank uh we no longer need variance relief then from section 296-1488 C correct correct now I'm sorry you can move we let's confirm that the two Bryan buildings and the one salt storage D all of those are principal buildings because they're all part of this Contractor Yard storage correct correct correct now you can move on to the parking uh so again we'll be formalizing the parking in the front of the site um over here with Ada striping and um General striping for parking as well uh from a fencing standpoint we'll be uh proposing a new fence between the Residential Properties and the commercial property to separate the two uh and also proposing fencing along the Eastern and Southern property lines are those going to be just open chain link fence or with some kind of I believe we're it's white vinyl um sorry 8 foot high chain link with vinyl slats so it will be screening but it will still be chain link okay and the everything uh we'll be formalizing the traffic circulation layout with pavement striping and signage uh and the last uh Improvement is a 10x10 trash enclosure proposed uh towards the northwest corner of the property so there originally there had been some parking spaces in the front that have been relocated is that the parking spaces that you talked about earlier uh correct they they've been relocated to the the other side of the wall um from a circulation standpoint you'd be backing into the RightWay which is obviously no good so we've eliminated them from the plan uh from a utility standpoint all existing buildings are going to continue to function as they are with their utilities uh we are proposing a new sanitary connection for uh 70 uh Route 31 it's the main building towards the southeast corner of the property um that connection will tie in come across the yard and tie into the RTM that's on the property um we are also proposing a new sanitary connection at the south end of building D um and then just electrical for both brightband buildings is going to be pulled from uh the 70 Route 31 building that's insisting any questions before I move on um just going back to you you noted that there's some piles on the site that are going to be removed has the so is that I'm assuming that area is not paved correct if you're removing piles of dirt uh to to be honest I'm not sure if it's paved underneath or not can I have you say on the record yes the microphone is should be on right here you gotta identify yourself also uh Carrie shambre uh owner of 68 r31 Flemington LLC the owner of the property and been previously sworn at the last hearing session you were men under oath correct yes that's correct so so all of the ground is impervious majority of is concrete some of it is is not in in the greatest condition but it's not dirt by any means um it was basically a combination of of uh stone dust gra like gra like uh Stone and and concrete but a lot of it is concrete solid so I guess my concern is the the Tipping Point for storm order management and if they're disturbing this whole area to remove material did we get in your letter you had asked for calculations of what existed before what existed with permits and what's now so that's where I get I guess I'm just not I don't have good Clarity on you know for example did the large parking lot where all the storage did that get approved by the township or was that constructed therefore it would maybe trigger a look back were paved surfaces there's no correct me if I'm wrong what what site plan approval are would executive snow be working off for this site none that I'm aware of there is no there's no prior site plan for this site so so how would that if this is paved impervious Automotive space surface surface yeah would that not then trigger yes storm water management for the whole site yes that's that's one of the things that that we asked for testimony on is is the the actual surfaces when they were surfac everything so you got it I apologize that's that's one of the things that we actually asked for testimony on I think it's in our our memo that you would provide testimony with regard to you know when the these areas were surfaced um because ngdp rules were Prett specific as to when the motor vehicle surfaces were constructed motor vehicle surface actually is more recent so if it was prior to 21 actually it doesn't count towards that that but these surfaces were not constructed but these surfaces were part of the concrete plan correct right correct and I think the testimony does it pre I guess the main testimony I'm looking for is does it predate February of 2004 yes yes so if if the the surfaces really yeah no no go ahead I apologize and if I could take it a step further anything below those stock piles I mean the stock piles is just kind of stored material yeah personally I wouldn't consider moving that as Earth disturbance since you're not ripping out the ground underneath it um so it's just more of cleaning I'm talking about the you're talking about the historical the historical Paving of the site and that's kind of the testimony we're looking for disturbance wise yeah if you're not exposing soil we're not going to count that as servance uh but from a historical standpoint uh what we're looking for is testimony as to when the hard surfaces were put down uh and when motor vehicle surfaces made and altered so do you guys know when Hunter in concrete installed all this concrete surfaces so we'll present uh testimony from M mcmanis who has an exhibit that I can represent shows uh in 1984 in an aerial photograph with the site being essentially but back to parking I had does the amount of spaces you're providing comply with the ordinance because I'm looking at Jeff has two memos he's got his review number three dated October 10 and then he has his review number two dated August 15th on his August 15th memo he lists 16 items of variance relief item seven has been removed uh Jeff memo 1010 says you no longer need a variance for not providing Curbing and improved Paving um also now item number eight is going to be removed as of tonight because you're doing an underground storage T but there's no variances that are listed for the number of parking space unless I missed it so are you complying with the number of parking spaces uh no based on the the tenant spaces we are required 97 spaces uh we are providing 48 um we're not decreasing the number of spaces we're not increasing the square footage or the parking demand and historically there's never been a parking issue on site wait a minute when you say historically there's never been a parking issue on site historically as hun and concrete or historically as dis operation historically as my client operation cor which didn't have an approval correct so all right you're going to have to give some testimony on that and the notice as a catch all correct which in my opinion will cover that c variance from the number of parking spaces but you got to address that tonight so so Mr bandetto that uh you understanding is that this is a we're we're not adding any additional office space or Warehouse space um for the parking correct correct so um historically this all of these buildings have been used with the existing parking that we're proposing correct when you when you calculated the parking requirement used four different uses in in our ordinance it really is meant to categorize it into one principal use but you have multiple is there any any other way that you could maybe group them or is there is was there any other calculation that you used what page of the site plan shows your parking copy that's page three on the right hand side so you say you're using office Flex Bas and Industrial Park so Jeff do you have some kind of suggestion for industrial are any of them Warehouse use no no go through show us where are the 12,500 foot offices where's the 7,450 ft² flex space and where's the 16,000 foot industrial park if you look at the table on the top right of that same sheet it has all the uses listed out uh by building and the uh those units in the parking schedule are just a summation of what's in the uh uses table just above it Jay can you take a look at this well Jay's looking at parking um why don't you go on to some other issue that he doesn't have to look at sure um so we can go touch on the storm water discussion yeah why don't you why don't you do storm water well he's looking at parking do storm water because that's for R cases uh the the site proposes a minimal increase in impervious coverage um and that's really just the uh filling in the man-made ditch in the middle of the site which uh we now have D approval for um so we're not proposing any mitigation also given the the history of the site and you know potential contamination from previous uses the goal is to minimize Earth disturbance and infiltration practices um from a grading design not really changing much from the uh existing grades um the pavement over the ditch is to be pitched into inlets and piped underground so we're essentially just replacing the uh man-made ditch with the subsurface piping um signages being proposed on each building will be complying with ordinance requirements the sight lighting is proposed to remain and we will be adding photometrics uh as requested in ves's letter uh on the E side of the property as well so we'll be updating that and that concludes my testimony unless anybody has any questions of course I have a question about two um shapes I think they are concrete pads that maybe date back um to when the um concrete block plant was there but I was hoping you could clarify what those things really are and if you intend to utilize that concrete surface I can show you on my [Music] um so the questions were regarding U this space over here just just uh west of the stock piles and then this space over here just uh east of the uh State open Waters and the raran Zone um right now there's nothing proposed on them specifically um they're going to continue to be used for contractor storage maybe possibly storing materials there uh things of that nature um but there's no specific intention for those concrete areas at this time thank you um I guess my concern was if they are going to be used for storage or any kind of um vehicle uh needing to have access to those concrete pads how would a vehicle get in there so there's space between this where the stockpile currently is being removed and the fuel tank so if a truck were to come in up Route 31 come down this main area it can be accessed very easily right uh on just east of the fuel tank um could you I I didn't find any diagram or information about the layout and circulation like physically how will the trucks come in and fill up I saw the underground schematics but I couldn't So within a circulation how how are trucks going to pull up to those pumps and if you could explain that to us please uh sheet six will show the trucks will be coming in no this an example of truck coming in from Route 31 uh make a right into the site so so this exhibit shows a truck I'm sorry making a left into the site from Route 31 southbound it will come straight across uh and then there there's two options uh really to go straight and come around uh so pull right up and Fuel and then come through this area that looks like a parking lot that's where a lot of the snow removal trucks currently are stored so it'll be able to make its way out through the main Boulevard or it could come straight through that first and then pull out with the tank on the right side and fuel up that way and during the time that they're being fueled it's typically most of the trucks aren't on site correct um say that again I'm sorry so when they're typically like during snow season most of the trucks aren't being stored on site anyway so there is even more room for them to navigate during well if they're not there then it' be a lot easier of course but we were able to show the maneuver with the truck spaces I just wanted to confirm because I know that there's a lot of parking so just noting that even in snow season when they primarily be going in and out most often that it would be a lot more clear yes but is there any diagrams that show the I mean you have to have some type of fueling station above ground the the pump huh the pump so the the the pump is going to be right above the uh the tank or in the vicinity of the tank and the details on sheets 11 and 12 really this she right there oh sheet six [Music] yeah yes identify where the pumps are hold on see them okay are you saying that the pumps are going to be on top of that concrete pad which is above the tank e either on top of or adjacent to and we'll add the specific location to the plat yeah we know where saying the tank to right next to right but we have no details is there could you identify on page 11 or 12 were those details on the above ground pumps that will fuel these trucks you know so if you look at the top right of page 12 fuel tank section a uh it shows the lines going to the right and then you'll see schematically if you go down to the plan view in the bottom left you could see the fuel tanks going uh up and to the left so it'll be in the vicinity of the the slab again the location is more picked out in the field but we're happy to add it to the plan and just say here exactly it's going to be right next to the slab yeah being the daughter of a gas station owner um the tanks the fuel pumps and the protection of the fuel pumps with ballards and all those kind of safety issues as well as lighting emergency shut offs all those types of things I would think are details that are really important for us to understand what they are and I don't see that so from there are ballards shown on the on the the detail sections um that that will protect the pump where the what sheet sheet sheets 11 and 12 and the B detail itself is on sheet nine or 10 11 12 show the b b 11 12 detail detail the Ballard detail itself is on sheet nine and the ballards are called out uh at least on sheet 12 and I believe on sheet 11 as well sure and the fuel the schematic there's a call up for it in the the fuel system schematic plan View the top left of the detail says Bard C detail I'm not why don't we not talk when everybody's moving their plans because I can't even hear Rob when he's talking so when everybody's moving their plans let's just wait okay so you're saying there is a note 11 that says bed CD details yes okay that note that says b details where is that Ballard or how many ballards where are they locate there's uh two of them right in front of the fuel pipe Riser which ends up being the pump where's the show what's the sheet sheet 12 bottom left detail top left of the detail so so G given I understand the the safety concerns around the pump we have no issue providing a Ballard on all four sides given the the circulation on the site particularly around the pump there's only to be one pump there's only going to be one pump I'm sorry there's going to be two pumps yeah there's two there's two there's two risers a diesel Riser and a g a gas Riser and they both have BS in the front we could probably put B behind it we we we'll agree to put Ballers behind it as well given the circulation on site uh your other concern I believe you mentioned was lighting lighting and emergency Fuel shut offs I mean every installation has that red button yep and and that's something that we will have to comply with as um in in installing this in in any event um but it's a safety issue and absolutely and that's why we're going to have to provide it here's the qu here's the issue you might have some board members that say listen you got enough for preliminary site plan approval but before we Grant final site plan approval I got to see all the details you might have other board members say look this is not a gas station where people from the public are coming on site right this tank this gas tank going to fuel any Vehicles other than the applicant's vehicles no no so you could have some board members say public aren't coming on this site to use these tanks so in this particular case we'd be willing to Grant preliminary and final subject to a condition that you make the detail to the plan I'm not both of those scenarios in my opinion are reasonable it's not for me to say this is a board decision on whether you think you want to see the detail before final or if you're comfortable making a condition but either way I believe the board has discretion how they want to make the call understood and obviously the applicant's position is these tanks are not fueling up any Vehicles other than their own and not to say that well therefore they don't have to worry about safety I'm not saying that but what their position is it's not like you know a safety thing for public that doesn't know the site it's not Costco it's not it's not a gas St yeah it's it's for private fueling of vehicles but that's what board members are going to have to resolve yeah and and um that's the argument you're going to make right that's the argument I'm going to make and and you know we're we're this is an existing site that we are adding the underground fuel storage tank I understand but see here's the problem anytime you mention it's an existing site and we're just adding this it's an existing unapproved unauthorized site and you're saying we haven't had any problems with it but you haven't had a fuel tank on it so you're better off making the argument that I made for you if you can hop right into this chair I'm not going to but I'm just [Music] saying I think he's making the argument that I thought he was going to make okay we yeah this this design was very similar to a project we did for New Jersey Transit so it was a similar use where it was just the facilities trucks it's not open to the public um from a lighting standpoint it's not it's not a how a gas station has to be well lit on its own it's they're only going to be using it when they're using it they're not again not waiting for anybody else we have we have intentions of putting ballards all around the pumps to protect it um things of that nature is there a lighting detail on the planet a lighting detail we have a lighting plan we need to expand the lighting plan over to that side uh she [Music] seven it it doesn't uh we we as uh I mentioned with cas's letter earlier we're planning on pulling the photometrics plan expanding it out to show the full site and in addition if it's the board's desire to properly you know add more lighting to that area per ordinance requirements we're happy to meet those ordinance requirements as well but just to clarify so you are a snow removal operation so the there could be movement in fueling a trucks since it gets dark at 4:30 in the winter correct right there could be um I believe the intention would be to have the trucks mostly fueled up before they have to be sent out in a situation like that but I I know that's ideal but you know it it would seem like having lighting where there's fueling going on um would be really I think important I assume the applicant wants to have Lighting near the pumps is that cor the applicant agrees to add lighting to to the pump areas right so the again the question is do you want to see it first before you vote on it or could you vote on it and make it a condition that's up to the board yeah and and again this is really solely for the applicant's use of we're trying to keep lighting down as much as possible um and and not lighting areas that don't need to be lit so um the area of the fueling where where the fueling could take place we can easily add a couple of more ballards to the satisfaction of the board's professionals and in in accordance with um the standards and regulations that are required as well as whatever lighting is needed at that fueling area but we don't want to go nuts and lighting other areas that don't need to be lit yeah I mean I think that we're basically saying we want the areas of fueling fuel pumps lit right Y and that's that's minimal area that that we can provide that information to you y all righty where are you let's ask Jay how we did with the parking evaluation can you give Jay a microphone I did comment um on the parking noting what's already been noted that 97 are required 48 are provided okay but under the 97 required that's one that's the first issue is that the right calculation or not or is that the calculation that you would make as the board's traffic the methodology is correct I I would just request that um we update the documentation as part of the application submission there was an exhibit B that was submitted which is a spreadsheet outlining all the buildings and all the Suites and what each Suite is used for uh who the tenant is if there's a tenant and it just seems like uh some of the numbers don't exactly match how they were categorized on the parking calculations where what spreadsheet is that it it was in the original package uh with the application where the uh attorney did a narrative statement and then attached several exhibits I definitely missed that Jeff do you have that yeah it's exhibit B exhibit B to his narrative see here's the application yes absolutely yep I see it you guys see it's attached to the variance application there you got it so you're saying that so so that has a breakout of all the different uses it's just when I tried to lump them into buckets for a parking calculation it was a little different than what's on the parking chart so I think we would just need a document like this that ties into the parking chart and then some testimony on who who's in each building and why they don't need this much parking that the code says all right is this something if we took a recess that could be done yeah I think it could be done all right do we want to take a 10-minute recess coming back at 810 adjustment do you want to do the resolution first yes if you wouldn't mind we could resolution 2024 I can't hear you we turned off the microphone but now it's back on that was a test so we're back on the record and I'm suggesting that the board adopt resolution 2024-the because the new members who had not been appointed until 2024 who were correct that they physically weren't here at the December 2023 meeting they all listen to a recording and sign certification so they are eligible and Co bringle recused herself for the record she was sitting down in that cold conference room and almost got a cold but that's a separate issue and a separate story so the board members who are eligible to vote on this resolution are schaer cretina dami Drew Miller and bl now dami is absent so it would be Schaefer block ktina Drews and Miller if one of those people can make a motion one can second then a roll call vote could be taken and we can get this resolution adopted R do you want to make the motion again so move I'll second vote please chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Mr Randy block yes Miss lorett ktina yes Miss Donna Drew yes Mr James yes thank you so when we took the Break um Mr benedetto took a look at the issue and I think we've come up with a definition for the parking spaces that Mak sense and if you could take okay first before we do that can someone what's the deal with the spreadsheet well the the the spreadsheet um I think I was saying before the break that I was trying to categorize each line item into a bucket of office versus storage um we're basically working with two parking rates here uh four spaces per thousand if it's office and two spaces per thousand if it's uh industrial park or Flex space so I was attempting to reconcile that with the parking calculations on the plan and I could not uh get everything to add up um I'll let them testify as to what they how they decided to categorize it okay so we couldn't reconcile it I think we have the spreadsheet but there's some other method correct yeah um just based on discussion of the uses um the the what we have listed as office is more attributed to an industrial Flex space uh you know like a typical contractor storage just going to have a little bit of office but that really doesn't pull the same parking demand as an office space so we're uh looking to make the entire floor area for the site across the site industrial Flex space following the two per thousand square feet let's get both Jay's opinion and Jeff's opinion and and I think that was what we were angling for at the beginning of the meeting can we find one category for the whole site I agree that Flex space is an appropriate category for all of the square footage because the way I understand it all of these buildings are basically storage contractor storage they do have some offices as well but that's always part of uh a storage operation always has some small piece of office that's cooked into the parking demand so I believe that if you take all the square footage and park it at two spaces per thousand you would come to the right parking requirement that's that's consistent with the township regulation as well and I would agree and my only concern is going forth the tenant spaces if they were to change in the future how is that going to contribute to the site and to the parking and ask that if you categorized the entire site for Park calculation based on Flex space What would the required number of spaces be uh 72 okay and can you tell us how many What's the total square [Music] footage in other words tell us how you get to the 72 it it totals to about 36,000 square feet which at two per 1,000 square feet gets us to 72 parking spaces he Jay you agree with that yes okay and you're proposing 48 correct okay so we're going to need testimony to support why 48 spaces is sufficient and you don't need 72 so Mr benedetto we we're having 48 spaces which um is sufficient for our needs but in taking a look at the entirety of the site if there was the need the the either the the owner of the property found that there was a need for additional Park parking spaces the way this is set up additional parking spaces could easily be provided if that became a problem correct uh correct um in fact if you take a look at additional parking spaces without adding any impervious exactly by by reducing some of the storage or parking areas for some of the vehicles that that could easily be accommodated if need be let me ask a quick question how many square feet would you need 72 minus 48 is what what's the parking space deviation 24 24 24 so 24 space deviation how many square feet would you need for 24 additional striped spaces that's another 12,000 Square F feet are you talking about like reducing the building square footage or no I'm asking how many square feet of the impervious area would you have to would you need to put 24 more stripe spaces in yeah about 200 feet per space times 24 spaces is 4800 square feet than so taking the SAT you have a lot of square footage of impervious coverage on the site exactly could you just comply with that and stripe an additional 24 spaces so the board doesn't have to get into variance testimony about the parking it's really not needed is the point and and what's needed right now is the storage uh and and we don't want there to be another problem um that the other proposal is to um install EV charging stations and get a credit we're trying to minimize the again minimize the disturbance um and but you have to comply with that that issue the EV charging stes I don't think the board can grant the variance from that because it's a statutory requirement I haven't seen anything that it it's requ under these circumstances I haven't seen that in any of the reports the first that's coming up no I don't think so yeah you I didn't see it I'm sorry I thought I saw a comment John comment 21 comment 21 in your report of October 10 whose report je October 10 Jeff October 10 number 21 says no not in October does have August 15 marking section 296-155 point1 for evse standards has not been provided the applicant shall address this requirement the applicant is not proposing any EV standards and then I wrote in the in the margin here this is a statutory requirement even though an ordinance has adopted it's a statutory requirement what I don't which I don't think the statute provides for variances so if you have to comply with the EV you're going to get credits you're it's going to lessen the number of your deviation how many EV spaces would they have to provide John I I'm sorry but I have to ask the question there were there was testimony that there were going to be 25 to 30 employees on the property for executive no that's not counting all the tenants so that's where I'm just trying to wrap my head around now we're talking 48 spaces that's I'm suggesting ttim I'm suggesting the easiest path for them is just to comply and not seek the variance because then the question you're asking wouldn't be asked and if they also provide the EV spaces which I think they have to because I don't think they're allowed to get a variance from that that's going to take the 24 space deviation and decrease it to what I don't know I'm gonna again go to Jay for that one yeah I mean I can just see from their end like the real being realistic like they wouldn't be charging any of the cars or something that's being used so having that there put it this way what if their employee they said the employees are going to drive on they're going to take a vehicle and leave their vehicle what if some of the employees have a EV vehicle they could charge their vehicle yeah so that means their car is going to be left there while they take the snowplows out the snowplow drivers got to get there somehow so that means they got to leave their car pick up the snowplow right or the truck with the snowplow so if if that particular driver has an EV vehicle they could charge their vehicle while they're out snowplowing and the employees that are there between as was testified 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. office hours and they said there's 25 to 30 was the testimony do you want do you guys want to take another five minute recess to figure this out I think we figured it out okay what do you what do you got all right we'll take the five minutes because I just want to I want to clarify something before I think we do have it back to the board of adjustment so we're going to eliminate the parking variants yes and R explained that we're going to be let me try to ex let me give you my understanding and tell me if I'm right or wrong you're going to comply with the parking requirement in the following fashion 72 spaces are required right now they're showing striping for 48 which means they have a 24 space deviation yeah the statute requires them to install two Make Ready charging spaces and for every charging space you put in you get credit as if it's two so if you put two of those in it's as if it's four therefore the 24 deviation minus these four credit you're getting now you head down to a 20 deviation and you're going to stripe out 20 additional spaces therefore complying with the 72 requirement with 70 striped spaces two of which are EV ready is that correct that's correct what about the handicap requirement uh that would increase the handicap requirement from one uh two to three we're going to add another Ada space to comply with that well you don't have to add the total number of parking spaces you just swap conver one of them to Ada okay does everyone understand what they're yes they're doing and they're going to comply with Park I just want to add that this is only for a flex space use correct so if there was retail or any other use then it would all have to be recalc correct okay thank [Music] you so the overhead door place is not a retail use that's on the property now no and I'm going to uh defer to our planner to give testimony uh on the uses in a little bit I think we've addressed everything in the reports but I'm not sure go through landscaping and Engineering because I think there are open items in those reports been waitting so [Music] patient so John the date on your report no I can't hear you sorry Jack the date on my report is 8:15 24 and uh and they're basically three comments the last two I had basically requested some testimony on the landscape buffer or lack thereof and then uh parking lot trees excuse so could you address number number two landscape buffers um sure so uh to the east is is a lot that um we currently own that's all fully wooded um so we feel that at least from our space to the the wooded space next to us or to any residen is there's a sufficient buffer of landscaping so you're seeking an exception you're not going you're saying you don't intend to comply you want an exception yes correct B the exception is that there's Landscaping on another property which could you point out which property you say you also own so that's that's about residential lot number six I believe yeah and that's a that's a residentially zoned lot with a residential use on the lot and and yes but the and the residential use is all the way towards the front um this whole area back here is is um just vacant wooded landscaping area and in fact Mr benedetto didn't the applicant already landscape that area by putting significant number of our provides all along the the property yes where's that lot six lot six on the adjacent property here oh you put the on lot six not on the property subject of the application yes could you show that please we yeah I'm sorry I don't know where lot six is east of proposed lot 5.01 yes uh proposed lot 5.03 sorry so is there any buffering proposed along Lot 2 three4 which you do not own uh on the are those on the far side side I believe uh let's see what's the direction the northern property line yeah along Pennsylvania Avenue how about I make that easy yeah lots lots two three four a residential uses um think and residentially zoned I believe correct uh so o over there they have um we have some uh kind of storage bins uh and then that as a height provides screening and then there's a a the fence that comes around the side that's going to also provide screening the the the arbes that we planted too were like 10 feet tall mature arbores um spaced every four or five feet and it's quite we're going to provide a picture of what we did it's quite the screen that we that we installed but but along the Residential Properties that's correct so on lot two three and four no only on lot six we actually have other Arbor vies along the other side as well that we planted last year they're slightly smaller but yes we actually have arbores along the entirety of it and that has pictures of those twoo that she's going to be showing no I just sent you one did you send it to my email no you want to your email so where'd you send it to you you don't have my phone number and I guess my other question was I I I thought I heard in testimony earlier that uh there's a chain link fence a security fence involved and the chain link fence may or may not have slats in and is that along both of these property lines also yes so are you are you saying that all the Residential Properties will have the chain link and the slots not yes okay not just your two properties the other ones also yes okay thank you can you show this is a 10 we're going to install a 8ot [Music] yeah uh the chain link fence details on uh sheet nine top right just a fairly typical chain link fence detail um and then we uh call it out to be fitted with vinyl slats in note number five uh no that's for the trash enclosure High Ching fence look at upper right hand corner where can hear you no number five I asked him about the 8 foot high chain link gate and fence detail in the upper right hand corner of of drawing nine and I asked where's it call out for slat and he said under note five and note five says fence shall be fitted with vinyl slats we care what do we care what color I mean I think in this situation I would say green green vinyl fence with green sleds we'll agree to that it's dark green and I'll be really fussy I a chain wants it to disappear it's a chain link fence vinyl coated green with green slats that's what you're saying correct that's acceptable actually before you before you do that do you want me to show the picture yes I I'll put it up and that's going to be once a hard copy is made that's going to be exhibit A3 and can someone identify this is a photo of what excuse so this is a photo of the property line along um proposed lot 503 and lot six east side of the property and on the residential property that we own located at 134 Pennsylvania Avenue we planted over 100 of these um arbores that are mature trees um this past spring so it provides quite the screen already like immediate and it's going to continue to grow in um uh as well so if this if this is acceptable to the board my suggestion is because lot six is not part of the application there would be some kind of deed restriction requiring Perpetual maintenance of the Landscaping there un unless the use stops at the site because we can't rely on what if you sell lot six to somebody we want the owner of the property to be required to maintain it you're you're talking about a deed restriction on this property that that they will maintain the arbores on lot six yes and that's accepted okay [Music] no number three so could you just address number uh three the parking lot landscaping and then we'll work our way back to number one so thank you I like to do things in reverse order uh so the the reason no parking lot Landscaping is really proposed is because it's all existing parking terain um and I believe uh since this uh law was redone recently um along Route 31 that there's Landscaping on top um kind of to screen the rest of the the s's operations from Route 31 okay thank you I mean I think we needed to hear from the applicant it is it is all um it is all impervious surface and I I think in the past the board has looked at given the nature of this use that the just like the board has looked at storage lots for uh uh car dealers is that place that it's it's certainly nice to have trees but there's some practical issues involved so I I assume we'll hear some maybe some planning testimony with that you wouldn't want to have trees in there get kned over thatu correct correct operation be more of an obstacle than anything more of a hazard all right thank you so let's let's talk about number number one and I guess this was where I was suggesting that um and first of all there was planting done on top of that wall um that I think looks great it does it does screen the storage areas from the road but I would you know again there's a there is a requirement for Street trees every 50 ft in the township and it a appears that there's room there there's no other planting proposed on the road Frontage so there's nothing green you comply with that so you don't have to seek an exception here's here's our only concern with respect to that is that there's been talk about widening Route 31 and we we'd hate to put that uh Landscaping in only to have to immediately rip it out how many how many shade trees are you talking about if it's one every 50 ft well I looked at at it and looked at there was probably room for about four or five easily without going to the 1 to 50 ft because there's a five trees okay so I think that's that's one and and while on that it wasn't included in my report there are no poles on this side of the street they're on the opposite side so there's plenty of room for the trees there's one pole a utility pole and it has a one above ground wire and it looks to me like the only thing that that it Services is a flood light that's uh lighting the front of the building and and I want and I I mentioned this to raes I think it's a pretty glar flood light if you drive by there and wasn't sure that was absolutely necessary I also think there's something in our ordinance that talks about I'd love to get rid not permitting Lighting on the front of the building came up a long time ago lighting the shopping service yeah my client would like to address that actually yeah I I don't think that's our light but I would absolutely love to get rid of it if possible so if that's possible yet and we'd love to uh I I know exactly the light that you're referring to it it shines off the building it's uh it's it's old it's old school looking you know to certain it doesn't do anything you've done a nice yeah knowing what the building looked like before I think you've done a great job on the thank front of the building so yeah that's no problem we can do make that go away that would be if if we can if it's ours I don't understand whose light could it be I think it might be this I mean think it might be a road like a road light that was there I don't I didn't put that light in unless that's that's I'm not sure that's our light listen unless there's an easement for the power company to have a light there if it's on your property and there's no easing it's on the utility pole there I understand in many cases you know a property owner maybe prior property owner would just put a a light on the dot pole and shine it for their purposes so if you ask the dot they're probably going to let you just take that light out sounds good it's not serving their purpose I'm going to the condition is going to say remove flood light from utility pole subject to do approval I'm assuming it's the do pole could be a utility whoever the owner of the okay subject to approval of owner yes okay that's everything with Landscaping okay I'm think it's what report we going to next Rakesh okay what's your report what's the date our report is dated or original date June 14th revised October 142 can you go over your open item sure absolutely uh so the the revised report is formatted to sort of hopefully be able to be followed fairly clearly uh items that the applic provise plans and address our comments not satisfi um comments from our August 9th provision already talized and new comments or or changes to to the letter as of 26 or underline size cash can you talk I apologize no problem I should have known better um so in any case um yeah any of the comments that or changes per the most recent revision are underlined and it Talen sized the the applicant did provide a lot of the testimony that that we had requested um and there have been a lot of changes that we' requested made to the plan there's a few open items or outstanding items and and that's all I'm going to cover of course if there's any questions about anything in the letter you know I'm happy to answer any questions the board has um on page page three of 10 uh the start on page two oh page two sorry the exception for the tank no longer that's no longer applicable and then the uh condition has been removed with the relocation of the parking area waiver is no longer required that's correct that's because the the parking along 31 has been taken out so that that's no longer required okay so let's talk about the I the uh 29 section ordinance section 29675 c 2 C this is item four on page three of 10 states the parking areas should be curved with granite Belgian block or concrete curbing it is unclear if the proposed parking or the existing parking area are curbed testimony should be provided a waiver may be required and you say they're now requesting a waiver so what's the if are you requesting a waiver and if so what's the basis yes and the basis is it's an existing site that we're just legalizing the parking by adding striping to it um does Belgium Block curb make sense for a uh this type of about concrete curve instead of saying Belgian block it could be Granite Belgium Block or concrete curve does concrete curve make sense to help with um drainage flown off the site or not is it is it would it help drainage or hurt drainage I think it would hurt drainage in a lot of cases given the way the site currently goes it just be holding up water in certain spots so the basis for the waiver is not because you you got an existing site you the basis is if you put curbing in it'll be detrimental to storm water drainage if you don't put curbing in it's a benefit is that correct correct I would concur okay how about item five can someone read this besides me can you absolutely I didn't want to step on your toes uh yeah item number five would be uh section 29675 c3d uh which states that no access Drive driveway or other means of or egress shall be located in any residential Zone this has to do with the that portion uh of the property that go goes up to Pennsylvania we've had a lot of testimony about that the applicant is not proposing an access up there so that's no that waiver is not required um Number Six 29675 c3e States sidewalk and curbing should be provided in parking areas for pedestrian traffic theant uh should discuss basically pedestrian traffic along the within their parking lot okay so you're requesting we are requesting waiver right an exception what's the basis for this exception that there's really no parking pedestrian circulation around the site they pull right up to the building and they walk into their respective buildings so you're saying it's imprudent it doesn't make sense to require sidewalk and curving where it's not going to be used because this area is not going to be used by pedestrians correct and the remainer of the the parking is really storage of of your vehicles and Equipment correct okay uh and number seven we just defer to the to Jeff for any other uh relief uh that may be required and I'm sure he'll cover what he's got noted so so those are the waivers um and then again going down in our review memo uh testimony was provided a lot of this testimony that we requested in general comments has been provided um the subdivision there was originally a subdivision plan uh as part of the plant set because AFC is looking to do some lot line adjustment uh we had numerous comments on that plan uh but the last two iterations the subdivision plan was removed um can you tell us what what gibes uh sure um so because we uh have decided to you know should this uh board look favorably on the application we will be uh perfecting the lot line adjustments by deed therefore a subdivision plan in accordance with uh map filing La that recordation laws recation law uh recordation laws U not required however uh for clarity uh we are going to go back and add a subdivision plan for reference not in accordance with the recordation law but just simply to demonstrate the lot lines a little better show all the required setbacks and and they will comply with your notes with the acception of meeting recordation law requirements I what do what do you think about I I actually I'm actually okay with that my my initial Rea my initial thought was when you said we're f a deed was for a complicated a somewhat complicated matter like where like this is where you're eliminating some some some lot lines you're adding some lot lines there's some R RightWay dedication and what have you we would prefer to have that on a plat um I'm I'm I'm actually okay with spling the baby with what what what the afc's offering which is the prepare a subdivision plan which we do want um let me ask you this [Music] sure if you if you want all those shown yep it wouldn't be better to attach and pilot yeah I mean how much additional detail and money even though money is not an issue is involved to instead of just submitting a subdivision plan for clarity you submitted the subdivision plan and you recorded the subdivision by the plan I know the law says you can do either one but it's in my opinion if the board wanted it done by filing the plan they would have the authority as a condition to say they want the subdivision filed via a Subdivision plat and not by a deed because of the complexity so how much more time and money is involved in doing it by plat I I don't have that number off the top of my head I just it's it's not an insignificant effort but it's it's all Al more of you know because it is a minor subdivision like you mentioned we are legally allowed to file it this way so that was just that we were suggested the law says you could do it either way but what I'm saying is in my opinion if the board wanted it to be created and filed by map they have the authority the law doesn't the law doesn't say it's at your option the law says it could be done either way it doesn't say the board can't tell you which one it want's done I I I don't know if I agree with that but the the other concern is that I have to do these Deeds anyhow to you know it's going to have to be done by deed for some of these by deed and by because the Subdivision plat creates puts all those easements in a recorded fashion rather than have the easements on this plat it sits in the planning office and then if someone does the title search to see the subdivision it's by Deeds without all the information on it yeah I mean I would tend to agree I agree with Mr Mr drill as far as that goes that if you do record it it's there in perpetuity and recorded and and it's not just in the the planning board's files I mean could it be more than $2,000 of details to put on a subdivision flat to be recorded rather than just for clarity again I'd have I'd have to talk to surve that I mean a plat could be anywhere up to $5,000 to $10,000 depending on if they already prepared one and then pull yeah they have prepared a subdivision plan but we had about 35 comments 35 comments that and after the comments that's when they yeah withdrew the plat and said they're going to file it by deed I'm sorry 28 comments 29 we we can do it by plat and we'll try to limit that what needs to be done by deed then um you could whatever you want to do by deed is your business if you if you the condition is going to say that the subdivisions got to be recorded and created by plat and then if you also want to do a deed God bless you on okay yes thank you reluctantly yes can a GIS file can a GIS file in state plan coordinate also be subed uh okay thank you uh just to to add to that um if it's okay with you that separate plat was just going to be independent of this plan set a oneon-one plat yeah if you're recording it that's perfectly fine yeah hey what happened to your general comments 8 through 12 so 8 through 12 we can go through that real quick the the afin did provide testimony number eight uh request General testimony about the operation that was provided uh do letter of no interest uh the a that that they will be submitting a letter that's a condition right um number 10 the that testimony was provided right uh and number 11 uhsh that's fire Marsh condition yes number 12 number 12 was provided okay and then that brings us to number 13 uh all the way 13 through 41 the applicant will agree that they will address on the plat because those are all plat related comments yep that brings us down to the site plan comments um and we note item number 42 43 44 45 whoa whoa whoa hold it sorry I just got lost no that's fine page five okay so you're saying comments 13 through 41 right they're all plat related comments that can agree to to address I have a question about that existing conditions survey yes Does it show the um trailers that are parked in the storage area are they considered a sort of a permanent item I would have to defer to Mr bendetto as far as the details that are indicated on the plan it was provided you can see them in the area and it's in that area that I was asking about before um get the laser over here shipping boxes um uh to be honest I'm I'm not sure I I wasn't I know it was my company but I wasn't the surveyor of record so I'm not sure if they were there at the time or if it was just surveyed as um you know it's a it's a material that's on the ground um I don't believe they're permanent structures you're talking about the tra about about the shipping containers me yeah that's not those are not permanently fixed to the ground those are those are mobile like units that that could that could be moved so wouldn't be on a surve when I reviewed it they like them to the different places they'll drop the box there and they can pull their machines in store it there so it's not on site without getting snowed on and everything so it's only the temporary storage what you're seeing on that yeah it wouldn't be and they're not fixed structure so it wouldn't be on a survey so they're not being used for or I think there was testimony they were being used to store materials bags of salt and things like that for the salt storage canopy is different that's more a permanent structure when you're putting it in a truck I I was talking about like so those because we do have regulations against shipping containers not being they're not being used as part they're not being used as part of the operation no and so so just I just want to be really clear so the shipping containers that are part of the one salt or the material storage hoop right those are used for storage of materials to our operations and that's even the second level not the second level not the second level the first level so so the first level is used because it's part of that structure the other independent Standalone shipping containers on the site we we use those on our customer locations to store materials when we're like for our operations they come back to our yard we typically do some repairs on them or you know work on them or just a small number gets stored in the spring and summer and they go back to the customer sites for winter season operations so there should be some sort of notation on the plan saying something like that what I'm not exactly sure um yeah just because as a heads up we are there's going to be some ordinances coming in regulating shipping containers on in the township so if you want if it's if it's something that's approved though by the boards then it's exempt so the testimony I think at the last meeting mean was that there was approximately 10 shipping containers that were in that temporary basis that are stored on site and used off site back and forth but no more coners and that's correct I heard it today when I reviewed the video stored on site for use off site how's that as a condition that's good so the aial that was provided that for the 10 10 shipping container limit yeah the area provided shows at least double before 10 shipping container limit right yes I'm sorry I want to make sure I understand the question so your aerial shows more than 10 containers exhibit A2 shows more than 10 containers yeah I I G I gave an approximate number it's sometimes there's been like I right now I don't think there's even 10 there and there's been other times where there's been 15 there um as a Max and I understand where we want we need to nail that down I understand that um just give me the number I would I would I would ask for 15 if that's the case so we're not you know it gives us enough room up to 15 shipping containers may be stored on site for use offsite and are those aren't stacked on top of one another are they no there's going to be a condition that containers cannot be stacked on each other other than the containers two stack for the next how about the the future contractor's yard to the to the south of the subject there's a there's an area to the South where it's the future I believe it's labeled future tenant oh um correct yeah um just just giving consideration for that part of the property that's the F furthest away from the residential homes and just thinking about and thank you Jeff for mentioning that um if we were to delineate a certain area in that part of the property um because there might be a contractor that needs needs a small number of of containers undercover for storage then I would just and that's adjacent to the railroad track so it's it's not near any residences it's by the you know the deepest part of the property I would I would ask for a separate um a separate allotment for that um area to X number of shipping containers do you want to do a flat for the property or do you want may may be used in the contractor if I get if I could if I could ask for 10 10 Max there that then I think we're covered separate okay I'm not speaking for the board I'm not speaking in terms of conditions but up to 10 shipping yeah that works containers may be used in the contractor storage area for contractor storage purposes how's that thank you okay so we're back to site plan all right so 42 is satisfied 43 is satisfied 44 45 satisfied correct 46 46 I think it's really a graphical thing um on the site plan there's a there's a sort of a rectangular shaped dash line that's you just tell us what that is yeah I I actually believe those were the areas where the uh containers were shown uh in the it was just a surveyed Dimension okay all right great is that the area that you're proposing to store them in the future uh yes so can we maybe just use label that area then as as your designated area for storing the containers for both of the bo yeah this is for the up to 15 correct uh item number 47 uh was satisfied um y number 48 uh was gr the the tank um the fuel tank now you can convert this into what details if the board said we are willing to Grant preliminary and final site plan approval subject to a condition that they provide additional details for the underground tank bards lighting whatever what would you want to see in that condition so we want to see ballards uh signage directing you know whatever emergency uh um measures there are signage instructing employees you know where things are and all that um and also how you how you handle spill whether it's going to be spill kits uh containment requirements uh I believe the the tank does require certification within njd so you that would be as a condition of approval and any any requirements that are part of that would be detailed also on the site plans we can do that as a condition of approval yeah I don't have an objection to that so hold on I'm GNA say add details for signage ballards lighting containment spill kit for 10,000g commercial underground fuel tank and above ground pumps yes did you have emergency shut off too okay hold on emergency shut off emergency shut off and I would add any and any other details as may be required by the NDP registration detail required by NJ d [Music] okay now take a look at you had 48a circulation the circulation plan they showed on the plan is that good enough for you we defer to to J on that yes okay so cross a out B cross that out right B is no C that's what you just said correct D you also what you just said yes and E is the ballards bance what you just said course has satisfied B okay correct 49 is satisfied 50 so 50 uh we we had a very robust conversation about parking that's 50a so I'm I'm satisfied as long as Jay and and Jeff are satisfied you guys satisfied after the whole discussion about how they're going to comply yes um B was satisfied with regard to that requirement uh C uh is the lighting that can uh agreed to provide that lighting so so that's going to be a condition that will be a condition um D is uh that's been satisfied the parking spaces were relocated that's satisfied that's satisfied um e uh Landscaping I defer to to John that's they explained the exception y so we got that take that off f f if any board members disagree with anything that we're saying you got to tell us yep f f again is the parking and again I'm I'm satisfied as long as Jane and Jeff are satisfied his F take a look at his F top of page seven I is obviously taken care of because I was at access to Pennsylvania Avenue and um the parking in the Route 31 was taken out so we're fine with that satisfied huh fix it okay 51 uh 51 again we defer to J with regard to the call outs for signage and striping and everything that's still an open item in my [Music] memo okay we'll get to you after we finish him 52 is satisfied 53 is satisfied correct uh 54 is satisfied 55 uh yeah we asked for the the structure to be numbered I don't think rob you have a problem with that right no condition yes 56 satisfied 57 satisfied 58 satisfi 59 uh 59 the applicant did discuss uh the runoff from the site it's yeah so do any board members have any more questions about this the runoff yeah I I guess I still there's I'm not sure there's Clarity around what existed prior and what might be included the storm water regulation so so I I think the um the basic uh breakdown there is that uh anything if was prior to 200 I should say anything after 2004 when when the current regulations well they've been modified since several times and um even more numerous in the last few years um but since 2004 any any dis any impervious coverage created since then um has to be accounted for as far as water quality and water quantity if there's disturbance greater than one acre uh even cumulative then the quantity has to be addressed um so that's where so we're we're waiting there's going to be apparently testimony by their planner who has either gone online and found pictures or whatever to show that all the impervious surfaces were created prior to 2004 and she's going to be able to tell tell the board which portions of the Pavements were created at which times correct that's that's my understanding we're going to be able to show you what was there in 1984 right okay and you're going to be able to say that what was there in 1984 is there today yes okay and I I I do agree with what Mr bandetto uh testified to earlier which is that if you have um materials that were moved around and and the hard surface underneath wasn't removed down to the to the Earth then that wouldn't count as disturbance so that's the other um part of of of the criteria the impervious surface mot and motor vehicle surface is what came in recently in 21 so any any creation of greater than quarter acre motor vehicle surface would require water quality treatment and I just want to confirm are they increasing the impervious surfaces at all under this application they are uh and one of the things further down is that we ask for a quantification of the actual square footage I believe I I know it's under the the threshold but we want the actual square footage Quantified you have what item is that we'll get to it then yeah we will get to that that's that's in my memo okay item so if but if there is not Clarity around when given that I'm just looking up for a fairness issue we we go after homeowners when they they put you know more impervious coverage in and we make them do storm water and this that and the other thing so you know that's that's why and they're after the fact usually and this is kind of after the fact as well photographs that's why Rakesh wants to know how many square feet of additional impervious are they proposing y based on that he'll be able to render an opinion is it a major is it a minor or is it exempt from storm water but that has to await the testimony on how much additional impervious I'm just going to ask a question is why do you have to add any impervious can't you could you do this without adding any impervious uh well the impervious being added is just uh for the removal of the madade ditch on site um it's being done for a couple reasons namely for circulation but also it uh it's a bit of a hazard given the the vehicle circulation on site uh and it would just make the whole site as a whole a lot safer to just have the area paved it's a very insignificant portion of the site by comparison to the size of the ex right now how many square feet of pavement and how are you going to how you going to eliminate the ditch you're just going to fill it in uh yes and we have D approval for filling in the ditch okay how many square feet of pavement are you going to add and what type of pavement is it concrete pavement is it black top uh it's going to be concrete Paving looking for the exact number of square footage and it is a motor vehicle surface it is a motor vehicle surface it it i i the number escapes me right now and I don't know that I see it on the plans but it is under a quarter acre I I'll testify to that and um yeah yeah we're going to want to know how many square feet you may have to take another recess but let's keep on going for now so you have D approval to fill the ditch and you're going to use concrete pavement fill the ditch and your testimony is less than a quarter acre now and I will confirm the number yeah and R can you if it's less than a quarter acre are they subject to any of the new storm water regulations if it's less than a quarter acre of increase and less than one acre of disturbance then they're not subject to any those and even if it's a vehicle service correct okay we'll find out the exact number item 60 uh item 60 is we asked for additional grading uh in the area of building E1 uh the Contours obviously were removed uh and because you I guess there was an indication that the actual topography isn't isn't accurately represented by the Contour so we asked for some testimony on that sure um yeah on the original survey there was a it it it was almost as if the wall didn't exist one of the spots in the in the 3D surface was off and it kind of threw everything for a loop um we we took a look on site and now the Contour is more ACC accurately reflect what's out there where this the it the site kind of Dives down next to building e and the Contour now show that so parking area is under the 10% okay so the fact that you took the the Contours out was not just take the cont it was really to clarify so what's depicted on the plan now is the actual condition correct okay okay so do I Crush that out is there something you can cross that out yeah absolutely 62 and 6 that was 60 and 61 you're you're look at you yeah you're right sorry no but but same explanation for both buildings um 62 this testimony was provided by the app that's the whole mua thing correct oh yeah um yes that's right as far as the like five EV yep yep absolutely so that was provided um so now storm water management item 63 63 is actually what we're asking that to quantify the proposed pavement which and that's that's an open item it's 920 let's keep on going but I think you're going to have to take another recess to see if you can crank out a number I I I will find it um during our planner testimony okay 64 yep is um we defer to John as far as the buffering goes took care of that on his um same with 65 yes that's correct um 66 satisfied 67 68 correct uh RTM 69 I'm okay the app can indicated they they'll provide this information regarding the sanitary SE connection yeah once the rtma approves it that's that's fine with me 70 is a condition correct no it's no longer applicable no it's no long they showed it correct 71 satisfied 72 satisfied 73 satisfied new comments U 74 we said minor subdivision plans well you're gonna have to slow down I'm going you're going much too fast okay sorry 71 72 73 are satisfied new comments starts with item 74 which is a minor subdivision plan should be provided and we discussed that before it's going to be a condition correct it's not simply a plan it's got to be a recordable plat yada yada yada yes y 75 is satisfied correct 76 76 uh we're basically asking for the limits of the pavement for the Ada parking to be provided and also we're asking for you know the proper signage and grades any problem with making that a condition no we'll comply 77 uh 77 uh we're just asking to clarify the the dimensions the setback dimensions for the for the two um uh what they called something bright the bright span bright span structures so I'm going to make this a condition instead of the location of the structure should be reviewed it's going to be the location the the dimension Dimensions correct the dimension setback should be provided and setbacks of the proposed structures shall be provided and and uh we will be moving that slightly to get it outside of both 10- foot setbacks okay that's that's item number 79 we're going to comply with 78 was satisfied and 79 Mr bendetto just indicated they'll they'll comply yep uh 80 uh are again some revisions to the UHD plan I don't think you have any issues with with that right we comply um 81 comply means condition yes now 81 I assume is going to be 81 is what Mr and I've been asking for here right the history of the site Improvement that's going to be for their planner correct uh 82 um given the the nature of the site uh it would be prudent to put some sort of Inlet filters in these inlets condition okay and then 83 are the Outside Agency approvals for me to make sure I put it in resolution in administrative also taxes fees future submissions that's those are to make sure I get it in the resolution correct that's correct I like to be thorough yeah and that's my M my my letter I'm happy to answer any questions that I don't think there should be any we covered every single item but if if there's more I'm happy to answer them [Music] no moving on to Jay yep my memo was originally dated June 14 2024 revised August 14 2024 and um the comments begin on page two and the items in bold give the stat the latest status of the comments um number one is addressed we we were just wanted to make sure these driveways have been operating safely and we did have a search done and there were no crashes found uh there's a three-lane section out there with a center turn lane which is good for this type of use to have that that separate stacking Lane along the frontage um number two uh we heard the testimony of the site operations at the last hearing uh number three is an open item um I was expecting to see traffic control signage on revised sheet uh five traffic layout and signage plan and it really only calls out building signage so that so yeah so what do you want to do about that a condition we'll make that a condition and we'll work with um Mr trowman to comply that's acceptable [Music] number four was the the truck turning plan which uh I already independently analyze that uh so I signed off on that okay so I can scratch that off yes number six is five comment addressed yeah and number six sorry number five is addressed okay so hold it number four you did independently satisfied five is addressed and six is addressed yes yes that yep that was they redesigned that and number seven is the whole parking calculation thing which we did before yes something on to Jeff's anything on Jeff's yep now we're up to Jeff Jeff got two I suggest we go through both you have some item yes Mike yes so August 10th uh October 10th is the new memo with new additional comments the only comments that i' like clarification is eight please confirm this the size of the shed on lot 5.03 if the structure is larger than 180 square feet variance will be required the shed's approximately 80 squet feet so 8 80 so it will not need a VAR so I believe it's a lot to the east propos 503 looks like a big  which one you're talking about I think he knows he's getting [Music] scale what would the variance variance be for the size of the shed or the location it would it would be for the location because of the new lot line so you're saying assuming the shed is greater than 180 square feet it has to be how many feet off the line 15 and how many feet off the line is it that's the dimension wasn't confirmed that's what is that shed able to be relocated to make the the variance go away that that's a fixed garage just based on scaling it appears to be 20 x 20 um so it it would need to we need variance approval okay thank you what's to construct it of I I believe I believe it's like a it's not a it's not a sh a block building um I do not I do not recall off top I I can get that information I don't have it off top of my head I think so is it a garage or is it a shed I believe it's a garage but let me confirm let's check because even if it's 20 by 20 if it's wood conceivably could just be moved and make the variants go away I guess it if it has like a wood floor right that would be the constitute if it's a shed or if it were a garage it would have concrete or something on the ground that's a it's a it's a it's a building with like siding it's like vinyl it's got a found yeah it's a foundation yeah it's got a foundation slab yeah yeah it's not a ship okay another sh of building on 5.03 approximately 20 by 20 which is 400 sare ft so can you use scale how many feet off the line is it Jeff says under the ordinance got be 15 ft uh the dimension is actually there it's 10.7 ft from that back property line 10.7 ft off the line required to be 15 ft we're gonna put that on Miss mcmanus' list of variances to support that's item eight item nine is will be a condition and explain item 10 so item 10 I believe there's there's been some notes and and um clarification for for signage to be comp complied with however there's there's there's not a sign plan uh provided um so at a time of zoning permit submitt or even prior to that uh some details uh by the manufacturer even some some coordination to accept condition of approval to submit a signage a detailed signage plan that's correct and uh I know that I know at one at one point were Ground signs um if that could I know that it was removed um and maybe some test testimony as to if there would be any ground signs proposed just confirmation no no ground signs thank you okay anything else for Mr Bella else anything else from Mr Bella I'm just reviewing the August 14th memo uh I think everything was testified to uh the hours of operation it it will be the um what's permitted in the ordinance except for the snow plowing uh or the the snow business which you know we need 24 for but everything else will be in accordance with the ordinance okay 24 s operation allow no not when it's adjacent to Residential Properties what does the ordinance set they're limited to 5:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. amm I'm sorry 5 a.m. to 12 midnight Midnight [Music] yes and what's the proposal that would apply to everything except the snow plowing operation right which would be 24hour when needed that's one of the D1 use correct that's your October 10 right that is now on August a August 14th [Music] item number 33 and as far as Township Agency Reviews we did not receive any updated reviews one Fire Marshall was was acceptable with the comments conditions out of your October 10 and the hours of operation [Music] condition having trouble hearing you I said I got the conditions from Jeff's October 10 memo and other than the hours of operation condition which limits hours of operation to 5:00 a.m. to 12 midnight except for snow plowing which can be as needed which can be 24 hours is there anything in your August 15th memo that has to be made a condition just the AutoCAD file and GE reference uh G uh number 38 nothing other than 33 and 38 because they agreed to do the E 31 right and 31 so nothing other than 31 33 and 38 20 applicant has agreed to relocate storage areas outside the boundary line and nothing other than 20 31 33 and 38 and 18 unit numbers so nothing other than 18 at this point1 33 38 at this point no done just okay any other questions from Mr benedetto and I'd like to call Miss mcmanis I'll have to change the paper five minute recess what did we say he was going to do on a five minute recess square footage square footage square footage five minute recess Jack get a change paper if to get square footage [Music] calculation m mcmanis Are you able to finish if we take a five minute break yes then we'll take a five minute break thank you calling the board of adjustment back to order so before the planner testifies um Rakesh brought up a a question yeah we can just confirm that uh on top of the um the old concrete plant the hopper the metal Hopper down to the roof line that's all going to be removed and then conveyor you're going to remove any and all remaining concrete plant equipment from the roof yeah roof line up what do you mean roof line up right they taking the equipment not the build I meant guys nobody can hear you the condition would be you're going to remove any and all remaining equ concrete plant equipment not the building from the yes from the roof I don't know what how about if there's more stuff on the site I don't know if it's on the inside of the building that wouldn't be part of it so I don't I don't know what's in there I'm just saying that the monstrosity that's on the roof that's the concern do they plan on using this building what do you plan on using the building for if if you plan on using the building then he knows what's inside is part of this equipment inside the building it's it it's it's not um it's built as part of the structure so it's not equipment like Machinery this is actually like the structure is the plant and we can take off we can basically take the top half off the bottom half is part of the structure itself so it's not it's it's uh it's structural it's not it's not like a piece of equipment we can just take out can someone explain to me part of I need to write a condition I gave it to you remove Hopper the hopper and and associ conveyor buildt remove the hopper and conveyor belt yeah conveyor apparatus and Associated structure remove the hopper and conveyor apparatus apparatus okay and Associated structor they don't want Associated they said they want the building Associated like support structure like like if there's like plates on the ground that kind of stuff any support structures not outside the building support structures outside the building how's that1 building labeled E1 yeah yeah perfect okay we do have an answer on the square footage too okay let's get the Wetland approvals for 3,121 square F feet of um the manmade ditch to be removed and replaced with pavement 3,121 21 Square ft of concrete pavement will fill the dat [Music] correct okay and if an acre is 711 43560 divided by four is what 10,000 10,880 okay it's definitely less than that okay I think missis was sworn at the last meeting yes yes she was you remain under roast and um I will just ask I know she's testified before this board many times I just ask if her qualifications her license is still in good stand good okay great Beth could you give the board to do you accept her yes plan she already said yes Beth could you give the board the benefit of your uh planning analysis yes I'd be happy to so folks we've got uh a handful of variances and exceptions here um but it just in terms of the big picture I'm going to start with the D D1 variances in a minute but in terms of the big picture I think what we're talking about here is we have a historic industrial use that has been here in riton for to be honest I'm not sure when the original concrete Flemington block started but it's decades upon decades at this point it it turned into a vacant property and now it's coming back to life as part of executive snow and I think that this is an opportunity for the township to have this historic industrial site that as of uh the last several years not most recently several years has been been a bit of a uh an eyesore but there's an opportunity to bring it towards conformance uh to have the improvements legalized and formalized through this process and also for the township to be able to better regulate this use and all of this can be done by maintaining while still maintaining the site as uh as a jobs location and uh and a center of Industry in the township not just if we're successful here not just for one use but for multiple uses on the property for a place for uh these uh businesses that need this type of uh an area as opposed to a typical retail or an office a place for them to go and stay in Raritan Township all by bringing this site back to productive use but two quick things you said retail I said not like uh as opposed to uh like retail I'm trying I just want to differentiate it from a from a typical retail um but in order for us to get there and Achieve those goals we need uh some use variances so let me start with that so and can I just do one other thing before I forget when you said was Beth sworn yes she was and I'm looking at my list John Ray was sworn Jay troutman's never been sworn so Jay do you swear or affirm the testimony you already gave in this proceeding was the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do okay um so for our use variances we need or we're asking for uh a use to be permitted on the site that includes a Contractor Yard uh as that is not currently permitted in your B2 District as part of that we're also looking for outdoor storage of materials as well as the shipping containers on the site uh as well as including for maintenance and the fueling of vehicles as we've heard and then we're also looking for D2 D1 use excuse me for more than one principal use on the property and I know we've heard a lot about what executive snow does on the property but what I thought uh we would provide is a proposal for the uses that would be permitted as part of the contractor's yard because we would also like to uh from an administrative perspective simplify things for us and simplify things for the township I have an exhibit here which Taylor I've emailed you and then I'd also like to pass out folks which provides a uh essentially a proposed definition and some information regarding our proposed use and I'll let this get passed out and then uh the first thing I want to do is actually edit one aspect of it based on the discussion that has happened this evening A3 A4 thank you this is yeah this is the uh definition of Contractor Yard or the proposed proposed proposed use on uses on the property right A3 was the thing that was emailed which right the picture which you're GNA print and then email me a copy okay so folks what you see here is I'll just walk you through quickly what's listed on the page so at the top we have uh proposed permitted uses intended to reflect not only executive snow but also the the tenants that we've talked about in here it states uh B2 Zone permitted uses and a Contractor Yard and I want to come back to that in just a minute but just to go through what's listed we also hold up hold up hold up so what you're saying is any use allowed in the B2 Zone okay so let me do the amendment first then yes so the proposal before this evening started was going to be any use perit in the B2 Zone plus The Contractor Yard as defined in here based on the discussion regarding parking I think what we'd like to alter that to be is the flex uses or Flex space uses which I know the township recently defined in June of this year as well as a Contractor Yard which is not a defined use but is what exactly what we're asking for here and I've provided a definition of Contractor Yard that my my proposal is that it be incorporated into a resolution so that we can rely upon it and so your zoning officer can rely upon it so we're going to scratch out any B2 Zone District use because that would raise parking issues yes don't do that and we're going to in after we cross it out in Flex space uses as defined in the ordinance as well as a Contractor Yard as defined below that's the proposal yes I also have in here the hours of operation which we just went through uh it's uh 5:00 a.m. to midnight except for snow operations which are 24 hours and specific to Executive snow okay so hold on the hours of operation right I know it says as permitted accept activities directly related there's no clearing but we'll use the condition that we had that as discussed yes and so then a Contractor Yard the definition that I that I'm proposing that we're putting forth to the board is intended to be consistent with what we know executive snow does as a business and the anticipated tenants on the site and that would that would include a use engaged in construction or maintenance services for general or specialty trades that includes one or more of the following related to the contractor use and the one or more of the following include things like Office training Workshop maintenance and fueling of vehicles fabrication Andor assembly of materials storage of materials and storage Andor repair of vehicles machinery and equipment and of course all before you go on quick question the fueling of vehicles is the fueling station for lack of a better word I thought it was only for executive snow is it also for any contractors our proposed fueling station is directly related to Executive snow it is not intended for our other tenants correct correct correct so hold on so it's maintenance of vehicles and equipment and we're going to crush out fueling because that will be we need it'll be specifically authorized for just this use for just executive snow fueling of vehicles for executive snow only put that on the bottom for now because if you don't do that that's going to bring all those safety and other issues that were brought up by some of the board members I think that's fair and that's certainly something that we can support now the maintenance of vehicles or equipment generally the couple times that the board has allowed that they've never allowed it to be done outside it's only been allowed to be done inside and obvious because I think that wasi I think that wastified that there wasn't going to be any mainten yeah that's that's there's no maintenance of vehicles and this is not intended to alter that it's just simply the activities that would be Associated so it's maintenance of vehicles and equipment in indoors only if if that's if that's necessary for the board yes that's acceptable fabrication and or assembly of materials indoors only yes storage of materials interior or exterior fine we have that limit of uh I don't know I forget it was like 20 feet of material stacking or something like that and last time storage Andor so storage and or repair of vehicles machinery and equipment so we're going to knock out repair because we already have maintenance of vehicles and or equipment was storage of vehicles Machinery Andor equipment so let me just bring this down and show you guys I have I'm not speaking suggesting that propos can you put repair maintenance and repair here you took repair out maintenance [Music] maintenance when we're done with this tayor is there a copy machine that you could make so you can hand this out to the board members so they can see exactly what the proposal is yeah no no we're not done yet but now we're going to the other part okay so that's so that's the operations of the use the final part on this page provides examples of what it would include uh the examples I've provided are landscape Contracting Tree Care Services plumbing heating air conditioning building Andor site restoration or remediation construction metal work IND oror welding and or building and site maintenance and then you also say the you shall not include on-site sale of materials or merchandise correct and we put on the bottom fueling of vehicles for executive snow only yes okay can I give this to yes so continuing on just to be clear just to be clear the the sale of materials and merchandise that that includes principal and accessory use uh yes we're not proposing retail uses on the site at all okay thank youc [Music] that means that nobody can come to your shop and and walk away with the good that they're purchasing from you directly like they can buy your service in other words if you have a landscape guy there this can't be like a nursery where he and where they have bags of fertilizer and bags of this and bags of that and people are driving on to the site to buy the stuff this is a landscape a landscaper who wants to use a storage yard for an office and he's delivering and doing his stuff offsite no on-site sales no on-site retail sales in other words you can do it if a customer wants something they call you on the phone fine the guy takes his truck out does it over there but they can't buy it on this they can't come to the site buy it and put it on their truck or car just I I just I just want to make sure really clear with that if somebody were to come somebody were to come and purchase so for example one of our tenants is a garage door installer right now currently come there they come there they might they might come it's not a showroom they could do the deal sign transaction can be there it's just they can't walk out with the garage door obviously okay right or they can't walk out with parts something breaks on the garage door they can't say he can I come down the guys the guy has to say listen I got to come out to your place to to to deliver it even if the guy saysi install it myself the guy's got to say still I got to go and deliver it to you you can't come here and pick it up here yeah can we just have some clarification The Contractor Yard is that yes vacant area correct The Contractor Yard use that is being proposed as part of this document is a use like uh as in similar to like how retail is a use wants to know where on the plan is it shown the cont but the contractor yard is 68 Route 31 it's the entire there might be a yard storage area on the Contractor Yard which I I may the terminology is confusing but it's intended to be the use not a not a piece of the property designation okay so that's the that's the first thing I wanted to go through because I think it's it's obviously very critical to the uh to the use variants that I'd like to start with so again we've we're looking for use variants to permit uh Contractor Yard as well as Flex space on the site these us uh consistent with all the testimony that we've had and that would include the the storage of materials the fueling of vehicles specific to Executive snow shipping containers Etc and then of course more than one principal use so that we can have multiple tenants on the site in addition to uh our one use that we've talked about uh as a d variance the first thing I'd like to talk about is how exactly our site is uh particularly suited for the proposed use I think there are a handful of reasons uh the first reason is that the site has been industrial use for decades for not less than 40 years and I do want to talk about aerial photography but let me come back to that in a minute before so that we can move through this a little bit um so the site has been industrial use for not less than 40 years and it was and I and I do believe it was an industrial use for much longer than that as we'll see in an exhibit I'll introduce in a moment and so this proposal as a Contractor Yard with multiple uses is really a continuation of this long-standing non-residential this uh industrial and this jobs generator use here in riton Township um and what we have here is not only a site that's got the historic use but we have buildings that lend themselves to the use and I think that's evidenced by virtue of the fact that we're able to reuse the buildings here on the property as opposed to tear them down have them uh put into waste and then construct new buildings with new raw materials we're able to adaptively reuse uh the buildings along the front of the parcel uh buildings A B and C yeah are there any buildings whatsoever that are going to be demolished under the proposed no there's a couple new structures or buildings that are going to be constructed but all existing buildings are going to be reused is that correct correct well that that that's not a building that's equipment okay um but thank you uh and I think and I think it's also important to note that the uses permitted in the B2 District I I don't think are going to be able to take advantage of this particular property and that's why the site lends itself to this use so if we think about the uses that permitted in the B2 District it in includes things like uh retail stores uh these sites are not configured to accommodate a retail store with the parking uh Etc that you would see for a typical shop an office space uh I think the same thinking applies this is not an office property where it can offer Class A or perhaps even uh Class B office to a larger corporate tenant uh Child Care certainly I think it's not appropriate given uh given some of the history of the property and the way it's laid out uh and then uh there are some other uses on the property excuse me Permanent in the district but they don't lend themselves to being able to use these uh these smaller older historical uh industrial esque buildings on the site in the way that the contractor uses are able to to utilize them what you're basically saying that if there were any B2 Zone uses that came in they'd have to do major Demolition and not simply reuse the buildings that is my opinion yes yeah other uses include things like a theater an animal hospital commercial Greenhouse the buildings on this property are not suited for those uses and would require new construction unlike uh our proposal here and so uh in addition to our particular site lending itself to this use I think the uh the immediate in the surrounding area also lends itself to the use so while we are in a retail District we're in the B2 District this particular area of the B2 District does not have a uh a strong retail character or perhaps even a strong office character or uh a character consistent with with the other uses instead this is um a little bit of a hodgepodge of uses you know we have a contractor use the the well drilling uh uh uh to the south of the site on Route 31 we also have Adams party rental in the area we have a gas station uh radiator and welding shop across uh Route 31 and we have and we do of course have some other smaller commercial uses like we have the Dunkin Donuts but what I don't see here is a retail concentration like you see for example further north on 31 where we have the uh Flemington department store and the in the the Town Center uh Redevelopment area it's this is very much a different character where you've got more of the service contractor related uses very much consistent with what we are proposing here furthermore we also have uh one side of the property which is perhaps one of the least sensitive land uses out there and that is the rail line and so we're able to uh provide the use as the contractor yard and do so without having I'll talk about this for negative criteria but without having to uh be concerned about negative impact or detrimental impact to the South along those along that property which is the rail line um furthermore of course as you know we own we own the land to the east of the site which I think also further lends itself to the suitability of the use in the sense that we're able to select a property without impact to the surrounding uh to the surrounding area uh which might not be the case if we did not have that ownership uh and then and so for I think I think you got particular Su yeah I know for those reasons I think forly seated um I do want to hand out the photograph just to butress the testimony I I just gave uh so what we have here is two areals that are and John for your information they The Source listed at the bottom of the photographs is the same Source but they are for the record uh historic ariel.com it's a essentially a clearing house that provides aerial photography going back to I want to say the 1930s um so we're I'm going to mark this a5.1 which is going to be page one which is on the second page and a5.2 which is page two which is on the first page correct so a5.1 is an aerial photograph from 1984 and I selected this year a a 5.1 is the 1956 aerial I'm using your page numbers oh oh you have it stapled I'm sorry I didn't even realize I had my page numbers backwards I'm sorry about that so a5.1 is 1956 and I selected this earlier date because this is the first aerial photograph this is the first aerial photograph that depicts an industrial use on the property and so and and also as we'll be relevant later you can also see buildings A B and C identified on the photo which were my uh my additions to the photograph can you also email these in to Taylor tomorrow I did she's already got them okay a5.2 which is the 1984 photograph I selected this Photograph because uh this is the earliest photograph available through that service that shows the property as it currently exist today and so these two photographs uh in total uh confirm the testimony I gave that the site is a historic industrial use for not less than 40 years and I would say for not less than uh 40 years the site has looked from uh from a coverage perspective roughly how it looks today uh however based on the 1956 areial you can see for another three decades roughly the site existed as an industrial use in the township uh unless there's question on that I'm going to talk about uh Municipal land use law purposes I think that that photograph will be relevant for some other testimony as well so we can stick a pin in that uh there are a handful of purposes of the municipal land use law that I think this application meets the fir the use variance that is the first one is purpose a and that's uh promotion of the general welfare and so yes I think this purpose is met because we do have a site which is so well suited so particularly suited to our proposed use that it does help to advance the general welfare but uh I think uh also supporting that application is we're able to bring the site back into a fully productive use and do so in a way uh that requires uh very little new construction uh able to um use adaptive reuse and we're able to do all of this while bringing the site to a better standard from an aesthetic point of view as well we also meet purpose G which is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses including Industrial and Commercial uh both public and private according to their respective environmental requirements to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens and I've cited this because uh contractor uses are certainly needed in the State uh executive snow snow clearing generally is sorely needed in the state as we start to experience more uh uh unexpected weather events in particular but simply being able to clear the snow is critical to keeping the state moving in times of weather events and so this is uh an important use it's important that we have a good location for it such as we have here where we've got a property that is over 10 acres to be able to host not only the snow clearing use but variety of other complimentary uses the contractor and the flex spaces and so we're able to uh to put these multiple uses on a site on a on a location that has uh limited impact thus being I think an appropriate location in the sense that we don't have uh we have very limited number of sensitive land uses we have just a few Homes located along Pennsylvania Avenue that are not owned by our applicant here um additionally for the the fueling and the storage I just want to note that uh the fueling in particular is located towards the center of the property and the storage aspects of the site are located towards the uh the back of the property thereby having limited impact and being in appropriate locations uh given their lack of visibility to Route 31 and other residential uses this a quickie are you aware of any Zone in the township that would allow a contractor's yard or snow removal facility I believe the answer is no I I don't believe they're right yeah and so of all different zones or sites in the township I assume it's your opinion that while this site might not be uniquely suited it's absolutely particularly suited for it again because of its past use absolutely um I also think it's it's particularly Suited uh because I realized I I skipped over this point is we have and it's relevant to purpose G as well uh because of our regional Road access the access to Route 31 gives us immediate direct access to the to the region which is particularly important for contractor uses that are working all over the state uh particularly during uh potential uh weather emergencies and I assume that you're also implying that they wouldn't have to travel over local roads it's not located in an area of local roads is that correct correct Yeah by virtue of that state access we're able to avoid local uh local roads and can access Route 12 Route 78 287 Etc other than someone goes out snow plowing wherever the snow is they got to go over a local road but that would be no matter where the facility was located correct correct correct same thing with the contract correct uh and so because of our site characteristics because of our road access as well as the historic use on the site I think all of that lend to this being an appropriate location in terms of the environmental requirements I want to highlight the fact that we're actually reducing the impervious cover here we're going from 92% to 85% so yes we still need a variance for that and I'll address that but I think it's I think it's important to recognize the environmental good that's going to come of this and also the fact that there's no tree uh remov removal proposed and in fact while while they're not all on not while they're not all on our property there have been significant numbers of trees planted as a result of this application and in order to support this application I also think that we meet purpose M uh which is to encourage coordination of uh public and private procedures for a more efficient use of land and I cite that when thinking about having multiple uses on the property uh gives us the ability to have complimentary uses to that might in fact be able to create some Synergy amongst themselves if you think about various contractors uh looking to uh potentially work together learn from each other Etc uh and we're able to do that in on sites that don't require where we don't need buffering we don't need different access points for those individual tenants instead there's an efficiency of locating them on one property I also think that we meet uh purpose H as it relates to the fueling and maintenance of vehicles H is for uh encouraging a location and design of Transportation routes which will promote the free flow of traffic while discouraging facilities that would result in congestion and blight and so by having the fueling station on that property on our property this means that our trucks for executive snow do not need to even so much go across the street to the gas station there andate create additional traffic in the immediate area much less potentially uh utilize uh other gas stations and create traffic a little bit farther from the property and so there's I think there's a direct impact to reduced congestion and and also to the efficiency as well for having the fueling station on the property and then the last purpose that our application supports is purpose I and that is to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques good design and Arrangement and so at the end of the day I think our proposal among you know aside from the use and things like that is to make the site look a lot nicer and in so much to the point where uh my client has been uh improving the property even prior to getting this to this point and getting to this hopeful approval through improving the building appearance adding plantings and just generally trying to eliminate the eyesore that this property has been for far too long and so through this approval process uh those improvements have been done anticipation of the of the approval but through the approval process the property will continue to improve uh its appearance and be a positive contribution to RIT and Township uh from an aesthetic perspective as opposed to uh its past condition and so uh those are the that's a positive criteria for the use variance and in terms of our various C variances I I do believe that if the board were inclined you could find that the C variances are but I would not provide that testimony here so uh so let's talk about the C1 variances uh there are a handful of setback variances that uh that we require such as also the hours of operations that's also don't D1 variance you need just okay I've added that to the list thank you uh I do think a D1 variance is still appropriate given the location the historic industrial use and it certainly contributes to the efficiency of the site as we do not need to potentially find multiple sites with differing operation hours instead we're able to concentrate everything on one property and the only the only deviation from hours of operations is for executive snow correct which correct because the weather's the weather correct yes uh I'm sure uh folks would love it if it only snowed during the office hours of the day but unfortunately that's just simply not the case um so for RC variances we I think that we have a handful of C1 variances so for the C variances I just want we're not I don't suggest you do it individually but just right if you look at Jeff's August 15th memo I think he lists them all out there I've crossed out number seven and number eight and we which one did we and no we're not doing a parking variance right so those are all the C variances you're talking about right the 14 of them he had 16 but we crossed out number seven crossed out number eight so the in the garage okay so we had add the garage setback garage setback so we have 15 C variances you agree yes okay so which which of those you want to take is c1s yep and which has c2s and if you want to take them all when don't feel I'm not like I don't think they're all one or the other category so I'm sorry I'm have to do both okay um for the C1 variances I believe it applies to I'm going to say generally well I'm not going to say generally anything it is the front yard setback for Building B of 14 ft instead of 75 ft this you have this written down somewhere it is uh do you want me to cite Jeff's numbers in his report would that yes please yeah number 10 is a C1 number 11 is a C1 number 13 is a C1 number 14 is a C1 uh the exist excuse me 14d is a C1 the existing building okay and that's it okay the rest are c2s uh and also the I also want to give testimony regarding the garage on lot proposed lot 5.01 oh yes the garage would be a C1 yep okay um let me start with the garage first okay so I I site this is a C1 because the existing condition and I think that you can actually best see this on I'm sorry I forget the exhibit number uh but our lot line exhibit which A2 which shows the aerial uh photograph y if you if you take a look at that property you can I I think you can see why I've identified this as a C1 because the garage cannot move move forward to the 50 Foot setback as opposed to the 10.7 foot setback without uh excuse me it cannot move forward as a result of the existing play and Recreation and outdoor uh area located between the garage and the existing single family home and while and continue to serve as a garage because the garage is located uh yes adjacent to the driveway so that folks can come off of Pennsylvania Avenue and access the garage but is behind the uh the outdoor recreation and play area and so while the garage could potentially have a uh a compliant setback at 50 feet it could not do so while also continuing to be served by the driveway off of the street and so it's because of that existing driveway it's because of those existing uh outdoor recreation there's a pool patio Etc because of those improvements uh the garage is unable to be relocated to a conforming location and so I think that's why the garage on proposed lot 5.01 uh does not meet uh or does meet the C1 category variance relief in terms of those other C1 building uh C1 variances what I'd like to do is point the board to yeah the garage on proposed lot 5.0 three it's currently on 501 oh I'm sorry I had a I'm sorry you look at the right hand side of that exhibit a to yeah I'm sorry about that and so for our other uh setback variances for these existing structures I'd like to to point the board to exhibits a5.1 which is the 1956 photograph and a a 5.2 which is the 1984 photograph and in 5.1 you can see buildings A B and C in their existing location now the setback may have been different because I suspect the right of way to Route 31 was Far smaller than what we see today however the buildings are in their current locations in that would include the garage on proposed lot 5.03 right you know I I'm I wasn't confident enough to be able to say that on the Fly that is the building you think so yeah let's assume it is for our for these purposes I I yes then then uh then that too has been existing uh prior to the township zoning I believe and then in a5.2 our photograph from 1984 not only do we see buildings A B and C but we also see the garage on proposed lot 5.01 as well as the building at the rear of the site which is 70 Highway 31 number one now oddly enough I think that the 1984 photograph is of a lesser quality than the 1956 photograph but you can still see the building outlines of of buildings A B and C a uh Building C admittedly is a little bit more difficult to see but I think if you you look closely you can see a little bit of a different uh color beneath the letter which is indicative of uh Building C there and so because these buildings AB andc have been existing for uh nearly 70 years at this point uh I think that the board can find in favor of C1 variants for Highway 31 31 number one I would also like to for the board to consider this as part of uh C1 category because the building has been existing there for more than 40 years and it's because of of that unique situation that the building has been there for at this point decades that uh that I think the board can find in favor of uh an extraordinary or an exceptional situation affecting this particular property can you finish in five minutes yes okay um in terms of C2 criteria uh for the uh for the garage Along on proposal app 5.03 the C2 variances are for all the other things in Jeff's report other than what you have identified as c1s correct yes uh and as well as the garage I think the garage meets purpose I as uh it puts the I think the least desirable part of a residential home uh to the rear of the property is far very far to the rear of the property put this way I'm I'm against subsuming but what you're really saying is the reasons that support the C2 variances are the same reasons that support the D1 variances right because a c a C2 variance yes has to granting the variance has to advance the purposes of zoning and the the um positives have to outweigh the negatives the same purposes of zoning that would be Advanced by the D1 will advance all these c2s right uh not purpose H which was the Transportation uh right well quite frankly just so you know I crossed out H and I crossed out I okay a G and M I think that's your ticket to R well if the board is happy I'm happy um I do think that those purposes do apply to the C2 variances though and I think that the board can find in favor of those purposes uh rather those VAR es in consideration of the negative criteria in the sense that if we think about uh the various setbacks the intent of that is to ensure uh that sensitive land uses are not detrimentally impacted I believe because of the surrounding land uses and the history of the property that we're able to achieve that intent um and it's also uh intended to ensure adequate light air and open space and I think we've continued to do that as well in terms of other aspects of the negative crit criteria um let me start with the master plan uh which asks the question as to whether or not there's any substantial detriment to the master plan I think the board can find don't rush on this one okay okay I got to take good notes on this one okay um as I review your 2019 reexamination report I see uh land use goals on page 27 uh that are supportive of our application the first one is to limit growth to existing roadway capacities and uh we're an ex we are a historic industrial use and in fact uh I cited this because contractor uses Flex face uses uh in my experience generate less traffic than an office or retail use additionally there's a land use goal on the same page 27 to permit additional non-residential development clearly we are in with that an additional goal to recognize the historical growth and land uses of areas while we're not proposing the same uses use this is really a modernization of a of a historic industrial site in the township and then the last goal is to reduce uh excuse me that's that's all for uh for the land use element the last go I want to site is for the utility plan on uh page 28 where we plan for permitted development within existing infrastructure limitations and so uh given our uh our work through the utility uh I believe that we're in line with that as well we're not seeking an expansion of sewer capacity for example and so for those reasons I think that there's no substantial detriment to your master plan and we're actually supporting many of the goals of your land use element for your uh second component of the negative criteria as to whether there's any substantial detriment to the public good I to be honest I think that there is that the board can very easily find that there's no substantial detriment and we're actually bringing positive to the community and I say that because uh we are uh eliminating an isore bringing it back to a productive use through the addition of uh improvements to our buildings improvements to our parking and circulation through striping and just uh regulating or excuse me formalizing the location of parking and how circulation should occur on the property would you agree there's no substantial detriment to the public good provided all the conditions that we've discussed are imposed yes and so uh yes in particular because we're reducing impervious cover on the property as well in terms of reconciliation the variances uh I want to point out the fact that this old industrial site is unique to the township it's it's relatively small but it is more than 10 acres and so uh I think that's important because it's not large enough to host as its own Zone it's would be inappropriate that size to be an industrial Zone however uh as a result of the unique aspects of the property I think the board can uh can find that it's reasonable that the use had not been incorporated into the B2 District the other properties in the B2 District don't have these same characteristics that would have made that a reasonable conclusion on the board instead it makes sense that this site would operate uh as uh as a modernized version of the industrial use through uh through the use variance route rather than a rezoning or a change of the B2 districts and I'm happy to answer any questions andary and final site plan because other than the variances and the exceptions and the exceptions were already handled by the engineer so you didn't have to it complies with all other zoning ordinance regulations and site plan and subdivision requirements so the board should Grant preliminary final site plan subject to the conditions also yes subject to the conditions but yes I think we've met that burden as well anybody have any questions I have no other Witnesses the only other uh issue I wanted to present to the board was that you had previously granted a c variance for us to have a 60.5 square foot company logo sign uh on the building and that we need that memorialized in the resolution I can include that in this one the the only thing that was discussed at that time when that variance was granted was that we wanted it to be um uh 24 hours and I think the board it indicated well we can't approve a 24-hour sign because we haven't approved a 24-hour use we would ask that that sign be allowed to be 24 hours why though it's for advertising everyone who works there knows where the knows where the thing's going to be it it's it's it allows for in inclement weather for um put it this way they they granted it not 24 hours now you're asking for the sign to be 24 hours so Beth can you come up with some reason that a sign which is for honestly it's for advertising purposes because anyone working there knows it should be allowed to be on 24 hours a day uh I can uh and it's for one of the reasons is yes if you're a long-standing employee maybe you know uh you can access the the property with your eyes closed but for new employees and potentially for for folks that are being hired for so they onboard him during the day they're not going to hire him like but they may a new employee uh showing up to grab their truck at 4 in the morning can I just ask can you ask the applicant if he'll stick with the the sign variants that they granted before the applicant the applicant will skip with the signed variance not the signed variance but it being 24 hours okay that what right right he'll stick with the one that was granted before us put it in his resolution all right it's not going to be Mr gber do you have a closing statement because if you do it's going to go to another Mee please Grant this uh wonderful application for this wonderful this is the type of person that you want in the township this type of use can we close for deliberation anybody want to go first okay I'll go first this is a unique site um I think this is an excellent use for this site I think the site's already been vastly improved I I really like it um I think this is a very good location it is bringing it back as M mcmanis said it is bringing it back to a uh current use it is a very good location with all the snowplows or trucks having to come out right on 31 and I would be in favor of um f of ranting this application I'll go next I'm also in favor for this application I think it is a great location really appreciate the fact that you're bringing it back to life and doing a good job at it and not making it look messy um so really just hopeful that with the conditions everything can continue and your business can thrive in our Township um and really appreciate you kind of working with us on the gas situation I know that that's a touchy subject sometimes so um but I understand the importance of it having friends and family who do snow plowing that you need that on site so it'll help with our gas stations not being all plugged up with trailers and everything along those lines for Machinery so pay for it anyone else I look forward to seeing some enhanced Landscaping across the front of the property I think you've done well already but now that there's not going to be parking in front of the building I think it it'll be a great enhancement to see some Landscaping in the front of the building conditions that they agree to are going to greatly improve the site yes that also goes into why you're in favor of correct all right um sure J i' just like to thank the applicant for working with us so diligently and for all the accommodations and for they agree to subsequent to an approve okay so it doesn't sound like we have any obors or so there's no one in the public anyone want to make a motion to Grant all the relief subject to the conditions I'll make a motion I second it can I get a vote please yes yes yes chairwoman Miss Cynthia schaer yes Mr Randy block yes Mr Jim Ferrero yes Miss Lindy K brel yes Miss lorett ktina yes Miss Donna Drews yes Mr James Miller yes great before anything you're now approved here is our application pure explaining the next steps we have also drafted a checklist once the resolution has been adopted we will be checking off the items that have to be submitted in order for you guys to be fully compliant with resolution compliance because other applicants have just been all over the place so I'm sorry I'm not doing it so here you go good sir and I will give you my card as well thank you thank you all for yeah they did the one and then all in favor of Jour I hi I don't know I I don't know