##VIDEO ID:KbirHwn9lYM## e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e on the plan I had but I believe they they would agree to do that yes we agreed to do that okay then with regards to the architectural plans uh again just to recapture to make sure I didn't we didn't miss anything the changes that have been made to the building facade the pre-cast concrete manels panels excuse me on the chipot store the metal cap and canopy added on the roof the thin brick veneer added for suets B and C which are uh units for rent that haven't been determined who the tenant's going to be at and the stone water table treatment added for suets b and c and again I think Mr D just advised that they were going to do that item B the colors of the pre-cast concrete panels brick and trim SL cap to be specified uh as Mr dyster showed on the architectural plans those pre-cast panels um are basically a I call it a concrete color if you will uh I think the key thing that he mentioned that's important to know is that they're matching the color of the Starbucks across the street correct that's correct okay a as the brick is also and basically he talked about the stone water table treatment with the exception of where the concrete panels are that was added uh item c i note that some of the sweet excuse me I knowe the areas of Suites a b and c shown on the architectural plans differ slightly from the are shown on sheet three of the site plan the area discrepancy to be resolved uh I just wanted to make sure that that was talking to each other so that the plans were consistent yeah we correct the architecturals they had just included the um common area walls and they just measured the area differently okay and I don't recall item D the location of the HVAC units for all three Suites to be shown and how they would be screened my recollection is but I wasn't sure this they're going to be rof mounted they're roof mounted and you won't be able to see them from the ground level okay then with regards to storm water management uh 5A General note number five on sheet one indicate all storm sewer pipe shall be class three reinforced concrete Culver pipe I point out however that the plan's sheets call for highdensity polyethylene pipe I don't have a problem with that my assumption is and just to make sure we're on the same page you're talking hdp pipe most likely yes okay that's fine just to make sure the record's clear what we're doing uh item 5B calculations were not provided for the proposed roof drains tyed into the storm drainage system the capacity of these pipes to be confirmed with the construction official and the leader drains to be shown on the plans I don't have a problem with that I just want to verify that with the roof drainage that's calculated and anticipated to be at the right slope and the right size no problem okay and item C the storm water operation and maintenance manual to be provided or reference provided to a previously recorded manual for the overall development which includes the lot the proposed lot the proposed building Jay is located on when this whole General North Village Development was conceived uh there was a lot of storm drainage to get the overall base it's put together the operation and maintenance manual since this particular site drains into some of those patients may already be filed and covered but in the event it's not we either need a reference to that recorded document or a document for this particular site agree okay number six under the lighting plan details of the light fixtures being used on the proposed building to be provided my recollection is from the original hearing and what we discussed at the meeting was it was going to be a downward facing exture so if we could put that detail on the plan that would take care of that no problem under number excuse me number seven the water system the limits of the water mains to be owned and maintained by Sparta Township Water Utility to be established in consultation with the water utility including location of the curve box for the water service again I know a report was provided by uh Corey long the utilities director for the township uh this can be done it's an important thing just to establish however because normally the curve box is the delineation point between what's to be m maintained by the utility and whats to be maintained by the property and building owner so I would recommend that any approval that the board may consider that be a condition to get that worked out no problem and number 7B confirmation of the adequacy of flow and pressure for the proposed building J to be provided for review and approval by the Township Water Utility uh given the proximity to the Germany Flats area and the pressure produced by the pump I'm not anticipating a problem but again it's one of those things to be verified for all parties intended number eight sanitary sewer they're tying into the existing sanitary sewer Main in Market Street and 8B the size and adequacy of the Sewer Lateral to be confirmed with the township construction official and the health department again just getting down into the nuts and bolts if you will of the particular system because this is a restaurant and basically they're probably going to have a grease strap and other requ ments that the health department will want to make sure everybody in all departments are satisfied under number nine signage the freestanding and Monument entrance signs for the access points off Route 15 were previously approved by the planning board under site plan application number 614 that's just a point of information because my recollection is for overall North Village they actually got that free standing sign approved as one of their main items that right up from the GetGo yes under item 9B facade signs are graphically shown on the front elevations of each of the proposed retail units however no details or lighting arrangements are provided for each sign the notes indicate the band signs will be 3et by less than 90% of the facade with and I guess again what I believe the applicant is trying to convey here is uh when they know what those particular tenants are or who those particular tenants are that they'll comply with the ordinance for the signage correct item 9 C the proposed chipul sign is called out to be back lit and I believe on the architectural plans that were submitted tonight basically it's a box type sign that's internally lit yeah the same as the Starbucks across the street okay and D the architectural elevation from North Village Boulevard appears to show three chipal Logo decals decals on the entrance doors I just point that out item number 10 with regards to Landscaping uh we quote section 18- 532a of the Land Management code any parking lot with 20 or more spaces shall be provided with interior landscape covering not less than 5% of the total area of the parking lot of which the primary landscaping material shall be deciduous shade trees interior parking lot Landscaping has not been provided they have provided some Landscaping I don't know if Mr dyra has that on his display or not if he could Point some of that out yeah the intent of that ordinance is when you have a large scale parking lot in this case there's really no interior to the parking lot as there's no cars nosing up to one another but in this case we do have extensive landscaping around the perimeter of the uh the site we have all these uh islands and peninsulas that are all landscaped so the intent is there and item 10B sheade trees have been added in the area of the Basin it's recommended to replace proposed smaller trees around the parking lot with shade trees to provide shade and minimize heat island effect if you recall if you look at the infiltration basins for example in front of Industry restaurant uh they did do extensive Landscaping in the Basin between industry and rout5 and I believe on the revised Landscaping plan on this you basically simulated that that's correct okay so that's so for my notes Dave that's done then it's on the plans yes yes and item 10 C per section 18 5.30 3B the applicant must provide a 10-ft wide landscape buffer between the parking lot and the RightWay of a street with a mixture of shrubs and trees as prescribed in the code a shrub planting 10 ft wide needs to be provided between the parking lot and Marcus Street the existing buffer between the parking lot and North Village Boulevard will need to be augmented with additional plannings I do know that Mr Dyer had indicated that along uh Northville Boulevard there are some existing trees perhaps you can point them out please I can go to the landscape uh sheet which is it's sheet five of six of the plans and the last time we were here we did request a waiver for the um 10 foot wide just because we wanted visibility of the building from that facade and we put extensive Landscaping along the front and then we have Street trees that are physically there and then we uh put shrubs in between them so lower line shrubs so I want the board to be aware of that waiver that they're requesting then going on to construction details again as Mr Dyer pointed out they have made some modifications to the outside dining area uh and and buffered and augmented that the only thing I requested was there's going to be some outside exterior dining tables and chairs again just so we have some details on the plans to show what you're doing the layout of the chairs are on the site layout sheet and it shows 16 seats right but I'm looking for an actual construction detail of the units you're putting in the RW iron chairs whatever they might be yeah Chipotle has their standards and they vary based on time so we can get you the latest one and we'll submit them that that's what we need okay and as far as an environmental impact statement they did not submit anything in addition for this particular application I believe the environmental commission did ask about the lighting on the site though and as Mr dyom mentioned uh just a little bit ago the light fixtures are pro proposed to be downward facing fixtures that's correct okay they're also at 4,000 not 3500 that thein commission prefers but that's that's to match the rest of the site okay and I think the environmental commission asked about when they get turned off or dimmed is there some overall consistent Way North Village does that and what will be the case here in North Village we dim the overhead lights based on what um facilities are open and all of them are controlled by each individual head and we bring them down to 50% when everything's closed within an hour of closing of the something like that correct okay then item 13 I just basically summarize the various agencies I believe they need approval from the sparta Township Water Utility the Fire Protection Bureau and uh uh Tom McIntyre the Fire Marshall did Issue an email dated September 12 2023 on the previous application uh the County planning board Delaware Conservation District uh land disturbance permit Co-op payments the construction official for Sparta Township and the police department and finally miscellaneous as we usually recommend that the applicant provide an as Bill upon completion of the project if the board decides to approve it and that's a summary of my report on this Mr chairman thank you Mr s yes sir m m thank you just a few questions um that were in my memo uh there was you know pretty much I'd say like four major changes to the site plan that I saw it as the change to the impervious coverage the change to the front yard setback the change to the outdoor dining area and the landscaped area in the front of on Route 15 um Mr dster as far as the increase in prvious card is like approximately 3 and a half% or so increase is what is that largely related to um what changed to the site plan triggered that increase we I believe we widened the uh service driveway in order to uh provide access for uh emergency vehicles so is it also the the configuration off of Market change from the previous plan no I don't think so okay and I mean there was a few additional parking spaces as well I think there was probably two oh from the original from the original side plan I'm sorry we came in on the second hearing all those change this is identical to the last the second here okay okay good thank you um as far as the Landscaping plan um I know that the previous the previous plan had included some landscape plantings at the back of the building um like at the service entrance at the back um for employees yes can I don't see those there now or I don't see plantings at the back of the the rear of the building we have them along the uh oh no I'm talking there was like some shrubs planted pretty much adjacent to the building in that Island area between the service so on the right of the service driveway right here yeah back there and then a little bit further further north we have a lot of utilities running through there we could put some small shrubs that's what I think was there in the past so I think that would help soften that back at the building and help complement that water table and design a little bit better um I mentioned in my memo that the landscape plan was boltered significantly particularly along Route 15 can you just describe if um I know there's a note thatting trees and trubs in this area to remain are the plantings that are shown there largely mostly the shrubs are they mostly new or proposed yeah that that that area is pretty sparsely landscaped currently okay thank you and then um the setback along Route 15 was um increased to basically meet the setback requirement and this is this was in the second plan site plan yep so the building complies now um with the setback or if it has complied with it but it's continuing to I only had one other comment and it's basically two or two comments about confirming um some of the previous things that that the applicant agreed to which was one that the outdoor dining um conditions will be um complied with in order to make it a permitted use yes um and then there was uh commentary at the previous hearing um on the previous decision on the application about The Pedestrian connections being um painted with like multiple coats of some thermoplastic paint or something that will basically make it without having to be a raised crosswalk or anything like that will you confirm that we'll continue yeah we agreed to that thank you I have no other comments this time thank you my notes as about imperious coverage being increased and things like that but we don't have a variance for that or no they're still in compliance I was just curious um about the the change when original my notes indicate there's no variances at all corre I believe there only the waivers that Mr Simmons had raised correct okay thank you all right bring back todayjust I'm going to start with you again could mentioned everything that the EC had come CHR can you speak into the microphone yeah um know the EC appreciates your comments and you're addressing the issues that it um that it referred to thank you no comments you mentioned that the rest of North Village uh they reduced their lights by 50% uh when businesses are closed I think because of the proximity to some residential areas with this particular lot would you consider reducing it further we could probably turn the lights off that are along line Market that side that I think that'd be great that wouldn't be a problem um is there particular hours of operation for that service road do you expect like it to be predominantly in the morning or throughout the day to be determined typically I mean the service vehicle we anticipate is Chipotle's delivery vehicle they typically come early in the morning not early like at night but like between 10: and 11: a.m. before they open because they have people working at that hour that they can take delivery so that's typically when see that and then the garbage truck without knowing the two other tenants do you expect that they would also use the service road it's unlikely that I mean they may have a a a truck here and there but I don't they're not big spaces they're typically uh small type vehicles that deliver to those type facilities thank you okay Deputy Mayor B many yep I several questions first I'd like to start with the access easement uh I know Mr Simmons already addressed part of it uh but I would like to ask you to explain and testify in detail your understanding of that access easement and its appropriateness for daily use as a service entrance I can explain when this lot was created it was subd it was a a resubdivision of the two Lots at the corner as part of that the access easement from that entrance allows access through Chelsea in into this facility and it doesn't have any limitations on it okay so it can be used for daily use yes okay and you'll provide the easement uh as a condition as a follow-up rate of course yeah okay the uh second question just wanted to confirm the outdoor seating area the patio that was redesigned can you just describe the protection and the fencing around that in this new version sure as you can see now we used to have the fence immediately adjacent to the curb by eliminating a parking stall that allowed us to put a green area around it we also provided ballards along um the easterly side of or I guess southeasterly side of it so anybody backing out of here would um hit them before they went onto that area so there there was no fence just vegetation is that the plan no there's fence around the actual um uh seating area it's just between the fence and the curb is now landscaped okay okay what is the fence what style fence was the appearance of it similar to the one at Starbucks it's a it's an aluminum uh industrial grade fence okay the uh switching to the the roof the HVAC and the mechanical equipment uh I know you you testified that you can't see it from the ground however I just wanted to confirm in the past hearing you uh there was an agreement to have the color of it match the roof color because there are residents in the Chelsea facility and elsewhere that might look down and see the equipment so it's great that you can't see it from the ground but Others May still see it as part of their daily life I mean it'll be a similar color I can't say it'll match exactly the roofs typically are white the um on roof equipment is typically a tan but it'll be in the same in that vein I mean I don't think you could buy like the units in specific colors is there an alternative or a way to Shield that from the residents of the the Chelsea unit the Chelsea building if you're in the upper level of Chelsea there's no way you're going to Shield that from view I it's it's a three-story building looking down at a one-story building okay uh the parking spaces can you confirm that the calculations that the latest or the new calculations include the outdoor seating it does okay I also saw in the reports that there were spaces designated for online pickup orders and for pull forward for drive-thru two different versions can you differentiate those for us so if you order online and you're going to walk into to get your food um you would pull into one of those spaces and run inside grab your food so it's a quick in andout so you don't have to park at the other side of the parking lot the other ones is if you come through the drive-thru and you order 12 things and you would back things up they'll ask you to go to the pool through and then they'll walk the food out to you okay so they're they're both for ordering online it's just that in one case the vehicles are going to go to the drive-thru and pick it up in the other case the customer wants to go park and come to the counter yes is that correct okay and can you describe the uh the solid waste storage area that's I'm I'm really concerned or thinking about the one that's closest to North Village and Route 15 that front Northwest or uh this one yeah southwest corner not sure what corner that is uh can you describe the the fencing and vegetation that will block that view from the public yeah we'll go back to the landscape plan um we put a lot of like Spruce type trees around it it then we utilize a I don't know if at North Village we try to make them nice looking you know we use um high-end enclosures so it it's it's kind of disappears in that space as the goal you know we have the ones right in front of between Starbucks and uh and uh industry and they kind of blend in you know those they match they feel like they belong there it doesn't feel like it's just a an i sore so we try to keep that way here as well and tucking them in so they back into the street it looks like a fence from the be from the back so that's what you'll see okay so it shouldn't be visible from Cars on North Village or on 15 you might see like a glance of it but it will it will definitely broken up L of site okay the uh I knew you described that the the new design the new building materials would match Starbucks can you just uh state I'm not I don't go to Starbucks uh so can you tell me the color of the the veneer the water table and the concrete panels I did bring an exhibit maybe that I'll just I'll just so then you'll kind of have a actual something in your file that shows the colors when don't we mark that I think we're up to W4 if I'm not mistaken yeah of the existing Starbucks yeah it's the existing star I have a couple of them thank you four or five as you can see we have the brick color this is a direct photo from the from this morning actually um it's the brick is kind of a reddish brick we have a Tanish gray is the uh Mr D would you mind putting up the rendering so that we can compare that's dangerous thank you yeah so you can see kind of it's in the same color palette we actually used the same Stone here um the uh concrete will be match the stucco and the brick is the same as brick okay thank you the um Mr Simmons mentioned in number n9b on his report this signage for the facade the business names obviously we know one of them for units B and C uh you're planning to once the tenant is known and the designs are determined you're planning to bring those back to the planning board right to this this the site plan waiver subcommittee yeah we always bring the signs back to subcommittee okay just want to make sure that was clear okay um I I noticed this talking about other directional signs um when drivers come in off of Market to enter the lot um the sign if how will the drivers know to go left um if they're not going into the drive-thru Lane a sign that said driveth through pickups um is there a a way to more clearly designate why someone would go left when you come in off the market I think it'll be fairly intuitive when you pull in through here to go left and we're we're typically use these um for employee parking in the back so most likely there won't be there won't be spaces available over there so I think logically you would make a left okay so when you're saying the employees that would be to the right be as you're heading towards a drive-through Lane yes correct they're kind of the farthest away from any of the doors so it's natural to put employees there so what will a driver see when they first come in off for the first time going here when they come off Market what will be in front of them I would assume they're going to pull in North Village so they'll be driving by the the front facade where they'll see all the entrance doors so they'll pull into market and they'll make another left and logically you would go to the entrance Door doors okay and there's a sign that says driveth through this way so okay I think you can oversign things so I wouldn't recommend a sign saying I just think it wouldn't serve any real purpose okay so any pickups or or seating would be to the left but that'll be intuitive yes okay the um police traffic engineer corpor morus um issued another report um would you like to I'd like you to actually address that and testify your perspective on that my perspective is it's a service entrance only it'll probably get a couple Vehicles a day and I don't see a safety concern there can you expand upon that because I believe that the concerns are broader than just what you described about that one service entrance yeah I Mr blumetti I would uh I would think that your engineer could comment on that as well yeah I understand that but I'm asking if you'd like to testify on it okay he did that was it yeah that's all there is to say yes in response to the report about this perhaps causing traffic safety concerns and public safety concerns this was discussed extensively at the first hearing you heard Mr dy's position that there's no traffic safety Hazard and you can certainly question your own I'm not asking him on the report from last year I'm asking him on the new report no it's not this is dated it's the same concerns 81424 it's the same concern repeated that's why I asked if he has a comment on it or a concern that's your testimony on this I'm not concerned that it's a safety issue correct is there Mr deer is there any there's there's been a change to that throat so to speak in in in through Chelsea and and also the addition of the speed table and addition of signage does does that address the concerns at all I mean is are some of how are some of the changes affecting that concern I think the main uh way to deal with it is that there's a very limited traffic coming through there number one and the speed table definitely slows people down coming through there you can't drive through there quickly and uh so those two together definitely uh limit any traffic concern Al so the site is designed per the standards that the township has in their ordinances so um it's compliant thank you uh Landscaping I'd like to review one or two items that Mr Simmons mentioned I wasn't clear on how it was resolved um I believe 10B is in the plans is that correct so replacing the smaller trees around the parking lot with shade trees yes they've been added okay thank you 10 a um can you describe I wasn't following your response to that so that that ordinance is intended for a large parking lot this is there's no um it's one lane of parking so you don't have any internal areas so in order to create an internal area in this parking lot you'd have to create a Boulevard in effect so it's not what I I think this ordinance speaks to like this large scale parking like a chop right they want 5% of that area to have trees and things in it to break it up in this case there is no internal area mhm the the code does specify parking lots with 20 or more spaces so I think they are when this was written apparently they were envisioning lots of 20 and more so not enormous ones like the main shop right lot yeah but I mean we have all of the areas that are like Corners peninsulas I mean we if you count those areas as part of the parking lot then it would be the 5% but since they're not internal to the parking lot it's uh I mean the only way to meet that requirement I guess the all the Landscaping in here is internal theoretically because it's inside but typically a one lane parking lot there's no internal area mhm okay I think to miss herod's question earlier you agreed to put plantings along the drive-thru Lane against the building that we're there originally okay correct and uh last one on Landscaping so number c uh letter C about the shrub plantings again can you clarify that your answer to that I know it's supposed to be a 10 foot wide buffer and the Mr Simmons report yes was stating that should be something done between the parking lot and North Village yeah so along that area we have um we basically have a 10-ft area between our property line and our curb and in that area we have shade trees and shrubs um but it's not a buffer that's this is the front of the building when you're looking at it from the street so because the parking lot is in front of uh of the building you would block the visibility of the tenants and that's their only marketing that's their only signage is on the building so you need some visibility can you describe uh I understand what large trees would block the signage can you describe what will be there according to this will it would be midsize trees will be shrubs what will be there we have large trees that will be up high and then we have shrubs low so you'll see the gap between um but it's not a buff for like on the Starbucks side for instance we you're looking at the back of the building so there it made a lot of sense to buffer it because you're not looking at what's effectively their only option to advertise their business MH okay okay thank you that's all I have for now okay no I don't really have any questions um other than when you're considering trees to just make sure that the root system isn't going to start to um infiltrate underground and uh pop up the concrete yeah we deal with that we deal with that issue we we spe spe ify specific trees for specific areas and all right and we do consider that when we're specifying them that's I don't have anything I I do have a few questions um so in the outdoor seating area we had discussed during the mediation that there would be plantings in that space as well can you describe um how you remedied that a little bit we created the the Landscaping all the way around the perimeter I know we mentioned that we would could potentially add some uh like potted plants or something and we can certainly do that so the so what type of plantings are are proposed in that in that area they're all shrubs so low so you'll see the fence you'll see the seating area but be very it'll be a green space as opposed to a concrete space that it was and I know we were talking about it it was because we were concerned about it being this concrete Island right and I think we address that by creating the Landscaping all the way around the perimeter okay thank you also during that conversation we did discuss additional wering signs for the drive-thru and that was agreed but I believe based on what I just heard that that you you were saying that you didn't think they were necessary can we expand on that a little bit we do have the Ware sign W wayfinding signs for the drive-thru I was saying he was looking for one going to the front door okay I just I didn't understand the differentiation okay um and last question or last statement really um for you at this point is uh we had also talked about anything should should this this application be be approved this evening that anything that we may have missed during the course of this hearing that was previously agreed in the last hearing would also be agreed for this hearing are you still that was the intent yes so um and my last question overall is is for Mr Simmons Mr Simmons based on the the issues concerning the the traffic and the the um the obvious concern that we still have regarding the the officer Mars's uh report can you please expand on whether or not you see any difficulties with how the layout has been proposed and whether or not that we should still be concerned certainly uh let me just start by saying Corporal Morris reviews all the site plans that come before the board and does a very good job and if he sees something that's of a concern he Flags it and brings it to the board attention so we can look at it further uh he also has uh extensive background information on accident analysis and what have you not necessarily for this location but in general that he can bring another perspective to the table having said that between looking at the site plan and listening to the testimony that we've heard here live tonight and at the previous hearing U I think there's several it that help mitigate the concerns about the service entrance coming through the Chelsea into this particular site number one um the limits of the easement where a service vehicle is supposed to enter the site is limited to less than 100 ft I believe substantially less than 100 feet going into the Chelsea site before they have to make a 90 degree right turn and go towards the common property line between Chelsea and the EnV site the significance of that is once a vehicle a delivery truck slows down to make that right they're going at a slower speed and then they've got to get uh even slower to make that 90° turn once they make that 90° turn they're going to be alerted especially with the signage and the speed table the first time they go through and if it's consistently the same driver or same company they're going to know after the first time across a speed table that excuse me that they've got to slow down for that so that's f deterrence for somebody speeding coming into the site number four uh when they get to the common property line area uh there is the uh drive-thru coming through for the pickup window but there's nothing that I'm aware of that's going to block the site distance from a delivery vehicle looking to the left to see a vehicle coming in towards where they're driving so that's a safety plus uh number five I think another thing that Mr Dyer just brought up is the fact that those delivery vehicles for all intensive purposes at this point would be coming in the morning hours before the normal Russia traffic for lunch or dinner comes into play so there's not that much interaction number six uh you've got a relatively low number of vehicles one or two I think Mr dyra testify to which sounds about right as far as deliveries to a restaurant this size and number seven when they go to leave the site if you recall when they make the left and go out towards uh the entrance or excuse me the exit for the site uh they've widened out the aisle to 28 ft the normal required aisle width is 24 ft they've taken 2 ft off of the parking space depth on each side to get a wider aisle which helps larger Vehicles negotiate within that aisle with so for those reasons I well I appreciate his concerns I think from an engineering geometric and the items that I just Des d i I think it is basically a safe situation the one thing I wanted to mention while I'm thinking about it also as far as additional waivers were concerned uh I leave this to Mr Brady if he thinks it's a waiver but I think I should bring it up um the normal parking space size for Sparta Township is 180 Square ft which is 9 by 20 that's 180 as I just mentioned they chose to widen out the aisle from 24 to 28 ft by taking 2 ft off each parking space and instead of 9x2 they're 9 by8 now from a practical standpoint when you take 20 20 and the aisle width of 24 and a standard layout that's 64 ft they still have the 64 ft from Curb line to curb line but they've a portioned it differently to give a wider aisle width in order to help the vehicles negotiate out of the site technically that may be a waiver that has to be noted in any decision the board board makes but I just want to point that out in addition as well thank you I know we had requested that waiver last time and I don't remember how we left it that's the only thing I know because we could either extend them to the 20 and have the 24 so I just I know when I said I would agree to whatever we agreed to last time we'd still prefer the waiver so if we had agreed to that last time I think it's a better design with the 28 so so just want to put that out there right I know that that was something that we agreed that we discussed extensively at at at the uh at that meeting um but I leave it to the experts to to make a determination as to whether or not you you the re is required okay anything else um I think Mr Simmons was about to say just getting back uh this is where my CDL license comes into play and uh again with the additional width of the aisle to negotiate a large truck you you're basically facing the same situation because the park vehicles are in all likelihood going to pull right up to the curb anyway so I think giving the waiver since the overall width is still 64 I think your my recommendation is I don't have a problem with the waiver thank you I'm good okay all right most of the questions I had have been asked answer already the one question I do have just to to make sure so when I look at the three uh Suites so the first one one Suite is going to be uh Chipotle restaurant and the other two I believe are retail so the other two and from a parking P perspective there'll be retail and they're not going to be restaurants with table service and that could change the potential parking scheme yes um what they will be will be determined when we actually get a tenant and they have to meet the parking requirements so it's very unlikely it would be any restaurant okay so so if it were a restaurant would you come back and and we could discuss that from a parking perspective where the standard would be a little different and could shape the overall yeah I expect it'll probably be a professional type space or a retail okay I had a note Ron from the old hearing that uh as tenants came in there would be some sort of calculation provided to the zoning office okay so if the calculation then results in a problem they'd have to come back and go before board okay that's the same with every application yep okay that's my questions uh so with that why don't we open up to the public if anyone from the public has any questions relative uh for the applicant relative to the testimony uh please feel free to come forward uh state your name and um and Mr bran to uh just take questions or allow questions and testimony all kind of mixed together because we have to do both so is is there any more testimony that'll be giv tonight okay yeah so why don't we combine them good good suggestion thank you absolutely no problem raise your right oh certainly testimony the truth the whole truth nothing but yes State your your name please spell your last name and an address and since I'm taking notes slow you're going to need a big piece of paper for my last name my name is Richard roacher r o HR b a c h e r okay imag 172 Demis road I don't have testimony I just have a couple of questions and comments we keep talking about emergency vehicles us and service Vehicles using the access from the um assisted living facility into the Chipotle parking lot and we totally and blindly seem to ignore the propensity for civilians non-service people uh non EMTs or emergency vehicle operators to take shortcuts if they think it will save them some time and they won't be stuck in traffic what is to prohibit or exclude such civilian vehicles from accessing that service Road there's just signage there that and what do we know about signage people will blow it off if there is no no stick to enforce it agreed I can speak very clearly to that there are signs uh from just before Wilson Drive and just off of Route 15 on Demis road that say trucks over five tons prohibited well guess what we get trucks coming down that street that are not making local deliveries that are definitely over 5 tons driving through and the answer I got was oh well if there happens to be a police officer there who can stop the offending vehicle they can then ride a ticket well I'm still waiting for that to happen um I thought my second question is more directed to you Mr dyra um I thought there were supposed to be some apartments above the commercial floor has that been removed yes that was the prior application that has been amended oh okay all right I just I thought it had but I just wanted to make sure that I was remembering things correctly my memory is not nearly as good as it used to be um that concludes my testimony at this point my questions at this point Thank you swear orir trth I swear Vian Pearl m p e r l m u tt e r five Morgan Drive sport of New Jersey Vivian Vivian vi vi a uh I wanted to know from Mr dyra is the plan to have waitress service out to the outdoor eating area or is it people buy their food take it out and eat at the tables people buy it at the service desk and they bring it outside will Chipotle have someone supervising that the trash goes into the trash cans when they finish I assume that the food will be on disposables this plastic whatever plates paper plates whatever and then there'll be trash cans there for the people and will they have someone supervising to make sure that everything is clear it off and that it's neat and it doesn't become a hazard or shall I say sight Hazard and a rat magnet and it's um it's of concern to me I appreciate the concern Chipotle is a pretty high-end fast casual restaurant they do maintain their spaces very well no because I got on to um just to let everyone know if you look on the web and you search Chipotle and Newton and you look at the reviews and you start reading them they are constantly in need of help they don't have adequate help people are complaining that they make orders and they're not filled correctly there was a lot of griping and it isn't on every restaurant but it was on Chipotle and Newton and I just hope I that it will be different here and uh I just uh want to know what the mechanism will be to make sure that the trash doesn't pile up because we don't have that in in the shoppr right center if you look around shoppr right doesn't have people eating outside no none of the other stores have people outside eating I love outside eating but in order to do it you you can't assume that people will be neat they will finish eating and they will walk away the stuff will be on the table and if somebody isn't there making sure that it gets cleaned up you're going to have trouble thank you Mr Brady since this is like both a question and testimony if the some statements are false information are we expected to have it corrected for the record or no Mr Brady microphone is up there they the one right in front does the one on the table work work it doesn't work it doesn't work oh so bill would you repeat that question looks like I think before we start a public comment we said it was gonna be a mix of both questions and testimony well yeah what we're doing is we're doing both for a matter because the applicant is finished with their testimony so we might as well go into both as a matter of efficiency right but if there's something that's said on the record that's not correct we not factual are we meaning by the public yeah you can certainly comment on it you we're not under an obligation to correct it you're not under an obligation to correct it no thanks okay I'm afraid to touch it time I touched it it so would you ra your do you solemnly swear or affirm testimony the TRU yes and your name and your last name please your name and your address and please spell your last like Mr warrecker you're probably gonna need a bigger notebook uh Kathy Eben Cowen e BB i n keep e b b i n k h u y s e n scutters Road scutters Road Sparta okay I have a some questions um a statement was and some uh testimonies some State a statement was made earlier stating that the aesthetic um was the main seemingly that the aesthetic was the main issue of the building or maybe the proposal uh to me the aesthetic was never the main issue of this proposal as I recall it was the traffic and what was discussed previously is corporal Morris's previous report and also his new report which I admit I have not been able to see not sure if that's available to the public someone can help me with that I did look at today's um documents available to the public and I did not see it um so I'm going to go off of memory of what I remember the previous report to have stated by corpal Morris and the issue um as I recall was around traffic Ingress and egress so my first question is um is the egress and Ingress solely still from North Village Boulevard because I cannot see everything there I apologize I would hope you could repeat that or help me uh explain what's there please the entrance is from Market Street which is the road that's perpendicular to North Village you come down North Village make a left and then a left into the facility okay so only off of Market Street not from North Village Boulevard there's no entrance on North Village boul okay so um knowing that intersection very well um the amount of cars as previously I've stated in uh previous um hearings um is very the the window of opportunity for cars to back up at the route 15 and North Village intersection is very short I think there's about five cars when leaving North Village at most that can Queue at the light which causes traffic to back up when trying to turn left out of there now I have a picture today with me of which I am looking at it shows the intersection of North Village Boulevard and Market Street so before I've even made the left to North Village Boulevard I see in front of me a a a queue of cars waiting for the light to turn green on Route 15 now what I see here is it causes a backup into the intersection of North Village Boulevard and the intersection of Market stre Street which ends up into the main parking lot so now this picture is taken from um the with the intention to exit from the main parking lot and make a left onto North Village and wait for the light to leave North Village in order to do so I see in my picture two cars queued up uh to make a right onto North Village Boulevard on Market Street 1 2 3 four five six cars already queued up and into the intersection of Market and North Village now this is on a weekend so granted it might be a time that is more busy but the reason I raised this is because this intersection is already a mess and I had testified to this uh in previous um hearings and it stands for reason if we're adding more businesses to this location this will further exacerbate this current mess okay um in the time which this previous hearing the previous hearing for this uh location has occurred and today our chief of police has um entered a report or created a report that states that the area in front of North Village is high accident in terms of anything else in our town the issue as I recall corpal Morris mentioning was not around speeding although that was a discussion today with uh speed mitigation bumps to cause uh traffic to uh be slower uh it's around congestion this intersection is already congested congested and therefore if you add more businesses to this I don't see how this issue has been mitigated with what is being presented today that's all I have for submission to the board thank you anybody else testimony I do Jennifer Derek's tap into Sparta Derek's d r i c KS just to give a little more information to what Kathy Ean cower was just saying the chief's report on Crash data does include 67 accidents in the parking lot of North Village 18 at that intersection it does include an increasing number of accidents along Route 15 in this strip known as Lafayette Road they call it Lafayette Road between the railroad tracks and the light at White Lake starting at 79 accidents in 21 89 and 22 106 and 23 and 80 and 41 in just the first 5 and 1/2 months of 24 uh 315 crashes total on that section of Road in the four years and the number is growing to Kathy's point it is Rel relative to congestion and I did want to ask she already asked but we were not able to access the documents for this application we weren't able to see the plans we weren't able to see Corporal Mars's updated letter which was in fact the major rationale for the discussion at the last hearing the last time this was brought to you onor dash Sparta raise your right hand please you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony about to give will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the yes so we're back the same application with all the respect to the applicant you know it's permitted use he's allowed to build it the issue is respectfully safety and and the applicant has a fair point he said Mr Simmons do you think it's safe that was this question his answer was yes in certain technical issues of Law and planning and zoning you absolutely need the advice of a professional like Mr Simmons to app on that and you should consider it here we have a situation respectfully my daughters don't like me standing up here they want this chipot they don't like getting door Dash from Newton but I confess my wife and I go to the Starbucks every day in the morning that's a problem it is inherently dangerous when you're coming out of the Starbucks you you can take a left or a right we don't need an engineer to tell us respectfully why the Ingress and egress when you're adding an additional layer of traffic it's just honest it's not that because I oppose development per se I don't but if you you don't need an engineer and you and Mr Brady said last time it's advice that you can reject but your loyalty is to defend the quality of life quality of life I I understand their standards legal Etc but quality of life comes down to traffic and congestion and this is what we're dealing with here this is the last piece on North Village I respect the property owner being able to develop but what's more important the rights of that property owner versus the safety of the Ingress and the egress with all the respect I I I don't want you know Owen and John to think I'm just here with thorn in the side nobody wants that I'm telling you respectfully If You observe if you've driven that right I I I I I respectfully disagree with Dave none of the changes and In fairness to them in fact In fairness there's nothing they can do to change it it's the intersection it's a four-way intersection I almost can't even ask them to do anything else you can't expect them to do anything else but I I honestly I'm worried if you're distracted for a second pulling you know you come out of the Starbucks you go left and you go you got to go left right all the time people in the the second entrance further down by the babuka babuka um Mexican right public it's the same thing people don't know they're creeping out creeping out left right and it's inherently dangerous and we have Kel Morris's report we have conflicting reports of course appli is going to say it's safe it's not it's not in a fair question to ask Mr dyra do you think it's safe of course he's going to say it's safe why would he say it's not safe he wouldn't be here he's a professional NG I respect him he wouldn't tell you members of the board members of the board this is an unsafe intersection he's Council by very good councel I'm just saying from my heart it's not tenable that intersection is not tenable and guess what this board has a right unfettered right to rule on safety issues to either reject or take the advice of its of its engineer you get in your good conscience with Goal Mor report knowing have you God hopes that you've all seen that intersection I submit respectfully no disrespect to the applicant no disrespect to development it's not a safe intersection your duut is to defend the safety the quality of life which is died into a legal standard by the way of Ingress and egress the same of Ingress egress it's all tied in I implore you please it's not personal it's your duty thank you thank you Mr Das thank you anybody else you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony about to give the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth I do spell your last name slowly so I can get it sure another tough one my name is Paul and the last name is steinel St e n h i lb my address is 16 Sierra place so Sierra place is the road that when I go right up to the end I see the back of the Chelsea and then there's Market Street right there on my street are about 20 children that live there um what we do see what I see um is because I'm retired so I'm home all day and I walk that area at least three times a day um throughout there and what I see is coming up um my road probably about two-thirds of the people are speeding and the reason they're doing that is they're cutting through when they come off White Lake Road to go to the Chelsea and they come up my street to get there which I would assume they would also do if they're going to go to Chipotle there on Market Street as well um and I do walk that that spot over by the Starbucks that was just talked about and there are times when I cringe because I see people inching out and somebody flying like they're still driving a rof 15 down um that that Northern route down that way um I end up many times because it's such a busy intersection having to walk down further and try to cross over by the playground to to walk around the facility so in my mind mind it's already a lot of traffic in that area it's very very dangerous area and um and also the other thing about Market Street there's many times as as somebody was saying when I get to that stop sign to make the right to the light I have to wait and when I come in from Route 15 sometimes to make the left to go on to Market I have my own turning lane not always because the people who are waiting to get through that light are in the middle of it and I can't make the left or there's people that are just stopped in the middle of the intersection because they don't want to be left out and it and it is it's a burden it's a burden right now so that's my testimony thank you yeah any other members of the public wish to question or comment okay so seeing none I guess we'll bring it back uh for a motion Mr Brady could you help us with the motion please could I have a point of order first please um since this is a hearing where um the public was required to participate um and they did not have access to the applications is it a viable decision I believe it is because Mr Brady the access usually people say l [Music] I think it is because the I suspect maybe I should ask that the exess that we're talking about is online access and while that's provided as a convenience by many municipalities it's not required the access that's really required is if you submit an Oprah or you come in person or simply like that that it's available at the municipal building to be looked at not that necessar it's available online people have become accustomed to that but um I don't think that's require if it's not available for some reason through some electronic glitch whatever it may be it's the available at the municipal building the notice would typically says I'm not going to Paw through to find the notice available for inspection at the office of the board secretary between the hours of you know 8:30 and 4: whatever it may be okay thank you so we're at the position now I guess where the board goes into its typical deliberations um if someone you know typical deliberations talk about what the issues are if you're satisfied with them someone can make a motion to uh approve or deny um if there is a motion to approve then I have a bunch of things that I've starred as being potential conditions out of Dave's report or things that were represented by Mr dyster or asked of Mr Dy and he said fine we'll do that U but I think the first step is to discuss this and then somebody step forward and make a motion unless someone just wants to make a motion right now I'll make a motion okay motion for approval Okay then if we're going to do that bill uh I'll go through as is my practice with boards and and outline the things that I have found as being conditions here that we discuss do we need a second you I I think before we have a second I'll go through the conditions then we'll second it uh because that way we know exactly what we're seconding and voting on thank you um bear with me a little bit because I've got a lot of them uh I would put in that they're they they've made a representation that they'll uh I'm going to use the word match but I'm going to find a better word than that for Mr Dyer's sake the the colors on Chipotle CU any batch of bricks or any batch of stone is not going to match exactly but I think the word was the same color palette or something of that so I would put that as a condition um they're going to provide excuse me you mean Starbucks correct Starbucks did I say yeah okay I apologize uh they're going to provide the latest some details to Dave on the latest trotle uh I'm calling it chair FL table design and details uh the fixtures are going to be I think Mr dyster said in the 3500 to 4,000 Kelvin um 4,000 4,000 okay and they're going to uh dim to 50% an hour after closing and I think he indicated further we'll find it that the lights along Market Street will actually be turned off at that time um fixtures will be downward facing it's going to be added shrubs or Landscaping at the rear of the building I think it's in that area between the drive-thru Lane and the building itself outdoor dining they'll meet all the conditions to make it a permitted use going to be used thermal plastic paint on the crosswalk uh this one we already covered I had looked quickly through my notes from the old hearing we didn't address these but I don't think there's any um dispute about them there's no order board here it's all online or call-in or something of that nature and I see Mr dyster shaking his head up and down so for the record is agreeing um I had a note from the old hearing talking about lights that when the building lights go off the signs go off too is that accurate that's correct okay and note that will come back for tenant signage for approval I'm not sure under the sparta ordinance whether that is something goes through zoning if it's compliant or has to come here for a minor site plan review but whatever the process is they'll comply with that uh say similar as other Tenants come in because they don't know the tenants for the other two there'll be some calculations submitted to the zoning department and what that means to the parking at the site if it means that there's some issue or variance because right now they're compliant they got to come back for a variance and then I went through as they went through Dave's report of August 14th uh Dave had a uh things that are um plan related adding books and Pages onto the plans for the easements uh needing an easement for that fire hydrant that encroaches did you get Dave your 3A striping and signage of the speed table did that get provided or is that still to be provided that is either to be provided or to be confirmed on the okay okay so we would do that 3A in his report um on for C there's areas discrepancy I think Mr Dyer said that's just some miscalculation that'll get straightened out uh 5A you've got the discrepancy between rccp and HDPE that'll get straightened out 5B and C are calculations of storm uh to confirm the pipes all will take the roof drains and the storm water operation manual which is now basically a state law that you have to record that uh Dave on six on six do you still need the details on the lights or has that been provided uh to be provided to be provided that'll be provided uh 7A with regard to flow uh and water mains and Consulting with the water utility will be a condition same for seven b or 8B which is confirming the size of the laterals um and then there's a waiver requested for the interior parking lot landscaping that's not a condition but while I'm looking down notes the board if the motion is to approve bill that would include that weight okay um and the motion would also include the waiver I think Dave recommended the waiver for the depth of the parking space'll be 18 feet rather than or 20 feet okay so those the conditions and and the two waivers that are involved and you're and I assume your your motion is amended to include them motion is to include that but also Katherine made some points about the lining the type of lining of the walkways yeah that was a thermoplastic I mentioned that you did y there's also a mention in the past about Native species for the Landscaping okay we agree to unless it's inappropriate there's a couple spots where they won't live very well so we do Native species primarily but once in a while and some of these environments where it's like the peninsulas there's trees a lot of native species don't make it so de I was in one municipality and it was somebody threw out the word native species but it turned out in that municipality it was really non-invasive species that they wanted and they're not necessarily the same look for ideally it's both right nonin yeah okay so for now we'll we'll we'll go with Native at least okay well include both put Andor okay native spe and Native and non-invasive species Okay Okay so we've got a motion may I have a second I'll second can I ask one question too Mr Brady did you mention I think you did about the conditional upon providing the easement that matches Mr dy's testimony that there's no restrictions and it's allowable for daily services in fact Mr blti uh Katherine looked online found it and emailed it to me I'm I'm reading it on my phone just before so it's on my phone I'm not going to say that I read it every word it looks like it's unrestricted it's just an a Ingress and egress easement okay thank yeah you can provide a copy please can anybody else see no one would anybody like to make a motion uh to Second it no I I did second okay great all right based on that can we have a roll call please miss frankman Deputy Mayor Dean blumetti no Janette Burke yes Christine dumbar no Vice chairman Bill Enright yes Joan Ferman abstain Justin Canales yes Celeste Luciano yes Ernie rad yes Mike Sylvester yes chairman Ronde yes you know you know what we we need a full board is seven members so the seven full members are the ones that vote and the Alternatives don't vote unless we need to go to that so I've already got seven noted but did we include Alternatives in that should we all alternatives alternates in that or the only alternate present would be Justin that's that's correct because because Brian is not here okay so what we've got to do is you should just go back and make sure we've only pulled the regular members until we run out of them and then go to the alternates should we read the roll call again or are we able to well I I recommend we read the roll call again okay to make it clear okay n regular members H there are nine full members not seven nine regular members how do we have nine full members on a planning board usually has seven full members and then alternates we have nine and two nine regular you really okay alternates well either way the rule that you go through the full members and only go to the alternates when you need to is the rule that we need to follow and I recently had a board where I frankly was not paying attention to who was Voting and we had some people vote who shouldn't I don't want that to happen exactly I we agree I we we would just need to exclude the one vote from right which would Mr corre okay is that what it is okay yeah and that makes that makes the vote 52 with one uh AB abstain right okay have to win another one correct so we're good that math doesn't add up well no we should that that math was correct we should have please do the roll than Deputy Mayor Dean blaty no Janette Bert yes Christine dumbar no Vice chairman Bill inight yes Joan Ferman abstain Celeste Luciano yes Ernie rstat yes Mike Sylvester yes chairman Ronde yes but I giv six yeses two Nos and one epain is that correct yes so the motion is passed so we got everybody thank you thank you gentlemen congratulations thank you gentlemen and with that okay I know we're we're running short in time but but I'd like to give everyone at least a chance to do a quick stretch of their legs why don't we do a quick I'm going to try to make it try to keep it to five um we want to get out of here as close to 10 as we can but uh those people need to get up and stretch a little bit they get shut up time what's that I think can set up during that time yeah exactly good call nuclear e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e up space yeah like to they had should redid it Matt did anything they put there will be better I tell you oh do you need these everybody get okay and you got this this one now I don't think I pass this one I saw these online yeah online too all right listen to your wonderful questions that's yeah in the corner of pine cone and wood yep I didn't have this it my man yeah I have this did you we have them here on the boards we're just in case you wanted to see them a little bit closer yeah are these they were submitted they were they were it's just you know they might have color I saw them today okay yeah they were in color no yeah can I can we give one to maybe jennif Jennifer and then there's one extra in case you need a anything what's the new rules here are your current rules are not testimony after 9 what okay thank you okaycome all right folks I think I think we're back oh here it comes so welcome to the I say Rew welcome to the folks from Pine Plaza um and um Mr Brady I I don't think anyone to be sworn in any concerns there I believe everybody sworn in anybody need to be reing yes yes I understand okay all right gentlemen all right uh good good evening ladies and gentlemen Daniel bandor from the law firm of Asin and hooker representing uh the applicant this evening um here on behalf of joint uh jvp Ventures uh pine cone Plaza and Hunters Lane um we were last here before the board on June 26 2024 um for the revitalization and a renovation to a building that exists on that corner property um we took all of your comments and your questions and your concerns to heart and we made some significant changes to the plans based on those requests uh we want to go over them tonight and show you that we did consider everything that the board said and that we did try to make accommodations for all those things um there were also some of those things included specific numbers for signage and things we wanted to make sure that we cleared all of that up um there are still some variances needed but here to provide that testimony as Mr Dunn from Dy Associates Mr dun before we begin if I may interrupt for a second um I'd like to know who we're dealing with you just said jvp Ventures but when I asked last time time I was given an there was another LLC on the application and then the applicant said that um it was going to be a different one the third one and that it would be corrected by this meeting so who actually owns and who actually is applying and for that I'll have my client provide that testimony no yeah I was last time you still underwrote you understand yes just for the record repeat your name Joe sorry I lost my voice this week so uh my name is Joe pasaka uh 23 windir way in Sparta um so the the property was originally purchased in a prior IPO properties this was about four years ago roughly um there was a d change submitted in the very end of 2023 to 172 woodport Road LLC well 172 woodport SP LLC um jvp Ventures is my holding company that manages applications you know anything that has to do with real estate in my portfolio so the property is currently own owned under 172 woodport Road SP LLC okay and we uh originally when I started this process about a year and a half ago roughly um the original property manager that I had that no longer works for me submitted it with the old LLC I okay and are there any other owners um in the 172 Westport LLC no I'm this I'm as a single owner okay thank you thank you Mr Pascal Aqua good evening Jason done with dystra Associates I'm a professional planner and licensed landscape architect D provide testimony of the June 27 uh meeting and I'd like to uh review the uh change that we've we've done since that meeting um I'll go through them uh briefly and then I'll go into some more detail uh the biggest change I would say is that we removed um a lot of pavement that formerly provided a loop connection before we talk about that exhibit let's mark it a21 with today's date and then tell me what it is the title block data preparation that sort of thing thank you I apologize I jumped ahead of process um uh the exhibit before the board is a 2.01 uh dated 8 dated at today's date uh the title is presentation plan and it also is stated today um it was prep prepared by our our office ster Associates it's one sheet uh it shows a color rendering of the site and also on on either side of the color rendering are uh signage details so the the applicant agreed to remove uh the loop pavement um which reduced significantly the amount of impervious on the site uh we still are over by um slightly over um we would be asking for a variance of 42.3% I'll explain how we arrived at that number um the parking we increased by one um so we have 51 spaces with the new uh not new with the with the areas of the building uh we would require 58 space es um the uh areas of the building include five tenants uh the proposed Fitness Studio is 3,549 square ft now I know on our site plan um we had not uh we did not put the correct number on that what is that again then from our note uh the proposed Fitness Studio is 3,549 the Exterminator is 955 um the nail Salon is 1,340 the dry cleaner is 1240 Square ft and on the upper level is the accountant at 941 Square ft the fitness studio uh parking factor is 1 per 100 squ ft all the others are 1 per 200 um some other changes to the site planet self uh we eliminated some sidewalk in front of the building so that uh pedestrians would be on the on the north side of the building or the side facing Pine Cone Lane uh they would go underneath a proposed uh covered roof uh to reach the other side of the building uh the uh the east side of the building along U parallel to woodport road so that the existing walk remains to connect these two areas um in the entrance to the Nail Studio access from the upper parking lot since it doesn't no longer loops around uh will be from two uh existing staircases concrete staircases that will be connected with a concrete sidewalk uh to a new um concrete sidewalk system on the south side of the building so everything is connected by uh the by Sidewalk for the pedestrians to reach each of the entrances um the Western parking lot has only been modified to remove that pavment that which connected it to the loop um I believe the history of that that Loop was for a Bank drive-thru uh it also I believe was a auto garage or something um so it was important for those uses but it is not important for these we've listened to the board's comments on how to reduce the impervious um it's my opinion and my testimony that uh this is as reduced as it can be um without starting to really impact negatively the functionality of The Pedestrian and the and the uh uh the vehicle vehicular circulation um some other elements is that we added some Landscaping along Hunter's Lane um we added a wall and gate around the existing dumpster area uh and we uh added the hydrant easement along Hunter's Lane and a sight triangle easement uh for for Pine Cone Lane and Hunter's Lane um which we will provide descriptions for as long as uh as long as the uh shape and size is approved um there was also a change to the architectural plan um there was some discussion at the last meeting uh and concern about the Aesthetics of what what I'm calling the stair Tower if I could introduce a new exhibit I'll show the board what that is and then I will get to science exhibit a202 dated today August 21st 2024 um is a color rendering of that was based on the new architecturals that were provided to the board for in advance of this meeting um it shows a different roof style of of the proposed stair Tower uh that is more in keeping in my opinion with the rest of the roof angles um and it comes up I guess you'd say from four sides to a single point the there's smaller versions of this provided to the board so this this provides A View From the corner of uh Pine Cone Lane and woodport road to the building uh I think lastly unless I missed something is about the changes to the signs um during the last meeting there was quite a bit of back and forth about what the freestanding I'll start with the freestanding sign about about what the freestanding sign would be and what the dimensions would be um the proposed freestanding sign would be 8 ft tall from the ground to the top of the uh to the top of the uh last placard I'll call it which is a uh uh uh property identification sign saying 172 woodport um there are a listing of each each pler has a listing of the five tenants uh so each tenant can be easily identified from woodport Road and also from um Pine Cone Lane um the 8 foot does not include the finals and the decorative pieces which I think we agreed um does not need to be counted in the height uh the total area of the sign is 24 Square ft uh where in this Zone it allows a maximum of 12 square feet for a freestanding sign um to reiterate my testimony from last time I think that this is a a better plan alternative um because this is a multi-use building and I think in this Zone uh it did not anticipate uh many multi-use buildings 12 12 square fet I believe is appropriate for one or maybe even two users but for five uh which which this this building has historically been used with multiple tenants I think it's appropriate and it's actually I think even smaller than the existing sign so we would request variance relief for that sign size um second sign modification uh was for the pine cone Plaza identification sign on the uh proposed stair Tower uh that would be um get to my notes I think that would be 20 25 Square ft total uh as as measured um from the full length and the full width the the actual real area of that would be less because it's a circular shape not Square um but that would be 8 foot from the from the grade to the bottom of that sign and it is uh in in uh compliance with the facade area of that facade uh that's all I have for the changes uh to summarize uh uh can you bring up the rendering again Mr dun sure all right uh and on that rendering on that rendering you're going to see signs that are located on the sides of the building uh all of those signs are going to be designed uh to uh accommodate the uh Code Compliance correct yes um each of those signs will comply um by the length width and size based on the facade and based on the tenant and and based on each tenant yes right okay how high was the dumpster enclosure going to be um just a moment the question is how high is the dumpster enclosure going to be uh we did provide a detail on the new plan set this is just what I'm putting up on the board now is what was submitted to the planning board with no other modifications so this this is not a new exhibit okay uh the wall would be 6' High freestanding wall surrounding three sides of the dumpster area and it's going to look similar to the building as it's been rendered yes yes um the the the it will be a 8 in Split face block wall with um I think it's called ephus which would match uh the style and color of the building um the chain the gates would be are proposed to be a black vinyl clad aluminum chain link with black vinyl screen slats and the uh rendering uh is similarly uh colored to what the building's going to look like correct the brick yes yes it is it's a combination of brick and E FIS um with a black trim and black asphalt shingle roof I have no further questions for the okay will there be any other testimony tonight or any other t okay all right so with that let's let's go to our professionals I think you m so you could run through the members it would be appreciated uh cther why don't we start with you this time if we could thank you Mr chairman um I apologize that my memo did not include the site plan that was not shared until I think late last week or early this week the other documents were shared as far as the signage and Architectural plan just is what I reviewed um there were I'm not sure if Mr joh captured it um there were I think significant improvements to the architectural design from the original um not just the building materials but the actual design of some of those Tower features and things um and I do think that the overall aesthetic Improvement is significant to what is there today um I appreciate the additional details on the signage um and I do agree that there is still a variance required for the freestanding sign um and some of the other variances that still exist um Mr D can you provide just the um the updated impervious coverage just so I have it thank you uh Katherine for bringing that up I actually left something out of my testimony on U on the parking um on upon second look of this uh Dan brought up a point about the uh requirement for Ada accessible parking spaces since I did add the one parking since the the plan has one extra parking which brings it to 51 total uh real spaces um uh that that I think brings the requirement up to three Ada accessible parking spaces so I think it's two for every 50 for the first 50 um spaces and then an additional one after 50 okay so what I propose to do is add another um Ada accessible space space uh to to the west side of the building next to the uh next to the two existing spaces with a new uh uh Ada accessible access aisle would be required uh for for a width of 5 ft um which would basically displace one of the parking spaces in this in this Western parking lot um that could be handled one one of a couple ways uh we could reduce the parking spaces back to 50 which we would require some uh relief for uh parking uh further relief from parking um or uh we could uh uh offer to add banked parking um to the the ends of the existing um Southern parking Spa uh area um in my opinion I I think that 50 spaces are appropriate we provided testimony about um the different uses and the different uh peak times and the fact that this is an instructional Fitness Studio that has um you know instructors and uh they wouldn't have a conflict of incoming and outgoing uh participants um so although I think I was well meaning to to add that extra space I think it causes a little issue uh so if we could keep it to 50 and get the variance um from from uh 52 because we get two bonus for the EV parking spaces which would be um which would be located uh one would be in front of the Ada accessible space and the one next to it uh brings us to 53 proposed spaces where 58 are are required and Mr dun just based on that testimony the in the other parking lot you can't add the Ada space because of the because of the steps up to the building yeah so I've referred to this to as a couple different things um the upper parking lot and also the southern parking lot it's the same the same lot and um it exists today uh we are modifying the one end uh slightly because of removing the loop uh loop driveway but essentially you're correct um there's there's a a elevation difference uh I would say of about 5 to 6 feet between the upper level Park area and the sidewalks to the entry of the building okay so the board understands Mr dun saying is that the addition of the addition of the extra space essentially has to become handicapped I think it probably would have functionally if it was in that upper parking lot it would have made more sense because there's two separate parking lots it would serve another handicap space in that one but because of the the steps there it can't be a handicap space there because it wouldn't be access the actual entryway into the building wouldn't be accessible so um I don't necessarily disagree it would greater make the parking variance greater in that it's one less space but it would be a restricted space anyway if it was provided so just something to consider for the board um Mr dun while we're on parking um is has the location of the Ed space EV spaces been designated on the site plan oh just give me a moment to check that I thought they were on here I got it under control now okay um no they they were not labeled on the plan I apologize for that but the intent was to have them uh one of them to be on the Ada accessible space and and another one next to it okay so the handicap space would be shared with an EV space it would be a handicap accessible EV space one one handicap space will be EV okay and one one space that's not handicap will be EV so there two total okay and the charger will be in the middle of those two spaces I'm assuming um it really depends on what the charger well these are EV ready spaces so the charger hasn't been decided yet okay whether it' be a single charger that would serve both parking spaces or or two Chargers one for each but I think the state mandate says that at least one of the EV has to be Ada accessible yes it's like a 5% requirement but it ends up having to round up to I see one um the as far as the signage when that does become uh installed can you just provide a signage detail on the for the restricted EV space on the revisite plans this we can agree to do that thank you sure um other than that I don't know if you actually touched upon it just reiterated the actual impervious coverage the now proposed impervious coverage just confirmed it um it's it's almost like a a choice um oh because if we add the one parking stall uh it would increase the impervious just slightly to 42.3% proposed if we keep it the way it is uh and and don't add that that one stall um it would be 42.1% okay as shown on the site plan presently yes okay thank you I ask a followup question if it was if it was just 50 spots what would the impervious surface be so if it goes down the one as you mentioned earlier if it was 50 um it would be 41.9 one parking spot is about 0.2% okay thank you yeah no that that's right he said 42.1 that's right that's if we kept the 51 spaces uh Mr blumetti is correct if we remove that 51st space it reduces it even further to 41.9% um um again I should know I know it's in the record but uh the existing condition I think is about 50.1% initially we were proposing to reduce it to 48 and change now we're almost down to the year 40 close almost Captain what's the minimum require requirement for handicap parking with the amount of spaces proposed Mr dun had mentioned that that it's two per 50 and then it goes up to one an additional one if you go over 50 spaces they're currently at we're going if it's they're at 50 if there are 50 spaces then they have two on the plan if they go to 51 they have to provide a third handicap space which is the conundrum the second one is also being used for Ev m Pur correct and that's that's allowed okay no I'm just trying to clarify that yep yep I with the other obvious revision to the plans being the parking variants shown correctly the the total square footage for the gym facility as well as the total number of parking spaces I think that I do not have any other further comments at this time just relative to that if I could just follow so so given the correction of the gym facil square footage what is the parking requirement in terms of total spaces to Total spaces for the for the uh Fitness Studio only or oh no for the for the entire site for total is 58 spaces the8 spaces yes and you get a credit for two so so right now so that says you need 56 and and the question is do we go with 50 or 51 just so I understand it correct okay Katherine any other questions I have nothing further thank you okay thank you Dave U Mr chairman of board members referring to the report dated August 19th 2024 uh and skipping over to page three of that report uh some of the numbers in my report changed because of things that Mr Dunn has explained here tonight uh again you've got the impervious coverage which went down from what it was originally be it depending on what you decide on that additional space whether it's going to be 42.1 or 42.3 uh under the site plan comments basically Mr dun pointed out and it's on the revised site plan they are providing a site triangle easement at the intersection of Pine Cone Lane and Hunters Lane and also an easement for the fire hydrant that extends beyond the right of way of hun Lane uh those easements have to be defined by meets and Bounds and put in a proper deed form uh I noted that uh the parking lots are in need of resurfacing I believe they're still proposing to Mill and pave those lots yes that's that's correct okay y okay and Mr Dunn based on the revisions to the area of the various tenants uh modify the parking requirement ideally to a total of 58 with regards to storm water they have shown the roof drains that I requested and they'll be subject to the review of the construction official um and they have also uh shown that since they're reducing the impervious coverage they don't have to provide they do not have to provide storm water mitigation for the Township's ordinance with regards to uh the lighting system uh on the two parking lots uh I just want to verify that the hours of operation or 1 hour after the tenants close and the lights will be reduced that's correct yeah that's that's in agreement with the testimony from last time okay uh with regards to the utilities um they are on the Township water system they'll have to confirm that with the utility director uh Cory long with regards to the septic system I it's an existing septic and by one thing I note by eliminating the pavement in the former drive-thru area they're eliminating pavement over the disposal beds too I believe so that's that's a positive as far as that's concerned and the uh the applicant will have to get a county approval for the capacity of that septic system uh they did add additional Landscaping to the plan they you have talked about the signs they changed uh substantially from what I had in my report based on the testimony tonight uh will the proposed Bild excuse me will the existing building be sprinklered um no I don't think it will will be no it was not okay I just wanted to clarify that yes okay uh I wasn't here for the original hearing the last time but for the four monitoring Wells just to get it on the record what is the status of those Joe can you reiterate that please so the the the excuse me the the gentleman that I bought the building from um he man he he maintains it every year company comes out does it they said they're about one year away from the parts per billion to be satisfactory so they expect they expect one to two more years of monitoring so the prior owner is responsible for that correct and every every year he sends me a report around April okay and the monitoring Wells have to remain correct okay I may yes sir expand on that so there's a active D case which I guess he sounds like he's going to a natural attenuation correct he's trying to sample the wells after twoyear period yeah they they've been doing it apparently for the last 10 or 15 years and they're coming to the end of where they think it's going to be satisfactor where they wanted to monitor it any longer okay so are any of those Wells they're surveyed into the property now um are there any of those wells in Jeopardy being removed or no they sit into yeah they sit in in the front of the building towards um towards the Pine Cone Lane Road or flush mount right correct yeah you could walk it and you could see them um and that s's under of then lsrp oversight right correct yes correct and you don't expect so the liability with the environmental cleanup stain with the previous owner correct yeah that's was part of the purchase agreement funding postage Etc is part of your correct if if you guys want to see the last report we can provide that too pretty simple to get I think we might have already actually all right okay now that that satisfies my question thank you okay and then uh just a construction detail for the parking lot Foundation light Foundation which I think they can provide yes we and there's a list of all the standard uh agencies that I believe they'd have to get approval from and as usual acquire an as built just to verify everything if the board approves the application and the project moves forward that's my report Mr chairman thank you yes sir so um what I'd like to do if we could so we said we were going to end testimony at 9:45 tonight I'd like to give a little bit more time another 15 minutes if everybody's okay and then we'll open then we we'll do all the uh ministrator stuff around 10 so if we can uh let me bring questions back to the deas and uh we'll go from there so Celeste can I start with you I'm actually good for the moment thank you okay thanks good thank you I just have a question about the upper lot oops sorry I have a question about the upper lot um that little uh extra piece that you added on where it used to lead into the curve um that's we proposing some an additional space or is that to help with the turnaround now that the uh loop is gone this um yeah where it says 35 that that's supposed to be I can't read it but I know but on your on your plan uh I think it says 35 as well um there's supposed to be a line striped there so that that is at a parking space um the ordinance says that any any parking space over 40 40 spaces would need a a hammerhead or a bulb turnaround so uh I did not include that because it's less than 40 spaces in this lot but the last time um there was a concern that people couldn't turn around that they would go up there find that there are no spots and then have to be backing out which was the argument for the loop um so that little square thing can you like just round it and make it so that it could be a turnaround this piece here yeah um yes I think that we could that that would bring us back up to our 42.1% if we remove the the parking space but yeah if that's important to the board uh I think we could add that it would might require um some grading here into the into the tree line and some uh maybe a small wall yeah like everything it's a balance right are going to do safety are we going to do impervious coverage are we going to do I was just trying my testimony was last time about uh the concern about turning cars but I looked further into the ordinance and it's it's not required yeah it's not so much the ordinance as it is really truly what you were saying last time as a safety thing because you would have to back out not just a couple spots you'd have to go back out the entire parking lot if there was yeah that's right um there there is I would only say two but there there is visibility on this upper lot is pretty visible from Cars turning in they would be able to see that this is full I actually practiced it today so I would not want to back out of that okay wow very that was just my right could you would you mind just confirming and clarifying one more time what this suggestion is how it would be implemented I'm just may I um we would add uh more pay over the parking space I mean not over but uh to the east of parking space that's designated as number 35 on our plan uh that would allow the car if if it were pull in and then they find that all the spaces are full uh it would allow the car to pull forward and do basically back into this no parking area and then pull out okay would that be marked no parking otherwise used asri yeah I would assume it would be striped have to strip the whole thing and we would have no I'm not going to say it okay it would be it would have to be enforced by title 39 yeah yeah that was all I had thank you thank you for all the changes you've made they looked look great couple of questions one is just to clarify the sign the sizes of the signs um I saw somewhere where in one of the reports maybe even on the site plan it said that the freestanding sign was being proposed at 50 square ft but I I I think that's overstating it was also I saw in the diagrams and other reports it was 24 MH but the site plan does say 50 it's 24 okay 24 sare F feet in accordance with that site in accordance with that plan there and the one that was provided to you uh this evening okay just to clarify it's 24 the 50 is not relevant okay I I think there was a a misunderstanding about the the two feet that existed at the base of the sign that isn't calculated in the square footage and I think that's what the miscalculation was okay if the site plan needs to be corrected we agreed to do that okay to be right and then the tower sign um similar question I I I believe it might have been overstated somewhere that it was 37.4 Square ft uh but it's not correct it's just under 25 just under 25 okay was I think that was on the previous on the chart that we provided at the last hearing it was closer to like 37 sare ft I think okay and it's been revised I think on the new on the updated plan about 25 so it's definitely just under 25 is correct okay yes that's what I that's what I thought I just wanted to make sure it was out there um I also drove around for a second time just more recently uh I noticed there are the three small freestanding signs that are by the street they were a couple feet high they're near the back and the side of the property that read parking 172 woodport Road they just small simple signs uh on the property what are what are the plans for those signs um I'm sorry I'm not not certain where they are we're going to remove it y we talk about it in the last meeting we said we were going to remove any of the smaller signs okay so they're going to be irrelevant okay there were I think three of them kind of near the entrances to the parking L way and then in the back we going to take those down okay okay thank you same same question for the um the steps I noticed and we mentioned last time too I think some of the steps are in need of cleaning repairing replacing are those in the plans as well um it's it's not designated on the plans to do that no um but I don't know if the applicant would agree to some repair if it's required you're talking about like chipping and cracks I my recol C is the steps are operable but oh including steps redo the whole okay um Joe with his Broken Voice just said um yes they do agree to re reconstruct the uh walkway and steps that connect the upper lot to the new uh proposed sidewalks um which would mean Dave's going to be looking for a stair detail I think he's over are nodding yes okay the these small exterior individual Business Signs it was was mentioned a little bit earlier yep um in terms of design color illumination consistency are are you planning to come back to the site plan waiver subcommittee when you have those signs designed out or are you stating tonight that they're all going to look identical and they're going to be exactly like that and you're looking for approval on all those other signs too tonight we're going to do the m yeah okay I mean just just from my experience with science and other buildings I'm going to I'm going to basically to each tenant I I own the fitness center as well so I'm going to the the sign that's already there I don't know if I planned on changing it or not but they'll all the signs will be consistent across the board whether they're all black or it's some sort of basic pler but every single company will have to basically change whatever they have um and we'll just do um the basic simple submission for approval on that but there'll be complete um consistency across the board okay and you'll come back to the subcommittee for that yes okay okay uh last one I am a little concerned about the visibility of the equipment on the roof not from the street and not from most angles but all the vehicles coming Northbound on 181 woodport Road that's how I came and I looked over and you could see all the mechanical equipment you're elevated coming down that hill before you get the pine cone can you address that and talk about that visibility from 181 and then will that be blocked as you're coming down the hill uh yes uh the the testimony I think from the architect last time was at these uh these maner roofs I think is the term I call them fake roofs but um they will block they're high enough that it'll block the uh the cars coming Northbound on woodport that was the goal yeah okay yeah this yeah that's right what about from The Backs side coming down not going up coming down I think that's what you're saying yeah that's correct so you're right this this view is coming uh Southbound on on woodport but what I'm saying is the treatment of the roof is is is high enough that it would block it okay um and you don't know the I'm started to interject the the site plans don't give a exact Building height they just note that it's under 35 ft which is the allowable Building height but it did go up a half Story Probably as a result of that half roof that maned roof as a screen so it's probably like a 6ot tall addition to give that architectural feature that will then hide anything that's roof mounted which is I think a benefit we are trying to do that within the code okay okay okay thank you that's all I have for now appreciate it all right I've just got uh two two uh questions first one let me get the easy one out of the way so the freestanding sign uh I think when we spoke last time uh all the signs were going to be indirectly lit none of them were going to be internally lit uh the Signarama um document still shows that the freestanding sign is internally lit so can you please clarify what the intent there is blond light provide T ground ground lights ground light ground ground L okay so it I apologize for the sign ofamen not not being consistent with our testimony but it would still be uh not internally lit it would be and none of the building signs are going to be internally lit though either correct okay that's right great thanks are they going to have any lighting are they going to have like gooseneck lighting or anything the wall signs the wall signs um they're proposed to have down down lights okay showing them all right so the other the other question I had is Rel related to actually it's a good chart to have up right now so when I when we talked about removing the drive you know my recollection on the from the last meeting was that it wasn't so much um taking the traffic out to the street as it was trying to find the shortest distance between the two points so now we have is two lots so so my concern um and I don't know if we've heard back from corpal Mo I don't believe I think we just got the site plan having a chance to hear back from um so maybe Mr Simmons I'm going to look to you is there any concerns with having two lots as opposed to having you know that are disconnected except through the street as opposed to having some type of a path that connects them so you got on-site traffic circulation between the two lots I think in this particular case uh what Mr Dunn pointed out before from the upper lot well the lower lot uh you've got direct access to the main access doors of the building from the upper lot especially now that the applicant agreed to redo the steps and the sidewalk getting down to the building you do have two possible path corridors to get to the building so since those pedestrian access points are provided I think it's satisfactory and I I recall from years ago when I believe one of the initial tenants in this building was Sussex Bank when it was a bank and the main purpose that I recall was for that Loop part that's been removed was for the drive-thru for the bank so since that doesn't exist and they've got two separate uh means of Ingress and egress for the pedestrians to get to the building I think that'd be satisfactory okay thank you okay that's all I have my only question is about the uh Ada spaces is there any and Katherine I'm really gon to ask you is there any requirement that it has to be in proximity like for instance if they were going to go to the nail salon would be on the opposite side of the building I think I don't know the code specifically but it has to do with the closest possible entrance building entrance doesn't have to be like the tenant space but the handicap space has to be located to the closest building entrance that has an accessible route there as well so not a distance requir no it's a closest to a building entrance that H and closest to an accessible route to a building entrance no further questions none as well um I would like to know a little bit more about this really doesn't I'm just curious as to what the issue is with the wells and what pollution Factor um that is being attenuated um I heard you say it's been attenuated there's a time period of 15 years in which it is no longer impacting the the groundwater water Supply in that area and what is the pollutant of cons concern and if if you know and what caus that pluton um I'm I don't I don't know the answer to that I'm not the expert on that the only thing I I can testify to is one of the questions was uh will the will the wells be modified as part of the proposed site work and they will not um but if you need some additional information I don't know how much more you can offer yeah where oh yeah mentioned that you we be happy to provide that report would would it would it be okay if you could submit to Mr Simmons an updated summary from the lsrp of the status of the REM current remediation certainly because I I mean quite honestly it's in everybody's best interest if that lsrp signs off on if that clean up OB obtains it ca ca and it gets it sign off you you get released they get released the wells need to be abandoned I think that's our concern we don't want to have you know any open direct Pathway to any uh groundwater the lsrp if it meets all the regulatory requirements and signs off on it they'll issue an Raod people will sign off and approve and they've obviously got all the documentation in place already that's a lot of ACR acronyms thank you make sure you make sure you get the Roo from the lsrp got it written down here yeah that that's all I have thank you yeah my my only my only question that you mentioned uh you know if you added that turnaround spot you're going to need title 39 enforcement so your your intention is to request title 39 enforcement on the parking lot yeah I think that's in the best interest of Joe would you agree with that that yes all right I wasn't at the the last meeting but thanks for taking everything into consideration um from that um it looks really nice um it looks like a really nice upgrade to the site so no questions for me thank you thanks before we go to the public may I ask one more question um the fitness studio at 33549 Square ft that would require 35 spots um how many implo is there a Max on the class size max amount of people that would be enrolled in a class and so this was if you remember this facility was by the post office for about six years um I had an approval originally there for um one spot for every 200 square fet MH and then when we moved here this it kind of carried over um and then we're going back to 1 to 100 so the class sizes are capped at 14 with one instructor so on the on the maximum basis SI you're looking at about 18 spots that are probably needed and there's a window of time in between the classes so they don't overlap about 15 minutes so you never have like a class of 14 and then an additional class of 14 all at the same exact time all right that would help when we consider whether or not there should be a waiver okay any other questions from the days with that let me open up to the public anyone from the public have any questions bring your own I was just gonna suggest that Jenny Derek's go ahead or affirm that testimony about to give will be the truth the whole truth nothing but yes thank you Jenny DK taen to Sparta de r i ckss I just had a couple of quick questions um but I can speak to having been in that parking lot a lot I've never seen anybody drive through that secondary Loop the one that goes closest to the building so I don't think it'll be missed um the purpose of the stair Tower is that to access the hbac yes thank you yes it is um currently there are decals on the window of the fitness center are they going to go away or are they going to stay stay okay because there's an ordinance 14- 8.1 that restricts that uh when window covering to 33.3% that maybe can be looked into we'll make sure that it Remains the thank you I appreciate that currently there is a huge Pine Tree on the corner um of that closest to woodport Road on me by the upper parking lot is that tree going to stay there's a couple of really big old trees and is the intention to leave them or are you going to take them down going to change the Landscaping so those big and 50 ft pine trees are coming down looks it's remove if it doesn't look like it's dying will it stay good okay they're beautiful and hard to replace uh and all the trees along that road are being stripped down slowly by slowly um also is there an ADA requirement for the Second Story office there's a stairway I see is there any requirement that there's alternate access um I think that's it thank you Dave do you want this okay any other questions okay so I think we're looking for an answer to that question is there a requirement for for the for the second floor Ada I think at the last meeting we had a conversation about this and we would make it a requirement of the accountant who's on the second floor to accommodate and any uh bu that needs an accommodation by meeting them by meeting them in a different location or walking down and talking to them but I mean I personally don't ever go to my accountant's office generally it's I send them in the information they do their job they send it back to me and I don't even I probably don't even know what Dave looks like to be honest with you but also it's my understanding that the the building code when you're rehabilitating an existing uh building I'm an architect not an expert but my understanding is um there's some latitude and what has there's not a strict compliance it's a strict practical compliance so in this case I don't think we would need that and if that tenant should ever change um I think that the same code would apply that case I'm okay all right so sounds like we're ready for a motion I'll make a motion second okay what is the motion but but what are we approving how many spots like to hear Mr Brady in terms yes I think we're going to rely on Mr Brady to the motion but we haven't talked about whether we're looking at 51 50 56 right question I got totally lost in that so if you want to I can go through excuse me conditions and all that I've noted and some will just be clarification so the first one that I came to is whether we have 50 spaces 51 spaces that'll of course Drive some of these impervious coverage so we have to yeah make that decision before I go on it that's that's what I was saying would you consider amending your motion to and people may disagree um but to include the turnaround with 50 spaces and 41.9% impervious coverage well I I believe it goes up to 42.1 at that point no at 42 that was with 52 spaces did I get that wrong I thought 50 space the turn right but once you add the turn turn right okay so I mean before we make that I mean I think we got to ask the applicant by making that modification or change is that going to be functional for a car to turn around and does it need to be an extension to the parking lot can you put stone or some type of impervious St like uh perious type of coverage there to just give a car the ability to make a k turn and get out of there I I don't want to think think you're a plan but I hear I hear the suggestion but it's going to conflict with your impervious P percentages yeah I mean ultimately we'd like not to have to put that in there um and I think that uh Mr dun had provided the testimony why we decided not to do that um but if the board it makes the request it's it's something that we would like to accommodate uh on their behalf so we would be willing to do the 50 parking spaces with the turnaround the turnaround would be uh in impervious surface we want it all to remain the same um you know and look the same um and I think it is functional if you were to pull into that spot and then back up you could pull out um so I think it makes sense uh and we would be willing to add that spot and stripe it so for no parking how long have you owned this property and in the four years has that upper parking lot ever been fully at capacity no it's never been close to it how many tenants do you have now um current tenants we have uh the fness studio uh the dry cleaner the nail salon and then the account so we currently have four okay I have a lease for an exterminator and then the gym is going to take additional space so it'll be five total okay and the Exterminator office is an administrative office basically so three or four people okay can I ask Mr Simmons actually your do you have an opinion on putting that extra nonp parkable spot at the end there would would it make it a lot easier or simpler for a car to make a turnaround smiling because Mrs Ferman mentioned she pulled in and had to back out I had the same experience tonight so so so quite frankly I think it would be a good idea to add that yeah okay so so I would amend that to 50 spaces with the the addition of that turnaround space okay that means an acceptance of the increase to handic correct right right still two EVS one of which is Ada and one is Ada that that that would be the 40 42.1 yeah that bring back up 421 may I add something just a recommendation uh for Mr Brady before you start getting into the conditions list just another condition to consider um and it has it should have no impact on the applicant agreeing to this or not but it really is um a summation of all the changes need to shown on the revised plan and be consistent with one another so the changes not only need to get be made but they need to all be consistent with one another in all these documents um preferably all on the site plan I think if they can be on that cover sheet and be cons you know concisely added there in addition to the exhibits just everything needs to be when it's submitted for reso compliance if it if this is approved needs to be consistent okay so now I know what we're doing on that uh other conditions lights reduce 1 hour after business closes be survey at the end sze sign move current small signs I describe reconstruct the existing steps and give stair detail right to the individual tenant signs will come back for approval all those on a separate basis freestanding sign will be ground lit wall signage will be Downs at Dave's report there's a site triangle easement that has to be prepared and approved and reported same thing for fire hydrant e to be lights parking there I think they sorry well if it isn't I'm going to put it in that'll double that'll make it doubly important are we Grant I guess we're granting a loader a waiver from the loading space requirement nobody's really discussed that I would say if we do I mean that's dependent on the current proposed and planned uses not receiving or Distributing materials or merchandise so that restriction should be included in resolution in case the use has changed down the road right like kind like when you have multip get a change zoning officer right yeah said needs a detail from parking a lot L foundations and then of course all the miscellaneous approvals um also a summary letter from the lsrp to submit to Dave's office and then you know I would Echo from comment from the public is if there's any attempt to uh preserve any of the established trees as best as they can kind of Mike did you mention title 3 39 is that what you just said or no okay so that the applicant will request title 39 enforcement that's another one right we making that a condition I know I made that I made a note saying there was the intention I didn't know um what's typical your experience I don't have too many applications either from a board perspective or from an applicant perspective where I've ran into yeah bigger projects yeah I'm I'm comfortable with it just being a recommendation or intention myself I believe in the first earlier on in the hearing we mentioned about the landscaping and using native non-invasive species is that correct okay I'm on a roll so I can keep going we we also uh last time talked about and we even voted on the use and the sports center and and all that and uh part of the testimony was that it was solely instructor Le so I think also that needs to go in the resolution too that if that fitness center or gym changes to still a fitness center or gym but it's not only instructor Le that that changes the parking requirements and the rest of it right and the uh the colors of the siding trim materials uh they're going to they'll be consistent or match what you showed us tonight right on the the display okay okay just wanted to confirm and that we're approving the variance yeah yeah sorry John you were saying and that we're approving the variance for the sign yeah and the Park yeah any anyone else so so anybody any other concerns or if not um do do we need to amend the initial motion and then second or okay so just to make it clear the motion is meant to include all the conditions that we just discussed and all the relief we just discussed okay yeah yes there were a number of pre-existing non-conforming variances that existed if I don't know I'm sorry just Joan yes Joan had reference the variances did you want to list all of those pre-existing non-conforming variances or just my Approach as the board attorney on pre-existing nonconforming to try to recite them in the resolution it's factual findings they're there but since if they're not being generated by this or not being um intensified I don't consider it part of the relief already exists okay just want to double check all right do we have have a second I'll second we get a r Deputy Mayor Dean blumetti yes Janette Burke yes Christine dumbar yes Vice chairman and Bill Enright yes Joan Ferman yes dest Luciano yes Ernie rxa yes Mike Sylvester yes chairman Ronde yes congratulations congratulations thank you gentlemen good luck and appreciate everything look great be an upgrade to the town it will all right let's let's keep let's keep going can so that brings us to let me find my agenda here okay um let's see if we can fa some of the stuff next so does anyone have any other board business that they'd like to discuss okay so seeing none uh we'll move on to updates um I'd like to carry as much of the updates as we can to the next meeting uh but if anyone has anything that you'd feel that you'd like to put on the table today let's let's give you a chance so um Deputy Mayor buy uh nope no updates a meeting we haven't met since we last met here and next council meeting is Tuesday August 27th um the only thing I'll mention is is that we um we are working on the Open Spaces plan and open space and Recreation plan um and um we were sent just the other day uh an update of some mapping that was done but I haven't had a chance to look at it but that is is in motion for us okay and in terms of the sub uh the the um master plan subcommittee I'll provide an update at the next meeting Mone s Plan update for the next meeting okay great okay um so that leaves us with the approval of minutes and a resolution and open to the public so uh approval of minutes um so we have one set of minutes to approved tonight from June 26 2024 um what anyone like to make a motion to approve I'll make a motion that we approve the minutes from June 26 2024 okay and then discussion so I'm going to just have discussion this will be the last time I I talk about minutes I promise um so so I still have a concern you know when I when I look at minutes I I'm looking for something short to read these minutes are 200 pages long um and we get them typically with only a couple days to review I think that's too much for us to to review and I'm also concerned that if we get two or three sets of minutes to approve in the catchup phase we're going to have 600 Pages or 800 pages so um so I'll put that out there um in terms of just a concern concern I have um not looking to change of motion I think we just vote on it so um well to to follow up on that concern I I absolutely agree with you but we brought this up to Tom at the last meeting and he said um because you asked him if a transcriber was an official transcriber and did we have to really read it all if it's verbatim and he said no so I'm not even sure what why we're voting if none of us are reading it um I think we're voting on the first page to make sure it's summaries are accurate yes if we do the first page then I think as long as we all know what we're voting on and I and I and just I heard Tom's point of view I I have I'm going to somewhat disagree with him I I feel an obligation I have to at least look at it and feel comfortable with that's just me personally so well if we made the motion that we are approving the summary the summary page a but then you I don't know how you do that because the summary page says incorporates everything else is there a way to use AI assistant to to shorten that or capture sing points the issue is that it's a transcription company they're they're transcribing word for word what being said so it's it's not a matter of but these are recorded these are recorded meetings right push the AI assistant button it gives you a pretty I would say a really good work document and a summary of all the facts that were stated I don't know if you all used it I use it quite a bit Yeah using techology but I'm not sure if that be an allowable use um to to do it that way I think it's got to be done by a a certified transcriber as right I think at the end of the day yeah you know my my concern with the transcriptions there a lot of things that are said there with unidentified person who said it um that's that's that's a problem for me so I know John looked at me but I'm going to defer to sounds like there's like a little history and a little process involving here that I'm not really familiar with and I so so my recommendation is and again feel free to disagree is I think I just wanted to have the discussion and then we put it to a vote and either we go forward with it or not anybody disagree with that well I think I think we'd have to know what we're discussing and what the goal is right and what the what the content would be I mean you know the transcripts have to exist right you have to have the M they have to exist for good you have to have the resolution that has to last forever um I think we're talking about the differences the summary and do we do we strive do we try to summarize what's in the transcript into a few paragraphs or a few pages right um I don't know if that's practical so U just given the the backload and the Township's resources are being used to do minutes and also not paying uh multiple services to catch up and do all these transcripts I don't know because the transcript to me is for the hearing and then there's this is kind of describing the summary of the transcript and then other matters this doesn't even refer to transcripts so this says minutes I would think this is what we're approving yeah I think I mean the first one does the attached transcript I think they do actually yeah yeah maybe we could rework the way we do the minutes and put that underneath at the I mean is it a matter of just putting like a bibliography in terms of hey if you want additional detail C whatever you know what I mean just site a section I I think I think menes typically you know what was motioned how was it voted on what was what was the response um and I want to be able to go to something and say yep I I I I I know everything's on this page without having to read the 197 pages to say did we catch everything um don't you know just don't I don't want to do that and I don't think we should be asking the public to be looking at at minutes that are 200 pages long so um I think I think I remember some past minutes though they do show the vote all right and the on the front page typically minutes are like a little summary of what right what went on in terms of like a hearing Mr Smith SM testified YZ Mr Jones talked about this motion to approve or motion to deny or maybe of course we just had a long set of conditions but maybe conditions kind of like the important s in points minutes are not meant to be transcripts I think about transcripts I think about official transcripts on prerogative RIT cases get filed with the court seems like what's hybrid thing going on you know and I would I don't know I don't think you're under any pressure to adopt minutes tonight there's really no deadlines I I would push it off talk to Tom and come up with a practice that makes sense and then Mr chairman if you if you don't mind I mean just based on the hour this this conversation in and of itself could go on for I agree you know so I I think that might be best to to table it until till our next meeting when we might have a little more time let's carry forward I mean I kind of support Ron on that you know the obviously the administrative I understand the administrative burden the administrative lift the expenses associated with it but also you know making sure that you know the public can read it and more kind of can we I don't know how we how the Town Council does it how we've done it in the past yeah well the council council is a different animal right because there's not a hearing there's not it's not a legal hearing it doesn't go on for that long publish your minutes yeah those are done by hand basically those are like Word documents those are more um script it out so uh to celest point does does anyone all in favor of carrying this discussion to the next meeting say I actually okay opposed no I'm opposed okay yeah because this one this one is just really most of this was carried forward and it says it here the only one that was voted on No actually they're all carried forward so we're not really doing much by saying we're going to spell them out further because they're all carried forward forward so so again so so I think that I think the consensus was to was to carry the the discussion am minuts forward to the next meeting is supposed to try to approve them tonight okay that's fine I will give a gentle warning that we have to be careful what we ask for because we don't have unlimited resources of people or money I know we have to get to an ideal that's useful for everyone in the public and us and for down the road too that they can all read understand it but we we can't come out with a recommendation that says we need somebody to sit for half a day or a day doing every single meeting because there's there's planning board there zoning board environmental Commissioners Council so just as long as we keep that in mind that we have to balance that maybe at least include the vote but we can talk about it in yeah actually I have seen them with the votes the last couple I think right this one there was no vote so all right so it sounds like sounds like again so so the the consensus was to carry this forward discussion forward to the next meeting and and U and make sure we consider uh Deputy Mayor bed's um concerns as well as part of that discussion so that then brings us to resolution so we have a resolution 2024 d-14 which is uh for planning board application 24718 through Labs measurement systems um would somebody like to make a motion to approve that resolution I'll make a motion to approve that I'll second okay any discussion I see none uh can we have a roll call please Deputy Mayor Dean blatty abane Janette Burke yes Christine dumbar yes Vice chairman Bill Enright yes Joan Ferman yes Celeste Luciano yes Ernie ragad yes Mike Sylvester yes uh chairman Rond yes all right so that brings us down to open to the public what's that sorry you have hear from me for a second this was going to be something I was going to bring up thank you for already starting the conversation I got you Dave the minutes are unacceptable transcripts are not minutes you're in violation of opma this is something that I'm going to be bringing up at the Town Council Mr plti I understand that there is a concern about cost and all of this but this is not new we've been having planning board hearings for decades and somehow we've been able to get our minutes together that even the last minutes that were approved at the last meeting did not summarize correctly the statements that were made I'm just going by what I know I said and what was reflected in the minutes they're not good minutes I'm sorry I know Dory is very busy and so maybe that's not the answer but there has to be an answer because you're in violation of opma you're not the only ones zoning board is in trouble too and I will be bringing this to the Town Council I appreciate that you bringing this up and you see it's a problem because it is a problem transcripts are not minutes there is a reason why we have minutes it's historical it has historical value people have to be able to go back and say why did we make that decision how did we come to that decision and without minutes it's impossible you cannot expect someone to your point Ron to read through two three 400 pages of Doc of a of a document that doesn't make any reference or say who said what so these are not minutes I appreciate that you're taking this seriously thank you thank you for your [Music] comment thanks Jenny thank you Jenny okay so being that there's no one else from the public I think at a point we can make a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn I'll second all in favor I'll second thank you all in favor say I I all oppose say no seeing none we are ajour thank you everybody thanks for the extra time tonight