##VIDEO ID:mnPgNTAhAxY## e e e e e e AR on good mine's on good evening Springfield welcome to the township of Springfield's planning board meeting September 12th 2024 adequate notice has been given in accordance with the sunshine laws notice was published on July 18th 2024 in the local source which is the official newspaper for the township of Springfield for the year 2024 was also posted in the Annex Building on July 18th 2024 let's do a salute to the flag please I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all I'm pleased we have power before this meeting tonight so um let's do a roll call committeeman Rich Huber where's Alex Oh presid committeeman Alex Kaiser Mr David Barnett here M Marissa rerio Mr Aaron laugher here Mr Richard Cedar Quist here miss Julie too here Mr Brian kallo here Mr Scott wishna Vice chair Sharon kessle and chairman tiger yes we have okay so for the record a couple housekeeping items before we start so first Sharon kessle uh notified me via email and you Jen that she was traveling this week um so that would be considered an excuse absence I know Mr wishna as well he had a family emergency so that would be an excused absence as well uh Marissa rerio should be here uh sometime through the meeting and we deal with it as it comes uh so the record let reflect that also uh for the record um I'll let that go for the next until we get to the application so let's do uh meeting minutes of June 2024 back in the beginning of the summer everyone have a chance to review those meeting minutes yes anyone have any questions concerns no you good Mr Huber with him y okay good can we have a chairman I'd like to make a motion to adopt a minutes of the June 20 24 meeting have a second Aaron second all in favor I anyone opposed yeah I I second it all in favor so anyone opposed none seeing none Mo motion passes okay we have a resolutions for the AT&T I guess we'll do them separately uh AT&T 200 Mountain Avenue block 1202 lot 35 for a cell phone tower waiver we had this before uh it was a it was a waiver board engineer supported the waiver uh anyone questions and concerns no can I have a motion to adopt the resolution so moved second all in favor I oh no we got to do a roll call do a roll call yeah Mr Barnett yes Miss tale yes comman Huber see Mr cederquist yes and chairman tiger yes motion passes okay the other AT&T cell phone tower one Cornell Parkway block 3903 lot 16 cell phone tower waiver supported by our board engineer can I have a motion so move Mr Huber you want to Second it sure okay he second it we have a roll call Mr Barnet Yes committ Man Huber yes Mr Cedar Quist yes Miss too yes and chair tiger yes motion passes okay uh first application before us tonight we're going to carry it's Kenneth grusin 10-22 4S 294 moris Avenue block 206 lot three for minor site plan Varian generator wall and awnings this anyone from the public here for this application for Kenneth grusin will be carried till 6:30 on September 23rd 2024 with no further notice so this that application Kenneth gruskin will not be heard tonight it's going to be Carri till September 23rd 2024 Monday in in this room the September 23rd and it will be the first thing on the agenda for anyone that's here seeing the next thing um um PCR store 17 LLC which is Jersey Mike's 8-20 24s block 2011 uh 2011 Route 22 block 307 372 Lot 2 preliminary and final site plan this is a conditional use with the parking variant did no there shouldn't be the parking variance J there's no parking variant so let's strike that off it's a conditional use that's coming before us so for the record uh subcommittee before you get started uh subcommittee met reviewed this Mr kenal do you want to give some uh update on the subcommittee yeah sure but talk into the microphone please sure um Mike I think did U extensive research on it we had a discussion about it and I don't think we had any significant concerns over jersey miks at that location with with the parking with the parking Mike do you uh agree before they get started this way we I concur with that we did onsite observations parking on weekdays weekends and we also did multiple onsite observations at Rus Jersey M you're not biased because it's Jersey Mike's and your first name is Mike not at all not at all okay council do you want to start uh with a brief I think you need a brief uh yes thank you very much Mr chairman and board members and members of public thank you for coming out this evening and first of all yes this is a in essence a change in tendency we appreciate and thank you uh for holding the site plan committee and it's great having um Mike just did a fantastic job doing the overview and and uh investigation as to the advocacy of the parking uh obviously Super Cuts is vacated it's vacant now and it's great to see a an entity like Jersey Mike move into this location to take over bacon space uh we ALS so we have we reviewed uh Mike disco's report have no issues with that Joe stiger will touch on that and also the other Mike Mike sha have his report again no issues line with that U I know there's a couple of cleanup aums on the site Mr stiger will address that very brief you're aware of the uh letter with some of the improvements yep actually Mike just gave me an additional Mike disco just gave me an additional copy so I'd like to briefly call upon Joe stiger to take us through the site plan brief Yes again it's just no changes to the site other than the cleanup items that Mr disco noted and and uh that's some and what he's putting up is a mounted version of the site plan portion we have the architect here with the floor plan but it's it's a Jersey mik it's all right so Mr serer we have you sworn and qualified yes please raise your right hand uh do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do uh can you please state your name for the record and spell your last name yes my name is Joseph stiger s a i g a r Mr stiger could you uh just identify for the board um your uh current employment yes um I'm a professional engineer and professional planner licensed in state of New Jersey and uh I've appeared before this board on numerous occasions I've also acted as a traffic consultant for this board in the past quite a few years ago now but um uh but appeared throughout Union County in the capacity of a site engineer traffic engineer and a professional planner um on on on numerous occasions I have to say well over a thousand occasions in that capacity and you currently hold your licenses for the state of New Jersey yes I do he's been before usine the board have any concerns okay we'll brief yes right briefly explain the site again there's no site changes and if you could touch on the items that were in uh that that sketch that I just provided to you wait one one second one thing I want to add before which which would help this was before us a decade ago and this was built one of the things this board concluded was that we wanted two opposite type tenants in there one intense one non intense Five Guys was always the anchor from and the haircut place was an add-on so please try to address because that's what the board has to consider we going to have two restaurants together that's that is correct and what that tells us also is that the peak of the parking and the traffic are going to happen at the same time it's not very much different than the Super Cuts um I know I do it myself and if you watch how hair salons or Barb shops operate lunchtime is a peak time go get run and get your haircut that's got some time off go get your haircut so the changes are really not going to be that intensive uh in terms of additional parking and traffic um this does not impose a and also examplify that this did not impose a a change of use that creates a new need for a doot access permit as well vot um based on their on their code access code uh no significant increase in traffic therefore the the current um permit that's obtained for this site is still valid for what's being proposed here um very simply um nothing's really changing on the site at all building is not changing the only thing that's happening is M superare of site um and therefore uh nothing's really changed at all we do have some comments from uh your engineer that are asking for some improvements on the site I'll go over those in a moment briefly but in terms of um requirements parking is still need your additional use standard of of the parking amount of parking we not asking for variance there um I think the uh the amount of parking is more than sufficient that was point out in in the parking studies that Mr disco has performed that sufficient parking um is provided on the site the signage is in compliance with the 's your or requires as well so again Varan stop you Mike do you agree with this study that the parking will not be any issue I agree with that yes question about parking Jersey Mar everyone that I've been at they have five six seven employees is there going to be enough parking there for employees plus customers yeah I mean so rich I'll open up to Mike that was one of the concerns we had instead of them doing the traffic study even though they did one I asked Mike to do it on behalf of the applicant authorized it the subcommittee and Mike went to several different ones got parking counts and determined that they will have enough parking with the employees that are there is that correct Mike that's correct okay and then uh Mr serer I know there were several the updated signage the the items that are noted on that sheet and if just briefly indicate so we can get a confirmation that weren't agreeing with those items five items that were included in comments comment letter uh for recommended site improvements uh add driveid yeah ID signs yes uh ID sign yes we will uh two restripe all parking spaces um at 201 22 yes um replace the stop signs do and restripe all arrows pavement arrows uh as well and consider last one consider uh sealant or resurfacing to match the 7eleven pavement condition I believe our our yeah and it's the same owner actually when we appeared here for the Five Guys Joe and I were here a decade or so ago it's actually same owners who are the landlords for Jersey Ms and rant it by them and no problem all these things would be conditioned before a CCO is correct so I have no further questions Mr stiger time again our architect this year with the I don't think we need the architect let me go to Mike and Mike Mike anything further to add I have nothing further I think we extensively studied barking observation situation and I'm very confident work employee parking again on the north side of the site was Ally designated as employee parking those are constantly or consistently absent of cars so the Five Guys employees are not parking there obviously it lends itself perfectly for the Jersey Mike's Personnel to park there in the employee spots okay those spots if if you come in off of 22 westbound that's the first spots you see but if you bypass it to try to get closer to a door you can't get back to them going on 22 so that's the original thought process why those were employees but they're not being utilized now so the employees can park there and leave the balance okay let's make sure that the Jersey miks is the tenants aware of that they are those are the spots to make sure Mr mrea we have no further comments we agreed that there's sufficient parking and they've agreed to do all the improvements okay perfect Jen anything to add you're good okay so let me open up the word Mr Huber I was just about to I apologize for interrupting we love you no questions I have nothing do have anything so you guys talked about parking and I and I understand and I trust your your assessment um we all know this Pro this this property um with the U-turn 7-Eleven Five Guys Hillside adjacent is extremely problematic now when we approved Five Guys it was with the the agreement that we'd have a restaurant fairly higher use especially during lunchtime and the hair place I pass by this location three to four times a week I barely have ever seen anyone in the hair hair establishment so now we're saying we're going to put another restaurant there and what you had said was that the restaurant this two restaurants the peak traffic and parking is going to be at the same time similar to the super right um Jersey mics to me is a popular restaurant there could be same am or Jersey other Jersey mics I've been to especially around lunchtime there's a line of people there certainly several people are you comfortable that adding this type of use with when their expert says the traffic will be at the same time as the other use on the property and a 7-Eleven which I would imagine around lunchtime also gets gets kind of popular that we're not exacerbating what's already a very difficult traffic issue in that area for anybody yeah it's it's the point that the subcommittee brought up uh it's the point that the chairman has uh volunteered that he cuts through that property instead of using the U what I have seen people do from Hillside to that uturn is yeah they they go straight across is terrifying right and I've almost gotten hit there many times I see people in the audience are all smiling we all know that uturn right right so my question is is this a parking I completely understand that was what the study was and that said okay there's enough but I'm very concerned about traffic and what happens there the this only has eight seats so this is not going to be longterm people coming is really on TBL so your typical what I observe is the typical Jersey mics and we went to three of them one on Route 10 because the subcommittee had suggested that we look at on a highway rather than just going to the one in CL for instance or something so we went to Route 10 which is comparable we went to Route One in Lyon which is probably more intensive than than Route 22 believe or not uh the average person if they call in the order and come pick it up they're in there one to two minutes and they're out if they go in make the order there and then leave with it takes six to eight minutes if they go in and eat then you're talking about 20 minutes plus but the what we saw and we we categorized it in the in the in the report and the studies is you know the most we saw at any of these at one time was 10 customers in a jersey mik and we looked at all the peak peak times for this so if you take the worst case which was 10 10 people physically there at the same time even though they only have eight seats these other restaurants had 26 seat all three of them if you take the 10 plus what's historically been there that we've observed and we also measured there it's going to work now some of the recommendations were as you come to this site there is no identification of Ingress and egress for these driveways first driveway if you're going westbound is only Ingress in and if you bypass that or don't know that it's there the next driveway is to egress out which is a difficult turn but they can't go in there so forced to go into the 7-Eleven Ingress and then work their way to the site so by at least putting the signs up it'll identify people and make make it safer in terms of getting into the site and out of the site the stop signs is because at night time you know you need the stop signs to be retr reflective the stop signs and the striping since the the site was built in 2010 they've all faded out essentially so these are things to upgrade and increase visibility safety information for the vehicular us and we're maximizing the safety on the site based upon the layout that the board approved in no question that they go from Hillside across that's not going to stop as a result of this it's not going to necessarily be enhanced as a result of this m I'm just going to add on one comment and it's what we're requesting on the applicant if the employees Park in those initial spots right there that's that's a key way of making sure that we have sufficient marking so that people don't bypass it that they're utilized and with the employees we did also evaluate the adjacent property arm the subcommittee had suggested if we need the employees to park par there's parking not suggesting this should be a shared parking thing but that was that was made as an option that plenty of parking there too I think as a practical matter there may be one or two employees that are actually Park I'm less concerned about the parking than just the crazy traffic movement I we did point out that the U-turn was recently done by do they widened that U-turn they made it flat well they made it better because if you recall the trucks were as they turned there were wheer there a couple days ago across two lanes trying to get into the into the U-turn stop traffic I me they would never design a U-turn like that now in fact if you're familiar with Mountainside used to be three U-turn they got rid of the they CL getting rid of the first one permanently because it can't make it's not designed for trucks the fate of this U-turn could change someday as well because the trucks just didn't negotiate that's why they widened it so anyway the pavement better there now it's a a little bit more defined and safer you can only help the whole situation satisfied Mr the experts I know I what was your favorite foot long sub when you uh rich rich Julie Ryan okay seeing none um do you have anything further no nothing further appreciate your time and and concern and and efforts so let me open it up to the public any of the members of the public wish to speak on the Jersey Mike's PCR store 17 LLC seeing none I'm going to close it to the public andand it back to the board I think one of couple of the conditions before we go is they agree to everything in both the planner and Engineers letter including the five improvements to the site thank and that uh that there's going to be a directive to management to make sure that the parking for employees is in the first three spots four spots three the whole Bank there I think five was five five spots in the first five spots to utilize one one of the other things in the letter was I guess when 7-Eleven did they're resurfacing the compliant Ada spot became nonant so if it's the same property owner Le or whatever in there we should should be made back to that should be made back to a compliant yeah actually that's the adjacent property own but we'll reach out to them 7-Eleven else yeah we'll speak to them on that okay perfect all right seeing none can I have a motion to approve of those conditions that we read motion I have a second okay Julie okay second it can we have a quick roll call committ man Huber yes Mr laugher yes Mr Barnett yes Mr cederquist yes Miss too yes Mr cig Gallo yes and chair tiger yes motion passes okay thank you have a great night thank you very much Resorts Mike and mik this resolution should be read at the next meeting which is tou face councel thanks again have a great night okay the next application before us is Congregation of isra a carryover from the last meeting it's 9- 24s 339 347 Mountain Avenue 18 pit road block 1801 Lots 33 through 36 and 39 this is preliminary and final site plan minor subdivision bulk variances in addition so some couple housekeeping items I want to enter into the record Aaron laugher and laugher and whatever laugher and Brian cagala signed the certification of absent members for the meeting times that they missed so that way they' be eligible to vote that correct Council that's correct I have them before me they signed them and swore them for me okay perfect so some house counselor you can come up uh so some house keep me items for the for the public so they're aware uh what we're going to do tonight is the applicant has is going to do some cleanup of the last Witnesses the engineer and the temple president and then have their two final um Witnesses appear which I believe is a planner and uh architect at that point we're going to close the meeting and what we've done is we've scheduled a special meeting for September 23rd which is which is 10 days hang on a second 10 days from now that way that meeting will be dedicated to the public to comment on this application so basically that meeting on September 23rd will be um the grusin application will will be like a 20-minute application and then from call at 6:50 7:00 on the public will have the entire time to come up and comment on that application so we've we created a special meeting pretty much for just that to make sure that public has adequate time as opposed to doing it at 8:30 9 o'clock at night and the public not getting the full amount of the time so wanted to make sure everyone will have a chance to speak so um no chance okay ahead thank you very much chairman I wanted to to advise the board that following the last hearing the congregation Israel professional team reviewed all the comments from the board members the township engineer and the township planner and made changes to the plans the applicants team is very appreciative for the input that was provided by the township professionals and as a result the revised plans do incorporate their recommendations I am recalling the applicant's engineer to testify in detail to those changes but at this time I wish to briefly list the changes one three parking spaces have been eliminated that bordered the neighboring properties two five parking spaces have been shifted to exist totally behind only 18 Pit Road and no other neighboring property three the aisle width in the existing parking lot has been decreased to provide space for a landscape buffer four additional and larger landscape buffers have been created five the height of the light poles is being reduced six light shining onto any neighbors's property will be shielded seven the height of the outdoor Terrace wall was increased to an appropriate height for privacy for both the congregation and the neighbors and for proper security eight loot coverage has been reduced nine two waivers have been able to be eliminated and 10 a security plan was worked out with the police chief and police department that involves the lights security cameras and the height of the outdoor Terrace wall to expound upon the list of changes provided I would like to recall Danielle lrer of dynamic engineering Consultants who's our licensed professional engineer who had testified at the hearing on August 26th need Danel you know you've been already sworn in and you're continuing with all that stuff still under roath that's okay Danielle if you would I just provided a list to the board of all the changes that were made is that an exhibit a new exhibit that you need to have marked yes okay all right so we want to mark that as an exhibit and then if you would please explain to the board all these changes that we've made is that or hold on I just have to pull out my two or three I could beong it's A2 is it A2 okay it's A2 I think so okay evening everyone again I would just e Mr Relic we do appreciate all the comments that we received at the last meeting and our conversations with the professionals they've been great to work with so far really appreciate their so as Mr already outlined we do have some changes tonight that I'd like to demonstrate to you first is the general site plan layout changes which bottom line is that we remove three parking spes that are adjacent to neighboring properties and I'll Point those out where they are so that is a reduction in proposed parking from 57 spaces to 54 and as a result of some of these changes we're also reducing the Imp by over 1200 which is just about 2% so two of those parking spes that are being removed are located in this where we were previously sh Ang and if you can see it from where you're sitting the black line here is'll to we Ines and again as we discussed at the last meeting we are going to make those compes that reduces that L by anding the that ches of because of angk that inrees theer also sh what is the exact buffer on each property the two neighbors sure yeah the buffer here is behind lot 40 here no so oh behind L that was the discussion about that one parking spot yes yes like what do you think it's appropriate the other one has what did you say it was the other property is about one second let the record reflect that Mrs rerio just joined at 7 o'clock and you'll have to read the meeting minutes for 650 to 7 figure out time sorry Mike I think she has one more parking spot to address let her address that and she can address the width of that buffer as well yeah in this other area of the existing parking lot we're also yeah so you've got 11 feet 15 feet and 20 feet on the three areas that they've enhanced when before we had as low as two feet on adjacent to lot I think it's 38 to the right so they've they've all been bumped up signicantly as a so the rear L 40 to the left and that's lot for so that that went from I think it was angled from 5 to seven five to six now it's seven if again if you lose one more parking spot there you're going to pick up another 9 foot of buer to go from seven to 16 I think want to discuss don't know if we need but I think greater buffer in that area so that way all all those residents have a more uniform buffer lay comands to 52 where was at L let me just ask you a question with regard to the parking spot that the chairman is referring to which would be the fourth parking spot because three of them have been eliminated this is number four do you consider that to be a prime parking spot for the entrance to the synagogue it is one of the closest in proximity to and with regard to the foliage that's there now is there already a natural buffer that's uh separating the parking from the the neighbor's property yes there is already a natural buffer and thank you forting that out I'll show you on the next exhibit there are are and the way the car would be parked is it facing an open yard or is it facing what looks like to be a garage or a shed it's facing the exting Gage and is there a fence that's going to be blocking that car from an adjoining property yes there will that's 6ot vinyl so if somebody were to be parked there are their headlights going to be shining through or is it solid it is solid it's solid so in in terms of that parking spot um the buffer that exists there what exists there now do you think that that provides adequate buffering for the neighboring property I do um the car would not be visible due to only the thank you Mike what do you I mean it's our job as the board to try to eliminate impacts for I'm not I'm not dying on the mountain on it I want to hear what the board has to say but for me more of a buffer to the residents that are G to have this in their backyard putting up the same fence as well it will be uniform obviously more is better what is where do you get to the point that you've gotten enough offer so we were able to Without Really um I think remember originally we had two bank parking spaces so we went from two to three at this point so there's only really a net of one so far um all the other buffer enhancements I'll call them were in in view of where the building and the and the entrances to Shield the the three Residential Properties but primarily the two one each side the temple property to the front entrance activ where the stroller parking is the door is there certainly the one to the left on lot 40 will is for the parking lot essentially only I'm not sure if there's outdoor activities gathering in that spot more is better the difficulty there and we've asked their team is to pick up a couple of feet you can't really it's it's either 9 foot to get this lose the space you can't pick up three feet or four feet or five feet more without losing the same space we we thought we could potentially shift the whole line of parking closer to Mountain Avenue I don't want to put words any I think the team feels that that bordering on getting a little unsafe as somebody backs out of that spot in into where the Mountain Avenue Ingress driveway so that's the tradeoff we don't want to jeopardize the safety there so if you lose the parking spot I mean maybe they could squeeze another foot but I mean other than narrowing the parking spaces from a 9 foot width to something narrow our normal you know ordinance requir which is the only way you pick up more buffer is to lose the one we'll see what the board wants yep I mean if you go to eight and a half foot spaces you're going to pick up a half a foot for every one of those hitting the doors into just giving y giving the the tradeoff right i' just ask a followup if that were to become also a compact space would that look odd or would that give you more buffer would that perhaps be the compromise yeah I don't know if it's nine that you're losing then the buffer goes to whatever it is or maybe you only give five feet or feet back to the buffer and you could put I think you needed a design w or something for the man parking spes without a break you can always add in break somewhere and put some trees in that other Force feet no that was in the existing parking lot we resolved that issue so I I don't know when you finish testimony open up to the board we've done before remember Mr chairman the parking ratios were established first time so we're significantly more parked for the ratio parking spaces to um size the seating uh that's much more increased still a variance so the loss of one more parking spot is much less in in relation to what the existing ratio of parking is okay continue and also touch on the EV issue yeah just have a couple more El also does eliminate the labor that we were through requesting for landscap t e because conc because that affects whether I want Council to discuss whether if it's not a public e does ites it still just require Le more of a variance which is fine if you're granting a variance for 50 or 54 whatever makes no difference but you do you get double the credit if you're not opening up to the public which I which I think we all agree the board we don't want to open right it's a fair question and the board and the applicant is on the same page we don't want this to be an area that they can go charge their car and and come to that we did look into that a little bit more and fortunately we learned that when the contractor whoever is ordering charging stations they would specify to the manufacturer whether or not they want them to be on theer off so basically public or private and this is something other Professionals in our office have come across because we have other residential applications where they have Chargers in a private park can't even get into the like for some locked so those they would also do the private option otherwise what's the point of having of charging stations you can't even access so this would be the route that the applicant would take to make sure that they off the private only okay so you testified last time that they get two for one oh yes so the question be not public you need to revise that count so the variance doesn't includ the asking coun yeah fair question um we were not able to find anything in the state regulations that Sate whether or not that actually impacts the the requirement satisfaction so in our opinion it does not impact our ability to count the twoes double just because they're or private and again in the example that I was just describing with residential if they were all private then they wouldn't count for anything projects so in our case it wouldn't imp our comp state regulations for EV charging and all it does make a difference it's whether you're getting a variance for X spots y spot I I would just make a comment on that that if there is nothing in the um you know in the state requirements but we're not sure whether or not it's entitled to the double I mean I would rather air on the side of caution that the parking variance is based upon that we're basically not getting two for one so that there's not an issue that's what I would think can work it out with counil okay not a problem see the landscape now this was never submitted before this needs to be marked as an exhibit exhibit correct this is entitled landscap exib scale it looks very similar to the landscape plan that is currently on file just changes that I'm about to explain generally it incorporates the new site design as prev showed in red we've now brought that in as if this was in our set and show the proposed design in the which are now perpendicular and we've now increased buffering on both sides those have been filled in with various plantings including Hol in area where we remove Inn existing parking lot we've added other Evergreen and deciduous mixtures trees andrs we've also replaced some of the plantings that were proposed here along that one that discussing that fa the to 32 instead of what wased Asia shs and even increas the planting height of those to 8 to 10 so as planted they will be to and then and we have mixs to how many versus adding I don't have that number how many you adding how many how many you're going up I don't think there's you know how many under 10 yeah we're also actually trying to save the line of trees that exists beyond the playground that faces Mountain Avenue and replanting theming you're taking out less than you know you're adding more four times yes and as I mentioned there are some pretty mature existing trees that is here previously weing to remove them because of the angking that was there but now because of that space elimination able to save those trees and so you would say that a significant amount of added buffer landscape buffer has been put onto this plan since the last hearing is that correct certainly yes in various areas of the thank you Mr chairman from an aerial view I would estimate from those two residential structures those properties maybe six I think they're adding more than enough now you know that main guarantee we we accept that responsibility next i' just like to discuss the lighting changes that we're proposing is this a new exhibit yes I as liting scale is again very similar to the lighting plan that was subed currently changes as we were prly 18s for the toin currently existing today there are 20 flip lights we had an engineer go out and measure in the field and so we discovered that they are currently not comp 18t is maximum height as to ordinance so they are currently non we understand that there's been some issues brought to our attention by the neighbors and very understandbly the applicant would like to withal so instead of the previously proposed 18 ring those to so that's a six foot difference between what is out there today and what is beinged in addition we will provide house shields on the light fixtures to provide even more even more that the light will be directed away from the neighbors will not be allow to over behind resal properties I'm referencing just these two but that is is the for here canopy lights also that are being proposed which are here around will all proposed lights will also be so couple quick things number one um I think you I think the agreement or the discussion was that within 60 days of if acts favor board acts favorably or any adoption of resolution that they will fix the existing lights to Shield them to the neighbors is that correct yeah the polls are going to remain they 50 years but we are going to Shield so that the backyards of the surrounding properties will not get that light glare and then a couple things I know there was on the record and as Mr disco to comment on this our chief of at the last meeting I had asked that kind of taking it from the board away from the board uh that the police chief would review the lighting from the discussion whether it would be on at all times do dust dawn whatever it might be and I think the police chief did review this and issued the board a letter Mr disco can you summarize that to the board I know everyone should have a copy of it if they don't the letter on the Google Drive dated September 11th I saw it this morning so um the chief and Captain Rachel met with attorney H and um they discussed Lighting in General Security cameras um and the the height of the U Pao wall outdoor Terrace door Terrace wall and the chief uh lays out it's a it's a page and a half letter um that he believes that the security measures in place for the video and surveillance the Wall height to be 5T as was introduced in the opening statement and that the lighting was cable for security reasons obviously he touches on in a letter bleeding into the Residential Properties and also post installation measures to verify that what you know is planned will actually our ordinance allows that for you to our ordinance know lighting all lighting is subject to PR ordinance post post installation inspection whatever you want to call it measurement so to make sure that what is shown on paper is actually works in the field talk about lighting you're talking about horizontal foot candles which is the brightness then the glare so we're I think the most serious complaint so far is really the glare of looking at the fixtures but shielding that can cure that the light levels is based upon the targeting of the fixtures and and shielding and also dimming capability I think the technology now was so much different than what was installed in 1976 presumably and so we can do so much and I think they will do better that but I don't want to read the no no that's fine has the letter but the chief was I think I wasn't at the meeting Chief was very comfortable with the security measures that are in place I think the applicant actually consulted with a security expert to to come up with these things so I think okay what the board requested the chief did and the police department did Mr chairman I just would like to uh piggyback on to what Mr disco said I did consult with um the director of security for the Jewish Federation of Greater Metro West his name is Thomas Michaels he provided our team with all of his input I provided that to the chief of police I did sit in a meeting with the chief and Captain Rachel and we went over everything and I'd like to add that we further represented I represent on behalf of my client that once we have those cameras installed to ensure that there's privacy for the Neighbors the police chief and whomever else from the police Department can come in see what's showing on our screens to ensure that privacy is secured perfect that's fine we'll we'll leave it as the police chief or his his designation yes that way in continue good I just think in your testimony you had referred accidentally to our 18 Pit Road is lot 38 it's 39 Oh okay yes I just wanted to clear that up for the record and that all parking spaces were moved to shift behind the property that the congregation owns is that correct correct on that line there are noer anyes behind correct perfect I think thater Mr mrea anything before we open I would just I would just add that we've had an ongoing discussion and we put a lot of issues on a table and they' appears that they've addressed all of our major issues regarding the light their concerns with the lighting reducing impervious coverage increasing substantially the amount of landscaping planting and with the Landscaping buffers so okay um just stay up there because we're going to go through the board to talk and I want to um ask to adjust the parking so I'll turn to Mr kigala first what is your thought I mean any questions for the can you put the exhibit up that had the landscap one the property touches how many residents properties yes and if you start in the lower right hand corner the the buffer going from the right around all the other properties that it touches is about how wide from there this wi yes presently it is 1.9t and we increasing it to just over uhhuh and and can you keep going around the rest of the properties uh currently the buer 3 I also it's mind if I reference myly I'm sorry it's 2.1 toot 3 and increasing that to 11.1 for that whole angle it'll be 11.1 for this corner right here right and then if it goes if it goes all the way up to the back it's yes going up to the back we are not changing the buffer here again I think it's just about okay and we're not touching that curve line okay and then in the back of it yep as you wrap around to the rear of 3r Andre okay just behind L 39 which is owned by the um don't ex and it's only just small here 3 so the question from the chair Mr chair earlier about the S foot moving a 16t you'd lose one parking space yeah on the most and if that happened almost all areas this would be an improvement in a buffer over what it is now to those one two three proper question compact I'm going back to those compact parking spaces are they going to be La this compact we actually don't Curr because I'm just curious if those compact having compact spaces like that that's not going to cause a problem I mean I'm I'm picturing lots of fender benders and cars bumping into each other with the doors you see that as a potential problem there I don't see that a potential problem because we're not actually reducing the width of the spes just the length correct right how do you define a compact space I mean who's driving a compact car H how do you determine what that is I know sure a Ty most people seem to be driving SUVs I would say if you have F250 don't park in a compact so you're going to leave it up to people's uh yes the drivers own right there's no in other in other properties there's no way to put a sign you put up a sign in that spot compact only yes we can put compact car parking only but to address the question you would have to know whether or not your car yeah it just seems to be very well it might it it might uh I mean it'll be up to the board but it might be nicer if it just said compact on I've seen that where they say just compact on the you know on the the pavement so that we don't have all this signage going on also that's fine that's fine I think that's acceptable I drive a compact I use a find compact yeah I consider the old Volkswagen to be compact you're dating yourself it's been known to happen Huber so what I want to just open up for a quick discussion is is the spot I mean seven okay I mean I think we got some adequate buffers on the other parts of the properties the other one was I think we got adequate we got some good buffering on some of the properties I just want to open up to the board to make the decision so we can put this to Ed do we want to eliminate one spot and I'm not saying if we do eliminate one spot we need 16 maybe it's 12 and then they kind of space out the parking down the line I know they wouldn't get additional parking but it would have give some bigger spots through the thing so David just work our way down what is your thoughts and look as much as we can do to increase the buffer we're going to give the the the variance which which they need for whether it's one or two more spots or less spots we'll make sure that's that's in place this is a low parking uh demand the property we all know that so to me it's not an issue so I would rather air on the side of as much buffer as as possible we have to adjust the numbers on the variance I'm perfectly fine so also before there's an option that we could do you could Bank it and then deal with it at another time if it's necessary come back the board that could be a discussion or do we just eliminate I'd rather not have them have to come back this but you so your suggestion is that would be yeah my suggestion is as much buffer as possible so take space out if they're fine with that I'm definitely in favor of more buffer um more Landscaping possible Ryan IW you were on site with Mr yeah I think the original request is for what they request with all the different parking question still going to if you're putting a lot more buffer if it's still going to suit the purposes of their need for or it's going to solve the problems of their need for more parking I'm just a little concerned that this may come back sometime in the future saying hey we need more space right but they're not increasing the amount of seats in the sanctuary they're not increasing the membership of the yeah sure no one can predict who's the amount of cars that are there my logic is the amount of cars that are there today are going to be the amount of cars that are going to be there after this they and they don't right you went to Services no but I just wanted to see you know and they didn't use all spots now right there's other options for parking that are nearby yeah I think it's it's nothing we're trying to take away spots I know it's a prime spot versus not the idea is I just our board as as representatives of the public being on the board which I want to try to buffer those neighbors so that way they have as much space more trees the trees will grow in and they'll have a natural buffer if 16 is a little too much because you're worried about people congregating to make it maybe 12 13 and then maybe space out some of the spots a little bit I mean that may be something so you don't have such compact spots as or add more landscaping or add more landscape so um well the I'll leave if I may just where the compact spots are located if you take away the spot you're referring to it doesn't help us in terms of dealing with the compact spots and in terms of the line and and please Den uh Danielle correct me if I'm wrong but in terms of the line the way we have it lined up she's right we don't want to get closer to Mountain Avenue by any stretch I'm not saying spot I'm saying if if you want to make a 12 and then add four feet and make some of the spots a little bit bigger right ahead then we would have one other compromise since we do consider this to be a prime spot in terms of the buffering I mean it's obvious that the board is going to want that spot eliminated but would we at least have the luxury of doing our own landscaping there our own buffering there leaving maybe some a little bit of not that trees are coming all the way up to us when people are coming out but that we have some open space yeah you could we subject to Mr J will'll work with you on that discussion I think we okay with Mr disco kind of working them on we just don't want a thick tree buffer no that's right standing in the midst of our parking lot like that nice if it's grass and as opposed to okay yes we're okay with grass perfect okay anything further from you I feel like we should shake hands no an accord anything further from the board from engineering so this is the end of engineering correct I don't have anything further perfect so you agree to come back at the next meeting as well she will be present perfect okay just this will take only a minute probably I would just like to recall uh Dr Josh Smo to clear up one one piece of his testimon thank you sir you're still under oath as well yes okay so Dr smilo you previously testified at the prior Hearing in connection with the outdoor Terrace and that's the outdoor Terrace that's going to be connected to the new audition building and I believe that your testimony had to do with the use of the Terrace but I would like you today to explain the the use of that Terrace because because I think there was a little bit of confusion with regard to when you testified and then when you were asked the question right uh as I previously testified the Terrace is needed for a religious reason we have a holiday where we are commanded to erect the Suka a type of Hut for a 7-Day period which occurs during the fall this is not the only time the outdoor Terrace will be used it will be used as needed but its use is expected to be seasonal and infrequent also as I previously tested IFI to be respectful to our neighbors the outdoor Terrace will have a high wall for privacy no lights on the Terrace will face the neighbors and the noise ordinance will be followed was all I needed from Dr Smo to clear up that tesy I have nothing further good Marissa Mr disco Mr M I think that ties in with what the chief had reviewed and and something the wall may have increased at to the 5 ft which which would be a better shield for any anyone looking up any Visual and obviously if there's any sound at all the all the walls but we agreed also no speakers outside or anything that we agree to we agree to that okay anything further okay okay thank you that's it for me okay so now I'd like to call David mayfeld of mayfeld architecture he is a licensed professional architect one second uh Smo you agree he will be at the next meeting he everybody here will be at the next meeting everybody here from my team want to make sure because that's important who's coming up David May uh he hasn't been sworn yet he'd like to be Affirmed [Music] counselor counselor just approximately you have two witnesses I just want to see if we're going to take a break timing of how many how long would it take you for your next two witnesses I would like to finish with both of them today oh 100% yeah um the next meeting is all public I mean if you want to would probably be a good spot to take like a fem minute break if that's what you're looking for all right so let's the board you good with we take a five minute break so the public we're going to take a quick 5minute break let you get set up in in custom and it's uh it's 735 we'll begin at 7:40 not a problem e e e e e e e e e e e te up right now so let's see what correct let's see what this looks like it needs to be uh affirmed yes and qualified sir can you please raise your right hand do you affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth uh could you please state your name for the record spell your last name David mayor Feld last name spelled m a y e r f l d okay and can you provide uh for the benefit of the board um your current uh profession where you're employed and uh explain to us your qualifications I'm employed as an architect uh our own firm is called mayerfield architecture uh currently we have uh offices in M New York uh we did have an office up until Co in New York City which is no longer we also have a sister office that's run by my son in the five towns in Long Island and you're currently licensed uh as an architect in the state of New Jersey licensed site of architect the state of New Jersey and also the state of New York uh have you appeared before planning boards and uh zoning boards throughout the state of New Jersey many a time yes and have you been accepted as an expert witness at those boards yes I have thank you board have any concerns he seems like he's been around for a while the color of my hair Mr chairman like to make a motion to replace the chair exactly I'm not letting that go to vote take that as a com now in other words didn't experience I was going to say the chair meant the chair meant that he was seasoned and they accept anything he says all right um I did have different color hair when I first started okay um Mr mayerfeld if you would I would appreciate it if you could take the board through the architectural plans from the perspective of the existing building and then what we're doing to the existing building when we go to the new addition and then the overall picture of why we need this okay um first board is an existing building what first we have to clarify is that are those plans that the board already has or is that to be marked as an exhibit okay can you bring the microphone close Mr Mr plans that are so the the dotted lines showing walls to be removed specifically um in the uh Sim room also known as the social hall there's currently the stage platform which will be removed there are two small kitchens which will be removed because we're going to have newer kitchens in the new edition which I'll discuss later on we also there is a small Chapel two small classrooms coat room and bathrooms they're all being removed because we're going to be updating those in the new facilities also there's a small office that's going to be replaced with a newer office uh Etc the uh basically the sanctuary space is pretty much staying the same as it is just as a few more seats which we'll get into later on we don't have we don't have to because it's already been submitted it's the plans you have Okay so this board is called a101 it's called the proposed first floor plan now this plan has been revised since it's been submitted uh there was building Dimensions added for the uh after our TRC meeting frankly after at the TRC meeting was proposed and suggested and we've done we actually made the building shorter uh so there would be no variances required front yard variance initially was requested but now that's we made the building smaller so there was no variance required for that so that's that's reflecting this plan also in reflecting the plan is obviously how the new building will look together with the uh with the addition I'll try to walk you through that currently the uh the main entrance is on Mountain Avenue there's also an old side entrance on the side of the small parking lot but what we're doing is again the sanctuary space is pretty much the same rise some sea and get a little few more seats in there I think we're going from uh 334 to 351 the uh the Simo room which we call the Social Hall will be now a nice clean space rectangular in shape and they have to accommodate up to to uh 20 uh approximately 280 people at 28 tables at 10 persons each also we're going to reworking the interior Lobby space and the coat rooms you talk about parking on cars we have to park the people so they can park the coats very comfortably and have the little Locker space so you just come in you feel very comfortable when you when you have a nice coat room nice place even small lobbies people can converse before they go into the synagogue itself so makes a more friendly user building and as as the uh Dr Smo you know mentioned last time is that the major addition here the purpose of this Edition is because there's a lot of young families and lots of youngsters in in that coming into the synagogue currently they're all sitting right behind this thin wall in the Social Hall becomes a disturbance so therefore very consciously we set up youth rooms on on this level for the youngest group and more youth rooms on the Upper Floor which get into uh next we also have now ADA Compliant toilet rooms comfortable toilet rooms Men's Rooms women's room a nursing room uh even a family room so that again it's just comfort for the for the people that that are currently be using the building also there'll be a new kitchen I told you there's old kitchens which are over here they're going to be removed there be a brand new kitchen coming in here there going to be an elevator so for Ada accessib ability since we're having a multifloor building we'll have a an elevator in here uh there also there's a smaller Chapel room which is going to be relocated the chapel room will be over here and as as you can see from the rendering the new entry point that keep look that the rendering points out is this new entry over here and as described earlier by the site people that the parking people come from the park they feel very comfortable walking in into the building with a new addition obviously there stairs in here to go up and down everything egress has been all calculated so everything will meet meet code actually above building code the next plane it shows the second floor plane again more this is part of the submission correct this is part of the submission correct just one the the first floor plan has been revised but this this this is no no change since the initial submission um again it shows the youth rooms multi-purpose room the roof Terrace uh suer room which we spoke about earlier again new new bathrooms up here so very comfortable small warming kitchen storage spaces uh where wearing get them in obviously staircases to make it eess always two staircases to go to communicate to all levels small things such as janitor's closets which actually a code requirement so that we try building should function properly and be maintained mained properly now on on this plan these are building elevations once again which which have been updated with the board each each board you have to tell me whether to Market is exhibit or they already have it this one's been updated they already have one but it's been updated person frankly we were uh actually way back the first TRC meeting we're asked to notate on the elevations the building additions and building Heights uh they're showing graphically but now we've denoted them with dimension lines so it's very clear what's called existing building proposed addition what dat is so this the most recent one here is dated 90524 with the last revision marked as an exhibit okay correct show were there any others that were dated later than the submission date that they have in front of them correct the first first floor plan like I I know ear let's bring that back up so that we can accurately Mark that as an exhibit that's what I was asking so this is what identify the sheet please call it drawing a101 proposed first floor plan we need to mark that as A5 and the one you were about to discuss okay again uh this this has been updated as purpose as I mentioned earlier it shows the uh new bill ma are we calling this and we have to Market well this is a300 and it's called north south elevations all right that's going to be A6 okay we'll mark it right now so what this this shows is the exterior of the building it labels all materials which relate to the color rendering basically there's lot lots of brick on the existing building there's a new on a new saw we're having duronotic bronze window frames and colors uh which will appear along the north side um also we're going to replace some of the existing windows on the North elevation so that the matching that the colors will match to be the D duronotic bronze also we've entire coping of all the new building existing building will all be a uniform color again the duronotic bronze that tie the whole building in together um Mr Mayfield the renderings are in various places here but they haven't been marked either so let's consider the rendering as A7 all the same thing they're all identical same just 187 okay okay thank appreciate that and Mr mayfeld I do believe that what you were just describing if I may ask a question the renderings all reflect how we have adequately tied the old building to the new building by putting these dividing metallic brand so that a it looks more modern and B it doesn't look like we just put an addition on a building is that correct absolutely absolutely correct um also showing up on this uh we have all building Heights on here with Dimensions uh specifically um we're showing the height of the uh the Terrace a wall is 5 ft and then another 5T to we actually have a Pergola structure which is What's called the top of the Suka and that's gives it a nice aside from the place that's where they put you know bamboo mats during the holiday but it just gives it a nice continuity and has like a Pergola feeling which will look look good on on the building also uh we shown outdoor lights we were asked to do that and the as you know dynamic went through that earlier so we put that on the elevations um and um lot a lot of detail in terms of Dimensions but the the point is is that uh all dimensions and the height specifically we even showed height for potential uh mechanical screening for the roof could be which I'll get to later we'll have some roof mounted equipment but all the heights is everything's less than 35 ft so there's no no requirement uh variance height VAR no height variance requested for our [Music] design and no setbacks as well correct variance that's correct no setback variance we we adjusted the building based on the TRC meeting we had I think last April seems like a long time ago thank you okay so this is 8301 it's called East West elevations and it's been updated so I guess this will be what A8 A8 so again what this shows the west elevation was is showing again because the angle of the building that's why we see that you see that from two elevations the elevations are drawn straight on but in fact it's angled but that's why it's drawn uh on both both the west and south elevations again showing the canopies showing the uh mechanical roof uh shielding as required shows the outdoor lighting which we spoke about earlier and and the East Elevation is pretty much uh existing conditions now this plan was presented earlier but I just want the only we we we've done two R we've done two renderings or isometric views of the building aside from the rendering this shows basically the existing building on Mountain Avenue this is the addition uh just some of the detail we try to pick up on here there will be a a duronotic bronze color break here so that this is existing brick this will be new brick and since we're not it's hard to get brick match existing well even though we'll do the best we can we're going to have a color break with material so it'll it'll fo fit in together and like the rendering show all the coping will be all the same color Mr mayfeld that is something that was submitted prior does not need to be marked as an exhibit uh I think this is the same drawing you had last time I think we already had this but Al although we do have a yeah that's correct it's uh it's the same drawing as done earlier it shows a date of 41024 and shows a revision date of August 10th yeah August date let's just make it an ex okay I was just gonna say let's be safe no problem I'm gonna call it A9 [Laughter] A9 and what do we call that Mr Mayfield is that the which elevation this this is not an elevation this is an overall view looking from Mountain Avenue towards the existing building and a new addition over here okay same question is that an exhibit this this is a new exhibit yes that's A10 A10 tell me what it is so A10 is a view of the addition of the building which really relates to the uh architectural color rening that you have you can see the new entrance over here we can see the awning over here uh an awning over here an awning over here and the Suka Terrace up here with the pergola roof and the and the 5 foot high wall over here so kind of see the whole building Al together from this View and again like earlier noted all the colors the coping colors will match we'll tie in so that at the end of the day all that the building reachs as one element is Terrace there's actually a dimension on the Terrace I'll go back it's on the second floor plane I I'll I'll re I'll Rite that it's 1,740 square feet in one section and there's a turn that's 320 Square fet enough you want I I agree I gave her the numbers but the point is the point is there's two there the 1700 includes the oddballs the rectangular plus that little Oddball space but the actual rectangular space there's a dimension on there that was with the two Dimensions that uh the attorney just read off to you you see this is just a duplicating of the rending we looked at that was A7 was A7 but we marked that one A7 but would like to show you this needs to be marked yeah because this is this needs to be marked because a little different uh it's the mechanical uh roof plan that the mechanical engineer prepared A1 mechanical roof plan and it's m133 but basically the important part is that all AC equipment uh condensers outdoor condensers will be on the roof will not be on the site also proposed that a location for a emergency generator so that the building will have an emergency generator but again will not be on we not take Lanes we not take site plan space we will be hidden be up on the roof and hopefully we don't have to use it like we had here two we in know our last hearing you'll need it spr field you'll need it um and also shows a line of proposed screening uh so that it can be can be shielded any equipment that be shielded from the outside recycling got to run once a week the timing of that oh sure it's not yes good point yeah for the generator okay um so the best of my knowledge I think we take you the entire building all the boards and uh any questions I'm here did you discuss the basement oh you uh you're right Bas the B that 12 come up if he's got a board if not the the basement plan was submitted to to the uh board I have it here if you need it yes provided there's no Provisions you have it what's the date on that date on this B 4104 all right we'll just make an exhibit 812 just2 812 is the basement plan okay so the important part of the about the basement plan is that all Utility Equipment will be in here the play place for storage aside from the other storage closets the elevator equipment room will be down in here again we'll have egress stairs two means of egress that get out and uh but there will be will be no occupants there strictly for mechanical equipment and storage and Mr manfeld if I may Mike disco had pointed out that he would be opposed if there was a need for a new Transformer for that to be on the outside of the building is there room in the basement for that to be placed yes there is plenty of room also uh in terms of utilities aside from uh Transformers Etc the the new building and the entire project once is designed will all be fully sprinkler right now there's no sprinklers in the building the building will be fully sprinkler that's the part that we've discussed that with with the president of the the congregation so that's that'll be that'll be happening but just increase fire safety and just make the building a a better place thank you thanks anything further councel Mr Mayor Feld with regard to the youth rooms I just want you to put on the record they are not being designed as classrooms because there is no school is that correct that's that's correct that's why they're called youth rooms versus classrooms also uh we did give the rabbi an officer he doesn't have an office in the building we thought this congregation the rabbi deserves an office that's also part of the first floor plan thank you I don't have any other questions for the architect okay perfect Mr M you want to start with you first just I know you did a tour of the building and yeah it's very helpful to do a tour of the building um just a one question the rendering the perspective uh that's been provided can you just provide testimony that we have one angle of the building elevation towards the new entrance is what is represented on the board consistent for all building elevations as far as building materials colors Etc correct they are lay labeled on you know on the uh on the elevation the materials are labeled dark bronze brick dtic bronze this all it's all labeled on on the elevation drawings at the appropriate spaces thank you thank you um and we would just ask for that all of these exhibits that were entered tonight if they were going to be submitted electronically we can do that absolutely okay thank you highest point highest point is really top of the screening for the mechanical equipment is 34 ft that's just you know 34 feet but that's you don't even see that here that that that that you're looking there that's about 32 feet so tucked back you won't even see it but it would just we just wanted to make sure we spoke to the engineer and he he's providing for a six told us to provide for a six foot fence may not even have to go that high we just we don't make sure that nothing ever appears above that Aon sorry har I call him Harris I don't have anything do you have anything that's getting his name right yeah that's really getting to be an issue um these days um no I think it looks great um when actually assuming this gets approved soon when do you think construction would start and about how long do you think this whole building would take I think we'll have to ask the fundraising committee about that okay that's a fair question it'll be a while now in real I guess realistically to build this it's funded like approximately how long would it take to build the structure obviously after you we get the planning board approval then we have to do all the detail engineering drawings have to go to building department approval and fire department approval that that's a process and the actual construction I would say is most and they have do it in phases cu the building the the synagogue is not closing down ask about that as well so we have to do it in phases I I I I say maybe was maybe a three to to four year construction phase plan it could be less it could be we'll have to work through a pre-con to figure out to make sure that we're cognizant to the neighbor so during that process just regarding the phasing I I'll just add to that that obviously we have to do demolition of two houses so those will come down proper fencing I know that's your thing Rich hu proper fencing will go around to Sure ensure safety um obviously the playground will come down last if if you know when we're ready to go but the existing building no renovations it's not going to change until the new addition is built so that then we move the congregation from the existing building to the new building while then they do the renovations on the existing building your threee time frame is including that correct so it's yes outside work isn't necessarily 3 years no we don't anticipate it would take three years to build the building we don't know the start date yet though that's Marissa canala I just realized I forgot Mr disco anything no okay so we'll see you next week or not next week but he'll be here on the 23rd we'll see it in September 23rd okay your this is your witness yes at this point I would like to call my planner and that's Matt Matthew seckler from Stonefield engineering he is a he is a licensed professional planner and professional engineer right hand uh do you swear firm that the testimony you're about the the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do could you please state your name again for the record spell your last name certainly my name is Matthew seckler that's s c kle r I'm with Stonefield engineering design address is 92 Park Avenue in Rutherford New Jersey okay Mr Seer um would you identify for the board uh your qualifications so have a Bachelor of Science and civil engineering from Union College I have a masters in city and Regional planning from Ruckers University I am a licensed professional engineer and professional planner in the state been practicing the field for over 15 years been accepted before over 100 boards in both engineering and planning on this project I am the planner for the project and he's been before this board yes I have okay I don't see any concerns accept your qualifications so Mr seckler if you would please give the board the rationals and the justifications with regard to the variances that are being requested and the waivers absolutely I'm not going to rehash what you heard from all the previous Witnesses tonight but I will kind of go into the the planning justifications um this is obviously the expansion of the synagogue it is located in the S60 Zone which is a single family Zone but this is a permitted in the zone that's why we're before this board and not the zoning board it's important to note that because clearly the governing body has felt that houses of worship are appropriate in residential areas they understand that there will be interaction between these type of uses hous of worships and residential uses because they allow them the same Zone and they obviously recognize that having local residents be able to be near places of worship is important to them so while this is a permitted use in the zone the zoning ordinance does not specify separate regulations for houses of worship to compared to single family houses so while if you're building a single family house designing a property for a single family house it's very different than if you're building it for a house of worship that's going to have Gathering of people and events the regulations the zoning regulations are exactly the same from a bulk standard so even if you were you know had a house of worship a synagogue and you were having your smallest possible prayer service a minion 10 people you'd have to have 10 spaces to park that's not what you typically would see on a single family lot so some of the regulations and you see this throughout the the township some of the regulations are really difficult or near impossible to meet when you're trying to build a house of worship to a single family lot design standard and you see that especially as it relates to building coverage and impervious coverage throughout the township I mean you can look at you know the various houses of worship up and down Springfield Avenue or Mountain Avenue uh Kingdom Hall Church the Renaissance Church um you know you look up and down these are places that clearly and I haven't reviewed every you know single site from a survey and and resolution standpoint clearly they aren't meeting the 36% impervious coverage standard they're most likely double that in many cases because they need to provide parking to you know for all of those seats inside and all their their um all their attendees inside which is again not what you typically see in a single family house so with that understanding there are a couple of variances that we we are seeking here that I think are pretty typical when it comes to this type of use in this Zone and two of them building coverage and impervious coverage you've heard considerable discussion about and when looking at those those standards the impervious coverage and building coverage standard you've seen that the building design itself has been designed specifically to accommodate this type of religious use they're not being they understand what their uh parishioners currently require in terms of having uh and what they currently lack they currently lack things like ADA Bathroom rabbis office they lack areas inside the building to have the youth inside and and that is something that they need to have as this congregation continues to necessarily grow in terms of families but as their families continue to grow and and I think that's important to understand that the building coverage that we've designed and I'll I'll get to the justification has not been one that they are oversizing this property oversizing the building in addition they are being mindful to all the setbacks so while the building coverage is beyond what would be allowed if this was a single family house they are not creating any new setback variances to any of the adjoining properties so they're building themselves within the proper area and we're not seeking a height variance so it's not like we're being an imposing property going up in order to keep the building coverage lower and creating shadowing effects or creating a tunneling effect on any nearby property so again from a building coverage perspective we are increasing compared to the existing site but again I think that you've seen the design you've heard from the architect it's been designed appropriately to serve this congregation uh in their current state impervious coverage we've obviously gone back and forth and we've even gone down from the initial proposal to what was I think it was from 75.9 to 74% we've dropped it I guess even more if you hear from tonight uh you know with this new design and then losing that last parking space which it seems like the board is in agreement to so we continually to work towards the impervious coverage requirement obviously we're never getting to 36% really no house of worship I think is getting to 36% especially if you need to try to provide parking um that said the impervious coverage to offset that is a storm water system that's the proper way to offset impervious coverage and we've mitigated that additional impervious coverage through a storm water system and storm water design that obviously your your uh board engineer will be reviewing and has been reviewing to ensure that we're mitigating and holding back and not just releasing water um into the uh storm water system so we are mitigating that as part of the project so again there are a couple of other um you know setbacks variances uh and other variances that kind of are pre existing non-conforming conditions just how the buildings currently align even the uh building of the single family lot that were're kind of leaving that has some pre-existing non-conforming conditions but really building coverage and perious coverage those are the two that are being triggered by new activities on this site we also are obviously seeking a variance as it relates to loading zone uh clearly this type of use is not one that gets a high amount of truck traffic or uh extensive loading activities uh so again we still believe that the single loading space is more than appropriate for a site like this and that two loading spaces um are not necessarily uh needed to operate this site uh in an efficient manner we also have that parking variance but we are improving that compared the existing condition you've heard how the applicant again is balancing with the board's help trying to provide more parking on site you know we are adding some new seats but trying to get a little bit closer to compliance but obviously we're not Paving the entire land or Paving three miles around uh the temple in order to meet that parking requirement I think we have an appropriate amount per the testimony that you've heard uh being provided so again those are the variances that we'd be keying in on now this board obviously Hears A lot of applications where C variances are being requested but I want to emphasize the fact that as opposed to you know a restaurant that seeking a parking variance or a residential house that may be seeking a setback variance this application includes an inherently beneficial use and that is what houses of worship are and they've been specifically called out as inherently beneficial uses in the municipal land use law being inherently beneficial use means that you automatically meet that positive criteria and you guys here all the time we're balancing those positives and negatives and that positive criteria automatically being met by providing by have it being a house of worship and that weighs heavy you know when you do that balancing that's a pretty heavy Stone that we're putting on that that uh positive criteria standpoint because it's basically a protected use religious uses are protected uses and really what Bor should be looking at is when you're balancing that positives and negatives are you are there any substantial negative impacts not is there you know a little is there a little issue is there a substantial negative impact and if there is how do we mitigate that how do we help and try to come up with ideas that that mitigate it because that positive criteria is so heavy when you're weighing and Performing that balance and I think that throughout this application and again personally I didn't think the original plans that were submitted had anything that was substantially negative but I think there were some things such as you know uh lighting height uh lighting direction um you know things like impervious coverage that the applicant has basically gone through that process with this board and the board has been active in that in kind of dialing back some of those things that could be seen as as negative impacts and again I don't in my evaluation I don't recognize any of those um conditions the building coverage impervious coverage the parking requirement that we have I don't think any of them are reaching that you know this is a safety issue a life safety issue that can outweigh that fact that we have an inherently beneficial use being proposed here so again just reminding the board removed parking spaces as we've gone on to reduce that impervious coverage we've reduced the light pole Heights the lights are being shielded different light fixtures are being proposed lck coverage again has continually gone down we've work with that outdoor Terrace space and try to Shield it from the neighbors you we've relocated parking to specifically have them be at their closest to the one property that we uh that we control on Pit Road so again we're being Mindful and again reducing that impact that any of these variances may have to the furthest extent possible and again that's what when have an inherently beneficial use you're kind of creating that balancing effect between that positive use and and those variances so again when I look at this application I see one that the proper process has been followed by the applicant and the board to come up with the best plan and I think that that's what we have here is the best plan for this property that allows this congregation to continue to flourish to continue to serve their current membership by having these indoor areas these indoor um IND areas expanded while still being mindful of the community we also again moving the driveway further from the intersection again another positive Improvement we're uh improving the sidewalks along the front edge that need improvements so it's not just the temple that is getting that positive impact it's also the the traveling public the people around by creating better safety at the intersection and the driveways themselves so overall I believe the variances that we are seeking can be granted I believe that when you weigh those positives and negative criteria clearly the positives are are outweighing the negative in this case I have some followup okay so you have very thoroughly covered the variances which are lot coverage imperious coverage building coverage parking variance and loading space there are waivers and I want to make sure that we've hit them all so with regard to the waivers we've already gotten rid of the aisle withd that existed in the existing parking lot as was testified to by Danielle our engineer we've also uh gotten rid of the 15 16 parking spot needing Landscaping issue that was also testified to but there were um there's there's a few more there was the waiver that has to do with driveways prohibited on both streets of corner Lots which of course this has been the case for 50 years and again I think you know you've heard from the traffic engineer and again I think the one-way circulation on a site like this is actually beneficial than having kind of dead end parking or the need for people to get in and out out through the same drive I think here it works well and I do think it would operate well in the future okay we also are seeking a minor subdivision with regard to 18 Pit Road with regard to the rear lot line and I would like you to put on the record um you know the justification for the minor subdivision yes and again uh we we are obviously making those modifications uh and we do have um you know the waivers as relates to what was called Lot B uh which is that 18 Pit Road property uh and again uh there is some pre-existing non-conforming issues with that property it's it's 3 ft narrower than than the uh um allowable with but again that's that's an existing that's an existing condition and again with that property um we are providing proper buffering between our property and that in terms of the fact that it has fencing and it is a property that both uh that the the temple owns as well as the temple being the I guess busier use nearby that it's been designed properly has proper screening as it relates to the fence and despite you know the non-conformities that are being created through the subdivision um we believe that site could still operate uh and and again it'll look the same from Pit Road if you're driving along you'll know no different in terms of its uh rear yard or anything related to Interior to the site and with regard to the pre-existing non-conforming conditions we are not changing any of them correct correct the building is where the building is on that road uh and we're not changing its location so look if you drive by today or you drive by after post approval it'll look no different and the adjustment of that rear lot line in no way is creating any other type of a setback or Varian correct correct and it's compliant in terms of the rear yard is that correct yes it is so the rear yard is not being impacted by this development despite that change in lot line okay we're also seeking consolidation of various of the Lots namely the existing lot that has the current synagogue the lot neck store that has the playground and the two lots going down Mountain Avenue that are the single family homes to be Consolidated into one site if you could please justify that for the board yes and again I think that is a a better planning practice is to have single building all on one lot again obviously the Lots range um in terms of their depth but again I think as one cohesive development having them as a singular lot is beneficial um and that is what's being proposed as part of the application so in terms of your testimony is it accurate to reflect that with regard to everything that's been presented to the board with regard to the positive the negative the justifications ETC that this application in fact would not have a substantial impact of a negative nature is that right correct and again I think that's in concert with the board and the board's professionals is that I do not believe there's a substantial negative impact with the variances that we're seeking and to go further to this will this Advance the purpose of Municipal land use law it does uh just on the basis of being inherently beneficial use but clearly if you run down those you know list of uh uh what you're promoting as part of uh zoning uh I clearly believe that we're uh promoting purpose a which is health safety General Welfare again houses of worship fit that category as well as uh uh having purpose I and J uh and H all of those purposes are being Advanced I think the building the visual environment is being improved as part of this project I believe the circulation is being improved by adding additional parking and having the driveway be further from the signalized intersection I do believe the site has been properly cited on this property uh being mindful of all the setbacks so your testimony is indicating that there will not be a substantial detriment to the public good that the benefits of the deviations will substantially outweigh any detriments and lastly the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and zoning ordinance are going to be substantially um will not be substantially impaired but will be promoted correct and again I think looking at the um looking at the master plan and the documents the township has Prov uh prepared as part of their zoning ordinance clearly having these this type of use in residential areas is uh a goal or is permitted within the zoning ordinance and again we're continuing that here I have nothing further for the planner perfect um for the next when you come back the next time I want to get the exord impervious coverage we have that now that's par parking space Oh with the parking space out okay the engineer can do it no problem Mr mrea because you've spent that was that was my number one comment if they could circulate an updated exhibit there's a lot of testimony tonight taking out that one extra parking space is going to further reduce impervious coverage and that could be maybe redlined or put on I think it's sheet two or three of your drawings you have the bulk schedule there and just update that information and circulate that as an exhibit whatever we're up to you can bring up the engineer next meeting for five minutes five seconds it's fine we'll do it any that's it testimon any questions testimony Mr disc I would just request a little more testimony on the lot coverage it was the response and the testimonies was couched in a drainage component which is for Mor management which I think was addressed a lot coverage is also the visual coverage Nal think should a little yeah we definitely can and again the areas in which the impervious coverage is that its greatest is in the areas that are generally in the rear of the site when you're driving by you know most of the public will ever see is when they're driving by on mountain or driving by on Shunpike and what they're seeing is basically the building set back the way it is uh currently and compliance with Landscaping free in the front of the area so really again the area that would be more black top is the area in the rear of the site which is really only seen by the members that be going to the synagogue uh and again I think that through the landscaping design that has been presented and again even adding more landscaping or more green space through the loss of the additional parking space it's not like we have a sea of asphalt either and again I think that goes to the fact we're no longer seeking the waiver as it relates to having continuous parking spaces without basically Green Space or breakup and again I think that is from a visual standpoint uh showing that there's not a negative impact with the with the um being seeking the variants for impervious coverage and in reality there was nowhere else to put the new parking lot was there correct it's again it's balancing that parking variance we had with an impervious coverage variance and you know we I guess went a little high on the parking a little low impervious and now we're kind of balancing it out anything further Mr Mr hoer anything you thought that was very thorough that's Ryan so you're all set that's all your testimony that's the testimony yes so for the next meeting everyone will be present and I think that we just need the your engineer to come up and give a little testimony on what the impervious coverages talk a little bit about the buffer whatever trees you guys have come up with uh in agreement with Mr disco and then we'll at that point we'll open up to the entire public to speak so from the public standpoint you know this this application be carried to September 23rd 2024 we do have one application in in before this but it'll take I'm the attorney on that so I'll get through 15 20 minutes it'll take 15 20 minutes max so the idea is that's going to be public night will be the option for every member of the public to take all the questions that they've come up with over the last two meetings one in August and and the one today and ask every member of their expert team questions if you have questions for Mr disco or Mr mrea as well um what we figure that out we'll have to figure out what's the appropriate time limit and so forth because you know we want to make sure that you have an opportunity to speak but you know we have to be very pointed so we're asking questions so it's not we give time for everyone to speak so we're going to try to keep the meeting as long as we can next uh on the 26 that way everyone get 23rd 20 23rd at 6:30 at 6:30 so at this point we're going to carry this application to September 23rd 2024 at 6:30 PM with no further notice anyone that wishes to come come to speak at that point time perfect thank you Mr chairman and the board and the professionals I'm gonna at this point I'm going to take this opportunity to open up a meeting for any uh other business that any member of the public that wish to speak anyone else seeing none I'm close this portion to the public and request a motion to adjournment motion to adjourn all in favor I okay great thank