##VIDEO ID:oWv5V_d7LPg## 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 excellent all right good evening everyone thank you for your patience the time is 6:08 this is the township of Springfield's Board of adjustment meeting for October 15 2024 adequate notice has given has been given in accordance with the sunshine notice was published on December 13th in the Star Ledger which is one of the official newspapers for the township of Springfield for the year 2023 and posted in the Annex Building on December 14 2023 can we please stand to salute the flag okay may we please have the roll call yes I got comfortable good timing Mr Steven Hawkin here Mr Michael wxin here Mr Steven fbal Miss Marlon amarano here Mr Peter shitz M Ana Dodson here Vice chair Mark hunningham here and chair Jody Cohen here we have a quorum excellent okay the first order of business are resolutions that are up for memorialization the first resolution is application 20248 145 Short Hills Avenue block 608 Lot 10 uh have uh the members had an opportunity to review the resolution are there any questions or comments if none is there a motion to adopt Mr hawy yes Mr wein yes Mr firstam yes M naano yes Mr schtz yes um Vice chair Cunningham yes and yes motion passes thank you the next application up for memorialization is application 2024-25 Ruby Street block 2902 lot 40 has every member had an opportunity to review the resolution or questions or comments if there are none is there motion I'll move second we just second it Mr Fen bam yes Mr wein yes Mr Hawkin yes M naporano yes Mr schwitz yes uh Vice chair Cunningham yes and chair car yes motion pass um okay uh applications on this evening the first application is application this is 39 Brook Street block 710 lot 9 this is a continuation from our September 17th meeting is the applicant here Hi how are you I'm on up thank you yeah let's swear them in and then this is coming to us now correct okay so we'll start with you going to both testify yes use your right hand do you swear or affirm to tell the truth your full name SP your last name State your home address Thomas morston I'm sorry the first name Thomas thank you address is 1934 Buchanan Avenue in cyon Pennsylvania okay so yes the last time that you guys were here welcome back we wanted to see rendering of what the front porch um would look like and the front facade so um I think since this just came to us we're going to mark it into the record as an exhibit yes this will be A2 there was an A1 which were pictures marked at the first uh hearing okay so do you want to walk us through what you've given us here yes uh so you were asked for a rendering of what what the Project's going to look like which be provided the second question that was brought up was about the downspout leader which in our first pictures it appeared as what as though it went into the garden box that's there but that's not the case as you can see on the third page it actually drains into the driveway and goes down to a storm drain that's at the base of the driveway so the new down spot's going to do exactly the same thing okay thank you um anything else you want to add uh now I think that pretty much covers it okay thank you uh board members do we have questions for the applicant I so you're getting rid of the planter that's there and you're going to put a porch there instead any other questions no any members of the public have any questions none okay excellent um okay uh I'm satisfied with this rendering I think it looks beautiful I would be in favor of granting the front yard variance request um I don't see any detriment to doing so any other board members is there a motion motion I'll make a motion I'll second okay Mr Shu yes Vice chair Cunningham yes Mr Haw yes Mr W yes verb yes M naano yes and sherff yes motion congratulations thank you thank you um okay the next application we're going to call is application 20242 76 Shunpike roadblock 1304 lot 11 this is a request for a lot coverage variance for a patio and driveway expansion is the applicant here hi come on up good good evening good evening we're going to swear you in okay please raise your right hand do you swear or or affirm to tell the truth yes you have to answer out loud yes thank you state your name spell your last name give your home address elanit 76 shanike Road Springfield New Jersey David 76 Sean good job than thank you okay um why don't you please walk us through what the request is and what you're looking to do on your property so uh I think the the first one is about the uh front uh the front area that we uh increased it and uh in the initially when we moved here there was a tree in the middle of the front house so we were not able to do a big uh I guess it's a use Circle for the cars so we did as much as we can following of course the permit uh and now not now for a few years I've been ruining every car I got because it was too narrow for me so uh I needed I asked for my husband to actually increase it uh the space so I canot ruin the tires and also my son is getting his license so it's was you know now he's practicing is's trying to get his license so it was hard for him as well so we just expanded a little bit to make it really much comfortable it's a Main Street also so it's it's all these things were uh was difficult for us when we used to park the car and getting out of the house when it was smaller okay is this is this something you want to do or you've done it and you got caught I I don't know we did it we did it 10 years ago all the circle it was a big tree that the town the count Tak the tree that trees and because we don't if you if the tree is now was there in that time probably we do it bigger but we don't have choice because the tree and after we remove the tree we just extended in another two feet all around in the circle this is something we have maybe 11 years ago so this is so this is done and you're just ask yes we just extended like another two feet you want to extend it more or no no no no perfect now did it already we did it already yes and the patio the patio is the pool is in the back that's you want to do a pull in the back of the backyard that was not done that's not done sorry I I was concentrating on the front first so I wasn't sure if to because this we apply for the permit and say you have like a lot cover problem we go to the varant we say we also apply for to get a p in the back so you want to put a pool in the backyard in the backyard yes 16 by 40 according to what I'm reading here is the backyard already fenced in yes if you don't mind me asking what kind of fence is it we have a vinyl fence and wood fence is a mixed how high is the fence six excuse me six feet aren't sorry Mike aren't they required though to put a fence around the pool it's the perimeter of the pool yeah inside new fences would require the Springfield has an ordinance far exceeding the state because of their unfortunate incident we had so yes when they go to the building department they'll have to provide a compliant fence is there any kind Water Management that you're putting in as far as like a drywell um since you're going over coverage do you find there's any requirement for that it is required I think they're showing a drain which would represent a dryw in the upper left hand corner of the backyard that would be something that you would have to approve their design of their drywall if you find in the affirmative there can be in condition but conceptually that would work for this area is there is there a filter or something here for that pool is it what filter filter filter the pool equipment we not we not do nothing yet we just get the size after some profession bring all the design but actually for that in backyard actually we have the stone you know like a stone sewer R in the house you know in that house and engineer in response to your question yes there's filter is required has to be at least 10 ft from the property line I don't see it identified on the plan again when they go to the building department they're going to be m data to have filter system for and I assume that's on some kind of pad and stuff so that would be actually a different but coverage depending on it's insignificant it's insignificant usually 2 feet by 3 feet something like that the area around the pool is that there be grass stone back there be like a party 3T around of the pool where is the water all the rest be R be grass so the applicant is showing an infiltration of stone trench around the perimeter of the pool which then drains to a dry well or seage bit so conceptually this is fine we would check the sizing of it if if you um prove it any other questions from the board okay any questions further Witnesses from any member of the public none anyone here wish to speak on this application no okay board members I would be in favor of it if with the conditions I'm in agreement I'm in favor of it with the conditions that you meet with the engineering department to work through your drainage plans and we're approving in that same thing the driveway that I think the total is the lot coverage right by right with the patio and the driveway so um yeah so in total it was it was at 39.3 and they're going to 42.3% coverage a 2 by3 bad okay if everyone or if anyone else is in favor and would like to make a motion I'll move to approve a second Mr HW yes MRX yes mround yesan yes yes Vice chair Cunningham yes and yes luck luck congratulations thank you have a good night next application is application 202 24-22 140 Hillside Avenue block 2901 lot 40 request for a side yard variance and height variance for a fence and shed excuse me sorry good evening how are are you um okay we're going to swear you in please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm to tell the truth s to tell the truth please State your full name spell your last name give your home address Olga sarov 140 Hillside Avenue Springfield New Jersey 140 Hillside Aven thank you okay great um would you like to walk us through what you're proposing to do and your reasons for the relief that you're requesting uh we completed the project uh it's basically done uh we have two variances one is the height of Defense in the back of the yard because we had to level the property it was very sloy uh to to level the yard uh my Constructors build the retaining wall and put the fence on top of it so it's all even height uh around the backyard uh that's one uh and the second one is the shed uh we had the shed on the same exact spot we used exact the same uh concrete slab because they managed to knock it down during uh the excavation process so we had to build something new to to replace it in exact the same spot and it was too close to neighboring properties um 10 yard 10 ft closer than 10 ft to the uh property line I'm actually very confused by your drawing here um according to your chart you have less coverage than before and I it it says permeable pavers yeah so um the pool doesn't count the permeable pavers count as 50% what they did is they removed in the front of the house they had a loop driveway like sort of like two driveways it was removed so the zoning officer and myself had gone out to the site to inspect it it had been cleared from zoning to do the pool and the like then these two issues popped up upon the final inspection which was on the survey you see the shed or the frame shed there it expanded in size which violated the sidey yard setback and then there was a fence placed on top of a wall and in combination the height of the fence wall looking at it from neighbors's point of view is over six feet so that's those are the two things of relief they seek pulls in it's compliant and so you you can ignore that it's the shed building to the right was expanded and it's in the sidey setback after the fact and and the fence wall combination is approximately 9 ft at its highest and 6 feet is the maximum per 32 in higher in on the back line not all around the proper backyard so the one question I have I know there's a lot of issues with water run off and neighbors and stuff when you put this uh this patio in the back did you any kind of water management so that mitigate the damage yes it's fully perable and it's uh it's uh Mike uh cleared this out in terms of the amount of gravel and the water management system it's actually better now because it was so sloppy all the water was running off uh to the neighbors and now we are managing it in house so to speak yeah there's a mass massive amount of stone under the pavers uh we have the tickets to verify it we did a water test where we flooded it you know water basically went straight down so that gravel will be in my nightmares for the rest of of my life probably still still have some um yes and if we cut the fence uh the thing is all our neighbors in the back they have their own fences back to back to back to back so when they are out side they see their own fence and not ours which is 32 in higher you can see it from the second floor probably that it's a bit higher but not when you're in your backyard how tall is the retaining wall that the fence sits on 32 in 32 in okay and it's only the back line it's gradually kind of increases in height it was an existing non-conforming yeah it's just that the size got larger hence the massing in the sidey yard setback so they need the relief so is the relief I'm sorry I one tell you so is the relief actually the five feet or is it less than that because the existing says five but when you say it's expanded did it actually go it went in the front a little bit not in the back yeah it it's on the on the side of the shed it continued that line so it's unfortunately it doesn't meet the required accessory structure side yard setback it's exist it's the same essentially the same as existing but because they increased the size of it they have to ask for the relief of that so how so how far is the shed actually from the side I think it's 5T and it was 5T from the side yard a property line just because of your sketches the scale the stuff it's really hard to because you have 5T in one spot and then you have you know so and 10 ft it's hard to um they sh increased in size maybe a few square feet uh because we had to cut the back corner because of the tree so it's not regular rectangle so it's a little bit more in the front that faes the Paro but in the back it's actually cut uh because there is a tree there what size is the shed now I think I can uh Mr haxon I would assume it's about a 4 foot setback I scaled it I scaled it based upon the other measurements with um I think if it's closer than 5 feet you can't have any uh windows on that there no Windows window no windows that would not a zoning building department so what size is the current shed uh the old one was 17 by by eight I think the new one is just a little bit deeper but same in the width bre will um I know that I have an exact so if if we were to approve this does a Construction office come out and check to make sure that it's compliant construction absolutely yeah the shed the shed that you that you're proposing well it's there already is it on the ground or is it on a pad is it it's on the same concrete slab that we had before basic the previous concrete slab it just it was a smaller shed and a little bit of concrete in front of it so we used the the entire area and right now it's 15 by 12 with the cut side on uh the right hand side so it's not exactly uh 250 it's less 156 square ft any other questions from the board so with the fence the requirement is 6 feet you're 32 in over the 6 feet in the back yes because it's sitting on top on the retaining wall yeah try a picture would it help I have more do you have a picture of the fence no like cuz you're saying it's six feet and then it goes up but it's only up there so it's CU it's on top of the retaining wall here but the sides are all within [Music] six it's all the same height just because the yard was sloping gradually uh the retaining wall was built from zip to 32 in across the side actually one side because the left right hand side is was pretty much flat so it sloped it used to be SL it used to be sloped and then you filled L we filled we leveled we filled it with and the retaining wall sits to the level and then have six feet Yes ex so with the retaining only on the your your your survey is 16 years old have there been any changes to the footprint uh displayed on this property no it was uh it's our first outdoor project I'm sorry it's our first project so there are changes well not since this is our first change since we bought the house what has changed the the the the pool the patio the we cut the backyard of driveway it's the survey is from it's before uh the survey is from before you bought the house before we bought the house and before we started this project so there's a lot of changes since this was stressed yes but I provided I we applied for the the construction permit and it's all there who who drew this I don't know what this is but who drew it ma'am you're not answering my question who drew it I you did okay that's the same thing that was AG right yes just a larar so the fence is in the shed is in okay than you so from the neighbor's property in the back it looks like 9 fet other than they the neighbor has a fence as well so they're looking over you'd have to they see the top of the applicant's fence over their own fence so they're seeing the the 32 in differ that's what you're saying they probably see even less than that when they're in the yard they just see like little bit topping all to be within six feet there they would have had to put the fence behind the wall That's property yeah if they put the fence at the bottom of the wall they'd be compliant they wouldn't be here for that reason but then we'll lose the privacy of uh you know having the privac yard and the meaning of the entire project who owns only permitted to have a six foot F you went on top of the retaining wall giving yourself 32 in more but also we removed the uh the nuisance of our neighbors dealing with runoff water from uh the street through our property all the way to their yard because now we have full man water management system as as opposed to them running uh what's the name of it the compressor every time it was raining heavily um after every rain who owns the little strip of land between the two fences I think we do uh but it's mostly Ivy uh Bob and Mike took a look when they were inside it's like covered in Ivy is there any issue with uh Mike is there any issue with maintaining that that area there there potentially could be that's not a grass area it's more of a um natural vegetation so um whoever property it's on is would be responsible for it if the need comes to enforce that do you see any reason to be able to have to access it and service it in any way well there is access uh there there is the ability to walk into that area so you there is access to it it's just that um you'd have to walk around the the linear length of the fence along the rear is that your property or your neighbor I think it's ours we couldn't put the fence on the property line because there are trees we had to step uh to the front a little bit but we do maintain it and it's like I said it's mostly Ivy if it starts over and growing we go and cut it so it's pretty clean down there do your neighbors have any concern with the height of your funds we have one neighbors that took time to show up no not yet thank you well I I talk to the couple they don't have an issue and they had chance to complain since last year because the project was finished last year basically and we got the permits for the electrical and the pluming and the last December so uh all right if they had not built up the back and they actually put the fence basically on the radiated property that would then be sitting well below their existing fence line correct correct so they would be 32 in beneath correct wouldn't six feet that's it almost look like a knee fence from their backyard at grade level yeah I'll be looking at the top of the Pence have to build up the soil any other questions from the board was it sh was the original shed the one that collapsed was that already there when you move there yes it was very old plywood with regular um plywood siden and shingles just and the concrete slab we had to put all this stuff somewhere so we had to build a rep replacement pretty fast we don't have a garage one more question for the the purpose of the wall mainly is just basically to the erosion of the of grading the backyard correct well I I think the applicant probably construct the wall to make the backyard More Level more usable um they did put a pool in so obviously the the elevation of the coping around the pool has to be equal so they probably uh built up a re the rear of the property somewhat to accommodate that right it definitely sits grade level on there sits much higher than their backyard neighbors grade level so yes any attempts to just build it up with soil would really build it up with just soil so that they could have a compliant six foot fence may not have made practical sense yeah you either it would have had a wall or a sloped embankment and which would be subject to potentially erosion but if the um Defence was on top of the embankment it would have just been 6' tall you're right the fact that it's in combination with the wall um is is where the relief is [Music] sought any further questions any members of the public have any questions for the witness all right members of the public that wish to speak on this allegation no okay sir you don't want to say anything about this the shed is on their side the shed on their side come forward come on guys come on sorry if if you're going to speak I have to swear you in oh I I didn't know first of all I got a letter the the hearings here and my neighbor and my Township want me to hear that's why I'm hear you you have a right to speak you have no obligation if you don't want to speak then that's fine thank you thank all right that portion is closed is reping the wall Mike do you mind bringing that up thank you certainly well while while he's waiting to see it um I will I will say that I don't uh have any I understand now I mean you're no offense but your drawing didn't explain Mike helped a lot um I would just say that if we were to approve this we'd want to have the construction Department make sure that that shed is safe any electrical any of those stuff that's been done in there no Elric the building itself complies with all of construction codes I would I would say that because I know when you're closer than a certain distance from the property line there are specific requirements for fire separations and safety it's a St shed than what we had before the just to clarify the back of your house would be closer to Beverly you're on the gas you're on the gas station side of the street yes we are from the gas station the second house second house on the hill side but on the same side of the street is that g station is Sito um just for the record the um picture that's been shown on the engineer's uh phone will be printed out and marked as A1 we don't have the dimension we do uh 17 by 12 but not the full 17 by 12 the back is cut diagonally it is 7t wide um as far as the length 17 by 12 I think by what 17 by 12 yeah I is no more than 14 so 12 to 14 the issue is yes and and the requirement for a setback is 10 ft or 5T for the shed and feed seems like a lot 5 feet from rear and and um side yards 10 feet from other buildings should be so so your your chart is wrong it it says 10t that's the that's the principal building in the chart okay there's the chart doesn't have a provision for accessory building because it's not a typical thing so they're asking not my chart their chart so they're basically asking for a one foot variance from four to five the back of the shed is 5T from the proper yeah I think the side yard is where the issue was so you're asking for approximately 1 foot variance on the side am I am I correct yes okay would anyone like to make a motion doing them together yeah ask that are we doing that together or separate um I'm fine together okay if if we're okay together then great but if you feel that we need to make them separately then please make a motion I think for clarity they should be separated okay let's separate them I will start with the fence is there a motion actually let's start with the shed is there a motion on the shed I I'll move and with the with the conditions that the construction Department uh approves the shed that the construction Department approves the sh second Mr ha yes Mr yes Mr yes Mr yes isano Cunningham yes yes as to the fence is there a motion I'll move to approve second can we add in the closure of maintaining that property behind the fence that is within the property yes with a condition to maintain that IV area yeah we do you're maintaining it now still we do we have been we had the fence it's pre-existing fence we just had to lift it up Mr hin yes Vice chair Cunningham yes Mr WX yes Mr f no M naano yes Mr shitz yes and no motion passes four five yes thank you thank you thanks bye should we take a two minute break okay uh the time is 652 we're going to take five minutes for e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e thank you all right the time is 7:03 we are back to hear application 2024-the 22 East block 7303 Lot 1 to request for preliminary and final site plan use variants um for an expansion of the Toyota dealership this is the continued application from September 17 2024 how are you good evening Madam chairwoman for the record my name is J Bone I'm an attorney with the law firm of Schiller piter and G PC I represent the applicant let me let me just put on the record before we start that all members of the board who did not who were not present last month have viewed the videotape and signed an affidavit to that effect so all members of the board are eligible to hear this matter thank you thank you at at the end of the last meeting we were given some homework to uh make some plan revisions we had the assistance of a meeting onsite with your board planner and board engineer um so I I plan first to present uh the redirect test of our engineer Josh Tiner to describe the plan changes and the results of that meeting of course to address any other questions that the board may have I have our other Witnesses here tonight and whether they come up will depend upon if we believe that their testimony is here to answer any further questions that the board has so first I'd ask Mr Tiner to come up Mr Tiner was previously sworn and qualified is engineer we're going to just swear a minut again but the qualification carries over raise your right hand do you swear or affirm to tell the truth please State your full name spell your last name State your business address thank you Mr Tiner I see you you brought some exhibits with you would you like me to help and the out to the board test there we go Council for the record have these been previously placed into the record are these new exhibits yes yes we'll have him described them okay I think we're up to 84 thank you this is just a packet y have says it's eight eight pages of a packet for the purpose of uh supporting topics as I as I go again I think we're well let me know when you're ready and and since the last meeting have you submitted revised plans to the board yes we did and what is the last revision date of those uh believe it's October 3D 2024 I'm going to ask you to describe for the board what the revisions were but if you can take that in whatever order you think most def effect yep all right so just for background we had the site visit on site with Miss Mr mrea and Mr disco and uh we reviewed the project the site plan um mainly with the goal of finding more green space I think um that was one of the main goals so um in this new exhibit on page two of eight this is where it kind of like helps it to pop out um there's basically five spots around the front where we we added some more grain space it would be inside this I guess we won't put it on screen Jen or I can do it yeah there's a spot here um right inside the first corner of parking two islands Peninsula type islands where signs are proposed we're going to be added as Green Space excuse me is this R2 in the lower right hand corner yes R2 in the lower right hand corner oh I said page two yeah it's the second page of eight sheets but I didn't I didn't know how they were marked for evidence I'm just trying to yep perfect that's what we're looking at there's a uh off to the left hand sign right near the word Lawrence Road you can see where it seems like extra wide of green space and some looks like there's some additional trees that that was a striped area around the perimeter that got added and then coming along to the back in between goes from light gray to darker gray there's um sort of an L shape in in the lower right hand corner of the green that's here that area was also like a hatched stripe area and in the conversation um we got the impression that mainly around the perimeter was the place where we would try to find these these additional green spaces and um those were the ones that were identified in the meeting that we we talked about adding Green Space um the island in the front Center I did get a little bigger just because we uh just reconfigured signage a little bit um so the other main real change to the site plan was the two crosswalks that we added to delineate the pathway over from the building over to this this inventory parking so that is really if you can see this sort of curved Arch feature there's a crosswalk that we added here that cuts across both aisles of traffic and then um there's another crosswalk here just creating a pathway across where Vehicles if they were coming into the service Drive they would they would give this an opportunity to cross over there um yeah the second one is if you see the four arrows pointing into the building right behind those two arrows are like five big fat white bars that that that creates a crosswalk I see it okay yep and there's signs in front of each of the crosswalks that are basically um mutcd that's the standards for traffic signage of pedestrian science that we're going to put there just to make it safe and it's obvious that there's pedestrians Crossing there um and then other little things just got cleaned up because of that based on having to add the crosswalks and shift some things around some of the striping is slightly tweaked and um we reconfigured lighting a little bit but lighting is still consistent with there being no impact to the neighboring properties as was discussed last time um also then architecturally if we go to sheet seven of the packet there is you can see in the elevations that are in the submission but on sheet seven of the packet which isn't really a numbered sheet but it's the one that's closer to the word service reception the bigger the bigger proposed architectural elevation there's some windows that got added to the side of the building there so that was part of the request is that we break up that large uh feature with just some windows to create some additional so what were some of the results of this whole change to the the coverage really the bulk requirements of the HC zone are generally unchanged but the max lock coverage requirement of 63% is still an existing non-conformity but it's improved from 92.1 2% down to 91.5 7% so we have less impervious coverage on the site likewise in the I40 Zone there's just one little tiny Corner very small area that did have green space added so we improved that from 81.7 5 down to 81.7 four% um so also during our meeting um there was just some discussion about this area going back to I'm I'm sorry we're going to shoot back to sheet two again um this area down here on the lower left is gray area we um it's an area of existing parking spaces and while we were on the site meeting we just had a conversations about whether or not that had historically been paved and have been parking and we had looked into historical aerial photos from early on and saw that yes it had been um parked with vehicles pretty much from the Inception of the site um but we also while we looked at it its condition is like Graal it's really millings what millings are are old old asphalt that got chopped up and then put there and what happens in with Milling since it's asphalt it melts in and creates a hard packed surface so it's pretty firm and solid it's not like gravel but that's what that condition is and since there are some section of the ordinance that require parking areas to be paved and have Curbing and striping and lighting um we're going to need to seek relief for that so Mr disco helped us identify where that would be in the ordinance and so we added that to the plan set as a part of the application um just that those that that area is requiring some relief because it's an existing non-conformity to remain um parking the total number of parking remains compliant based on the significant unstriped inventory just as we testified before um the service drive queuing again now it has crosswalks um there's pedestrian signage is added um regarding drainage in general a revised drainage design was resubmitted with the application to address a topic that Mr disco had raised to me uh earlier and um we believe we've addressed that comment but there was no review yet we believe that marent is continue to be TOS satisfy Mr disco's drainage comments during resolution Appliance if the board so chooses to approve the application um signage is the other thing that's that's worth talking about um just based on some of the discussions we had with Mr mrea I I did a much deeper dive into into the signage existing and proposed because I wanted to be more clear on the plans what we were actually doing um nothing significant change from what was on the plans but we put we put into the application packet um an analysis of what all the existing signs and what would be then removed and replaced and or proposed so there's 17 existing site signs and then between removals Replacements and new additions there's a net six additional signs being added um so that results in 23 total proposed signs this is freestanding signs um and so going on to sheet three of the packet which is EX3 or exhibit 3 which is on the screen yeah okay so in the convers ations with Mr mrea I think we all agree that most of the signs were um directional helpful for traveling around a site knowing where people would go but this one sign which was a certified used vehicle sign which again the to the right hand side that's the proposed sign and this Max height of 22 feet requires relief because this is at 29 feet 8 in this sign is located on if we look back to the Sheep prior exhibit to again this this sign is proposed in now one of these little green islands that we added up here the existing tall one that's 40t tall is in this Green Island over here more to the east that little green Island that sticks out there to the West a little fur I mean further to the east I got that backwards the existing 40 foot sign is further to the West that way and that one remains but now it's in a green space the new one the 29 ft sign is here um we're removing this sign as you can see on EX3 which is a certified used vehicle sign it's a 17t tall sign um it's an old Lo if you drive around and see Toyotas throughout the state you'll see this sign this is no longer the brand typical signage for certified used vehicles the new one is the new one that we were proposed so um we just wanted to make it really clear that this is very important to the brand um if you would grant that relief that's why it's proposed um early in the conversation it seemed like a very similar sign to the 40 foot existing Toyota sign but um it does serve a purpose from the Brand's perspective and and that's why they're seeking that relief uh for compliance with that um other topics then minor minor changes to lighting we've added some Landscaping um again we have we're perfectly willing to take feedback in any other review letters for resolution compliance associated with Landscaping um to just satisfy Mr mrea as a condition of approval we don't what we've proposed we believe is appropriate but they might he might have some other comments and we'd work with that um I do have the list of variances then variances and waivers it's a list of 22 items is it's very similar to last time um I could run through it just to put everything on the record but it really does map to what is shown on the cover sheet these this list of of the regular set list of variances and waivers um is there a preference I know some people talked about the Yankee game being on tonight but I could read this list if you'd like I just have one I just have one question sure going back to the second page um the parking lot in the lower left hand corner you said parking lot that you going to use as a parking L yes so yes the lower left there's really not many vehicles in there now historically what I understand is that they would like put a a vehicle there that maybe got towed in off a wreck or it was a vehicle that like a lease ran out and they didn't really have a that's where they would store the lease when it came out of the lease um so it's unstriped it's solid it's safe it's it's it's an appropriate place for vehicles but the question that I have looking at it from this from this description here it's surrounded by grass so how vehicle's going to get in there if you drive them over to Grass that's that's wrong this this this is this should be gray right here you're right that's that that's that that is actually also paved right up through here and just a good eye we're not going to change what the current condition is it the current condition is it was it's a storage area it's a storage of vehicles but what it was historically probably it had been paved many many years ago became into disrepair and the way that then the prior owners had resolved that was that they acquired some millings from a project of someone probably disposing of millings and it was placed there to stabilize it and did a very good job of stabilizing this area and basically restoring it to a stable condition where Vehicles could be they were sinking into the mud anecdotally I heard um yeah okay so the you you mentioned that there was an error on this that there would be access to this area from where again I'm sorry oh yeah so right so the the vehicle if you're coming in off a Lawrence this is actually a very good uh topic to talk about uh Del delivery vehicles can come in here they can actually back into this Parts building and then as they drive around here off to the right there's a driveway that brings you over to that area which is not marked on it's not marked on this colorized exhibit although it is accounted for right off of diamond it it would be it doesn't come off a diamond that that the driveway that comes off a diamond the entrance right yeah right near that entrance is where the driveway is taking you over into that M area and that's actually asphalt there that it's more in here as the millings but yeah so in the impervious calculation we're accounting for that it's just a it was an oversight to have not colored it properly for the record you could actually see on R1 with the aerial you can see how it exists right now and I'm assuming that is not changing yeah correct yeah right on on the first page R1 you can see that that's and did you say that there was relief associated with that well the relief is because um well me I could read these because these are sort of a change from that litany I went through before we're talking about from section 35- 231a parking is required to be on paved areas if you read that ordinance it says parking parking lots are supposed to be on paved areas and then from 23.4 e um it says um lot parking lots shall be made with standardized Paving and lighting and then from 35-25 23.7 it says there should be Curbing and Paving and striping on a parking area so those three different sections of the ordinance identify three sections of relief that we would need technically to continue the existing non-conformity and and this is certainly not a customer parking area it's not an area that the customers will ever have any reason to access yeah it's employee inventory or Vehicles like that it's not a customer location yeah that's so I'll show you why that would be if you look at page one this is your zoning map or the the blue line is the zoning overlay which helps you see that the site is actually in two zoning districts so the northern part of the site is the HC Zone the lower part of the site is the I40 General industrial Zone and if you can see that that part over here of the site at the end of the aisle is in the I40 Zone um and so when we changed this area right here that zoning line cuts through here like this so when we change this from striping to planted Green Space the I40 Zone dropped by 0.01 of impervious so we've identified it for the record and why the 29 from 22 what's why the need for it 29 29 ft that you measured on page three yeah it's 29 but um yeah 29' 8 in so that should be 29.6 6 if if I did decimal right so um the height of this certified pre-owned new brand sign standardized sign at the brand asks the dealers to put into their properties that's the height of that sign and the maximum sign height there's an existing non-conforming condition because we have a 40 foot sign on the site that looks like this but it just has the logo and just says Toyota this proposed sign which is the standardized Toyota sign is 29 ft 8 in tall and that's its function for the purpose of the applicant is that it it identifies that there's certified use vehicles on the property that used to be identified by a sign that looked like this and this is going away in our application so now we have this instead but this one needs relief you're going to have a total of 23 of these no no the application shows and this we could I'd have to open up we can open up the plan set the application shows that there's only one of that sign and that's the one that's I'm bringing up because it's sort of the one in question from the conversation with Mr Mista the on sheet 10 or actually it's probably better to look at sheet 11 you can see the different kinds of freestanding signs there's 23 different signs but they're they're like one says Toyota night drop another one will say um exit thank you for visiting or this one says sales and service in that direction sales and service that way some say Chrysler Jeep Dodge Ram and so they're just they're kind of traffic orienting some of them have a Toyota logo on them but they're all really there for guidance and circulation so that people know how to go where they go and and in general how high are those those are they 5 ft tall so you're only putting one sign in that for 29.6 yesing the 4 foot no no the 40 foot remains a 17t sign is being replaced by a 29 ft sign along the road that they would be this would all be clearly marked on sheet 11 uh no sheet sheet 10 and she 10 kind of shows with a little picture where each sign is so so if you looked at sheet 10 you'd see um existing sign E9 is the 40 foot sign and that's the one that's in the island to the left um off to the West it's sort of on what Jen has that's maybe the older exhibit I didn't bring that one but um I didn't update that colorized version of this but if you zoomed in there along the the road you could see that tall one there is to the left that one that's the existing sign of remain that's 40 ft and then any other sort of new island that I showed is is proposed sign 17 now on the new plan anyway it's probably not labeled here but sign 17 is that certified pre-own on both sides of the sign with a label every other sign is yeah like a 5 foot tall sign maybe some might be six and a half or something like that but they're all lowly Direction directional signs so it can I ask a question you finished um so I'm I'm a little confused so if you were to like take out one of those six foot sections of the sign and drop it down what is the reason that sign has to be so tall could you make it like a 24t high or 22t high sign I I think that's Mr CA is here he testified last time I'll bring him up to to address the The Branding and and essentially the manufacturer requirements what is available so this is a a a sign that's well I guess we could ask it's a it's it's a sign authorized by Toyota they have I believe they have certain sizes that that you can you can buy it's not customade because this particular dealership wants this particular size but I'll I'll let I I think that yeah I mean just at least in terms of so you understand our process there's a sign vendor named Patterson that is authorized to design the signage on the properties for toy Toyota Global I think and so um at least around here because we always work with them if we're working on a Toyota project so um patteron gives us a site plan and says this is what we want you to put where and then we put it on a plan and then P they review it and say okay this is brand approved now go see if you can get it approved with the town that's you know what I mean like so that's kind of like how so if we said no it's not approved you wouldn't have a sign or they wouldn't be happy as a Brandon I mean he probably has to speak to what kind of find that puts them in I'm just saying of facts but is it the actual sign or is it the sign with the height of the pole I just measured the the highest point of that sign that well that one needs relief because it also doesn't have it's not on a pole oh it's actually oh that is that whole yeah that whole thing is like from the ground to the 29 ft the thing in the middle is a side profile of it that the actual lettering and logo is a much smaller part of the surface area yeah the surface area itself is the sign there's no there's no pole underneath of it so actually one of the points of relief is that if something doesn't have like 7 feet clear that it needs relief and we don't have that so that's one of our signage Varian is that we've asked for Relief on okay any other questions from the board okay I'm going to turn to our professionals Mr disco uh I'll stick to the storm water stuff so as the testimony was they further increased Green Space and Landscaping on it they gave you the percentages as far as the lower left corner that EX prehistoric uh parking area I I don't see any need to require them to pave that that is an area that no customer will ever see most likely it's just for the inventory of a vehicle so as far as the site plan goes they added the crosswalks I think the the signs is where you're going to to focus in thank you Mr machetta sure thank you um I agree with Mike uh they bless you they slightly reduced the amount of impervious we went up walked out in the site we added some more landscape islands along around the perimeter of the parking lot so I think that was a benefit to our meeting um I think the main question that remains for the board to consider is the signs the sign variances the number of signs and so forth um as they depicted on EX3 which is right up on the board right here behind me um that's just one of the one of the variances for the signs about approximately 200 ft further west along Route 22 there's another sign that says Toyota that sign is 40 foot 4 in high and it's just has the Toyota brand um our ordinance says 22 foot is the maximum height for freestanding sign the existing Toyota Toyota sign is 40t 4 in approximately 200 feet down along 22 they want another sign that's 29 ft 8 in so it's a it's multiple variances it's the number of freestanding signs it's the height of the sign it's the square footage of the sign and as the board uh chair pointed out before from grade up to S feet is supposed to not be or open right from from grade to S feet above and that is all one structure that goes all the way down to the ground so that's that s foot clearance is just one more variance for not just this sign but all of the freestanding signs that are being proposed so I think majority of the freestanding signs that are proposed though are all interior to the site and it's a lot different but when you get on 22 I think that's the point of the board's discussion or Focus other point that I have is just to clarify on sheet 10 of modified or the amended site plans I just want to clarify if I'm there's a lot of signs so I don't know if I got this right but on the handout that you see up here uh the board members and the testimony was existing signage E8 is to be removed which is one of the freestanding signs and I just want to clarify on sheet 10 of the site plan drawings there's a E8 and it states to remain freestanding sign I just want to make sure it's not misnumbered or misl labeled or if we have the right sign that's being removed there or not let me just check this out that's just a cleanup item we don't I don't have to waste the board time with that I just want to just make sure that we at some point that table gets cleaned up and then my third point is uh the testimon is correct they list all the variances that they're requesting but what the variance what the specific variance request is is not identified for example total number of freestanding signs is one per dealership um they ask for that relief but we don't get the number next total number of total area of free standing signs is 75 square feet whereas the ask is what I just want to clarify that so that should the board look favorably upon the application there should be the second part of each variance request what is the specific number so that it would become part of the record those are my three points thank you you're welcome I'm in agreement with the third Point not that I'm not in agreement with the other two but the third point do we have those numbers to State on the record we are those available for I don't have that calculated at the moment yeah okay I didn't yeah it hadn't been presented that that would be I mean we could certainly put that on the plan as a condition of approval so that's clear and even could get put into a resolution maybe um I don't have that information at the moment without having those numbers I can't see how we could give an approval for that because it's a blanket approval for the signs without knowing the details yeah I mean I'm not going to be able to do that on the spot um you know I think with Mr mrea we could all we can do is make sure that he agrees with how we calculate those numbers and then I hate to have to come back I mean I don't know what else to to say I don't have the I don't have the ability to produce the total conglomerate of how the how we would agree that he interprets that relief um you know it's it's a quite a it's quite a few things we've listed each of the items that required relief um that's what we understood was going to be required for this all right so let's do this because let's let's have a signed discussion um so you'll know eventually what you will need to calculate for us um any members of the public have any questions for Mr Tiner Tiner I no no no I know I know but we're going to call it Mr Cantina right right to discuss how the the sign why it was chosen right so we're going to have that discussion so I was opening it to the public for just questions on what was the the testimony given now for the engineer Mr MCD also right okay MCD is here and I expect to to recall him after Mr okay I do have one question so the the ordinance required the signs to be on a pylon 7 fet Up I assume it's so for visibility for the so the fact that they're putting they want to do these other types of signs does that affect the safety or ability for people to manipulate on the site and see things but these signs being so different I I don't want to go into Mike's area of site triangles and I don't want to testify as an engineer I will state that the two freein the the free signs that I'm looking at uh sign 17 and existing sign E9 which are the the focus of my conversation with the board the existing 40 foot 4 in sign and the proposed 29 foot 8 in sign appear to be both located within a landscaped Island that you would have a there's a parking space for cars on both sides of it so for what that's worth you're going to have a a car parked on both sides of the bottom of these signs if that makes sense with the sign freestanding sign in the middle in this landscaped Island so while the top of a car is not as great as s feet you know the obstruction is there at the eye level or the ground level with the park with the with the car itself on both sides sandwich on both sides of the signs it's far enough enough in from the highway that we're not concerned about yeah I don't see a dimension I don't see a dimension there it's a it's a good question I don't see a dimension of what the sign is set back off of the property line our ordinance requires 10 feet and if they hold that 10 feet and it's within a island that's wrapped with cars on both sides I would be comfortable with that yeah there there's no expectation from the exit going on to Route 22 that these signs would pose a problem in terms of the the visibility um they're both in the island as Michael said um I believe the one to the east is certainly where inventory parking is they could put on the record whether the one on the west is where inventory parking is I believe it is the customer parking seems to be um identified between the sign and the building and the other uh parking Bank um so from a visibility standpoint most likely not going to be an issue they should put it on the record the sign that's there it's already there sorry that's already there corre correct yes so it's 229 foot sign 129 to the west of the 40 foot sign approximately 200 feet west of with the removal of one sign at 17 feet 6 in and a proposed sign of 29 ft 8 in okay I have a qu how far is this new sign going to be from mo22 itself uh the new sign is approximately um well from the the cartway it's about 35 ft from the property line it looks like it's about half that 17 could be 30 question um as you all know like modern light posts on highways when they're hit by a car they break away so the car doesn't get wrapped around it um what I'm point I'm getting at is if it's that close if it's within even 35 ft from a high from 22 cars are doing 50 60 miles an hour on that road even though it's above the speed limit they still do it anyway um car hits that sign is that sign going to how is it anchored into the ground is it going to break away so the car doesn't get destroyed or is it going to be solidly anchoring to the ground so so God forbid a car would hit that it would just get total I mean do you know anything about how that sign's going to be built I I mean that my opinion is that they would it would be anchored firmly and you wouldn't actually want that sign falling over yeah because and it is set actually you can see the line of it it's it's five six feet behind the line of the actually light poles that are proposed so it's between parked inventory Vehicles so it I'm not saying people don't fly off the road and hit things they certainly do um it's it's behind the line of light poles the light poles are probably more likely to get hit first um and I agree with um both of the testimony Mike like if if anyone's ever left this site and you're just looking to try to get into Route 22 traffic you're not seeing any of the parking lot or the signs you're it's very good visibility to the highway Mr Mr Tiner on your um sheet 10 yeah you have the um proposed sign chart or table I should say and it has some sizes in there could you identify which of those are freestanding signs and which would exceed the 75 Square F feet um yeah we can because I actually that would help at least narrow the that one issue yeah so this chart on page 10 I don't know if everyone wanted to pull it out it's it's got some complexities to it but I wanted to be really clear and I do see Mr Mist correct we have a typo um existing sign E9 on this sheet is existing sign E8 on sheet n so the this the sign that I called the existing sign E8 is the tall one existing sign E9 is the certified pre-owned one that is getting removed and so one way or another one of those two E8 or E9 E9 eight or n are going to be one of those is going to say removed it looks to me like it's the E9 is labeled as 17t high sight on on sheet 10 so let me just get that right E9 is going to be removed then on sheet 10 this should be labeled as existing sign E8 just so we're clear sorry apologize for that error um so exist there's several existing signs that are remaining and they are E1 is 72 squ ft E2 which remains is 209 Square ft E3 is also 29 squ ft those are cdjr signs on the far side of the drive aisle sign the next sign that remain or the next sign that remains is E5 that's 108 Square ft then I just said E8 is remaining that's 4848 Square ft that's the 40 foot 4 point4 fo sign E9 is not going to remain so that's that comes off the list and we get the rest are being removed or replaced in one way or another but then to the right is P1 right so these are all small signs these are all 8 8.2 squ ft or 11.3 squ ft so they're all smaller than that limitation p17 is this um that's 29 6.7 Square ft so p117 is the new the new large sign that one needs relief and then the rest are existing well there the building mounted signs they're all comp so it seems like there was at least four existing oversiz signs one two three y I'm seeing four four signs that are oversized existing to remain and this one new proposed sign which is really the only one then that requires that item of relief as a new sign 2 96.7 were those other signs approved the 40 foot high the um the last time they were before the board a couple years ago was just a service building to the rear um I think we had commented that or researched that the last previous proposal uh on the highway was quite some time ago so okay point is it's not in a vacuum you already have four existing oversiz signs so the question is you have to have a compelling reason to add to that okay so I think we should talk about the reason for adding those and that would be to bring up Mr K um so let me just one more time ask if there's any member of the public that has any questions for Mr Tiner I see none do you swear firm to tell the truth I do once again please State your full name spell your last name give us your business address sure Joe ktina cat 170 Route 22 East Springfield would you just remind the board the position you hold with the app sure I'm the vice president and general manager of Borderland the board has expressed uh curiosity as to why the certifi proposed new certified use car is theze sure if you're on my I'm G to stand because I've been sitting all day so Toyota is requiring or actually you know they changed their whole brand image okay from license plate frames to you know license plate inserts to that sign so the existing sign that's there right now which is the 17 sign is going away and we are you know they're requesting requiring us to add new sign now a new sign is I don't know if it's plastic or fiberglass and of course then you you have the metal po that's insert if you look at the dealerships that have went through their new imag everyone has that Tye of sign that size sign on their this is what the manufacturer is required from us pson who does all the signage they come out and they service the signs on a quarterly basis they come with their sign they they look after the sign so you never have an ice or or you know something like with the older sign that we're looking to replace you know what rustv is on the bottom of the sign the metal pole whatever else this is a big beautiful sign clearly you know illustrates what the sign is you know advertising the fact that you know we have certified vehicles on our property does Toyota look at the site and see what is existing and say okay you need to now replace and Rebrand this sign but this main 40ft sign can stay because that meets our requirements but you need all of these signs yes okay there's two separate signs you know one is showing that we are Toyota dealership the other one is showing that we sell Toyota Certified cars on Toyota's branding side they actually have basically they almost look at it as two different you know two different entities you have their CPO sales unit which is their certified pre-owned sales unit and then you have their new car sales unit as well as you know the service department so you know when they go over numbers on on their monthly end everything is broken down you have your new car sales you have your certified pre-own sales so that is the reason for okay and so when you submit a plan to them or how how does it work how does it work when you're choosing the signs they basically come to us and state this is the signage requ okay and so is it the look of the sign could you go back and say okay well we can't really have it at 29 ft because that's not what the code in this town States so could we have this sign custom made at right they're telling us they want it they would love to have it at 40 you know they're telling us they wanted at9 just so this sign is going to east of the existing wait we said West it is east east okay so I just want to I just want tole up I don't want there to be any confusion because if you're looking west of it we're going to be in you know acurus parking right so it's east of 4ot and it's just two signs on 22 the 40 foot that exists we have two signs right now right the 17t sign which is going away okay which is going away and we have the 40 foot sign which is yes so ultimately there's still two right now there are two signs two exist existing signs certified pre-own sign which is 17t and then the 4 sign yes and there was no requirement to replace those that's a different right that's that's different oh right on the other side of the driver I understand I'm sorry okay I got it so when you're looking at signs you guys even consider what the current the locals ordinances what do signs before or is just like that's disregarded and well nothing's ever disregarded and I can guarantee you that Toyota knows basically every Town's ordinance okay you know where they're at this is again when you look at you're saying there's no other option this is the this is the option we have so if they know the ordinance say no that well you might be see if you can do this but here's the alternative if you can't J I would you know defer that to you because right now like I said we've this is this is what they ad about adding and they can't give you a sign that's 22 feet it can only be 29 I don't know if there's a sign that's available for 22 Fe I I I don't know what happens if we say no to that sign that the heights the height is there any wiggle room is there any somewhere along the line somebody had to say no we're not going we're not you as Toyota aren't telling us what to do we're we're uh describing or we're working according to our ordinances right so if we say we're sticking with our ordinance what does toota do I'm hoping we don't get to I'm I'm again but that's not the answer I I understand that and that's you know again speaking quite frankly that's you know that's where we're hoping at again the presentation that we presented and you going moving not adding another sign moving a sign place a sign I thought he said you were adding you were going from 17 to 23 well he's talking about the the the brand sign at the highway the most of those other signs we are directional telling you how to get around the sign s so because not only are you you're over the height you're also correct me if I'm wrong but there's a it's supposed to be whole not full space under seven feet right it's a s fo clearance right so you we which your current sign does have no yes well the 17 foot sign does the brand sign does not right okay so this is basically an identical sign to the brand sign but being short from 40t to 2T to 29 and if you went back to them and said we have to be within 22t you don't know if that's something that's even produced at this point can can I ask what would be the reason that we would approve a sign that's non conforming at 29 fet instead of 22 aside from Toy Toyota wants that I think that's a it's Mr MCD I think one of things that gets us here persp are there any other questions for Mr CA no I would like his question to answer yeah okay any of our any of our professionals have any questions okay any members of the public have any questions for the testimony that was just given no all right let's talk to Mr McDon you swear affirm to tell the truth yes I do please state your name spell your last name give us your office address sure hi there again everyone my name is John McDon that's Bel MC capital d n o u My office address is over in Paran 101 jalta drive and you were uh approved as an expert uh at the last meeting which we'll carry over correct okay so the board seems particularly interested right now in signs and particular the 29 change fo High Toyota certified used cars so we'll take first the quantity of signs that are out there reminding the board we pointed to the aggregate area of the property last time this is a massive property in the context of your Highway commercial Zone district and your industrial district in in the back um it's about 20 times larger than the minimum zoning requirement so to the extent the board may feel that there's a lot of signs on this property the zoning ordinance to a degree says that's okay because this site could be cut up into many smaller Parcels that would have roadside signs with them as well the frontage along Route 22 is more than seven times zoning requirements so again we could have seven frontages here we could have seven signs along the front edge again so as a planner whenever I consider relief that an applicant is seeking always have to look at what the Zone plan would say is okay so along that physical run of Route 22 you could see a similar number of roadside signs and then of course we dive into the site um as Josh walked you through these are circulation AIDS these are navigation AIDS visual cues that on a on a massive site uh that could end up having a you know be a complex driving environment both internally and particularly along Route 22 these will help the driver get through the site so I think given the sheer size of the property um given the fact that the applicant is unifying a property that could be disjointed in terms of multiple other individual retail or other Highway commercial uses I see this as a better zoning alternative and certainly not a substantial departure from what the Zone plan would contemplate in terms of the number of signs that are here and I think the board can move favorably under the balancing test with a benefits of the application as a whole would substantially outweigh the detriments associated with that sign package I think the sign package ties neatly into the use relief that you're being asked to consider as well um I think what the board did and with your professionals input we took a good plan a plan that is going to result in better overall site organization and definition of parking and circulation you know it's a a massive almost free-for-all site now that has evolved over time and this is going to give it nice concentration and definition as a result of the last hearing and then the site meeting we had with your board professionals we've taken a good plan we've made it even better now where it will flow function and operate safely and efficiently and certainly modernize a site that has been a longstanding part of your local landscape so again I think the relief related to the use and the overall site betterment and the sign package as well modernizing some of the older signs that are on on the property again present a better face to the motoring public on 22 that has a positive reflection not only on the site itself but on the image and the identity of the community as a whole looking at Progressive and and keeping up with the times if you will now that additional five or so feet for that that 29f footer 7 ft it's my math off um again I would tie this as a better zoning alternative as well given the Matrix of signs that are along the frontage of the property this sign is not going to appear obtrusive it's not going to be imposing along the road and I don't think anybody driving by is going to see it as non-conforming given what's around it you have taller signs um so I don't think this is going to stand out as as an overly large sign in the public realm so again I think it's important here to consider that this is going to benefit an established business with a long-standing commitment to the community it produces jobs produces ratables all of that I think goes towards the the public interest as well and it cleans it up it modernizes it uh and I think that sign falls into the overall betterments that I spoke about last time so we have to look at the degree of departure from The Zone plan um it is several feet above what the ordinance would require but given the physicality of the site the physicality of the landscape around it I don't see this as being a substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of your Zone plan and ordinance and certainly not a substantial detriment to the public at large and and given that that there are two existing Toyota signs with different um branding motifs is there a planning benefit unifying that to have the two signs be essentially the same appearance rather than one being the older brand identity yes again it's a modernization it's an integration as well uh providing a a display to the the roadside public that I think is a better integration than that which is there now from the I I do have a question about I see that um and you're not the architect so I don't know if this is appropriate talk person I talk to about I see that you added windows on the side that's facing 22 I would like to suggest that you take that freeze and you you run it along that side as well that because that is it is facing the uh the highway there and it's kind of looks like an old western set where you just see the front of it and it doesn't wrap around I think it would look a lot better I'm I'm seeing head nods from the applicant so I'll stipulate to yes and I it's another uh Improvement to the plan another good Improvement any other questions any members of the public have any questions I'm sorry profal have question just a reminder that for um with car dealerships we have a five acre minimum requirement in our ordinance so we're talking about the testimony it's an it is an oversized site it's a large site but there's a 5 acre minimum requirement for the car dealership operation any members of the public sorry I um you had mentioned there was other sign up there that's not just specific to Toyota um that's of the same height levels what are we referring to there with regards to height level there's the 40-footer that Josh had and I may have to defer to Josh to walk us through sign by sign as just generally like a range we don't and we're referring to to sheet 10 on the revised plans okay if you look at at existing sign E2 indicates a height of just under 35t E3 which is a little bit further to the West height of little over 36 ft so the the the signs out there right now are of that high level and I assume were previously approved yes there there there there those two which which are Chrysler Jeep one for the new car one for the certified used car for those brands are in between the 29 ft proposed for the Toyota certified use car and the 40 ex Toyota and do they current are they currently on a poll with the seven foot clearance or no they're like a yeah we're talking about Eastern cor the site any further questions I just have a question professionals you just your comments just uh that you just made regarding the uh minimum 5 AC site you referring to the use variants no I'm sorry I was just referring to U as Mr mcdunn was testifying describing the site how it is an oversized site and I agree with that is definitely an oversized site um but it's not quite as over it doesn't the size of the site gets a little bit smaller when you take in consideration auto dealerships in our Township which has a five acre minimum requirement that's the point that I was trying to make okay and the only expound upon that is the ordinance doesn't say that the site has to be in order dealership point I was trying to make is that 20 retailers could go here right can I clarify thank you look looking at page 10 was revised October 3rd there's a chart that shows all of the signs I I'm trying to reconcile that with testimony that there are 23 proposed signs that chart seems to have more than 23 signs I'm trying to figure out just exactly I question I think the board has exactly what's being proposed for signs and we're trying to figure out where that information is set for if you look all the way to the right the chart says total I labeled every sign that would remain as F like it's a final sign final 1 2 3 4 and it comes up to f23 although I think it's going to be F22 because we are to have the one typo that says remain so so you're looking at sheet 10 yes so the signs that are listed as being replaced there a second line which contains the sign is being replaced with right that's when it says replac it says C p13 so you know which one it's kind of replaced with it's a either in kind or yeah so the actual proposed signs are F1 through f23 yes the the final condition will be F1 through f23 thank you through F22 no but some yeah F22 because tell me the cuz the 17t is marked as right E9 say remain and that's F6 that will go away this table in compliance will be renumbered as F1 through five on the left and then 6 through 22 on the right 23 okay and I do I I I know it would be tedious and cumbersome but I think if the board really did want we probably do have enough data that we could go through every relief item line by line here tonight identify it call out where it is and what it is it would take us a little while but we could do that if we thought that that was necessary well I think what I would propose if we were to proceed would be a condition that with the change the removal of the 17 foot sign that the signs will be constructed in conformance with compliance with this chart so that all of the height and sizes that are listed here they would be limited to that so it would not change from what has been listed here yeah yes that absolutely okay so let's do this are there any other questions for the witnesses yes I'm just I'm GNA add a caveat to that look at on that chart at p7 um which is the the sign in question the the 29f footer I believe yes Mr Tiner is that accurate P 17 is that sign that looks like a typo yeah the height says five feet that that's really the 29 right foot sign are all the others so we're going to remove the 17 footer so it would come down to 22 signs and you're going to amend the chart to also indicate that p7 is at 29 ft correct 66 as a height yes right the height is are all the other those all those smaller ones are that's accurate yes p7 is the freestanding sign the new the new free sing sign sign yes the the used car sign and and just to clarify again that's one sign with two faces I think earlier might have been confusing so cor another question what is the tolerance when it has plus or minus what is your tolerance level on that each sign has a plus or minus maybe we should use an approximately these are it's going to be like grading couple inches from where we vertically said a little bit of dirt climbed up onto the side of the thing or you know so that's what I'm saying what is the 2 and half in plus or minus gives you where and half two two and a half inches okay it's only yeah very close this is it's this Dimension sign and just how like they install it grading might change across one of the you know yeah Toyota says exactly for the toall sign here their willing to have a little bit of Tolerance that's me I'm putting the tolerance because I know that the grading is going to I know it just seems to me to it just seems to me to be inconsistent Toyota is very specific spefic about the the height of the sign from their base to the highest point of the of the sign we will only have 22 not Bruce has that he has that here f17 B7 B7 p7 so on that on P 17 what is a square footage then 27 296.32 and that's 2 96.7 on each side Okay you Okay uh any other questions none any members of the public have any questions any members of the public wish to speak on this application okay um so anyone have anything to say with respect to the application no um I'm in favor of granting preliminary and final site plan with the relief s um I think we have a few conditions that we want to put on the record um I do think that the testimony satisfied the proofs that are required for the signs um and I think that the testimony also satisfied the rationale for why these signs were chosen so um I'm in favor of granting the relief related to those freestanding signs along with um the other signage that is proposed on the site um I do appreciate that you came back with the greenery um I think that there was a condition with respect to the freeze the panel uh extending to the uh side of the building which would be the western side of the building um right as expanded so one of the conditions um would be for the paneling the freeze that is across the front of the building to extend to the western side of the building so turn the corner correct wrap the building uh condition with respect to signage is one the applicant is limited to the signage that is is listed on page 10 of the plans with the two changes that were stated on the record one E9 is going to be removed the 17 foot freestanding sign and two which brings us down to a count of overall 22 signs and two p17 is going to be amended to indicate that it's at a height of 29 ft um 29 that was my next one the second condition with respect to the signage and the chart would be that the plus or minus is not to exceed 2 and a half inches so give or take when you're two and a half inches grade okay did we have any conditions that were um placed on the record at the previous do we I I believe that everything that was discussed was addressed the Amendments that were presented okay I don't have any other conditions that I wrote down unless our professionals do just a catch all uh STM order for the njd okay I'm sorry storm water a catch all for uh ultimate review by the township engineer for okay D JD major development compliance we want to say anything about that one area the parking where it just hatched wrong where there was no way to get to it that they're going to adjust that that rendering I don't think that has to be a condition we'll we'll catch it in resolution compliance it didn't change the number and if I can just for the record sheet P10 is the revised version updated on October 3rd 2024 any other conditions okay with that is there a motion to approve I'll move to approve is there a second Mr hin yes chair Cunningham yes Mr yes yes yes yes and yes thank you very much everyone for your time with this and congratulations motion to adjourn second all in favor I thank you