Jun 25, 2024 Zoning Board

[I. ROLL CALL]

[00:00:05]

TO THE MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD. MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, SOMERSET COUNTY, NEW JERSEY. THIS IS THE REGULAR MEETING THAT WAS SCHEDULED ON JUNE 25TH, 2024. THE TIME IS NOW 7 P.M. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT. NOTICE OF THE TIME AND PLACE OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTED AND SENT TO THE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED NEWSPAPERS, SHERRI, COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? HERE. ROSENTHAL HERE. LOZOVSKY. HERE. BRUNS. HERE.

WALLMARK. HERE. WOOD. HERE. URBANSKI. HERE. SHAH. MEHTA DRILL. HERE. LAVALLEY HERE.

BARLOW. DAJI. PRESENT. FISSINGER. HERE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. EVERYBODY RISE FOR THE PLEDGE. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. ALL RIGHT. AS, AS WE NORMALLY DO, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE SESSION UP WITH, PUBLIC COMMENT, JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION IS FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT, ON TODAY'S AGENDA. SO IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS THAT ARE OF A GENERAL NATURE FOR THE BOARD, YOU CAN, COME BEFORE THE BOARD AND SPEAK. I'M HEARING NONE, SO WE'LL GO ON TO OUR RESOLUTIONS, FIRST RESOLUTION IS

[IV. RESOLUTIONS]

LOTS 38 AND 39 240 ROLLING HILL ROAD, WHICH IS A MINOR SITE PLAN AND USE VARIANCE TO REPLACE THE TENNIS HUT AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM. PUMP HOUSE, FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE AGAIN, I HAVE A MOTION TO MEMORIALIZE AND THIS ONE IS LAST DATED JUNE 18, 2024. AGAIN, A VERSION THREE. I MAKE A MOTION TO MEMORIALIZE. THANK YOU. MR. WOULD A SECOND MR. WOMACK. THANK YOU. SHERRY, CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. BLAZAWSKI YES. BLODGETT. YES. WOMACK. YES. WOULD. YES. AND BRUNS. YES.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE TO OUR APPLICATIONS FOR TONIGHT. THERE IS ONLY ONE, THIS IS CASE

[V. APPLICATION]

[00:05:01]

BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT JUST JUST FOR THAT REPORT, I THINK. AND I THINK HIS WITNESS NEEDS TESTIFY.

RIGHT, BUT DO YOU WANT TO FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION THIS EVENING AND HAVE HIM PUT IT IN, OR DO YOU WANT TO FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION? TOTALLY. WHETHER THAT TAKES THIS MEETING OR ANOTHER MEETING OR WHATEVER, AND THEN HAVE HIM PUT IT IN AS PART OF HIS OBJECTORS CASE? THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. YES YOU HAVEN'T PUT IT IN AS PART OF HIS OBJECTORS CASE. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE'S ANY, YOU KNOW, NECESSARY REBUTTAL FOR STORMWATER, WE CAN WE CAN ADDRESS THAT. SO IN MY OPINION, THE APPLICANT HAS THE RIGHT TO, YOU KNOW, INSIST ON THAT ORDER.

SO IT SOUNDS REASONABLE TO ME AND OKAY, YOUR HONOR, IT'S OUR RIGHT. YEAH. SORRY. YOUR HONOR, I'M SO USED TO MY APOLOGIES. YOU'RE TALKING TO THE CHAIRMAN. THAT'S RIGHT. YES. YEAH.

OBVIOUSLY. NO. NO PROJECTION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. GREAT ALL RIGHT. I'M SORRY FOR THE INTERRUPTION. PLEASE GO AHEAD. NO, NO. THANK YOU. IF, IF WE MAY, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. VAN ALUCHE NEEDS TO BE SWORN IN AGAIN. HE WAS GOING TO TESTIFY, RIGHT? YOU'VE YOU'VE BEEN. I SWORE YOU IN BEFORE, AND YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE STILL UNDER OATH, CORRECT? YES, SIR. CAN YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD AGAIN? EXCUSE ME? IDENTIFY YOURSELF. YES, LOUIS VAN DULUTH V A N D E L O E C H T ARCHITECT. AND, MR. VAN DER SLOOT WILL BE REFERENCING AN EXHIBIT WHICH WILL BE MARKED EVENTUALLY AS A EIGHT, WHICH IS THE, I ASSUME THAT EXHIBIT EIGHT IS GOING TO BE THAT THE SITE CROSS SECTION. YES. EXHIBIT, WHICH IS SHEET NUMBER A 6.0 DATED JUNE 14TH, 2024. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. I WILL SUBMIT IT TO THE BOARD IN ADVANCE, BUT NOT NOT TEN DAYS IN ADVANCE. IT'LL BE MARKED. ALLOW TO PROCEED. GO AHEAD, MR. VAN, CAN YOU DESCRIBE, THE EXHIBIT, WHICH WILL MARK AS A8, WHICH IS CURRENTLY ON THE SCREEN. YES. SO WHAT THIS IS, DID THE BOARD STENOGRAPHER GET THE IDENTIFICATION OF THAT EXHIBIT? OKAY AND I HAVE AFTER I HAVE COPIES FOR, FOR THE BOARD, HARD COPIES FOR THE BOARD AND FOR THE. YEAH ACTUALLY, CAN YOU HAND THEM OUT NOW, WELL, I HAVE THE LARGE, I HAVE 211 BY 17 FOR THE BOARD RECORD. I DON'T HAVE IT.

YEAH, THAT'S FINE. SO HAND OUT 11 BY 17. AND ALSO, INTO THE FILE SO WE CAN GET A HARD COPY OF THE EXHIBIT IN THE FILE SIZE FOR FILE. OKAY. AND AGAIN, CHERI A8 IS. SHEET NUMBER A 6.0 WHICH IS TITLED. OKAY. SITE CROSS SECTION DASH NORTH SIDE AT RETAIL PLAZA. AND I'LL HAVE A ACTUALLY SORRY THE SITE CROSS SECTION. AND THERE'S THREE SECTIONS ON THE EXHIBIT. THERE'S THE WEST SIDE AT WAWA REALTY RETAIL, WHICH IS ONE THAT'S DETAILED, ONE OVER A 6.02 OVER A 6.0 IS AT THE EAST SIDE AT THE RESIDENCE AND THREE OVER A 6.0 IS NORTH SIDE AT THE RETAIL PLAZA. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO YOU HANDED ONE TO CHERI AND THERE'S TWO ADDITIONAL. THIS RIGHT HERE.

[00:10:01]

YES, YES. THAT'S THE SAME DRAWINGS ON THE SCREEN. AND, AT THE LAST HEARING, THERE ARE SOME REQUESTS FROM, FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND FROM THE BOARD TO PRESENT AN EXHIBIT THAT, SHOWED SOME SIGHT LINES AND SOME PERSPECTIVE BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, I WILL LET MR. VANDERLOO GO THROUGH AND EXPLAIN IN MORE DETAIL, BUT THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF PRESENTING THE EXHIBIT. THIS EVENING. OKAY. SO WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SEEING ON SCREEN, AND I'LL JUST, FOR THE SAKE OF REFERENCE HERE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS A KEY PLAN THAT REFERENCES EACH OF THE THREE ELEVATIONS AND SECTIONS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, SO SECTION ONE IS THROUGH THE REFERENCE OF WAWA IS HERE. ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE. THE RESIDENCE IS ON THE RIGHT, WASHINGTON STREET ON THE SOUTH, AND THE RETAIL PLAZA ON THE NORTH. THE FIRST SECTION KIND OF DOES A CUT SECTION ALL THE WAY FROM ROUTE 206, THROUGH THE WAWA, UP AND THROUGH OUR BUILDING. SECTION TWO THEN CONTINUES THAT THROUGH OUR BUILDING UP ON THE RESIDENCE TO THE EAST OF US. AND SECTION THREE SHOWS IT KIND OF THROUGH THE DRIVEWAY, LOOKING AT THE BUILDING AND THEN DOWN THROUGH THE SHOPPING CENTER IN THE BOTTOM, YOU'LL NOTICE ON EACH OF THE CROSS SECTIONS THERE'S A SMALL ELEVATION NUMBERS RIGHT HERE UNDER THE ROAD. THOSE ARE THE ELEVATION POINTS. AND WE HAD EITHER VIA VIA THE TOPO THAT WE HAD OR AS BEST WE COULD EXTRAPOLATE FROM GOOGLE EARTH IMAGES AND OTHER DATA THAT WE HAD, SO SOME OF THIS IS, IS PULLED OFF GOOGLE, BUT IT'S WE FOUND IT'S FAIRLY ACCURATE FOR WHAT WE HAVE, THE SAME WAY FOR THE WAWA WE EXTRAPOLATED AS BEST WE COULD. WE DON'T HAVE DRAWINGS FOR THAT AS WE COULD FROM GOOGLE EARTH AND FROM, YOU KNOW, PERSPECTIVE IMAGES THAT WE HAVE, WE COULD START TAKING PERSPECTIVE FROM, SAME FOR THE WASHINGTON STREET. THE NUMBER TWO WASHINGTON STREET BUILDING.

AND THEN ALSO AGAIN FOR THE MONTGOMERY SHOPPING CENTER, WHAT YOU'RE ALSO SEEING IN EACH OF THE IMAGES IS IN BOLD LINEWORK. IN THE IN THE FOREGROUND IS THE BUILDING AS WE PRESENTED LAST TIME, NO CHANGES TO THAT BUILDING. THAT IS THE ELEVATION STRAIGHT OUT OF THAT, STRIPPED OF COLOR TO MAKE IT EASIER TO SEE, AND THEN OVERLAID THE HATCHED AREA BEHIND IT. IN THE TAN IS THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT WAS THERE. THE OLD ONE STORY BUILDING HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED AND NO LONGER THERE. IT'S REFERENCED. I BELIEVE THAT WAS HATCHED THE TAN, THE TAN SHADING. OKAY. THE TAN SHADE, THE TAN SHADE. YES, THE TAN SHADING IS THE IS A ONE STORY BUILDING. AGAIN WE PULLED THE FOOTPRINT. WHAT WE HAVE FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND THEN USING OLD GOOGLE EARTH IMAGES TO TRY TO GIVE CLOSE AS WE COULD TO WHAT THAT ELEVATION WAS. AND THEN ALL THE WAY IN THE BACKGROUND, THERE'S A THIN LINE THAT SHOWS ALL THE WAY IN THE BACK. THAT IS THE ORIGINAL BUILDING THAT WAS PROPOSED, ORIGINALLY BEFORE WE DROPPED IT TO A TWO STORY IN HEIGHT, SO WHAT THIS TOP ELEVATION IS SHOWING AGAIN IS JUST KIND OF THE ELEVATION CHANGE FROM OUR BUILDING. THE TWO STORY BUILDING, THE SMALLER BUILDING TO THE EAST, AND THEN DOWN TO THE WAWA AND DOWN TO 206, SAME WAY GOING THROUGH THE EAST SIDE WHERE WE SIT IN RELATION TO THE RESIDENCES ON THE TO THE EAST OF OUR PROPERTY LINE. AND THEN HOW WE SIT IN REGARDS TO MONTGOMERY SHOPPING CENTER AND WHERE WE ARE , ESPECIALLY SHOWING WHERE THE OLD BUILDING WAS IN RELATION TO WHERE WE ARE NOW ON THE FOOTPRINT. AND THEN WE INCLUDED SOME LINE OF SIGHT. SO IF SOMEBODY'S STANDING IN THE SHOPPING CENTER, WHAT THEY WOULD SEE VERSUS IN THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AS WELL. I HAVE, I WILL HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

I'LL ASK FOR THE BOARD, PUBLIC FOR ANY QUESTIONS. QUESTION FOR THE BOARD, A QUESTION FOR THE PUBLIC. YEAH. I THINK WE'LL JUST GO RIGHT TO THE PUBLIC THEN. CHAIRMAN'S ASKING ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS ABOUT THIS EXHIBIT THAT HE JUST WENT THROUGH? A PUBLIC WOULD INCLUDE ANY REPRESENTED.

I FORGOT YOUR NAME AGAIN. MY APOLOGIES. BANDALOOP ANDALOU. I'M SORRY. THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME, MR. VANDERLOO. I'M GOING TO TURN YOUR ATTENTION TO NUMBER THREE. I GUESS THAT'S THE SIGHT LINE THAT YOU HAVE FROM MONTGOMERY SHOPPING CENTER. YOU'RE SHOWING THAT A LOOKS LIKE AN INDIVIDUAL. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. BY THE WAY, IF MY REPRESENTATION OF 40FT FROM THE BUILDING. BUT IF THEY'RE 40FT FROM THE SHOPPING CENTER BUILDING, THEY WOULD NOT SEE YOUR PROPOSED BUILDING, OR THEY ONLY SEE PART OF IT. IS THAT CORRECT THAT IF FROM THE FROM THE SIDELINE, I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT LITTLE PORTION GUY, RIGHT THERE. YES.

IF THAT THAT IS SOMEBODY STAYING 40FT AWAY FROM THE SHOPPING CENTER. THAT'S THE SITE SIX FOOT

[00:15:05]

THERE'S A DYNAMIC ENGINEERING GRADING PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED AT SOME POINT. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WAS EVER MARKED AS AN EXHIBIT. MY APOLOGIES. CAN YOU HOLD IT UP? WHAT CAN YOU HOLD THAT EXHIBIT UP? AND THAT'S PREPARED BY THE APPLICANT ENGINEER? I BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS PREPARED BY THE APPLICANT'S ENGINEER AS AN EXHIBIT. TO DEMONSTRATE THE, TO DEMONSTRATE THE POTENTIAL PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. I DON'T THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY EVER MARKED AS AN EXHIBIT IN THE HEARING, THOUGH. OKAY, I THINK THAT WAS JUST SENSE, LET ME JUST LET ME JUST GO OVER JUST TO MAKE SURE. WHAT I HAVE IN MY NOTES IS ON MARCH 28TH. I HAVE EXHIBIT FIVE, AND THAT'S NOT EXHIBIT FIVE. I HAVE EXHIBIT SIX. THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT EXHIBIT SIX. AND I HAVE EXHIBIT SEVEN, AND THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE PART OF THAT PACKAGE. SO GOING BACK TO JANUARY. IT WOULDN'T BE A ONE.

THE AERIAL MAP EXHIBIT WOULDN'T BE A TWO. THE SITE PLAN RENDERING. IT WOULDN'T BE. WELL, A THREE IS A GRADING PLAN. LAST REVISED DECEMBER 18TH, 2023, WHICH SHOWS THE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY. WHAT'S THE DATE ON THAT DATE? DID YOU SAY THAT MR. BILL? DECEMBER 18TH, 2023. THIS ONE ACTUALLY HAS SOME JUNE 8TH, 2023. SO THAT'S ACTUALLY MORE UPDATED VERSION.

YOU CAN PUT IT IN. OKAY. LET ME ASK YOU, WHERE DID YOU GET THAT EXHIBIT FROM? IF THEY'RE IF THEY'RE ENGINEER, I BELIEVE IT WAS GIVEN TO US BY THE APPLICANT. IT WAS OKAY. SO YOU GOT IT OFF THE TOWNSHIP WEBSITE. HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WHERE WE GOT IT FROM. I CAN'T YOU CAN'T PUT IT IN THERE. I THINK THE DYNAMIC ENGINEERING, I JUST I WANT TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT IF IT'S PART OF THE RECORD OR NOT. IF IT'S NOT, I CAN USE THAT OTHER, OTHER PLAN, I BELIEVE THE ONE THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED. YES, WE COULD MARK IS ON THE SCREEN, UNLESS YOU WANT TO MARK IT AS A MARKET AS M3. OKAY. SO YOU CAN MARK IT M3, THE LAST HEARING, AND BY THE WAY, WHAT DOES WHAT DOES THE M STAND FOR? YOU KNOW, I DON'T I HONESTLY DON'T REMEMBER BUT I FOR MARKING ONLY WOULD THEY WEREN'T INTRODUCED. THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T MAKE IT AN A EXHIBIT OR AN EXHIBIT, THESE ARE. OH OKAY. YEAH. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE TRANSCRIPT FROM LAST TIME.

THAT'S WHY I DID I. YEAH. WELL, MY NOTES SAY WE MARKED THEM M BECAUSE WE MARKED THEM FOR IDENTIFICATION. ONLY NOW, SINCE THAT EXHIBIT THAT HE'S HOLDING IN HIS HANDS WAS PREPARED BY YOUR ENGINEER. WHY DON'T YOU TAKE A TWO MINUTE ASK FOR A TWO MINUTE RECESS? GO BACK, TALK TO YOUR ENGINEER AND FIND OUT IF YOU WANT TO ADMIT THAT AS AN A EXHIBIT, OR IF YOU JUST WANT TO LET HIM MARK IT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHERE HE'S WANTS TO GO WITH IT OR WHAT QUESTIONS HE WANTS TO ASK. YOU KNOW, THE I THINK PART OF IT WAS PARKING FOR THE TIME BEING. THERE WAS A COUPLE OF ITERATIONS OF THIS, I UNDERSTAND. SO CAN DO YOU WANT TWO MINUTES? I'LL TAKE TWO MINUTES. CAN YOU GO FOR TWO MINUTES? WE'LL TAKE A TWO MINUTE RECESS.

OKAY. SO THERE ARE, COUNCIL'S ENGINEER CONFIRMED. JUST WHILE WE TOOK A BREAK THERE FOR A SECOND. THAT THAT A3. AND WHAT I HAVE IN MY HAND ARE THE SAME. OKAY, SO WHY IS IT GOT A DIFFERENT DATE? BECAUSE I WAS READING THE WRONG DATE. I DIDN'T I DIDN'T READ IT RIGHT. I DIDN'T OKAY, SO YOU'RE A DIFFERENT DATE ON IT. SO DO ME A FAVOR RIGHT NOW. RIGHT ON THAT A3. SO WE NEVER HAVE TO DO THIS ISSUE AGAIN. AND NOW YOU HAVE A3. AND YOU'RE GOING TO ASK THE ARCHITECT THE QUESTION ON A3, WHICH WAS PREPARED BY THE ENGINEER. YEAH. IT'S A IT'S A

[00:20:03]

[00:25:03]

CHASE. COREY. CHASE. I YOU'RE THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING EXPERT, CORRECT? YES, SIR. I SWEAR YOU WENT ON JANUARY 23RD. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THAT'S WHAT MY NOTES REFLECT. THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD STENOGRAPHER IS SAYING. SO YOU REMAIN UNDER OATH. UNDERSTOOD, SIR. OKAY DID, YOU GOTTA QUALIFY HIM? WELL, THAT WAS THAT WAS MY QUESTION. DID HE. WAS HE QUALIFIED AS A WITNESS? I SWORE EVERYONE IN SO I WOULDN'T FORGET, WHICH IS ONE OF MY FEARS. OKAY BUT YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR GETTING THEM QUALIFIED. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR. CHASE, CAN YOU PROVIDE US, YOUR BACKGROUND, EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND? CERTAINLY AGAIN, GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. COREY CHASE WITH DYNAMIC TRAFFIC, LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, BACHELORS OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS. PLEASE YES, SIR, BEEN QUALIFIED AS AN EXPERT IN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING BEFORE OVER 120 MUNICIPALITIES THROUGHOUT THE STATE, INCLUDING THE TOWNSHIP ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. AND YOUR LICENSE IS IN GOOD STANDING AT THIS TIME. IT IS OKAY, WE WOULD REQUEST THAT, MR. CHASE BE ACCEPTED AS AN EXPERT WITNESS, IN THE FIELD OF TRAFFIC, THE BOARD MEMBER HAVE QUESTIONS ON HIS QUALIFICATIONS. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, WE'LL ACCEPT YOU AS A WITNESS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE RECEIPT OF THE BRIGHT VIEW ENGINEERING REPORT, LAST DATED MAY 13TH, 2024. I'M SORRY. MARCH 13TH, 2024. YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT . LISA. AND, WE SUBMITTED A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, WHICH WAS DATED MARCH 12TH, 2024, PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED AND REVIEWED BY THE TOWNSHIP. AS YOU NOTED, WE DID RECEIVE A REVIEW LETTER FROM MR. FISSINGER DATED MARCH 13TH, 2024, AND I APOLOGIZE, MR. DRILL. I DON'T RECALL WHAT THE EXHIBIT NUMBER FOR THE SITE PLAN RENDERING THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY TESTIFIED TO BY MR. SEEWALD WAS I HAVE EIGHT, TWO EIGHT. THE SITE PLAN RENDERING DATED JANUARY 23RD, 2024 IS A2. THANK YOU. AND SO AS PART OF MY TESTIMONY, I'M GOING TO BE REFERRING TO THE EXHIBIT PREVIOUSLY MARKED AS A2, WHICH IS THE SITE PLAN RENDERING FOR I'M JUST GOING TO STOP YOU BEFORE, YOU BEGIN. I BELIEVE THERE WAS AN UPDATED RENDERING A5, WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. THAT'S THAT'S THE UPDATED A5. A5. SO CAN YOU MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A5 AND I BELIEVE A5, IT SHOULD BE UP ON THE SCREEN. CORRECT. A5 IS UP ON THE SCREEN, CORRECT? OKAY. ALSO, DO ME A FAVOR. PULL THE MICROPHONE AWAY FROM YOU A LITTLE OR DON'T TALK RIGHT INTO IT LIKE THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE TROUBLE HEARING YOU LIT, IT'S EASIER TO UNDERSTAND YOU. UNDERSTOOD? OKAY. IS THAT BETTER ? MUCH BETTER. GOT IT, SO AS PART OF MY TESTIMONY, I'M GOING TO BE REFERRING TO THE SITE PLAN RENDERING PREVIOUSLY MARKED AS EXHIBIT A5, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY TESTIFIED TO BY MR. SEEWALD, JUST TO RECAP FOR THE BOARD, RELATING TO SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION, THE SITES LOCATED ALONG WESTBOUND COUNTY ROUTE 518. IT'S LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THE ADJACENT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION WITH ROUTE 206. WE DO PROPOSE A SINGLE ACCESS POINT ALONG COUNTY ROUTE 518, WHICH WILL PERMIT LEFT TURN INGRESS MOVEMENTS, RIGHT TURN EGRESS MOVEMENTS, A RIGHT TURN INGRESS MOVEMENTS RATHER, AND RIGHT TURN EGRESS MOVEMENTS ONTO COUNTY ROUTE 518. WESTBOUND ONLY, SO THE LEFT TURN EXITING MOVEMENT FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL BE RESTRICTED. AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION, WE ARE PROPOSING A CHANNELIZING CONCRETE ISLAND WITHIN THE DRIVEWAY TO RESTRICT THAT MOVEMENT. WE DO PROVIDE TWO INTERNAL LOADING STALLS WHICH ARE LOCATED ALONG THE NORTHERN BUILDING FACADE TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING THERE ARE 16 PARKING STALLS PROPOSED ALONG THE WESTERN BUILDING FACADE BETWEEN THE TWO STORY SELF STORAGE BUILDING AND THE OR BETWEEN THE TWO SELF STORAGE BUILDINGS. RATHER, THERE IS A LOADING ZONE WHICH IS STRIPED.

THE HATCHED AREA WHICH IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE EASTERN BUILDING FACADE OF THE SMALLER

[00:30:04]

AGAIN, UTILIZING DATA PUBLISHED BY THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE SELF STORAGE FACILITY WOULD GENERATE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS TRAFFIC THAN AN OFFICE USE, SIMILAR TO THE SIZE OF THAT WHICH OCCUPIED THE SITE PREVIOUSLY. DURING THE WEEKDAY MORNING AND EVENING PEAK PERIODS. OBVIOUSLY, OFFICES HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL WEEKDAY TRAFFIC GENERATION, IT WOULD EVEN GENERATE LESS TRAFFIC WHEN YOU COMPARE IT TO THE SATURDAY TRIP GENERATION, PUBLISHED BY THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS. SO OVERALL, A REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC FROM THE FORMER LAND USE. BUT AGAIN, TO BE CONSERVATIVE, WE DIDN'T TAKE ANY CREDIT FOR THAT AS PART OF OUR TRAFFIC STUDY, WE ASSUMED IT WOULD BE NEW OVER VACANT LAND.

WE DID A PRE AND POST DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS AT THE ADJACENT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION. COUNTY ROUTE 518 AND US ROUTE 206, CONSISTENT WITH SEVERAL OF THE TRAFFIC STUDIES WE'VE PREPARED RECENTLY AND THROUGH CONSULTATION WITH MR. FISSINGER, AT THE TIME THESE REPORTS WERE PREPARED, NOT KNOWING THE STATUS OF THE MONTGOMERY PROMENADE, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT CONSTRUCTION WOULD START. WE LOOKED AT THESE, FINDINGS BOTH WITH AND WITHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PROPERTY AS WELL AS WITH AND WITHOUT THE INCLUSION OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, ASSOCIATED WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LOOP ROADS ON THE SOUTH WESTERN CORNER OF THE ROUTE 518 INTERSECTION WITH ROUTE 206, SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL FIND ON PAGES EIGHT, NINE AND THEN THE FOLLOWING ANALYSIS, RIGHT AFTER THAT, IT'S WITH AND WITHOUT THE MONTGOMERY PROMENADE, WHAT WE FOUND WAS THAT THERE'S NO SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, NOT GENERATING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC. EIGHT A MAXIMUM OF 18 TRIPS DURING THE SATURDAY PEAK HOUR. NO SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS TO THE OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS AT THAT INTERSECTION, THERE WAS A SLIGHT INCREASE IN THE DELAY FOR THE WESTBOUND THROUGH RIGHT MOVEMENT. SO THE WESTBOUND COUNTY ROUTE 518 APPROACH TO ROUTE 206, WE FOUND THAT THAT COULD BE MITIGATED WITH A VERY MINOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING ADJUSTMENT, WHICH RESULTED IN THE REALLOCATION OF TWO SECONDS OF GREEN TIME AT THAT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION. AGAIN JUST DEMONSTRATING HOW MINOR THAT THAT INCREASE IN DELAY WAS. BUT THE OVERALL OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS OF THE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION WERE GOING TO REMAIN THE SAME BETWEEN THE PRE AND POST DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS, WE ALSO TOOK A LOOK AT THE SITE ACCESS POINT. THE RIGHT TURN EGRESS MOVEMENT ALONG COUNTY ROUTE 518 AND FOUND THAT THAT WAS GOING TO NOT ACCEPT OPERATE AT ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF SERVICE, AGAIN, THAT'S UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF SOMERSET COUNTY. SO WE WILL BE WORKING WITH THE COUNTY, TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR

[00:35:02]

HOW MANY OTHER SELF-STORAGE FACILITIES WERE USED IN THIS STUDY? HOW MANY OTHER AS FAR AS WHAT LIKE IN TERMS OF LIKE COMPS IN THE AREA, DID YOU LOOK AT OR OR STUDY ANY OTHER LIKE TRIPS COMING IN AND OUT OF FACILITIES NEARBY? WE DID NOT KNOW. OKAY, SO YOUR DATA IS PRIMARILY BASED OFF THE IT 11TH EDITION. THAT'S CORRECT. WHEN DID THAT EDITION COME OUT? IT'S PUBLISHED APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS AGO. OKAY, BECAUSE SOME OF THE LIKE OFFICE CALCULATIONS SEEMED LIKE MAYBE NOT CURRENT WITH CURRENT CONDITIONS WITH LIKE, WORK FROM HOME, BUT, MY PRIMARY QUESTION WAS ON THE COMPS. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LOOKS LIKE THERE'S NO MORE PUBLIC QUESTIONS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR, FROM THE BOARD FOR THIS EXPERT? SO ONE QUESTION ABOUT, FIRE TRUCK ACCESS, HAVE YOU GOTTEN A TEMPLATE FOR THE LARGEST FIRE TRUCK THAT WE HAVE? IN THIS PART OF THE TOWNSHIP, TO CHECK THAT IT CAN ACCESS ALL PARTS OF THE PARKING LOT. YEAH, THAT WAS INCLUDED. AND I APOLOGIZE, SIR, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE AN EXHIBIT THAT DEPICTS THAT, BUT THAT WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN SET. THANK YOU. MR. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. CAN YOU JUST

[00:40:03]

I, BASED ON THE SIZE OF SOME OF THOSE UNITS, THOUGH WITHIN THAT FACILITY I WOULD THINK THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE MOVING THE CONTENTS OF THEIR HOME IN THERE. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE DOING THAT FROM A, I MEAN, MAYBE BETWEEN RESIDENCES, RIGHT? I MEAN, THESE SOME OF THOSE, THOSE UNITS ARE QUITE LARGE. THEY'RE CERTAINLY IT JUST WOULD, IT WOULD SURPRISE ME IF SOMEONE WOULD DO THAT IN A SEDAN OR A SUV TO FILL THAT. NO YOU'RE COMPLETELY CORRECT, MA'AM. AND SO THOSE ARE THE BUT THOSE UNITS AREN'T TURNING OVER EVERY DAY. YOU MAY BE TURNING ONE OF THOSE OVER EVERY COUPLE OF MONTHS, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING IF SOMEONE IS IN BETWEEN HOMES, THOSE CONTENTS ARE GOING IN THERE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. SO THEY MAY MOVE IN ONE, TWO, THREE MONTHS LATER, MOVE THAT STUFF BACK OUT. THEY MAY MOVE IT IN IN BULK AND MOVE IT OUT IN SLOWER PORTIONS. SO THAT'S WHY WE DON'T SEE A HIGH FREQUENCY OF THE LARGER TRUCKS GOING INTO THESE FACILITIES, EVEN WITH THOSE LARGER UNITS. YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY ONCE THE CONTENTS ARE IN THERE, THEY'RE IN THERE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. OKAY THANK YOU. MR. FISHER , THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

COREY, JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS WHILE WE'RE ON THE SU 30 TRUCKS, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE SCHEDULED BY THE OPERATOR SO THAT THEY CAN CONTROL HOW MANY? WELL, THIS MIGHT SLIDE, HOW MANY TRUCKS SHOW UP AT ANY GIVEN TIME? YEAH. SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AS WELL. THEY THEY DO SCHEDULE THE MOVE INS. SO FOR THAT VERY REASON. SO YOU DON'T HAVE 4 OR 5 TENANTS SHOWING UP AT ANY ONE TIME TRYING TO USE THE INTERNAL LOADING BAYS FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME. SO THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT CAN BE COORDINATED. OKAY. MOVING ON.

YOU SAID THE LEFT TURN OUT OF THE SITE IS PROHIBITED. HOW? IF SOMEBODY FROM ROCKY HILL WANTS TO GO, USES THIS FACILITY, WANTS TO GET BACK TO ROCKY HILL? HOW DO THEY HOW DO THEY GET BACK TO THEIR. I'LL SAY, HOME, BUT HOW DO THEY GO BACK EAST ON 518 IF THEY CAN'T MAKE A LEFT OUT OF THE SITE? YEAH. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF THE, THE LOOP ROADS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY THE TOWNSHIP, YOU KNOW, WITH MORE COMING ONLINE AS THE PROMENADE IS BEING CONSTRUCTED, WHAT THAT'S GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO DO IS UTILIZE THOSE LOOP ROADS TO MAKE U-TURN MOVEMENTS. AND ULTIMATELY, THE VISION WAS TO BE ABLE TO ELIMINATE THE LEFT TURN MOVEMENTS ON NORTHBOUND AND SOUTHBOUND ROUTE 206 AND ACCOMMODATE THOSE THROUGH THE LOOP ROAD. SO THEY HAVE THE ABILITY NOW TO, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO USE BRECKNELL WAY, IN THE FUTURE, YOU'LL HAVE THE INNER LOOP ROAD, WHICH WILL GO AROUND, THE BANK BUILDING ON THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF 206 AND 518. SO THERE'LL BE SEVERAL OPTIONS. AND DID YOUR TRAFFIC STUDY ROUTE THOSE? HOW DID YOU HANDLE ROUTING THOSE? I'LL SAY LEFT OUTS, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE NOT REALLY MAKING THEM MOVE DIRECTLY. HOW DID YOU ROUTE THEM THROUGH THE INTERSECTION, I THINK I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHEN BRECKNELL WAY WAS OPENED, BUT I BELIEVE YOUR COUNTS WERE DONE PRIOR TO THAT ROAD BEING. YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. MR. MR. FISSINGER SO THEY THEY DIDN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE OPENING OF BRECKNELL WAY, SO CERTAINLY WITH IT BEING OPEN NOW, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT, PREVIOUSLY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO NORTH ON 206 AND THEN USE THE EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK. I BELIEVE IT'S SYCAMORE LANE TO THE NORTH. THEY WOULD ADD TO USE TO REROUTE THEMSELVES BACK. TO THE EAST. BUT NOW HAVING THE

[00:45:02]

AND MAKE ANY FINE TUNING ADJUSTMENTS NECESSARY. AND I WILL REMIND THE BOARD, THE PROMENADE IS COMPLETELY REDOING THAT TRAFFIC SIGNAL. SO DEPENDING ON THE TIMING OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, IT MAY BE A MOOT POINT TO MODIFY THE SIGNAL, THE TIMING AND THEN NUMBER 11 IN MY REPORT, JUST TO CLARIFY, I'M ASSUMING AM I CORRECT IN UNDERSTANDING THAT THE REFERENCE TO THE PROPOSED DRIVING RANGE DRIVE THROUGH LANE IN YOUR MOST RECENT REPORT WAS JUST A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR FROM AN EARLIER VERSION? THAT'S CORRECT. WHERE IS THAT? IT'S PAGE THREE OF MY MARCH 13TH REVIEW LETTER. COMMENT NUMBER 11, MR. CHASE'S MARCH 2020 FOR HIS REFERENCES. A PROPOSED DRIVE THROUGH LANE. OKAY. AND JUST I HAVE HIS REPORT. WHERE DOES HIS REPORT REFERENCE THE DRIVE THROUGH LANE? IT'S A, PAGE 11. IT'S THE BOTTOM PARAGRAPH, SIR. SECOND TO LAST SENTENCE. ALL RIGHT, SO WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS JUST CROSS THAT OUT. OKAY. GOT IT. AND THEN IS BELIEVE YOU SAID THERE'S 16 SPACES PROVIDED. CAN, THIS IS COMMENT 12 IN MY REVIEW LETTER.

CAN YOU DISCUSS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AVERAGE HEIGHTS? I THINK IT SAYS AN AVERAGE PARKING OF DEMAND OF 11 SPACES. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU'RE USING THE AVERAGE AND NOT THE 85TH PERCENTILE? CERTAINLY SO. AND YOU'RE CORRECT IN THAT TO DEVELOP THE RECOMMENDED PARKING SUPPLY FOR THIS FACILITY, WE CONSULT THE DATA PUBLISHED BY THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE PARKING GENERATION MANUAL, WHICH SUGGESTS AN AVERAGE PEAK PARKING DEMAND OF 11 VEHICLES. WE'RE PROVIDING 16 DEDICATED SPACES, PARKING STALLS, WHICH SUPPLEMENT THE ADDITIONAL LOADING AREAS, BOTH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL, TO THE TWO SELF-STORAGE BUILDINGS, BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE, MR. FISSINGER, WE'RE TYPICALLY PROVIDING ANYWHERE FROM 10 TO 15 PARKING STALLS, FOR FACILITIES OF THIS SIZE AND EVEN LARGER. SO IT'S RIGHT IN LINE WITH WHAT THE, THE NATIONAL, SELF-STORAGE TENANTS ARE LOOKING FOR AS FAR AS PARKING SUPPLY GOES, I KNOW THE IT SUGGESTS POTENTIALLY HIGHER FOR 85TH PERCENTILE, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I'VE EXPERIENCED IN RECENT YEARS WITH THE, THE ADVENT OF THESE MULTI-STORY SELF-STORAGE FACILITIES. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION, JUST A QUICKIE, JUST A QUICKIE. DO YOU DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT, THAT 85TH PERCENTILE? HE STATED TO SOMEONE IN THE PUBLIC ASKED HIM IF HE HAD STUDIED ANY OTHER SELF-STORAGE FACILITIES, AND HE SAID NO. HE ONLY USED THE IT. NOW HE'S SAYING BASED ON HIS EXPERIENCE WITH OTHER FACILITIES, THAT THE IT'S NUMBER SHOULDN'T BE USED IN 85TH PERCENTILE. SO THE CHAIRMAN WANTS TO KNOW WHAT'S YOUR VIEW ON THAT. THE 85TH PERCENTILE RATE IS EXACTLY THAT. THAT'S SAYING 85% OF THE AVERAGES THEY LOOK AT, HOWEVER MANY SITES, I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. THEY LOOK AT THE PEAK PARKING DEMAND OF ALL OF THEM AVERAGE. THOSE NUMBERS. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU YOU GET. THE 85TH LOOKS AT 85% OF THEM ARE AT THAT NUMBER OR LOWER, WHICH IS USUALLY THE HIGHEST PARKING REQUIREMENT WILL DESIGN FOR VERY REALITY IS SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN, IN MY EXPERIENCE THERE, THE 16 SPACES THEY'RE PROVIDING SHOULD BE ENOUGH THAT THESE SITES REALLY DON'T HAVE A VERY HEAVY TURNOVER ONCE THERE, ESPECIALLY ONCE THEY'RE UP IN OPERATION. SO I THINK 16 SPACES IS ACCEPTABLE.

OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE TO HEAR WHAT THE THEIR EXPERT SAYS AS WELL. BUT I DO THINK 16 IS, YOU KNOW,

[00:50:06]

CERTAINLY SO THE 16 PARKING STALLS ARE THIS NUMBER OF STRIPED PARKING STALLS WERE PROPOSING ADJACENT TO THE WESTERN BUILDING FACADE. RIGHT, RIGHT. CORRECT AND HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH 16 PARKING SPACES? IS THE RIGHT NUMBER 16 WAS BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH THE APPLICANT, THE OPERATOR OF THE FACILITY, THE LAYOUT OF THE SITE, WHAT COULD WE FIT IN AN AREA WHICH WOULD MAKE SENSE FROM A PARKING AND CIRCULATION STANDPOINT? AND THEN AGAIN, LOOKING BACK AT THE DATA PUBLISHED BY THE ITE, WE SAW THAT WE EXCEEDED THE AVERAGE PEAK PARKING DEMAND AS THEY PUBLISHED, BASED ON MINE AND MR. SEWELL'S EXPERIENCE DOING DOZENS OF THESE OTHER SELF-STORAGE FACILITIES AND THE PARKING SUPPLIES THAT WERE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS NATIONAL BRANDS, IT WAS IN KEEPING WITH THAT. RIGHT NOW, THE IT HAS AN AVERAGE AND THE IT ALSO, I THINK LIKE IN THE BEGINNING CHAPTER LIKE EITHER OF CHAPTER 1 OR 2 OR WHATEVER OF THE IT, IT RECOMMENDS USING 85TH PERCENTILE, CORRECT. IT DEPENDS ON THE USE, SIR. AND IT ALSO TELLS YOU TO CONSULT, YOU KNOW, APPLICANT AND TYPICAL CONDITIONS. AND I CAN TELL YOU IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, I HAVE NEVER WORKED ON A SELF-STORAGE FACILITY WITH 34 PARKING STALLS. THAT IS, YOU'VE NEVER WORKED AT A SELF-STORAGE FACILITY USING THE 85TH PERCENTILE. CORRECT. I'M SORRY, I YEAH, I WAS DISTRACTED. SORRY. I'M LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE. I UNDERSTAND NOW THEY'RE PROPOSING 16 SPACES. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. HE SAYS, AND I ASKED HIM WHY YOU'RE PROPOSING 16 SPACES. AND HE SAID HE'S PROPOSING 16 SPACES BECAUSE THE AVERAGE PARKING DEMAND, ACCORDING TO THE IT IS 11 SPACES. AND HE CONSULTED WITH THE APPLICANT.

THE APPLICANT SAID GO TO 16. SO THEN I SAID IT'S EITHER I THINK IT'S IN CHAPTER ONE OF THE IT WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT YOU SHOULD USE 85TH PERCENTILE. THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE IT IN HERE, 85TH PERCENTILE. AND I SAID, WELL, WHY DIDN'T YOU DO WHAT THE IT SAID AND USE THE 85TH PERCENTILE. AND HE SAID BASICALLY THAT THEY DON'T USE THE 85TH PERCENT PERCENTILE WHEN THEY'RE DOING THESE THINGS. AND I'M LIKE, OKAY, THAT EXPLAINS WHY. BUT WHAT'S YOUR OPINION ON THIS? AS THE BOARD'S TRAFFIC EXPERT, THE IF THEY WERE JUST USING THE AVERAGE, I WOULD BE MORE CONCERNED BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T LEAVE TOO MUCH ROOM FOR ERROR, THEY'RE PROPOSING SOMETHING IN BETWEEN, GIVEN MY EXPERIENCE, ESPECIALLY IN NEW JERSEY, WHEN I HAVE REVIEWED THESE OR SEEN THEM, THEY'RE USUALLY NOT FULLY PARKED AT THESE TYPES OF PARKING NUMBERS, IT BECOMES A BALANCE BETWEEN THE NEED FOR PARKING AND OTHER CONSTRAINTS ON THE SITE. THE

[00:55:06]

GRADUATE FROM GEORGETOWN. POSTGRADUATE CERTIFICATION IN MEDIATION FROM HARVARD. ABOUT A DOZEN OTHER COURSES SCATTERED AROUND A BUNCH OF OTHER PLACES. I'VE BEEN IN THE PLANNING FIELD FOR 43 YEARS, LICENSED IN NEW JERSEY AS A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL PLANNER FOR 29 OF THOSE YEARS. LICENSES CURRENTLY VALID, I'VE SERVED AS A COURT APPOINTED MASTER, QUALIFIED IN OVER 100 HEARINGS AND TRIALS HERE IN NEW JERSEY, FOUR OTHER STATES, THREE FEDERAL DISTRICTS,

[01:00:01]

I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. GREAT. SO I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT YOU WANTED. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I GET FOR HAVING NOTES FROM EARLIER. MY FAULT. AND I THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BUT WE STILL HAVE THE D4, NESTED WITHIN OUR, OUR APPLICATION, SO WHY DO I SAY THIS IS A DIFFICULT SITE LOOKING FOR A NEW USE, AS YOU'VE HEARD IN, IN GREAT DETAIL AND PLANNERS DON'T TYPICALLY TYPICALLY START OUT WITH PARTICULAR SUITABILITY, BUT THAT'S AT THE CORE OF THIS APPLICATION. WHY THIS PARTICULAR SITE FOR A DIFFERENT AND UNIQUE TREATMENT? THERE IS A CONTINUOUS PROCESS NOW THAT THE SITE HAS BEEN LARGELY REMEDIATED, THERE IS LONG TERM WASHING. IF YOU WILL, OF GROUNDWATER, THROUGH BOTH PUMP OUT OF SURFACE WATERS AND LONG TERM MONITORING. THAT WILL BE ONGOING FOR A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME. SO WE START REGARDLESS OF ZONING, NO RESIDENTIAL, NOTHING THAT NEEDS TO DO. GROUND PENETRATION CAN HAPPEN ON THIS SITE. AND WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE MARKET LIMITATIONS THAT COME WITH THAT LONG TERM REMEDIAL TALE, IF YOU WILL, WHILE IT'S ARGUABLY CLEAN AND DOESN'T REPRESENT A HEALTH IMPACT, NO RESTAURANT OR FOOD RELATED USE OR DAYCARE IS GOING TO RISK BEING ASSOCIATED WITH THE CLEANUP ON A CONTAMINATED SITE.

SO IT'S STATUS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S CLEAN AND SAFE. WILL SCARE OFF CERTAIN USERS THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SITE, IT ALSO REQUIRES PLANNING FLEXIBILITY. IN TERMS OF SITE PLANNING, WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE WELL LOCATIONS, THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE WELLS, THE FACILITY AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, SO YOU YOU CAN'T HAVE A SITE PLAN THAT WOULD TYPICALLY WANT TO PUT BUILDINGS WHERE THOSE FACILITIES ARE. SO YOU NEED SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RELATIVELY FLEXIBLE AND THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU HEARD FROM MR. SEEWALD. IN DESCRIBING HOW THIS PARTICULAR USE WAS ABLE TO WORK AROUND THOSE PARTICULAR ISSUES ON THE SITE, WE'RE IN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE, BUT UNLIKE THE VAST MAJORITY, IF NOT ALL OF THE SITES IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONE IN THIS AREA ARE ONLY ACCESSES TO ROUTE 518. WE'RE NOT PART OF THE ROUTE 206 CORRIDOR THAT MOST OF THE RETAIL PROPERTIES IN THIS PARTICULAR CORE, HAVE. THE BENEFIT OF.

WE'RE ISOLATED BEHIND THE WAWA AT THE REAR OF A SHOPPING CENTER. SO WE'RE PART OF THE COMMERCIAL NODE THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED FOREVER IN YOUR MASTER PLANNING, BUT BECAUSE OF THIS UNIQUE LOCATION TUCKED AS IT IS ON 518, THERE ARE FAIRLY LIMITED LOGICAL USES THAT YOU MIGHT THINK OF FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE, IN TERMS OF CONVENTIONAL RETAIL, NOT ONLY ARE THERE THE TWO CENTERS WITH SOME SIGNIFICANT VACANCIES, THERE ARE ALSO PAD SITES AND

[01:05:04]

ABSOLUTELY. THE ONLY THE ONLY THE ONLY PROVISION IN YOUR ORDINANCE FOR A DIFFERENT KIND OF SELF STORAGE THAT WE'LL GET TO IS YOU CAN'T DO BUSINESS FROM THE SITE. NOBODY WILL BE DOING BUSINESS FROM THE SITE. BUT WILL THEY BE STORING GOODS HERE? ABSOLUTELY ANYWAY, SO YOU HAD THE E-COMMERCE REVOLUTION AND THEN YOU HAD THE JUST IN TIME ISSUE. NOW WHERE COUNCIL WAS WAS STEERING ME TO IS IT SELF STORAGE IS ESSENTIALLY THE WAREHOUSE FOR SMALL BUSINESS.

THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN A LONG HISTORY OF FILE STORAGE PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS, SMALL LAW FIRMS, USING CLIMATE CONTROLLED FACILITIES FOR FILE STORAGE, BUT THAT'S BEEN DRAMATICALLY CHANGED IN RECENT YEARS AND WHY YOU'RE SEEING A STRONG DEMAND FOR SELF STORAGE FACILITIES AND WHY SO MANY ARE BEING BUILT, THERE'S A NEW DEMAND FOR SMALL RETAILERS. PEOPLE NOW WANT TO BUY IN BULK, PEOPLE WHO TYPICALLY WERE GETTING THINGS OVER THE OVER THE THRESHOLD FROM UPS OR FEDEX ARE NOW TALKING ABOUT BUYING CASES OR GETTING A LARGE SHIPMENT FROM OVERSEAS AND STORING IT SO THAT THEY HAVE GOODS FOR THEIR NEXT SEASON AND NOT WAIT FOR DELIVERY. SO THEY'RE GETTING THOSE KINDS OF DELIVERIES AND STORING STORING THEM IN SELF STORAGE. YOU ALSO HAVE THE INTERNET ENTREPRENEURS, ETSY. EBAY SELLERS, STORING THEIR GOODS LARGER THAN THEY WOULD TYPICALLY WANT TO DO IN THEIR LIVING ROOMS. TEN YEARS AGO THERE WAS A SURVEY IN THE SELF STORAGE INDUSTRY THAT SAID BUSINESSES OCCUPIED ABOUT 8% OF SELF STORAGE SPACE NATIONWIDE.

OF THE NEW FACILITIES IN NEW JERSEY THAT HAVE OPENED SINCE THE COVID ERA, OVER A THIRD ARE IN BUSINESS RELATED STORAGE ACTIVITIES. SO THAT'S A VERY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR SELF STORAGE COMING FROM SMALL BUSINESS, ALL THE WAY FROM FILES TO STORING GOODS FOR RETAILERS, PEOPLE WHO MAKE CUPCAKES WANT TO HAVE ALL THE DESIGNS, BAKERS, THAT SORT OF THING, SO SELF STORAGE IS NOW PART OF A LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT FOR THE SMALL BUSINESSES WITHIN A COMMUNITY. THE SECOND PART OF THE EXPANSION OF DEMAND FOR SELF

[01:10:01]

SORRY, AND THAT EXHAUSTS WHAT YOUR COMMUNITY ZONES FOR IN TERMS OF SELF STORAGE. IT'S NOT THIS USE. IT'S THE OLD FASHIONED, NOT CLIMATE CONTROLLED, SINGLE STORY STEEL BOX KIND OF FACILITY, AND LOOKING ON GOOGLE EARTH, I COULD FIND SIMILAR STEEL BOXES IN HILLSBOROUGH, LIFE STORAGE IN LARKIN, AND THE CLOSEST CLIMATE CONTROLLED FACILITY THAT EXISTS AT LEAST ENOUGH TO BE ON ON GOOGLE EARTH IS IN MONMOUTH JUNCTION. SO DESPITE THIS INCREASING DEMAND FROM THE THREE DIFFERENT AREAS, THE SUPPLY HERE IS LIMITED FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE. THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THERE MAY NOT BE SOME IN THE PIPELINE. I'M SURE THERE ARE, BUT IN TERMS OF WHAT'S BEEN LISTED, THAT WHAT I'VE REPORTED TO YOU IS WHAT YOU CAN FIND, SO IN TERMS OF THE MEDICI DECISION, WHICH COUNCIL WILL WILL UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING, THIS REMAINS A NEW USE IN YOUR COMMUNITY. THIS IS A USE THAT'S BEEN EXPANDING IN RECENT YEARS TO FOR WHICH THERE HAS YET BEEN A ZONING RESPONSE, IN TERMS OF THE MASTER PLAN, THE AREA THAT WE'RE IN IS CALLED THE ROCKY HILL NODE. IT'S SUPPORTED AS A CENTER OF COMMERCE FOR THIS AREA OF THE MUNICIPALITY. NOT SURPRISING. IT SUPPORTS THE HC, ZONING. SO WHILE SELF STORAGE IS NOT A PERMITTED USE, IT IS CERTAINLY CLOSELY RELATED TO THE KINDS OF BUSINESS USES THAT ARE LOCATED IN THIS ZONE, AS A BUSINESS SUPPORTING SORT OF ADJACENT SORT OF USE THAT I THINK IS AN APPROPRIATE TRANSITION UNDER TWC REALTY. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS WE'RE MEANT TO LOOK AT. WE'RE OBVIOUSLY A VERY TINY PORTION OF THE OVERALL HC ZONE. WE'RE BETWEEN TWO MAJOR SHOPPING CENTERS WITH SOME VACANCIES, SO LOSING QUOTE UNQUOTE, THIS LOT FROM THE INVENTORY OF LAND IN THE HC DISTRICT IS NOT GOING TO INTERFERE WITH THIS MUNICIPALITY'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE AMPLE SPACE FOR RETAIL USES. WE'RE NOT TAKING AWAY SOMETHING THAT IS OF VALUE IN TERMS OF PUBLIC POLICY AND MEETING OTHER OBJECTIVES, AND IT IN NO WAY PREVENTS LANDS ADJACENT TO IT FROM BEING USED, AS THEY'RE CURRENTLY ZONED. SO WE'RE NOT INTERFERING WITH THE INTENT OF YOUR ZONE PLAN. BY HAVING THIS USE IN THIS

[01:15:01]

OKAY. YEAH, I'M RIGHT ON THE PERMITTED. OKAY. I'M JUST GOING OFF THE MEMO FROM, THAT WAS REVISED, MARCH 26TH, 2024. JAMES, WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED? F.A.R IN THE HD ZONE.

IT'S 2,020. IS THE MAX, THAT'S CONFUSING. IS. I SAY THAT THE EXISTING F.A.R WAS 44.4. THAT'S REALLY NOT THE CASE, BECAUSE IN THE PREVIOUS BUILDING AND THE PREVIOUS BUILDING, BY THE WAY.

OH, OKAY. IS THERE A BUILDING ON THE SITE NOW? NO, THAT'S THE POINT I WAS GOING TO MAKE. THE BUILDING IS GONE. THE CURRENT F.A.R IS ZERO. CORRECT. OKAY. SO THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED F.A.R IS 20% UNDER THE LAST PROPOSAL, WHICH IS THE CURRENT PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF THE BOARD. WHAT IS THE PROPOSED F.A.R 83.83 OKAY. 83% CORRECT. AND I BELIEVE NOT. I BELIEVE I KNOW I SENT AN EMAIL MEMO ON JANUARY 24TH TO THE BOARD AND TO THE APPLICANT ATTORNEY. SENDING OVER MY CRIB SHEETS FOR THE D1 USE VARIANCE. THE D4 F.A.R VARIANCE, AND THE D6 HEIGHT VARIANCE. NOW THE D6 HEIGHT VARIANCE IS NO LONGER NEEDED. CORRECT AND I BELIEVE I EVEN ASKED DURING A HEARING BECAUSE AS TO THE D, THE D1 VARIANCE, THE STANDARDS ARE CRYSTAL CLEAR. THE BOARD HAS DEALT WITH IT BEFORE THE D4 F.A.R VARIANCE. I SAID THERE WERE TWO STANDARDS IN MY OPINION . ONE IS WHERE YOU HAVE A PERMITTED USE. THEN IT'S THE TRADITIONAL COVENTRY SQUARE TEST AND ONE IS WHERE YOU HAVE A PROHIBITED USE, WHICH I SAID MEDICI APPLIES TO THE D1 AND I BELIEVE, MR. VANCAMP, YOU ACTUALLY AGREED WITH ME. YES WE ARE. IT IS A D1 APPLICATION WITH A D4. SO OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE TO MEET THE D1 IN THE FIRST PLACE. BUT, YEAH, YOU HAVE TO MEET THE D1 FIRST. BUT IN MY OPINION, THE SAME MEDICI TEST INDEPENDENTLY APPLIES TO THE D4 F.A.R. FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S ASSUME FOR ARGUMENT'S SAKE THAT THE BOARD SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT WE, BY YOUR ARGUMENT THAT THERE'S A NEED AND THE SITE IS PARTICULARLY SUITED. SO WE WOULD GRANT A D1 USE VARIANCE. BUT WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE GRANTING A D4 F.A.R VARIANCE FOR 83, WHERE THE MAXIMUM IS 20. SO YOU HAVE TO PUT IN EVIDENCE. AND WHY IS THERE A NEED FOR SO MUCH? AND WHY IS THE SITE PARTICULARLY SUITED FOR 83 F.A.R. AND THIS IS PARTICULAR SUITABILITY UNDER MEDICI. WHY IS IT PARTICULARLY PARTICULARLY SUITED FOR THE F.A.R NOT COVENTRY? DOES THE SITE, YOU KNOW, DESPITE THE DEVIATIONS STILL APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAR. YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. WE GET TO THE SAME PLACE. I WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THERE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY, BUT IN THE END RESULT WE'RE THERE. OKAY, SO WHEN YOU PRESENT YOUR F.A.R TEST, YOUR D4 F.A.R TESTIMONY, KEEP IN MIND THAT THAT'S THE OPINION THAT I'M GOING TO BE GIVING TO THE BOARD THAT THE SAME MEDICI TEST APPLIES INDEPENDENTLY TO THE D4, RIGHT? WE COULDN'T HAVE RUN FROM IT ANYWAY BECAUSE IT'S A D1. AND I AGREE THAT YOU'RE ASKING THE QUESTION WHETHER THE F.A.R WHETHER THE F.A.R RELIEF MAKES SENSE IN THE CONTEXT OF ALL OF THE MEDICI PROOFS RELATED TO THE D1. SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, HYPOTHETICALLY, THEY COULD FIND THAT A D1 VARIANCE IS WARRANTED AT 20. IF THEY ARE, THEY COULD. I DON'T DISAGREE THAT THEY COULD COME TO THAT. SO YOU AND I JUST HAVE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT LOGIC OF GETTING THERE, BUT I DON'T DISAGREE. IT'S YOUR JOB TO EXPLAIN FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE WHY THE SITE IS PARTICULARLY SUITED, AND WHY THERE'S THIS NEED FOR 83% F.A.R INSTEAD OF 20. YES, GO FOR IT. OKAY I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE ON THE SAME. YES. OKAY. BUT HOPEFULLY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SAY I HAVE TO REPEAT EVERYTHING THAT I JUST SAID, BECAUSE NOW I'M TALKING ABOUT THE D4. AND BY THE WAY, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAD IN MY NOTES YOU SAID I BELIEVE. BASED ON THE STUDIES YOU READ,

[01:20:03]

AND THEN YOU HAD EXTRA CLOSET SPACES NUMBER TWO AND THE GENERATION SHIFT HEIRLOOM STORAGE IS NUMBER THREE IS ONE THIRD, ONE THIRD, ONE THIRD. OR IS IT ONE THIRD. AND THEN THE OTHER TWO MAKE UP THE TWO THIRDS. YOU IF ONE THIRD OF SELF STORAGE. LET ME LET ME REPHRASE IT. THERE ARE THREE THINGS THAT ARE LEADING TO INCREASED DEMAND. THERE HAD ALREADY BEEN SELF STORAGE DEMAND IN THE PAST. SO I'M NOT SAYING THESE ARE ONE THIRD, ONE THIRD, ONE THIRD IN THE TOTAL SPACE OF THE BUILDING. THERE ARE THERE ARE IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, IF ONE THIRD OF SELF STORAGE IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY IS FOR SMALL BUSINESS USE , DO YOU KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE OF SELF STORAGE IN NEW JERSEY IS FOR EXTRA CLOSET SPACE FOR PEOPLE? OKAY, AND WHAT PERCENTAGE IS FOR HEIRLOOM STORES? NO. THERE WAS A SPECIFIC SURVEY OF NEW SELF STORAGE FACILITIES ASKING THE QUESTION ABOUT BUSINESSES. SO I CAN CITE TO A DATA POINT FOR THAT. OKAY.

THE REST OF IT IS JUST GENERIC DEMAND FOR THE USE. OKAY. GO AHEAD. JUST GIVE YOU A HALF A SECOND TO FIGURE OUT WHERE I WAS. YEAH OKAY, SO TURNING TO THE FAR VARIANCE. AND GIVEN WHAT COUNCIL SAID, I'M GOING TO BELABOR IT BY REPEATING A COUPLE OF THINGS. THE SITE IS A DIFFICULT SITE FOR ANY PARTICULAR USE TO LOCATE FOR ALL OF THE REASONS THAT I SAID THE CONTAMINATION. IT'S A DIFFICULT SITE FOR THE USES THAT ARE IN THE HRK DISTRICT, BOTH BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION ON 518 AND NOT ON 206. TUCKED THE WAY IT IS, PLUS THE CONTAMINATION ISSUES.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIND AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THE SITE. AND THIS IS ONE SO THAT THAT'S RELATED TO BOTH THE D1 AND THE D4 TESTIMONY. AS TO WHY I THINK THIS, THIS SITE AND THIS USE ARE APPROPRIATE WITH THIS LEVEL OF F.A.R, THE INHERENT NATURE OF THE USE, AS YOU HEARD FROM THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERS GOING BACK AND FORTH, IS THAT IT NEEDS REMARKABLY LITTLE PARKING, AS A PLANNER, WHEN YOU'RE ESTABLISHING F.A.R FOR AN OFFICE BUILDING OR FOR RETAIL, YOU'RE KEEPING IN MIND HOW MUCH OF THE SITE YOU INTEND TO USE TO SATISFY THE PARKING DEMAND OR NEEDS FOR THAT PARTICULAR SITE. SO, YOU KNOW, WITH AN OFFICE BUILDING, IF YOU GO WITH AN FA OF ONE OR 2 OR 3, THAT'S MEANING MEANS YOU HAVE A TALLER AND TALLER OFFICE BUILDING ON THAT SITE. IT'S GOING TO MEAN YOU NEED MORE PARKING. AND TYPICALLY WITH SURFACE PARKING, YOU'RE GOING TO RUN OUT VERY QUICKLY. SO THERE'S A LIMIT ON HOW MUCH FAR YOU CAN HAVE FOR THAT KIND OF BUILDING. RETAIL IS PARTICULARLY DEMANDING IN TERMS OF PARKING SO FAR, AND RETAIL TENDS TO BE LESS THAN FAR AN OFFICE. AND IN BOTH CASES THEY'RE GOING TO BE LESS THAN.

IF YOU'RE USING FAR AS A BULK STANDARD IN YOUR COMMUNITY AS YOU ARE, BECAUSE IT'S A USE THAT HAS SO LITTLE PARKING, IT'S GOING TO FUNCTION IN A VERY DIFFERENT WAY, AS YOUR PLANNER SAID EARLIER, YOU HAVEN'T CONTEMPLATED THIS FROM A PARKING PERSPECTIVE, WHICH MEANS YOU ALSO HAVEN'T CONTEMPLATED THIS USE AT THE GOVERNING BODY LEVEL IN TERMS OF WRITING A ZONING DISTRICT, IN TERMS OF F.A.R. SO IF YOU'RE USING FA AS A WAY TO MANAGE AND REGULATE WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE SITE FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE, A HIGHER F.A.R IS NATURAL AND INHERENT BECAUSE IT'S ESSENTIALLY SELLING BUILDING VOLUME WITH THE NEED FOR VERY LITTLE PARKING TO SUPPORT IT. NOW, IN TERMS OF THE ESTHETICS, THE ISSUE THEN BECOMES, ARE YOU LOOKING AT AN OVERSIZE BUILDING IN SOME PARTICULAR WAY, NOW WHAT CAN HAPPEN ON THIS SITE? AND LET'S SEE IF I CAN OH, I CAN ACTUALLY DO THIS. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT EXHIBIT I BELIEVE IT WAS A5 ON ON THE SCREENS A5. CORRECT, ONE COULD HAVE A PARKING LOT THAT COMES IN THE FRONT. AND LET'S JUST USE THIS DIVIDING LINE ON, ON THE SCREEN HERE AND SAY THAT THE BUILDING IS FROM THERE FORWARD DOING A MORE TRADITIONAL OFFICE OR RETAIL USE. AND YOU'RE GOING TO COME IN AND PARK BEHIND. WELL, THIS LENGTH OF BUILDING IS NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU IS, IS NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD NOT SEE. TO USE A DOUBLE NEGATIVE. IT'S SOMETHING YOU WOULD EXPECT TO SEE IF IT WERE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED FOR A PERMITTED USE. ON THE OTHER HAND, I COULD HAVE DONE A RECTANGULAR BUILDING ON THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY. WE CAN FORM WITH THE BUILDING SETBACKS AND HAVE THAT BE THE BUILDING AND HAVE THIS AREA BE THE PARKING AND THIS LINE OF BUILDING WOULD BE WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO SEE AS ZONING AS A PERMITTED USE GOT DEVELOPED. SO IT WOULD EITHER BE ONE OR THE OTHER, NOT BOTH. IN THIS CASE, IT'S BOTH. BUT BY HAVING BOTH, YOU'RE NOT HAVING A DIFFERENT IMPACT ON THE PEOPLE LOOKING AT IT FROM ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER. THEN YOU COULD HAVE HAD IN THIS SITUATION WHERE YOU HAD A PERMITTED USE, SO I DON'T THINK HAVING THE LARGER BUILDING BECAUSE OF ITS DEPTH IS HAVING A NEGATIVE IMPACT IN TERMS OF ESTHETICS, BECAUSE IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN YOU COULD HAVE HAD ON EACH OF THE BUILDING LINES BY A PERMITTED USE ON THIS

[01:25:02]

YOU'RE ONLY REFERENCE TO THIS USE IS ONLY IN THE AIRPORT. HAZARD AREA, NOWHERE ELSE IN YOUR COMMUNITY. AND THAT'S A COUSIN TO THIS. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT THIS USE IN THE SAME WAY THAT TOWNHOUSES AREN'T THE SAME USE AS SINGLE FAMILY. YOU KNOW, IT SERVES THE SAME FUNCTION.

SOMEBODY CAN LIVE IN IT, BUT IT REALLY IS A DIFFERENT USE, THERE ARE NO NEGATIVE IMPACTS IN TERMS OF POLICY. WE'RE NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACTING THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF YOUR ZONE PLAN. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL OBJECTIVES OF YOUR MASTER PLAN TO HAVE BUSINESS RELATED USES IN THIS KNOWN NODE, AND I BELIEVE IT'S AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION AND USE, ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION WHEN MR. VANDERLIP WAS UP ABOUT THE ESTHETICS, THAT THERE ARE PLACES YOU COULD STAND AND SEE THE BUILDING, WE'RE NOT FOR A SECOND SAYING THAT THIS BUILDING IS INVISIBLE. THERE ARE PLACES THAT YOU CAN STAND AND SEE THE BUILDING. WHAT'S IMPORTANT ABOUT THE EXHIBIT IS THAT THE BUILDING IS BROKEN UP. THERE ARE PLACES WHERE YOU'LL GET A VIEW OF THE BUILDING, AND THEN IT'LL BE BLOCKED BY OTHER BUILDINGS. IT'LL BE BLOCKED BY LANDSCAPING, THE QUESTION ASKED, WHAT ABOUT THE NEIGHBOR IN THE BACK OF THEIR YARD? YEAH, THEY'LL SEE A BUILDING. THERE'LL BE A LANDSCAPING THAT THAT MITIGATES A GREAT DEAL OF THAT. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU THAT LANDSCAPING IS EVER A COMPLETE 100% SCREEN, BUT THEY'RE A PERMITTED USE IS GOING TO CREATE A BUILDING AT ROUGHLY THE SAME DISTANCE THAT THEY WOULD LOOK AT. YOUR ZONING CONTEMPLATES THAT THERE WILL BE BUILDINGS ON THE SITE THAT PEOPLE COULD SEE.

SO THE QUESTION IS, DID WE DO OUR JOB IN TERMS OF PRESENTING TO YOU AND ATTRACTIVE BUILDING AND APPROPRIATE LANDSCAPING THAT MAKES IT APPROPRIATE AT THIS LOCATION? BUT WE ARE ABSOLUTELY NOT GOING TO PRODUCE ENOUGH EXHIBITS TO EVER SATISFY YOU THAT THE BUILDING IS GOING TO BE INVISIBLE FROM EVERY LOCATION. IT'S ABSOLUTELY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN THAT WAY. BUT IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING SCALE, THE MATERIALS ON THE BUILDING, YOU'LL HAVE FILTERED VIEWS, YOU'LL HAVE BROKEN VIEWS, YOU'LL HAVE BUILDINGS BLOCKING IT IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS, I THINK IT'S AN APPROPRIATE SIZE AND LOCATION. LOCATED BUILDING HERE AT THIS LOCATION, AND LASTLY, IN TERMS OF OVERALL DEVELOPMENT, IT'S REDUCING THE NUMBER OF CURB CUTS. IT'S BRINGING IT UP TO MODERN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND AGAIN, FINDING A PRODUCTIVE USE FOR A DIFFICULT SITE. AND I'LL LEAVE IT THERE, I HAVE, JUST A FEW QUESTIONS. SURE. IS IT IMPORTANT TO YOU FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE THAT THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT TAKES WHAT WAS A DILAPIDATED, BUILDING AND SITE AND NOW WITH DEMOLISHED BUILDING AND REVITALIZES IT? THAT SITE? ABSOLUTELY, AND THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF CASES, GOING BACK TO THE, WHAT IS IT, MINE HILL CASE, THAT THAT THE ESTHETIC IMPROVEMENTS OF PREVIOUSLY, DEVELOPED SITES, ARE AN IMPORTANT OBJECTIVE AND CAN BE THE BASIS FOR A USE VARIANCE. YEAH BUT THERE'S NO BUILDING THERE ANYMORE. THERE IS NO DILAPIDATED BUILDING THERE. CORRECT, WE CAN DEBATE WHETHER THE PROCESS IS PART OF THIS OR NOT. IS THERE A BUILDING THERE? WHEN'S THE LAST TIME YOU'VE BEEN OUT TO THE SITE? WELL, THERE'S NOT A BUILDING SITTING THERE TODAY. WHEN YOU GO OUT, WHAT DO YOU SEE WHEN YOU GO OUT THERE, CHAIN LINK FENCES AND VEHICLES. NOT NOT A PARTICULARLY ATTRACTIVE SITE. A VACANT SITE WITH NOTHING ON IT. BUT THERE'S NOT A LOT IT. WOULD YOU CALL THE SITE DILAPIDATED OR VACANT? WOULD IT PASS A REDEVELOP, A REDEVELOPMENT TEST? I PROBABLY, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

THAT'S YOUR ANSWER. THAT'S FINE. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. I'LL DEFER TO THE BOARD. OKAY ALL RIGHT, I'D PREFER TO HOLD, THE BOARD'S QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GIVE THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY.

IS THAT ALL RIGHT FOR EVERYONE? THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART OF THE TESTIMONY HERE. SO, I'D LIKE TO OPEN THIS UP TO THE PUBLIC TO ASK THE PLANNER ANY QUESTIONS. THIS IS THIS IS CLARIFYING QUESTIONS BASED ON HIS TESTIMONY. THIS IS NOT YOUR OPINION. AGAIN, I ACTUALLY I

[01:30:02]

SO FROM A MARKET PERSPECTIVE, I'M SORRY. MAYBE THEY WANT TO EXPAND. PERHAPS THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF THAT. ANYTHING ELSE? SO THOSE ARE THE TWO OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THAT ARE ON THE ON THE LIST WITHIN THE HC DISTRICT THAT I WOULDN'T RULE OUT FOR OTHER THAN MARKET REASONS.

RIGHT. AND CAR WASH AND VETERINARIAN OFFICES ARE CONDITIONALLY CONDITIONALLY CAR WASH IS A CONDITIONAL VET I BELIEVE IS A PERMITTED USE. OKAY. HOLD ON. YOU GET YOU'RE YOU'RE DOING WHAT HE SAID NOT TO DO. NO NO NO YOU'RE YOU CAN ASK HIM QUESTIONS. THAT'S NOT MY OPINION. THAT'S REALITY. NO THAT'S YOU'RE NOT LISTEN, YOU'RE NOT SWORN IN YET. YOU CAN'T DO THAT UNTIL YOU'RE SWORN IN. RIGHT NOW, YOU CAN ONLY ASK HIM QUESTIONS. IT'S NOT MY OPINION.

YOU'RE NOT GIVING A TESTIMONY AND YOU'RE NOT GIVING AN OPINION BY THE WAY. YOU'RE YOU'RE A LAYPERSON, SO YOU CAN'T GIVE OPINIONS. YOU CAN ONLY GIVE FACTS AND YOUR PERSONAL OPINIONS WHEN YOU'RE SWORN IN. RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST QUESTIONING OF HIM. OKAY SO YOU SAID 30% OR SMALL BUSINESS USE FOR SELF-STORAGE IN NEW JERSEY SINCE IN THE POST COVID ERA, THIS PERSON WHO TALKED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF CARS AND PEOPLE IN AND OUT, BECAUSE THAT'S TWO VERY DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. BUSINESS IS NOT COMING IN. MY SUV OR MY PERSONAL CAR THAT'S PROBABLY COMING IN A VAN OR A TRUCK. THE AND IT'S COMING MORE OFTEN. WELL, YOU GOT TO PAUSE AND LET ME ANSWER ONCE IN A WHILE. I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT. OKAY. NO, NO. YOU AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO JUST PUT IT OUT THERE. YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO PUT IT IN TERMS OF A QUESTION. SO SAY, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT YOU . CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION, PLEASE? HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO THE TRANSPORTATION EXPERT BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING 30% IS BUSINESS USE? THAT'S NOT SOMEONE COMING IN A CAR OR THEIR SUV WOULD PROBABLY A VAN OR A TRUCK. SO STOP. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? NO. MANY RETAILERS ARE COMING IN THEIR OWN PERSONAL CAR, MOVING INVENTORY BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THEIR STORE AND THEIR SELF STORAGE UNIT. SO NO, IT'S NOT NECESSARY. AND THEN ASK THEM, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT? I'M 65 AND THIS IS PROBABLY MY 25TH APPLICATION ON THIS KIND OF USE.

AND YES, I GO BACK TO THEM AFTER THEY'RE OPERATING TO SEE HOW THEY FUNCTION. SO YOU'VE SEEN RETAILERS DRIVE UP IN THEIR CARS TO PICK UP PRODUCTS. ABSOLUTELY. IN FACT, I HAVE SELF-STORAGE UNIT ONE IN NEW JERSEY AND ONE IN MARYLAND. AND I WATCHED I KNOW WHO MY NEIGHBORS ARE. YOU LIVE IN THIS AREA. I LIVE IN RIVERTON AND IN BETTERTON, MARYLAND. RIVERTON, NEW JERSEY, BETTERTON, MARYLAND. KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE HISTORICAL TOWN OF ROCKY HILL. THAT'S A BIT OF AN EXAGGERATION. I'VE WORKED IN THIS FIELD, IN THIS STATE, ALL OF MY LIFE. I KNOW ROCKY HILL. HOW MANY, HOW MANY DID THIS? AND YOU DON'T PRETEND YOU DO ROCKY HILL BEFORE, I HAVEN'T DONE AN APPLICATION IN THE TOWN, I HAVE CERTAINLY BEEN IN IT, THROUGH IT, AROUND IT, INVESTIGATED SITES IN IT, BUT I HAVEN'T DONE AN APPLICATION SPECIFICALLY THERE, OKAY. THANKS THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YES. HI. MY NAME IS JOANNA LEONARDO LEO NADEAU. THANK YOU. HOUSE RIGHT NEXT TO THE PROPOSED BUILDING, MY QUESTION IS PRIMARILY FOR CLARIFICATION. I THINK MR. ABU

[01:35:01]

AND THIS WAS A AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER WHO HAS SINCE PASSED, MY GRANDMOTHER AND, HENRY BAKER OR MR. BAKER, WHO OWNED THE PROPERTY WHEN IT WAS GAMETECH.

OKAY. SO HONORED THAT SORRY. MY QUESTION IS, WOULD YOU I GET THE QUESTION. MAY I BE EXCUSED FOR A FEW SECONDS TO TALK TO THE DEAN? YEAH, WE CAN WE CAN TAKE A ONE MINUTE OR ACTUALLY, LET'S TAKE A BIO BREAK FOR MAYBE FIVE THAT'S, LOOKS LIKE WE'RE, ALL BACK AND READY TO GO. SO, SO CAN YOU.

LEONARDO, CAN YOU COME BACK UP? BECAUSE WE HAD LEFT THAT YOU HAD ASKED A QUESTION, AND HE WAS GOING TO CONFER WITH THE CLIENT'S REPRESENTATIVES TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. YES AND I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING LATE, BUT I HAD TO RESOLVE IT BEFORE I COULD DO THE BIO BREAK. SO, THE QUESTION PERTAINED TO A INFORMAL, PERHAPS AGREEMENT HISTORICALLY FOR DRIVEWAY KIND OF ACCESS ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE IN THIS LOCATION, THERE IS NO RECORDED EASEMENT. THE AREA HAS SOME GRADING GOING ON, AND SIGNIFICANT LANDSCAPING THAT WE THINK IS IMPORTANT, NOT JUST FOR THE ADJOINING LANDOWNER, BUT FOR OBLIQUE VIEWS OF THE BUILDING FROM THE STREET. SO WE'RE NOT WILLING TO CHANGE THIS FOR ACCESS. HOWEVER, IT TURNED OUT THAT THE HEART OF THE QUESTION WAS ACCESS TO THE REAR YARD IN THE EVENT OF FUTURE LANDSCAPING, DECK BUILDING, POOL BUILDING, THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE DO BEHIND THEIR HOMES AND THE APPLICANT IS WILLING. AND WE DISCUSSED THIS WITH OUR NEIGHBOR TO ALLOW THE PAVED AREA HERE TO BE USED FOR STAGING FOR THEIR LANDSCAPER OR CONTRACTORS, SO THAT THEY CAN BRING THE MATERIAL IN TO THEIR REAR YARD FROM THE PROPERTY. SO THE APPLICANT IS AGREEABLE TO ALLOW THE REAR PARKING AREA TO BE USED AS A STAGING AREA AND TO ALLOW ACCESS TO THE REAR YARD FOR BUILDING MATERIALS. TREES THAT SORT OF THING. FROM THAT AREA. WHAT'S THE ADDRESS OF THE OF THE HOUSE? TWO WASHINGTON STREET, ROCKY HILL. NEW JERSEY OKAY, SO AFTER HEARING THAT ANSWER, WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE? OKAY, I HOPE WE WILL RECEIVE SOME SORT OF DOCUMENTATION OF THIS. I'M PRETTY DISPLAY IN THE EVENT.

AGAIN IN THE EVENT, THE BOARD WOULD GRANT THIS APPLICATION, WOULD THE APPLICANT AGREE THAT THIS WOULD BECOME A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL? YES, I THINK I MEAN, I'LL ALSO SEND A FOLLOW UP LETTER. I'M JUST NOT SURE WHAT THE CONDITION WOULD LOOK LIKE, BECAUSE THE CONDITION IS WELL, REALLY, IT'S IF THIS IF THERE'S ACCESS REQUIRED, THEY COULD STAGE THERE. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT A CONDITION THAT COULD BE MET FOR, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, IF, IT MAY NOT ARISE

[01:40:03]

YOU'RE RIGHT. I PUT A COMMA, I'M SORRY. AND MY COMMA LOOKED LIKE A12. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND, IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS YOU WANT TO MAKE WHEN THE PUBLIC PORTION WHEN WE PUT EVERYONE UNDER OATH AND YOU CAN MAKE ANY COMMENTS YOU WANT TO MAKE. BUT THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I REALLY HAVE I LIVE AT 118 WASHINGTON STREET. YOU DO TWO THINGS. MOVE THE MICROPHONE TOWARDS YOU AND TELL ME THAT AGAIN. MY NAME IS BAILEY OCCHIPINTI AND I LIVE AT 118 WASHINGTON STREET IN ROCKY HILL. OKAY. AND I KNOW I ASKED YOU THIS BEFORE, BUT CAN YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME AGAIN FOR ME? OAK H I P I N T. THANK YOU, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS. I'M GOING TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. WHAT'S THE TRADE AREA? BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED A NUMBER OF SELF-STORAGE FACILITIES YOU LIKE IN THE AREA, BUT WHAT'S THE ACTUAL TRADE AREA WHERE YOU EXPECT CUSTOMERS TO COME FROM? I DON'T HAVE ANY MARKET STUDY FOR THIS SITE, THAT WOULD IDENTIFY TRADE AREA. DID THE APPLICANT DO A MARKET STUDY BEFORE THEY SELECTED THE SITE? I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEM. I DIDN'T HAVE IT AS PART OF MY WORK. OKAY OF THE SITES THAT YOU DID MENTION, WHO WERE THE OPERATORS? THE STORAGE OPERATORS, I CAN TELL YOU THEIR TRADE NAMES. I DON'T KNOW WHO THE OPERATORS ARE, LET'S SEE. TO PUT IT THIS WAY, IS THE APPLICANT GOING TO OPERATE THIS ITSELF, OR IS THE APPLICANT GOING TO ENTER INTO I. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT WAS, YOU KNOW, PUT IT THIS WAY. I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE ANYTHING. IS THE APPLICANT GOING TO OPERATE THE FACILITY ITSELF, OR IS THE APPLICANT GOING TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH SOME, YOU KNOW, EITHER NATIONWIDE OR REGIONAL STORAGE COMPANY TO OPERATE IT? I DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE, BUT I EXPECT THE LATTER WOULD BE THE CASE. AND THE TRADE NAMES YOU MENTIONED? YEP. I'M LOOKING SORRY. I HAVE TWO MASTERS. ARE YOU GIVING A TRADE NAME FOR RENARD MANAGEMENT, OR ARE YOU GIVING A TRADE NAME FOR ONE OF THE FOR THE POSSIBLE OPERATORS? I'M GIVING THE GOOGLE NAME LISTING OF THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE SITES IN THE AREA THAT I MENTIONED. I ASKED WHO THE DIRECT COMPETITORS WERE THAT HE MENTIONED, OKAY. AND I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M NOT FINDING IT. IT WILL BE HERE. ALL RIGHT. HERE WE GO, SO THE ONE LOCATED HERE IN THE COMMUNITY AT 35 AIR PARK ROAD IS MARKETED AS PRINCETON SELF-STORAGE, THE TWO THAT WERE IN HILLSBORO, FURTHER UP ROUTE 206 WERE LIFE STORAGE AND LARKIN SELF STORAGE. THE CLIMATE CONTROLLED ONE IN MONMOUTH JUNCTION. I DIDN'T GET THE NAME FOR. A MARKET STUDY, BUT DO YOU KNOW ROUGHLY THE POPULATION DENSITY OF THE AREA? DENSITY, NO, I WOULDN'T GUESS. YOU JUST MENTIONED THERE WAS A GROWING NEED FOR SELF STORAGE IN YOUR TESTIMONY. SO I GUESS GAVE YOU REASON TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT, THE SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF NEW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS GOING UP WITHIN A 3 TO 5 MILE RANGE OF THE SITE. HOW MANY MULTIFAMILY UNITS ARE GOING UP WITHIN A 3 TO 5 MILE AVERAGE? I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC COUNT. OKAY. THEN I'M GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION. I PROBABLY KNOW THE ANSWER, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE AVERAGE STORAGE IN THOSE MULTIFAMILY FAMILY UNITS ARE LIKE? IF IT'S 16FT■!S, SQUAE FEET OF STORAGE, FOR A ONE BEDROOM, MANY, MANY ORDINANCES

[01:45:02]

YEAH. OKAY. OKAY WELL, LET'S SEE IF I HAVE IT. I CAN GO TO THE WEBSITE AND CONFIRM WHAT I HAVE.

I ALSO. YEAH. GO TO GO TO EXHIBITS A5, A6 AND A7 AND THEN SCROLL DOWN. THERE'S A6 THERE.

A6 HAS FLOOR PLANS FOR THE VARIOUS FLOORS. SO MR. VANCAMP, HAVE YOU SEEN THIS BEFORE THIS EVENING? I HAVE SEEN THIS, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A SUMMARY TABLE SETTING. I REMEMBER MR. VANDERLIP'S TESTIMONY WAS THAT THIS WAS A CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT COULD EASILY CHANGE BY THE TIME IT WAS BUILT. BUT AND THERE'S NO SUMMARY TABLE , IS THERE A UNIT MIX WITH, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY? FIVE BY FIVE UNITS. FIVE BY TEN. WE'RE GOING TO NEED THE ARCHITECT FOR THOSE ANSWERS. CAN YOU WANT TO DEFER THAT TO THE ARCHITECT TO ANSWER? YEAH THERE'S NOT A SUMMARY TABLE . IN FRONT OF THE ARCHITECT FOR THE ANSWER. I DON'T THINK THAT MEANS WE GET THEM RIGHT NOW, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO BRING THEM UP AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. AND THEN YOU DESCRIBED THAT THIS USE IS PERMITTED IN THE REO3 ONLY WITHIN THE AIRPORT HAZARD ZONE WITHIN THE RIO THREE. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH VACANT LAND IS ROUGHLY THERE, WELL, YOU'RE IN THE AIRPORT HAZARD AREA, SO YOU'RE ONLY IN THE RUNWAY ENDS, END CAPS OF THE RUNWAY OF THE AIRPORT AREA. SO IT'S A VERY LIMITED AREA AND THE USE HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT. SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL VACANT ACREAGE. AND YOU COULDN'T BUILD THIS USE ANYWAY. IT'S TOO TALL. YOU COULD ONLY BUILD THE SINGLE STORY STEEL BOX UNIT, SELF-STORAGE TYPE. WAIT A MINUTE. WAIT, ARE YOU SAYING THAT IF CLIMATE CONTROLLED WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE AIRPORT? DO YOU? I'M SORRY. I'LL LET YOU FINISH. ARE YOU SAYING THAT A CLIMATE CONTROLLED. I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING TWO STORIES WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED, BUT ARE YOU SAYING A ONE STORY, CLIMATE CONTROLLED SELF-STORAGE FACILITY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THAT ZONE? IN THE ALONG AIRPORT AIRPARK ROAD? BY BEST RECOLLECTION, IT WOULD BE PERMITTED BY USE, BUT IT WOULD NEVER MEET ANY OF THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE BASED ON ROWS OF ROADS AND LONG LINEAR BUILDINGS. OKAY, AND DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S SUFFICIENT LAND TO HAVE IT THERE, OR ARE YOU JUST ASSUMING THAT THERE'S NOT? I'M ASSUMING BECAUSE IT'S ONLY THE AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE AND I KNOW HOW BIG THEY ARE. SO IT'S A SMALL LAND AREA, AND THERE'S ALREADY ONE OF THESE IN IT. SO THE IDEA THAT THERE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL LANDS FOR A, AN ANIMAL THAT DOESN'T EXIST, A ONE STORY, CLIMATE CONTROLLED BUILDING, WOULD BE VERY SMALL.

OKAY. WHY LET ME I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHY COULDN'T THE APPLICANT DO A ONE STORY, CLIMATE CONTROLLED BUILDING AT THIS SITE? CLIMATE CONTROL AT ONE STORY IS COST INEFFICIENT, THE VOLUME OF THE BUILDING IS WHAT HELPS YOU COVER THE COST OF CLIMATE CONTROL. THE VOLUME OF SPACE IS MUCH, MUCH MORE COST EFFECTIVE TO CONTROL TEMPERATURE THAN A LONG LINEAR BUILDING.

OKAY. SO IT'S MORE ECONOMICALLY. ADVANTAGEOUS. BUT IS IT ECONOMICALLY NOT FEASIBLE TO DO A ONE STORY CLIMATE CONTROLLED ON THIS SITE, ESPECIALLY IF THE OWNER OF THE SITE LOWERED THE SALES PRICE? WELL, I'M A PLANNER . I'M NOT GOING TO GO TOO DEEP INTO THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY.

YOU'RE ALL I CAN SAY IS I'VE NEVER SEEN SUCH A CREATURE CAN I? I'VE SEEN YOU TESTIFY IN IN VARIOUS PROCEEDINGS. CORRECT. YOU HAVE. I'VE HEARD YOU TESTIFY ABOUT ECONOMICS IN THOSE PROCEEDINGS. CORRECT. ON USES THAT I'VE STUDIED THE ECONOMICS OF. YES. AND YOU ACTUALLY HAVE

[01:50:04]

YES. I HAVE NOT DONE THAT. ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE. I UNDERSTAND YOU MAY NOT HAVE STUDIED IT, BUT SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ECONOMICALLY YOU COULD DO A ONE STORY, CLIMATE CONTROLLED SELF-STORAGE. I LIMITED MYSELF TO SAYING I'VE NEVER SEEN SUCH A THING. SO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS HE DOESN'T KNOW. GOOD EVENING. I'M SUSAN BRISTOL.

I LIVE ON WASHINGTON STREET IN ROCKY HILL. LAST NAME IS B R I S T O L. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES, SIR. MY FIRST QUESTION AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION IS IF THIS IS SO DIFFICULT AND HAS SO MANY CONSTRAINTS, WHY WHY DIDN'T YOUR CLIENT PUT THEIR PROJECT SOMEWHERE ELSE? SO AS I SAID, THERE ARE TWO PARTS TO THIS. ONE IS THAT IT'S A SITE LOOKING FOR A USE. SO IF THIS IF THIS USE GOES SOMEWHERE ELSE, THERE'S STILL A SITE TRYING TO FIND AN APPROPRIATE USE. AND THIS ONE HAPPENED TO FIT DID WERE YOU INVOLVED IN ADVISING THE YOUR CLIENT THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD SITE FOR THEIR PROJECT, I BELIEVE ON THIS ONE. THEY WERE ALREADY IN ACQUISITION DISCUSSIONS WHEN I WAS RETAINED. THANK YOU, YOU MENTIONED DOING SOME HOMEWORK ABOUT THE PAST HISTORY OF MONTGOMERY PLANNING ACTIVITIES AND MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT, AND, I HAVE AS WELL. SO I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THE ROCKY HILL NODE, HOWEVER, I'M NOT SURE, IF YOU FULLY DESCRIBED WHAT MONTGOMERY CLAIMS WERE THE ASSETS, BENEFITS TO PLANNING THE ROCKY HILL NODE COULD YOU SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? WELL, YOU HAVE IT RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU, AND I DON'T. SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO READ, THAT'S WHAT YOU DON'T WANT TO READ IT. SHE WANTS TO KNOW. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU UNDERSTOOD TO BE THE IMPORTANT GOALS OF PLANNING THE NODES AND THE ROCKY HILL NODE IN PARTICULAR. OKAY THROUGH SEVERAL DECADES OF PLANNING IN MONTGOMERY, WHICH YOU REFERENCED BY SAYING YOU SAW THE 1971 MASTER PLAN. WELL, THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT IN THE 1971 MASTER PLAN WAS LARGELY A, IDENTIFIED IDENTIFICATION OF THE COMMERCIAL AREAS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT SHOULD DEVELOP IN THE FUTURE IN REEXAMINATIONS AND PLAN ELEMENTS. SINCE THEN, THERE HAS BEEN A FOCUS ON THE DESIGN OF THE NODES, IN TERMS OF THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THE DEVELOPMENT, REFLECTING MORE CURRENT DESIGN APPROACHES THAN WERE DISCUSSED IN 1971. DO YOU RECALL THE TERM SMART GROWTH BEING USED? THAT'S EVERYWHERE. THAT'S IN THE AIR? YES. WHICH MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY MONTGOMERY PUT SOME OF THEIR MORE DENSE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN A FAIRLY CLOSE PROXIMITY. I CERTAINLY SORRY, I CERTAINLY SUPPORT MULTIFAMILY BEING CLOSER TO, COMMERCIAL AND OTHER SORTS OF USES. WE HAVE NO, SO ARE YOU AWARE OF MONTGOMERY, REFERRING TO THIS AREA AS A PEDESTRIAN WALK, SHED AREA OF INTEREST AND IDEAL FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LINKAGES? YES, IF I MAY, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE REFERENCING A SPECIFIC DOCUMENT, THE DOCUMENT SHOULD BE NO, NO, NO NO NO, NO. SHE CAN ASK HIM IF HE'S AWARE. IF HE SAYS YES OKAY. IF HE SAYS NO, SHE COULD THEN REFERENCE IT. BUT THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH HOW SHE'S ASKING HER QUESTION.

SHE DOES NOT HAVE TO IDENTIFY WHAT SHE'S READING UP FRONT. IN MY OPINION. THANK YOU, I AGREE, I'LL MOVE ON TO MY NEXT QUESTION NOW, I HAVE READ MANY PLANNING JOURNALS AND ARTICLES THAT SUGGEST THAT THE SELF-STORAGE INDUSTRY IS IN DECLINE AND THAT THE MARKET IS SATURATED. HAVE YOU HAD ACCESS TO ANY OF THOSE REPORTS SINCE YOU SEEM? I'D BE VERY SHY. SOME OTHER SOURCES THAT YOU HAVEN'T IDENTIFIED FINISHED. OKAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I DON'T TALK OVER YOU.

OKAY, THERE WERE A LOT OF THOSE SORTS OF STUDIES PRE-COVID, THERE HAVE THERE HAVE NOT BEEN INDUSTRY WIDE DISCUSSIONS OF A COLLAPSED POST-COVID. THERE ARE CERTAINLY MARKETS THAT GOT OVERBUILT AS, THERE ARE A LOT OF PROJECTS IN PIPELINES IN CERTAIN AREAS IN THE STATE. THIS IS NOT

[01:55:04]

I THINK THAT WAS A FUNCTION OF THE ARCHITECTURE. I THINK IT'S A WELL DONE BUILDING AND IT IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION. ARE YOU FAMILIAR, SIR, WITH THE NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF PLANNING ADVOCACY? YES, I AM OKAY, SO ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THEIR GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY? I DON'T KNOW IT BY THAT NAME. OKAY SO, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY DISCOURAGES TOWNS FROM PUTTING UNWANTED USES ON THEIR BORDERS WITH ADJACENT COMMUNITIES. SO ARE YOU AT ALL FAMILIAR WITH THEIR OPINION PIECES ON THAT POLICY? YES, AS IT RELATES TO, I'M NOT SURE UNWANTED USES IS THE RIGHT PHRASE, BUT IN TERMS OF UNDESIRABLE, LET'S USE THE WORD UNDESIRABLE IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE. IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TO PUT YOUR LANDFILLS AND TRASH TO TRASH TO STEAM, OR THOSE KINDS OF USES ON MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES. I DON'T SEE THAT AS BEING APPROPRIATE TO THIS SCALE OF USE. OKAY. THANK YOU. OF ALL THE DIFFICULTIES YOU IDENTIFIED WITH THIS SITE AND CHALLENGES, HOW MANY OF THOSE WOULD YOU SAY BASED ON DESIGN DECISIONS ARE SELF-IMPOSED BY THE APPLICANT AND THEIR PROJECT? NONE. THEY ARE THE BACKGROUND REQUIREMENTS OF THE EPA. FINALLY, MY LAST QUESTION. YOU SUGGESTED IN A KIND OF, OFFHAND WAY YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT MODERN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, BUT I DON'T. COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT, THAT THE REGULATIONS CONTROLLING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT HAVE EVOLVED A GREAT DEAL AND HAVE BECOME MORE RIGOROUS OVER THE YEARS SO THAT AS SITES ARE REDEVELOPED, THE CURRENT MODELING AND APPROACHES TO WHAT GOES ON IN A SITE ARE IMPROVEMENTS OVER WHAT EXISTED THERE HISTORICALLY. SO IN TERMS OF WATER LEAVING THIS SITE, AS I UNDERSTOOD THE ENGINEERING TESTIMONY, WE ARE, AT OR BELOW PREVIOUS PEAKS AND HAVE MORE WATER QUALITY. OCCURRING HERE THAN HAD OCCURRED IN THE PAST. SO ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT YOUR CLIENT WILL NOT BE USING THE REDEVELOPMENT LOOPHOLE AND WILL BE USING ENHANCED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT HERE? YOU SAY LOOPHOLE, I SAY REQUIREMENTS OF THE REGULATIONS. I SAID IT WOULD BE BETTER THAN IT WAS HISTORICALLY. I DIDN'T SAY IT WOULD MATCH SOUP TO NUTS. THE CURRENT REGULATIONS. WELL, YOU DID SAY MODERN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION WHEN YOU WERE TESTIFYING THAT YOU WERE SAYING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO GO WITH, YOU KNOW, THE BEST PRACTICES OF DEP, AS IF THIS WAS NOT REDEVELOPMENT. I DIDN'T SAY THAT AT ALL. I UNDERSTAND YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT AT ALL. THAT'S THE IMPRESSION YOU LEFT. SO. SO IF THERE WAS ANY REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE FOR THIS USE OR ANY OTHER SITE, WOULDN'T WHATEVER STORMWATER MANAGEMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE? EXCEPT THAT YOUR PREMISE WAS THAT THERE WOULD BE A USE THAT COULD USE THE SITE. YOU HAVE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM FIRST. TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM, YOU NEED A USE THAT WOULD ALLOW THE STORMWATER TO BE IMPROVED. OKAY, SO WHY WOULD A CHEAP QUALITY HOTEL RATHER THAN A GOOD OR HIGH QUALITY HOTEL BE MORE LIKELY TO DEVELOP HERE? TWO STORY LIMITATION, OR TWO AND A HALF STORY LIMITATION AND A VERY SMALL SITE. THE NATURE OF THE HOTEL IS NOT GOING TO BE, A HOTEL WITH A CONVENTION CENTER OR A WEDDING AREA OR ANY KIND OF SIGNIFICANT, SIGNIFICANT MEETING ROOM. IT WOULD BE THE, STREET HIGHWAY SIDE HOTEL THAT OUR SOCIETY HAS MOVED AWAY FROM. SO WE SHOULD ADD HOTEL TO THE LIST OF USES. YOU SAID CAR WASH COULD GO THERE. CONDITIONAL USE. VETERINARIAN OFFICE COULD GO THERE. PERMITTED USE. HOTEL COULD GO THERE. CONDITIONAL OR PERMITTED. IT'S A PERMITTED USE.

BUT I DIDN'T SAY COULD GO THERE. THAT WAS YOUR CONCLUSION? NO. YOU SAID NOT A HIGH QUALITY HOTEL. IT WOULD BE BECAUSE IT'S LIMITED TO TWO STORIES. COULD YOU PHYSICALLY FIT A SMALL TWO AND A HALF STORY HOTEL ON THIS SITE OF THE HIGHWAY? SO BASICALLY IT WOULD BE IT WOULD

[02:00:02]

I'M JUST WONDERING WHY YOU DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IT. BECAUSE WE'RE BEFORE A BOARD IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND I BELIEVE THE LANDSCAPING THAT'S BEEN SHOWN ON THE FRONT OF THIS SITE, THE ARCHITECTURE THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED, ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS IN THIS DISTRICT, IN THIS COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

HELLO. MY NAME IS MARGARET QUIRK. I LIVE AT 179 WASHINGTON STREET AND ROCKY HILL. CAN YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME? YOU YOU E R E C. THANK YOU. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE BUILDING ON THE LEFT, BECAUSE I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THAT BUILDING IS THAT ONE OF THOSE THINGS? WHERE ARE THEY? THE DOORS OPEN UP AND PEOPLE CAN DRIVE IN. SO YOU'RE AT ON EXHIBIT A6, CORRECT? AND YOU CAN ACCEPT THAT, RIGHT. SHE'S ASKING ABOUT I'M ASKING ABOUT THIS BUILDING. SO IT HAS STORAGE UNITS IN THE BACK AND THEN OPEN TO GARAGE DOORS IN THE SECOND. LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT EXHIBIT THAT IS SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT. EXHIBIT A6 OKAY. SO EXHIBIT A6 IS THE ARCHITECTURAL PLAN FOR THE BUILDING THAT WE'RE SPEAKING OF TO THE LEFT OF THE SITE PLAN, AND IT'S I'M SORRY, I'M GOING TO SIT SO I CAN READ, FIRST FLOOR ON THE LEFT, SECOND FLOOR ON THE RIGHT, AND INDICATING WITH THE GREEN ARROW, THERE'S AN ENTRY ON THE GROUND FLOOR THAT WOULD ALLOW ACCESS TO THE ELEVATOR LOBBY, THERE ARE REAR UNITS THAT ARE CONNECTED TO AN INTERIOR CORRIDOR, AND THEN UPSTAIRS IS OBVIOUSLY ALL INTERIOR ON THE GROUND FLOOR FACING THE LOADING AREA, AS SHOWN ON. WHAT DO YOU CALL THIS ONE, A5. A5? YES THOSE DOOR OUTSIDE OPENING DOORS ARE ALONG THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING. I'M INDICATING WITH THE GREEN ARROW ADJACENT TO THE LOADING AREA, WHICH IS SHOWN ON STRIPES ON EXHIBIT A5. NOW IS THAT BUILDING CLIMATE CONTROLLED? ALSO? YES AND THE DOOR AREAS THAT THE DOORS OPEN UP IS THAT 24 HOUR ACCESS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT RENT THOSE UNITS? I THINK THAT'S, A QUESTION THAT MAY BE BETTER SUITED FOR THE ARCHITECT, WHO TESTIFIED TO THAT AT THE LAST. OKAY. SO WE BRING IN THE ARCHITECT BACK TO ANSWER TWO QUESTIONS. NOW YEAH. I MEAN, SO HOWEVER YOU FEEL YOU WANT. YEAH. LISTEN, LET'S. YEAH. AFTER AFTER MR. VANCAMP'S DONE, I JUST I DON'T WANT HIM TO GET TOO FAR INTO. CORRECT. BUT OTHER PROFESSIONALS, WHEN THE ARCHITECT COMES BACK, HE'S GOING TO BE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT A6, WHICH MR. RUHENKAMP COULDN'T ANSWER AND DEFERRED TO THE ARCHITECT. AND SO HE CAN ANSWER.

HE CAN ANSWER. I JUST SOME OF THIS WAS TESTIFIED TO THE LAST TIME. SO I UNDERSTAND I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT. I COULDN'T BE HERE. YEAH. I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IF MR. VANCAMP COULD HAVE ANSWERED THESE QUESTIONS, WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE ARCHITECT COME BACK. HE'S DEFERRED IT TO HIM. BUT THE ARCHITECT'S QUESTIONS WILL BE LIMITED TO THE QUESTIONS MR. VANCAMP CANNOT ANSWER AND DEFER TO THE ARCHITECT SPECIFICALLY, IT WAS TO IT WAS THE UNIT MIX WITHIN THE BUILDINGS AND WHETHER OR NOT THE EXTERIOR DOORS WERE ON A TIME LOCK. THAT'S CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW. RIGHT. OKAY. YES, BECAUSE MY QUESTION WAS HOW THAT WOULD BE MONITORED. RIGHT.

THAT'S GOING TO BE FOR THE ARCHITECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND JUST FROM FROM THE RECORD OF THE LAST HEARING, THOSE WERE OPEN FROM THE ARCHITECT THAT TESTIFIED THAT THOSE WERE OPEN FROM 6 TO 10. ALL OF THE UNITS WAS THE

[02:05:04]

SO WOULD THERE BE ANY RESTRICTIONS OR LIMITATIONS. AND YOU KNOW, SHORT OF YOU MENTIONED THERE'D BE STORAGE OF SPORTING EQUIPMENT, BUT, YOU KNOW, WOULD OBVIOUSLY MAYBE PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE A PROPANE TANKS. BUT MORE THAN THAT, YOUR, YOUR, YOUR COMMENT ABOUT BUSINESSES AND I UNDERSTAND OKAY. SO BUSINESSES WANT TO HAVE A PLACE TO STORE THINGS. BUT I MEAN WOULD THAT INCLUDE ANY BUSINESS SCIENTIFIC. CHEMICALS, FERTILIZERS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. IS THERE ANY THOUGHTS OF RESTRICTIONS ON THAT? YES. THE INDUSTRY STANDARD LEASE PROHIBITS A LARGE UNIVERSE OF THINGS, TYPICALLY IT'S A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR SELF STORAGE THAT THE BOARD ATTORNEY SEES. THE STANDARD LEASE, THERE WAS ONE DISCUSSION THAT HAPPENED EARLIER THAT I SHOULD CORRECT THE COUNCIL. YOU ASKED ABOUT, FLUIDS IN VEHICLES AND WHETHER THEY WERE DEP CONTROLLED. ONCE THEY'RE IN VEHICLES, THEY'RE NOT ON THE DEP CONTROL LIST. IT'S A QUIRK OF THE DEP REGULATIONS.

BUT ONCE ONCE WE'VE PUT THE OIL IN OUR CAR, IT'S NO LONGER A REGULATED OIL UNDER DEP. SO LET'S JUST ASK, CAN YOU SUBMIT THE PROPOSED LEASE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE TO TENANTS OF THIS FACILITY SO THE BOARD CAN LOOK AT IT AND SEE THERE'S USUALLY THERE'S A CLAUSE OF PROHIBITED ITEMS. AND SO WE COULD LOOK AT THAT AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT THE AGAIN, ASSUMING THE BOARD GETS INTO A POSITION THAT THEY WANT TO GRANT THIS TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THEY WANT TO PUT ON THE PROHIBITED LIST, THE, THE PROPOSED LEASE IS NOT, YOU KNOW, BEEN FOR THE TENANTS HAS NOT BEEN DRAFTED. HOWEVER, WE I UNDERSTAND WE WILL SUBMIT THAT THERE WILL BE NO HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. NO, NO NO NO NO. LISTEN, I'VE DONE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS 35 YEARS, SO I'VE HAD A COUPLE STORAGE FACILITIES. WHEN THE BOARD ASKS TO HAVE A PROPOSED LEASE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO LOCK AND LOAD THAT. THAT WILL BE THE COMPANY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GO WITH. BUT IF YOU TELL THE COMPANY THAT THEY'RE BEING CONSIDERED, THEY'LL SEND YOU A LEASE. SO WE WILL SUBMIT THE PROPOSED LEASE. THAT'S RIGHT. THANKS AND THE FINAL QUESTION, SOMEWHAT RELATED TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, BUT YOU MENTIONED THAT THE SITE WAS OPTIMUM BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ON THE PROPERTY. AND YES, I UNDERSTAND, THE DAY CARE OR SOMETHING. SO THIS USE WILL BE LESS OF AN IMPACT TO THE RESIDENTS. I MEAN, THE, THE USERS, EXCEPT MY CONCERN IS, WELL, NO. MY QUESTION IS, MY QUESTION IS, HAS THERE BEEN ANY THOUGHT OF, SINCE THE SITE IS ON A CONTAMINATED SITE, VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION, YOU KNOW, PASSIVE OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE USE IS, IF IT'S GOING TO BE THIS OR ANYTHING ELSE. BUT I WOULD THINK. WAS THERE ANY THOUGHT OF THAT? A VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION. SO I'M THE PLANNER.

I DON'T WANT TO PRETEND LIKE I'M THE ENGINEER AND TELLING YOU ALL OF THIS, BUT THE CLEANUP PLAN FOR THE SITE INCLUDES ESSENTIALLY CAPPING, WHICH IS WHAT THE BUILDING PARKING AND IMPERVIOUS LAYERS ARE WITH THE PIPE SYSTEM. THAT'S RUNNING UNDERNEATH IT. SO THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T HAVE A USE THAT THAT PENETRATES THE GROUND. SO ALL OF THAT'S PART OF THE CLEANUP THAT

[02:10:02]

GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MICHAEL DAVIS, ARE YOU, MONTGOMERY RESIDENT? RESIDENT OF ROCKY HILL BOROUGH PLANNING. GREAT, YOU'RE THE ROCKY HILL BOROUGH PLANNER.

OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU. DAVIS SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY TONIGHT. MR. GOOD EVENING, BRIAN KEMP, I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS FOR YOU. I KNOW WE YOU HAD DISCUSSED EARLIER WITH ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT THE AIRPORT ZONES, WHICH PERMIT SELF STORAGE FACILITIES WERE NOT ANALYZED FOR VACANT LAND SPECIFICALLY, IT WAS KIND OF JUST AN UNDERSTANDING, I KNOW THAT THE RIO RE ALSO CONDITIONALLY PERMITS SELF STORAGE FACILITIES, SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK IF YOU HAD DONE ANY ANALYSIS OF THE O3 ZONE. THE RIO THREE PERMITS SELF STORAGE AS A CONDITIONAL USE. AND ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS THAT YOU'RE IN THE AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE. OKAY.

SO IT'S ONE THING. IT'S NOT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS KIND OF OVERLAY. GOTCHA, AND THEN I WAS JUST LOOKING THROUGH THE ORDINANCE BRIEFLY, AND I WAS JUST WANTING TO KNOW IF SECTION.

I'LL READ IT TO YOU. SECTION 16 DASH 5.10 PRINCIPAL USE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED IN THIS CHAPTER, NO MORE THAN ONE PRINCIPAL DWELLING OR BUILDING SHALL BE PERMITTED ON. ONE LOT.

HAS RELIEF BEEN REQUESTED FOR THAT, THE D1 INCLUDES THAT, YES, IF I'M ACTUALLY IF I MAY, I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE PLANNER, BUT, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON ONE LOT IN THE, IN THE HCA. YES. OKAY. YEP NO, JUST JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. OGDEN. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC HAVE QUESTIONS OF THIS WITNESS? ALL RIGHT, THEN, WE'LL SHIFT TO THE BOARD. I'M SURE THE BOARD HAD SOME QUESTIONS. I'LL START OFF WITH A QUESTION. YOU TESTIFIED YOUR OPINION. WHY? YOU BELIEVE THAT THE SELF-STORAGE FACILITY COULD COULD HANDLE A LARGER F.A.R RATIO? YES SIR, CAN YOU JUST SUMMARIZE FOR ME AGAIN? AND YOU. I KNOW YOU TESTIFIED IN A COUPLE OF AREAS ABOUT THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY, BUT GIVEN HOW FAR ABOVE THE ALLOWED LIMIT, WHY COULDN'T THIS BE A LOT SMALLER? LIKE WHAT? WHAT IS PROHIBITING THE APPLICANT FROM SHRINKING THIS BUILDING? SO WHAT'S MAGIC ABOUT 83? OKAY, LET ME. HE'S HE'S NOT EVEN ASKING. WHY CAN'T YOU GET DOWN TO 20? HE'S ASKING WHAT'S MAGIC ABOUT 83, I UNDERSTOOD, OKAY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE. OKAY, SO THERE ARE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF WAYS I WANT TO ANSWER THAT. THE FIRST IS, WE'RE ASKING THE QUESTION AS IF THE POINT TOO FAR FOR THIS USE EVER MADE SENSE. IT DOESN'T. THE FIRST THING I SAID TO YOU WAS THAT IN SETTING AN FA, YOU SET THE F.A.R FOR SPECIFIC USES, FOR THE KINDS OF USES YOU EXPECT IN A ZONE, IN THE SAME WAY THAT YOU WOULDN'T APPLY A COMMERCIAL PARKING RATIO TO THIS BUILDING, YOU WOULDN'T APPLY AN FA THAT MADE SENSE FOR RETAIL OR OFFICE TO THIS USE. IF YOU WERE INTENDING TO DO THIS USE, YOU NEVER WOULD HAVE PICKED A POINT TOO FAR FOR THIS USE. IF I WERE GOING TO WRITE A ZONING DISTRICT FOR HC AND PUT THIS IN AS A PERMITTED USE, I WOULD IMMEDIATELY PUT IN BULK STANDARDS THAT MADE SENSE FOR THIS USE KEYED TO THAT PARTICULAR OKAY, WHAT WOULD IT HAVE BEEN? WOULD IT HAVE BEEN 83, OR WOULD IT HAVE BEEN 60? THAT REQUIRES A MUCH MORE ANALYSIS THAN ME DANCING ON ONE FOOT. I UNDERSTAND, BUT THAT'S WHAT HE'S REALLY ASKING. OKAY.

GIVE ME HALF A SECOND AND I'LL COME BACK ON THAT ONE, LET ME FINISH. FINISH ANSWERING THE

[02:15:04]

YEAH THEY ARE THE SAME THING ABOUT I'D ACTUALLY KIND OF THINK THAT THIS THIS IS ACTUALLY LEADS US DOWN NOT A GOOD PATH BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, ALL THOSE ORDINANCES ARE BASED ON SPECIFIC ZONING AREAS IN THEIR OWN ZONES, NOT IN THE CENTER OF A TOWN, NOT IN NEXT DOOR TO ANOTHER TOWN. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S AN APPLICABLE, FLOOR AREA RATIO, BUT I THINK BUT I LIKE THE QUESTION. I'M JUST NOT SURE THAT THE PROPOSAL SATISFIES THE OBJECTIVE OF FAIR ENOUGH QUESTION. BUT THERE'S ONE OTHER THING THAT YOU WOULD SAID THAT THE IN THIS CASE, F A R IS RELATED TO PARKING. YES, BUT F A R IS ALSO RELATED TO ESTHETICS. F A R IS ALSO RELATED TO INTENSITY OF USE. YES RIGHT. SO RIGHT. SO I, I, I SAID ALL THOSE THINGS IN MY TESTIMONY. I'M NOT RUNNING AWAY FROM THEM. I WAS JUST FOCUSING ON ON THE SPECIFIC QUESTION THAT WAS BEING ASKED, AND IF THE BOARD WILL ACCORD ME THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO DO SOME RESEARCH, I'LL COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDED NUMBER. RIGHT. THE WHAT IS THE ANSWER? WHY IS 83% THE MAGIC NUMBER? DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER TONIGHT? NO. OKAY AND TO BE FAIR, I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A STATEMENT THAT 83 WAS A MAGIC NUMBER. I THINK THAT WAS A QUESTION. IS WHY 83. IT WASN'T THE INITIAL TESTIMONY.

OKAY RIGHT. AND WHY DO YOU WHY DO YOU NEED 83% RATHER THAN A LESSER F A R AS CLOSE TO 20% AS POSSIBLE? THAT'S THE QUESTION. YEAH I JUST YEAH. IT'S SO FAR ABOVE THE LIMIT. I'M I'M JUST IT'S A CONCERN. YOU KNOW, YOU YOU ADDRESSED IN YOUR IN YOUR, IN YOUR COMMENTARY WHY YOU MAY BE ABLE TO SUSTAIN A HIGHER FA FOR THIS USE. AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO BRIDGE FROM THE 20 TO 83. IT'S I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION AND I APPRECIATE IT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SOME TIME TO ANSWER IT THOUGHTFULLY. THANK YOU. OKAY MR. WALMART. SO I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE, CLERK CATON HINTZ MEMO REVISED MARCH 28TH, 2024. YES, SIR. AND I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 16.

SECTION 10.1 BUILDING DESIGN, CHARACTER AND IT'S ASKING A SECOND, SIR. LET ME CATCH UP TO YOU. YEAH 10.1 UNDER ARCHITECTURE. YES. OKAY. YES, SIR. SO, MAKING A RECOMMENDATION THERE THAT, THE SECOND DESIGN WAS A MORE BRICK HEAVY DESIGN THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE OFFICE. AS A MORE ATTRACTIVE OPTION OR ALTERNATIVE TO USE THE VILLAGE SHOPPES AT MONTGOMERY AS A MODEL FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT IS REMINISCENT OF TRADITIONAL ARCHITECTURE IN THE AREA. SO MY

[02:20:06]

YES SERVICES? YES. YOU'VE MENTIONED IT SEVERAL TIMES, I APPRECIATE YOUR EXPERTISE IN THIS AREA, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE CONCRETE THAN JUST YOUR OPINION IN IN TERMS OF A STUDY IN TERMS OF STATISTICS, IN TERMS OF SOMETHING TO BACK UP THAT THAT CLAIM. WE'VE HEARD THE QUESTION. WE'LL SEE WHAT I'M AUTHORIZED TO DO. THANK YOU. I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION, KIND OF AND ACTUALLY, RESUMMARIZE YOUR YOUR, ARGUMENT ABOUT ESTHETICS FOR THE D4 VARIANCE FOR AREA RATIO, I THINK YOU WERE REFERENCING BOTH THE ESTHETICS AND THE INTENSITY ASPECTS OF RIGHT OF THE RELIEF. YOU'RE YOU'RE REQUESTING, IF I COULD JUST SUMMER TRY TO RESUMMARIZE YOUR ARGUMENT. YOU WERE SAYING THAT IN THE PERMITTED USE OF THE .2.2 FLOOR AREA RATIO, YOU WERE SAYING THAT THE LINEAR FRONTAGE OF THE BUILDING WOULD BE ROUGHLY THE SAME, AND YOU COULD PARK BEHIND AND THEN YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT, WELL, YOU COULD ALSO ORIENT THE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, TO THIS WAY, AND YOU CAN HAVE ALL THIS AREA FOR, FOR PARKING AS WELL. AND SATISFY THE EXISTING USE. THAT THAT WAS I DID I DO A GOOD JOB OF SUMMARIZING. YES. YOU DID. OKAY. I PUT EXHIBIT A5 UP ON THE WALL, AND I'VE ALIGNED THE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LINES WITH APPROXIMATELY WHERE I PERMITTED USE BUILDING COULD BE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OR ALONG THE SIDE. IT WOULD BE AN EITHER OR. WE CAN'T SEE THE VERTICAL HORIZONTAL.

OKAY. IF YOU LOOK BEHIND YOU. RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT, I GUESS MY QUESTION IN THAT, IN THAT AND I'M NOT I YOU'RE LEAVING OUT THE THIS BUILDING OVER HERE ENTIRELY IN THAT ARGUMENT, THOUGH. WHICH BUILDING THE BIG ONE OR THE SMALL? THE LEFT. THE LEFT SIDE, WHICH IS THE SMALL BUILDING. YEAH. SO YES, I GUESS CAN YOU ADD TO YOUR, HOW DOES THAT FIT IN YOUR,

[02:25:04]

EXHIBIT A7, A7 AND REFERENCE VIEW THREE. VIEW THREE. YEAH THAT DOESN'T. YEAH. CAN WE PUT UP EXHIBIT 7733? CAN WE KEEP ON GOING? SCROLL SCROLL SCROLL THERE. NOW YOU'RE ON EXHIBIT A7.

NOW SCROLL A LITTLE BIT MORE. YOU SEE WHERE THE VIEW THREE IS. THERE'S VIEW THREE, VIEW ONE, THERE'S YOUR INVISIBLE INVISIBLE BUILDING FROM STANDING IN THE FRONT YARD. YES, THE 518, WHICH IS A COUNTY ROAD, IS LISTEN, GUYS, OUT IN THE AUDIENCE. ANYTHING YOU SAY. THE COURT REPORTER IS NOT PICKING UP. WE CAN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAY. ALL WE HEAR IS LIKE NOISE, WHICH INTERFERES WITH THEM LISTENING. SO IT'S BETTER TO IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT, WRITE IT DOWN. SO WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN TO TESTIFY, YOU CAN MAKE THE COMMENT. SO I WENT BACK, OKAY, COUNSELOR, IF YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT EXHIBIT THIS ONE IS, THE LOCATION PLAN. THAT'S THAT'S A THAT'S THE FIRST SEVEN TOGETHER. OKAY. YEAH. SO ON EXHIBIT A7 WHERE THE NUMBER THREE IS LOCATED IS LITERALLY ON THE FRONT YARD WITHOUT ANY OF THE LANDSCAPE SCREENING. IF WE'RE DOING VIEWS FROM THE ROADWAY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE LANDSCAPING, WHICH IS NOT SHOWN TERRIBLY WELL ON THIS PARTICULAR EXHIBIT. OKAY. THEN THEN THEN I'D LIKE TO YOU TO REDO, A NUMBER SEVEN, WHICH IS TEN FEET TO THE SOUTH OF THAT, WHICH IS, WHICH IS ON THE ROADWAY. I MEAN, COME ON. RIGHT.

I MEAN, WILL IT BE DIFFERENT? OH, YOU'RE SAYING AT A SEVEN. I'M SORRY. I WAS LOOKING I WAS LOOKING FOR SEVEN. OKAY. YES. IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT THREE IS NOT THE RIGHT CHOICE, THAT'S FINE.

BUT THEN I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SEVEN. OKAY. WHICH IS TEN FEET TO THE SOUTH OF THE THREE. I UNDERSTOOD. RIGHT. OKAY SO ALONG THAT SAME LINE OF LINE OF QUESTION, THEN I MY INTERPRETATION, CAN YOU, CAN YOU ADD TO YOUR ARGUMENT THAT, REPRESENTS SIMPLE MATH? IT'S ABOUT 100,000FT■!S BUILDING. THAT'S 22,000FT■!S ON THE ON THE SMALLER BUILDING. IT'S, YOU KNOW, A FIFTH OF THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA RATIO, SO. I MEAN, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU WOULD YOU COULD YOU ARGUE THAT THAT BUILDING COULD BE GONE AND, AND REDUCE THE INTENSITY OF THE FLOOR AREA RATIO? YOU'VE ASKED THE QUESTION. IT'S BEEN HEARD. I'M SURE THAT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED. THANK YOU. SIR. I'D ALSO LIKE TO ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT YOUR, WAREHOUSE THAT THAT THAT SELF STORAGE ARE BECOMING KIND OF WAREHOUSES FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND SMALL RETAILERS. ARGUMENT IN THE, PERMITTED USE SECTION, OR D1 VARIANCE. YES, SIR, THE, YOU ALSO CLAIMED THAT ABOUT A ONE THIRD OF THE UNITS IN, IN NEW JERSEY ARE USED FOR SUCH SMALL BUSINESS SELF STORAGE OF THE FACILITIES THAT HAVE OPENED SINCE COVID, OF THE FACILITIES THAT ARE OPEN SINCE COVID. SO AND I KNOW WE'RE AWAITING ON THE ARCHITECT TO, TO, TO DEFINE HOW MANY UNITS. I KNOW THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE WAITING FOR. THE ARCHITECT, BUT CAN WE REFERENCE THE EXHIBIT? I FORGOT WHICH ONE IT WAS THAT IT'S EXHIBIT A5, A SIX, RIGHT THERE, RIGHT THERE. A6, SO I MEAN, I DON'T I DON'T NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY, BUT THAT'S A LOT TO ME, SO A THIRD OF A LOT IS KIND OF A LOT, I, I'M WONDERING ABOUT AND, AND THIS IS A QUESTION I'M GOING TO ALSO ASK THE PARKING, THE, THE, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER. BUT FROM A

[02:30:03]

YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT IF A BUSINESS IS THE TENANT, THEY'RE ASKING, THEY'RE VISITING THE UNIT MORE OFTEN. YES. THEN A HOMEOWNER. THAT'S WHAT HE'S ASKING. ABSOLUTELY. YEAH, I THAT'S I THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M ASKING. I'M SORRY. WOULDN'T WOULDN'T YOU AGREE. RIGHT NO. IF THAT IF ONE THIRD OF THE UNITS ARE GOING TO BE SMALL BUSINESSES, THEY'RE GOING TO BE VISITING IT ESPECIALLY. YOU SAID THEY'RE GOING TO BE STORING INVENTORY, MORE THAN A HOMEOWNER WOULD VISIT IT. AND YOU SAY, NO, NO. WOW THERE HAS THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY EVIDENCE OF IT. NO OKAY . OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU ABOUT THE, YOU TESTIFIED THAT THE RIO THREE ZONE, THIS WAS A QUESTION, I THINK THAT THE ROCKY HILL PLANNER ALSO KIND OF ALLUDED TO, BUT I HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION THAT THE RIO THREE ZONE ALLOWS FOR SELF-STORAGE UNITS, BUT IT'S ONLY ON THE CONDITION THAT IT'S IN THE AIRPORT, SAFETY ZONE. SAFETY ZONE, CAN YOU I MAYBE I'D DEFER TO OUR PLANNER, IS IT CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT? IS THAT RIGHT. AND IF SO, ARE THERE. YEAH I CAN I CAN TAKE A MOMENT TO CONFIRM THAT. OKAY THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS. WELL, I HAVE A I HAVE QUESTIONS. YES BUT, BUT I'LL FIGURE THIS OUT FIRST. BUT I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT I HAD SOME SOME QUESTIONS. THAT I JUST WANTED TO GO BACK TO THAT QUESTION. THAT MR. GOULD HAD ABOUT THE PARKING AND OUR ORDINANCE THAT JUST SPEAKS TO IT. THAT SAME SECTION THAT PERMITS, OF, SELF-STORAGE IN THE RIO ZONE ACTUALLY SPECIFIES THE PARKING REQUIREMENT IN THAT SAME CONDITIONAL USE. AND IT ACTUALLY STATES ONE SPACE FOR EVERY EMPLOYEE PLUS ONE FOR EVERY 200 UNITS. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT'S 738 UNITS. I BELIEVE, SO IT WOULD BE FOUR SPACES PLUS WHATEVER NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ARE FOUR SPACES PLUS WHAT? PLUS ONE FOR EVERY EMPLOYEE. SO WE WOULD NEED SOME TESTIMONY AS TO HOW MANY EMPLOYEES TO HAVE. I DOUBT IT'S EIGHT EMPLOYEES, RIGHT? NO. AND THAT'S THE UN CLIMATE CONTROLLED. THAT'S THE RIGHT.

THE QUESTION WAS WHETHER OUR ORDINANCE HAS SPEAKS TO PARKING FOR SELF-STORAGE. IT DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY TO MULTI-STORY. RIGHT. THANK YOU. YEP. GOOD SO THAT IS CORRECT, THAT IS ONE OF 21 CONDITIONS FOR SELF-STORAGE IN THE RIO THREE ZONE IS THAT IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE AIRPORT, SAFETY ZONE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY, NOW FOR YOUR QUESTIONS. CAN YOU EITHER PULL THE MIC CLOSER OR TALK LOUDER? I'M SORRY. A LOT OF NOTES. SO STUFF IN THE WAY OF THE MIC.

OKAY. WELL, MR. RYAN CAMP, GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. SO YOU OPEN UP YOUR TESTIMONY BY STATING THAT YOU ARE RELYING ON THE TESTIMONY OF THE OTHER PROFESSIONALS. PREVIOUSLY OVER THIS HEARING. IN THE LAST PREVIOUS TWO HEARINGS, WERE YOU PRESENT FOR OR READ THE MINUTES ON THE DURING THE JANUARY 23RD, 2024 HEARING? I BELIEVE I WAS AT ALL THE HEARINGS, BUT NOW THAT YOU'RE ASKING IT THAT WAY, I DON'T. HE WAS THERE JANUARY 23RD WAS I SWORE HIM IN BECAUSE YOU SWORE ME IN, RIGHT? YES OKAY, I WAS THERE. ALL RIGHT. SO I HAD ACTUALLY ASKED MR. SEEWALD A SERIES OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE USE OF THE SITE. PARTICULARLY RELATED TO THE LEASE, AND ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD WAS, WOULD TENANTS BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE A BUSINESS OUT OF THE SELF-STORAGE FACILITY? CORRECT, THE ANSWER THAT I RECEIVED AT THAT TIME WAS THAT THE LEASE WOULD NOT ALLOW BUSINESS OPERATION. YES, HE WAS INCORRECT. OKAY. SO THAT IS THAT IS NOT WHAT I WILL SAY. TO CLARIFY, YOU CANNOT OPERATE A BUSINESS FROM THERE. OKAY? SO

[02:35:02]

THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT YOU MENTIONED. IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT THOSE TWO USES IN PARTICULAR THAT WOULD PRECLUDE SITE DEVELOPMENT IN TERMS OF THE BUILDING LAYOUT OR THE NEED OR DEMAND FOR PARKING? NO, THAT'S WHY I SAID THEY WERE FEASIBLE. THEY'RE RELATIVELY SMALL, LESS INTENSE USES THAT COULD FIT WITHOUT IMPACTING ANY OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES ON THE SITE. OKAY, AND SO THERE WERE ALSO PART OF YOUR LET ME LET ME FINISH THAT. I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, I DID I DID NOT PRECLUDE OFFICE IN TERMS OF SMALL SCALE OFFICES FROM BEING PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE JUST TO USE NOBODY'S BUILDING BUT ONE, I THINK. AND THE REASON I ASKED ABOUT THESE TWO USES IS I'M TRYING TO ATTACK IT FROM THE MOST PRACTICAL STANDPOINT, RIGHT? WHICH IS, YES, IT'S PERMITTED. YES PHYSICALLY IT'S POSSIBLE TO DEVELOP, BUT ALSO THERE WOULD BE A DEMAND TO DEVELOP IT. RIGHT? THERE'S A MARKET FOR IT. SO I STAYED AWAY FROM OFFICE FOR THAT REASON. RIGHT. THERE'S I UNDERSTAND THAT AND I'M NOT PRESENTING THIS AS A C1 OR A HARDSHIP BASED, EXPLANATION. I MEAN, THIS IS NOT A TAKINGS CASE. I'M NOT SAYING NOTHING IS FEASIBLE. I'M SAYING THEY'RE DIFFICULT. NO, NO, NO. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING, BUT YOU DID MENTION AS PART OF YOUR TESTIMONY THAT IT'S THERE IS SOMETHING INAPPROPRIATE OR OR I'M GOING TO LET ME TRY TO FIND THE RIGHT WORD. THE DESIGN OF THE ZONE OR OR THE ZONE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SUCH THAT THERE ARE USES THAT ARE APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME. IS THAT A FAIR WAY TO CHARACTERIZE WHAT YOU'D SAID ABOUT THE H, C ZONE OR. WELL YOU'VE TURNED IT INTO A CRITICISM OF THE ZONE, AND I WOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT USE VARIANCES ARE FOR. OKAY. WHEN YOU HAVE A UNIQUE SITE LIKE THIS THAT HAS PROBLEMS, THAT'S WHAT THIS PROCESS IS ABOUT. SO I'M NOT SAYING THE ORDINANCE IS WRONG FOR NOT HAVING ANTICIPATED THAT THERE WAS A DIFFICULT SITE, OR THAT THE LOTTING PATTERN THAT WOULD HAPPEN OVER THE DECADES WOULD LEAVE AN ORPHAN SITE ON 518 WITH NO ACCESS TO 206. YOU WOULDN'T HAVE KNOWN THAT WHEN YOU WROTE THE ORDINANCE OR WHOEVER WROTE THE ORDINANCE. OKAY. WOULD YOU THEN

[02:40:02]

SO THIS IS IDENTIFIED AS THE AS ONE OF THE TWO NODES WITHIN MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP FOR ENHANCED DEVELOPMENT THAT IN ADDITION TO MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, THAT, THAT SELF-STORAGE WOULD BE SOMETHING I WAS AND IF I TOTALLY TOOK WHAT YOU'D SAID OUT OF LINE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. BUT MY YOU HAD MADE COMMENTS ABOUT THE ZONE ITSELF AND ABOUT THE USES, AND IT NOT HAVING BEEN EXAMINED OR LOOKED AT OR IN LOOKING AT THIS, THIS IS THE KIND OF USE THAT WOULD BE BELONG HERE. SO YOU'RE SAYING IT'S SPECIFIC TO THE SITE AND NOT TO THE ZONE? LET ME TRY TO ON THAT ASPECT.

LET ME TRY IT THE OTHER WAY AROUND, OKAY. THAT IF A COMMUNITY IS GOING TO IDENTIFY NODES WHERE MORE INTENSE USES THAT ARE BUSINESS ORIENTED ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LOCATED, THIS WOULD ULTIMATELY BE A USE THAT I WOULD ANTICIPATE BEING IN SUCH A NOTE. OKAY, TYPICALLY ON THE EDGES AS A TRANSITION ON THE WEIRD LOTS AROUND THE EDGES OF IT. BUT THIS IS TYPICALLY A NODE. THIS WOULD BE A USE THAT YOU WOULD FIND THERE. OKAY, AND BASED ON INFORMATION IN THE MASTER PLAN, DO YOU KNOW THE LAST TIME THAT THIS ZONE WAS EXAMINED FOR CHANGES IN USES OR WHEN THERE WAS AN ORDINANCE UPDATE TO THIS ZONE? YEAH, I'M NOT GOING TO GUESS AT THAT. NO OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. YEAH. I'M NOT TRYING TO TRIP YOU UP. I DID PUT IT IN THE REPORT FOR THAT REASON BECAUSE I THINK IT'S FAIR PART OF THE DISCUSSION. SO WAS IN 2012, WHICH IS 12 YEARS AGO, RIGHT? LONGER THAN THE PERIOD OF A MASTER PLAN OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. RIGHT. IT'S NOT A TRICK QUESTION. RIGHT. BUT THE MASTER PLAN WAS REEXAMINED IN 2017, RIGHT. SO OLDER GOALS FROM OH EIGHT ARE THEN, UNLESS THEY'RE SPECIFICALLY THROWN OUT, THEY ARE CARRIED FORWARD IN THE REEXAMINATION. SO WOULD THE INCREASE IN MARKET DEMAND FOR SELF-STORAGE FACILITIES? WOULD WOULD IS THAT PRESENT IN 2017? IS THE SPECIFICALLY A POST-COVID PHENOMENON, IT'S VERY SPECIFICALLY A POST-COVID PHENOMENON. OKAY. SO YOU DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY A WHEN YOU'RE DEVELOPING MULTIFAMILY IN A PARTICULAR AREA THAT IT WOULD BE AN ATTACHMENT TO THAT. YOU THINK IT'S SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO COVID, NOT TO MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT? NO BUT BOTH OF THOSE ARE ASPECTS TO AN EXPANSION OF DEMAND. IF A COMMUNITY IS GOING THROUGH, AN EXPANSION IN MULTIFAMILY, THERE WOULD BE AN INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR SELF-STORAGE THAT WOULD HAVE MANIFESTED PRIOR TO COVID, THE CURRENT WAVE THAT'S DRIVING PLANNERS AND ENGINEERS TO BE WORKING ON SELF-STORAGE APPLICATIONS THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS HAS BEEN COVID BASED, BUT BUT BOTH ARE TRUE. SO SO EACH IN ISOLATION WOULD ADD TO IT. BOTH IN COMBINATION WOULD MAKE A GREATER DEMAND. YES. OKAY SO SEPARATING THEM IN ISOLATION RIGHT. COVID WAS A FIXED WELL NOT FIXED. BUT THE CATASTROPHE THAT THE BIG CHANGES THAT HAPPENED WERE IN A FIXED TIME PERIOD. YES. IN 2017 WHEN THE MASTER PLAN WAS REEXAMINED, THE NODE WAS ENVISIONED AS A MULTI AN AREA FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT FOR, FOR AFFORDABLE, FOR MARKET RATE FOR SENIOR HOUSING, AND SO THAT GOAL FROM 2008 WHICH SAID WE SHOULD REEXAMINE THE CC AND THE HC ZONE OR LOOK AT THE HC OR CC ZONE. IN 2012 THE ZONE WAS UPDATED SO IT WAS LOOKED AT. IN 2017, THAT MASTER PLAN WAS REEXAMINED. AND AT THAT TIME THERE WAS NO CHANGE, NO RECOMMENDATION, AND SUBSEQUENTLY OBVIOUSLY NO ORDINANCE CHANGE TO ALLOW THAT. SO I THIS IS IT'S GOING TO TURN FROM A QUESTION TO A STATEMENT, BUT IT'S JUST I DON'T I THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THESE NODES IN THE MASTER PLAN, IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCUMENTS.

AND I DO THINK THAT THERE HAS BEEN SUFFICIENT OVERSIGHT FROM THE TOWN. AND THIS IS AN OFFICIAL PUBLIC DOCUMENTS THAT SHOW THAT. AND THERE THAT USE HASN'T BEEN ADDED TO THIS, TO THIS ZONE. SO I JUST I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND THE DIFFICULTY I HAVE IS, IS THAT JUST BECAUSE IT WAS REEXAMINED OR LOOKED AT DOESN'T MEAN A PARTICULAR USE WAS THOUGHT OF IN THAT PROCESS. THERE WAS NOTHING IN THOSE DOCUMENTS THAT SAID WE LOOKED AT SELF-STORAGE AND DECIDED WE DIDN'T WANT ANY OF THAT, SO THERE'S NOT A NEGATIVE FINDING SAYING THIS SHOULDN'T BE THERE. THERE'S NO INDICATION THAT IT AS A USE WAS STUDIED, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE LOTS OF USES THAT WE AS PLANNERS SHOW UP BEFORE BOARDS DOING USE VARIANCE APPLICATIONS ON THAT ARE THE MARKET ACTING FASTER THAN ZONING, I DON'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I BET IN 2017 YOU DIDN'T HAVE URGENT MEDICAL AND DECIDE THAT IT SHOULD BE PUT IN THE ZONE AND THAT WE'VE HAD LOTS OF USE VARIANCES FOR THAT, SO USES EVOLVE FASTER THAN MASTER PLANS. AND JUST BECAUSE THE MASTER PLAN WAS UPDATED DOESN'T MEAN ANYBODY THOUGHT ABOUT THE USE AT THE TIME. OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. AND THANK YOU FOR ENGAGING IN THAT CONVERSATION. SURE. OKAY THE LAST QUESTION IS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE PURPOSES OF ZONING.

AND SO WE WEREN'T WITH PURPOSE G, I BELIEVE WAS THE WAS THE ONE THAT YOU. YES. PRIMARILY THAT'S WHERE I AM. IF THERE IS A CROSS PURPOSE RIGHT. THERE'S MULTIPLE PURPOSES TO ZONING AND IT'S ALWAYS A CROSS PURPOSE. YES. OKAY. SO THE CROSS PURPOSE AND I AND THIS IS FOR ME IS, IS,

[02:45:03]

AND YOU USED THE WORD NODE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE REFER TO THAT IN THE MASTER IN OUR MASTER PLAN. YES. THE ROCKY HILL. YOU DID IT FIRST. WHAT'S THAT? THE TOWN DID IT FIRST. THE TOWN DID IT FIRST, RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT. SO CAN YOU REMIND ME WHAT IT'S CALLED? SO I CAN REFERENCE IT CORRECTLY? THE ROCKY HILL. RIGHT. SO THE ROCKY HILL NODE. RIGHT. SO THIS IS THE AND PART OF YOUR TESTIMONY ABOUT THE, ABOUT THE NEED FOR SELF-STORAGE IN THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL OF LAND IS THAT IT'S IN THIS KIND OF ORPHANED NODE THAT'S KIND OF HARD TO ACCESS RELATIVE TO OTHER THINGS. AM I SUMMARIZING YOU CORRECTLY? ORPHAN GOES TO THE PARCEL, NOT TO THE NODE. THAT'S THE NODE. MAKES SENSE. THIS IS KIND OF AN ODD PARCEL ON THE EDGE OF THE NODE WITHOUT ACCESS TO 206 YEAH, I MEAN, THERE'S ONLY TWO PARCELS. SO THERE'S THE. YEAH. WELL, ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY THREE, THERE'S LIKE A SLIVER. BUT I GUESS MY THAT MY QUESTION IS IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS PARCEL OF LAND LIKE IT'S A BLANK SLATE AND THE POTENTIAL USES FOR THIS, THIS, THIS PROPERTY, IF IT WERE TO BE AGREED UPON WITH OTHER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TO, TO MAKE A THOROUGHFARE THROUGH THIS TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE CONNECTED WITH OR A 1 OR 2 WAY DRIVEWAY, A DRIVEWAY, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW. I MEANT SOME, AN ABILITY TO, TO ALTER PARCEL TO CONNECT IT WITH OTHER PROPERTIES. WOULD THAT ALSO IMPROVE THE USE AND ALLOW IT TO RETAIN ITS CURRENT PERMITTED USES AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONES AND BE MORE COMMERCIALLY SUCCESSFUL? YEAH. PLANNERS ARE GENERALLY FOR CONNECTIONS. THE PROBLEM HERE IS IF YOU CONNECT PARKING LOTS, YOU'VE ESSENTIALLY CREATED A MAJOR RELEASE VALVE ALTERNATE ROUTE THAT'S GOING TO DRIVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PARKING THROUGH PARKING LOTS, WHICH IS NEVER A GOOD THING, SO YEAH, WHAT DID I SAY? OH, YEAH. NO. YEAH PARKING. I'M SORRY. YEAH. YOU'D WIND UP HAVING REGIONAL TRAFFIC FUNNELING THROUGH PARKING LOTS TO AVOID THE LIGHT AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE. SO FROM A TRAFFIC PLANNING POINT OF VIEW, IT COULD BE PROBLEMATIC TO MAKE THAT KIND OF LOW KEY CONNECTION BECAUSE THE WORLD ISN'T GOING TO LET IT STAY LOW KEY. YOU'RE TESTIFYING THAT YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE HARD TO AGREE UPON? NO. HE'S SAYING THAT HE DOESN'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. THAT RIGHT? YEAH. I MEAN, IF DOT WERE HERE MAKING A GIANT ROADWAY AND TAKING LAND, YOU COULD HAVE A GREAT SOLUTION. BUT IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CONNECTING TWO PARKING LOTS AND THAT BECOMES A REGIONAL TRAFFIC SOLUTION, YOU'VE GOT ALL KINDS OF TRAFFIC ISSUES. OKAY. AND, JUST SO THAT THE, THE CHAIRMAN REMEMBERS, JESSE WILL TESTIFY AT THE LAST HEARING THAT, IT WAS A CIVIL ENGINEER TESTIFIED THAT HE CONSIDERED IT TO BE AN UNSAFE CONDITION TO HAVE THAT THAT DRIVEWAY THROUGH. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I KNOW IT'S 10:00 AND PEOPLE MIGHT GET AT ME, BUT ANY WAY YOU GUYS WOULD AGREE TO LET THE ARCHITECT ANSWER THOSE THREE QUESTIONS SO WE COULD. OH, I THINK THAT'S PERFECTLY REASONABLE TO CONCLUDE THIS, I SUSPECT ONE OF THEM IS GOING TO REQUIRE MORE STUDY.

WELL, THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU HAVE THE ARCHITECT. YES. ANSWER TO THREE QUESTIONS.

[02:50:01]

THANK YOU. THE LAST QUESTION WAS GO TO PAGE 16 OF THE CCH REPORT, LAST REVISED MARCH 28TH. UNDER 10.1 ARCHITECTURE. AND JANE, CAN YOU PARAPHRASE IF YOU COULD JUST READ THE PARAGRAPH AND THEN HAVE IN FACT WHAT JAMES IS GOING TO READ, HAVE THEY BEEN INCORPORATED INTO ANY OF THE DRAWINGS OR EXHIBITS, OR DO YOU AGREE TO DO THAT? SO, THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS CONTAINS A TYPICAL HIGHWAY ORIENTED ESTHETIC SIMILAR TO A STRIP COMMERCIAL MALL. ELEMENTS HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE DESIGN IN AN ATTEMPT TO COMPLEMENT THE EXISTING ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER. HOWEVER, THE USE OF BLUE METAL AWNINGS IS VISUALLY DISCORDANT AND DRAWS UNNECESSARY ATTENTION TO THE BUILDING. I WILL NOTE THAT THAT'S BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PROPOSAL. WHILE THE APPEARANCE IS AN IMPROVEMENT ON THE ORIGINAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN,

[02:55:04]

OKAY. SO RESTATE WHICH CHANGES. HAVE YOU MADE AND WHICH HAVE YOU NOT MADE. YOU WILL MAKE OR WHICH HAVE YOU NOT MADE AND YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE? I I'LL, I'LL BE HONEST WHEN WE CAME LAST TIME BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE GOT THIS THE 26TH, WE CHANGED THE BLUE AWNINGS WHEN WE BROUGHT THE PROJECT BACK. AND I PRESENTED ON THE 28TH, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED ALL THE ITEMS IN HERE. AND WHEN YOU AGREE TO MAKE ALL THE CHANGES CORRECT, I THOUGHT WHEN WE LEFT THE MEETING THE LAST TIME, WHAT WE PRESENTED WAS WHERE THE BOARD WAS OKAY WITH, AND REALLY, I WAS JUST BRINGING BACK THIS CROSS SECTION CUTS. NOT COMPLETELY ADDRESSING ALL THIS. I WAS AN IMPRESSION. WE ADDRESSED ALL THIS WHEN WE HAD THE LAST MEETING. YOU MIGHT BE RIGHT. OR THE BOARD COULD HAVE LEFT YOU WITH THAT IMPRESSION. AND IF I MAY, TO JUST CLARIFY THIS, I THINK, JAMES, YOU'LL AGREE. I THINK THE ISSUE THERE WAS THAT SORT OF BRICK HEAVY DESIGN AND POTENTIALLY SOME ISSUES WITH, THE WINDOW CUTOUTS. THAT WERE OKAY. I HAVE WRITTEN DOWN, I, I WROTE DOWN A CONDITION. THIS IS FROM MY NOTES . FROM MARCH 28TH. THE COLORS AS REFLECTED ON THE EXHIBITS SHALL BE THE COLORS AS CONSTRUCTED. BOTH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE. BECAUSE THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT, SOMEONE ASKED ABOUT THE COLORS AND THEY SAID, OH, THEY COULD CHANGE THEM. AND SO BASED ON THAT, AT LEAST FROM MY NOTES, HE IS CORRECT THAT AT THE END OF THE LAST HEARING SESSION THEY HAD MADE SOME OF THE CHANGES. YOU WOULD ASK FOR, NOT THE BRICK, AND THE BOARD WAS OKAY WITH IT. ACCORDING TO MY NOTES, THAT IS, THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION AS WELL, THAT THE THAT THE CHANGES THAT WERE INCORPORATED. YEAH, THAT ESPECIALLY RELATED TO COLOR WERE ACCEPTABLE. SO YEAH. SO THAT THAT IS MY RECOLLECTION. SO UNLESS A BOARD MEMBER TELLS ME THAT MY NOTES ARE WRONG OR SOMEONE'S CHANGED THEIR MIND OR SOMETHING, THAT'S HOW I HAVE IT IN MY NOTES. SO IF THERE WAS AN APPROVAL, THAT WOULD BE A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL. NO ONE'S INDICATING ANYTHING ELSE. SO I THINK THAT'S A WRAP FOR TONIGHT. ACTUALLY, MR. CHAIRMAN, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING. GOING BACK TO THE IDEA OF THE ACCESS TO THE BAY DOORS I HAVE IN MY NOTES FROM THE JANUARY HEARING THAT THEY WOULD BE PHYSICAL PADLOCKS AND KEYS AND ACCESS WOULD BE RESTRICTED BY THE LEASE TO CERTAIN HOURS. CAN YOU JUST RECONFIRM IS THAT THE CASE FROM MR. SEWELL'S ORIGINAL TESTIMONY, OR WILL THERE BE SOME SORT OF ELECTRONIC LOCKING MECHANISM? I WROTE DOWN ELECTRONIC RIGHT NOW. THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M WANTING CLARIFICATION. THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. YEAH IT'S ELECTRONIC. WE CAN CONFIRM.

YEAH, YEAH. BASICALLY, IF IT'S NOT ELECTRONIC AND IT'S JUST A PADLOCK AND IT'S A LEASE, SOMEONE CAN GO IN THERE AND WE CAN WE CAN CONFIRM THAT. OKAY. WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT? IT MEANS I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND TALK TO THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT BACK THERE? YEAH, I CAN GO CHECK. GO RIGHT NOW. LET'S GO RIGHT NOW. LET'S JUST LET'S FINISH THIS ISSUE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS ISSUE. WE COME BACK TO ALL THE OTHER STUFF. I HAVE A QUESTION.

YEAH YES, WE ARE GOOD DOING ELECTRONIC LOCK. YEAH. ELECTRONIC LOCK ON THE ON THE DOORS THAT ACCESS THE EXTERIOR. THE GARAGE DOORS? YES. THE ROLLER. YEP OKAY, OKAY. DO WE

[03:00:01]

SO HIS ARGUMENT. SO. ACCESSORY. THERE IS A ROAD HERE. THERE'S NO PARKING. THIS IS A, LIKE A SERVICE. LIKE I KNOW I'M JUST SAYING. THAT. THAT'S WHY I. YEAH, I'M JUST LOOKING. FOR OUR TEAM IS GOOD FOR EITHER THE 22ND OR THE 27TH AT, YOU KNOW, AT THE BOARD'S OPTION. OKAY. YOU'RE SHOOTING. I'M SORRY. AUGUST. THEN OF AUGUST. YEAH. AUGUST 20TH 5TH OR AUGUST 27TH. AUGUST 20TH 2ND OR AUGUST 27TH. AUGUST 22ND OR AUGUST 27TH. DO YOU CARE WHICH ONE DOESN'T MATTER TO US? YOU GUYS, LET'S, LET'S MAKE IT AUGUST 27TH. SINCE, WE'VE GENERALLY DONE, LIKE, RESIDENTIAL TYPE THINGS FOR THE FIRST MEETING. OKAY, OKAY. SO THE APPLICATION IS GOING TO BE CONTINUED WITHOUT NOTICE TO AUGUST 25TH, AUGUST 27TH, 2024. NOW, RIGHT NOW, THE TIME WITHIN WHICH THE BOARD HAS TO DECIDE THE APPLICATION EXPIRES ON JULY 31ST. SO I ALWAYS LIKE TO GET 60 DAYS OUT. SO I'D LIKE YOU TO CONSENT TO AN EXTENSION FOR THE BOARD'S ACTION TO OCTOBER 31ST.

ABSOLUTELY. I'LL SIGN THE PAPER BEFORE WE LEAVE. THAT'S FINE. OKAY WE DO HAVE SOME

[VI. MINUTES]

WALMART. YES. YES BRONZE. YES. OKAY. SORRY, I CAN'T HEAR. URBANSKI ALL RIGHT, THEN THERE WERE, MINUTES FROM MARCH 26TH, 2024, WAS OUR REGULAR MEETING. CAN I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE MINUTES? SO MOVED. MR. WALMART MOVED SECOND. MR. BRONZE SECONDED. ROLL CALL. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. THOSE OFF. YOU CAN'T HEAR. RAISE YOUR HAND FOR A YES, PLEASE. EVERYBODY.

BAZOVSKY OKAY, SO EVERYBODY MARCH. YOU WERE HERE. HERE. OKAY OKAY. EVERYBODY PROVED HIM OKAY OKAY, MINUTES OF APRIL 23RD, 2024. REGULAR MEETING MOTION TO APPROVE. SO MOVED. MR. WALMART SECOND, MR. BRUNS, ROLL CALL, PLEASE. WASABI. YES. BLODGETT. YES. ROSENTHAL OH, SHE'S NOT HERE. SORRY. WALMART. YES WOOD. YES. AND BRONZE. ALL RIGHT. ME? YES. FUTURE MEETINGS IS JULY 23RD AND JULY 25TH. RIGHT. YEAH. 23RD IS OCCUPIED. RIGHT? YEAH. IN 25TH. TUESDAY AND THURSDAY.

SORRY. SAY THAT AGAIN. JULY 23RD AND JULY 25TH. IS THERE ANYTHING ON THOSE AGENDA SO FAR? THERE IS. ON JULY 23RD, WE HAVE THREE APPLICATIONS. NOTHING. ON JULY 25TH, THOSE THREE HOMEOWNERS

[03:05:01]