[I. ROLL CALL]
[00:00:06]
OKAY, THIS IS THE MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD, MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, SOMERSET COUNTY, NEW JERSEY. IT'S OUR REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 9TH, 2024. IT IS OUR INTENTION TO CONCLUDE THIS MEETING NO LATER THAN 10 P.M. AND THE TIME RIGHT NOW IS 7:00. 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 NEWSPAPER. ROLL CALL PLEASE. CAMPEIUS HERE.
MONEY HERE. BATTLE. BLODGETT. HAMILTON. HERE. KEENAN. HERE. MATTHEWS. ROBERTS. HERE. SINGH.
GLOCKLER. HERE. KHAN. HERE. CASEY. HERE. DARCY. PRESENT. CLAVELLI HERE. FISSINGER HERE.
BARTOLONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SHERRY. OKAY. PLEASE JOIN ME IN SALUTE TO THE FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. OKAY. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO LIMIT THEIR COMMENTS AND OR Q&A TO FIVE MINUTES. AND WHEN PROVIDING COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA OR FOR AN APPLICATION, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD.
IF YOU PREFER NOT TO PROVIDE YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE ADVISE WHICH MUNICIPALITY YOU LIVE IN.
[IV. RESOLUTION ]
OKAY, OUR FIRST ITEM IS A RESOLUTION. IT IS CASE PB DASH ZERO 524. THE APPLICANT IS MONT PENN SC, LLC. IT'S FOR BLOCK 29 002. LOT 46. IT'S 1325. ROUTE 206. IT IS A MINOR SITE PLAN WITH BULK VARIANCES FOR FACADE LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPING UPGRADES TO MONTGOMERY SHOPPING CENTER. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO MEMORIALIZE? SO MOVED. SECOND. AND ACTUALLY, BEFORE WE DO THAT, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING BACK TO REPORT FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE THAT WAS FORMED? NOT YET. NOT YET. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ROLL CALL PLEASE. HAMILTON. YES.KEENAN. YES. KHAN. YES. MONEY. YES. ROBERTS. YES. AND. SINGH. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY.
[V. APPLICATION ]
NEXT ITEM IS AN APPLICATION. ITS CASE. PB DASH ZERO SIX. DASH 24. THE APPLICANT IS PRINCETON ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATES. IT IS FOR BLOCK 28 006, LOT 43. IT IS 862. ROUTE 518. THIS IS A MINOR SITE PLAN TO CONVERT AN EXISTING 15,180 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING TO AN ORTHOPEDIC SURGICAL CENTER. THE EXPIRATION DATE IS JANUARY 9TH OF 2025. AN AFFIDAVIT, AN AFFIDAVIT OF NOTIFICATION AND PUBLICATION IS REQUIRED AND WAS PREVIOUSLY FOUND TO BE IN ORDER FOR THE APPLICANT. WE HAVE RICHARD SCHATZMAN, ATTORNEY. ON NOVEMBER 25TH, WHICH IS THE ORIGINAL DATE FOR THE HEARING, THE BOARD FOUND THAT THE THAT THE APPLICATION OF PUBLICATION, THE AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE WAS IN ORDER. SO WE CAN START RIGHT OFF NOW WITH THE WITNESSES TONIGHT WE'LL HAVE DAVID SCHMIDT, THE ENGINEER WHO WILL GO OVER THE PLANS AND THE ENGINEERING QUESTIONS RAISED BY THE PLANNER AND BY THE ENGINEER. WE HAVE MR. STEVEN LEONE, WHO IS THE ARCHITECT. HE WILL GO OVER THE ARCHITECTURAL PLAN. WE HAVE MATT FLYNN, A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER, WHO WILL TALK ABOUT THE VARIANCES THAT WE NEED. AND WE HAVE SCOTT KENNEL, WHO WILL ANSWER ONE QUESTION IN MR. FISHER'S REPORT. AND IF NECESSARY, WE'LL HAVE MR. WILLIAM HINES-IKE, WHO IS THE GENERAL MANAGER OF PRINCETON ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATES, THE ENGINEER AND THE APPLICANT. SO WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, WE'LL HAVE MR. SCHMIDT BE SWORN IN, PLEASE. ABSOLUTELY. MR. SCHMIDT, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. I DO. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MR. SCHMIDT, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE YOUR CRITICS AND YOUR EDUCATION AND YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE? OH, SURE. I'M A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY. I'VE BEEN LICENSED FOR OVER 25, 26 YEARS. I'VE BEEN IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD NUMEROUS TIMES. ZONING AND PLANNING I CURRENTLY HAVE AN ACTIVE P LICENSE 39,409. I STUDIED AT NJIT FOR ENGINEERING AND I'VE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THIS BEFORE. IN PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS. PROCEED. OKAY. AND[00:05:03]
THE PLANS WERE EITHER PREPARED BY YOU OR UNDER YOUR DIRECTION. YES THEY WERE. AND YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP? YES, I AM.AND MUNICIPAL LAND USE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY. YES, I AM. YES, I SUBMIT HE'S QUALIFIED TO GIVE EXPERT OPINION ON THIS APPLICATION. YES. OKAY. MR. SCHMIDT. OKAY. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF OUTLINE OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY EXISTING OUT THERE AND THEN GO INTO THE PROPOSAL. AS YOU'RE AWARE, IT'S PRINCETON ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATES PB OH 624. THE PHYSICAL ADDRESS IS 862.
COUNTY ROUTE 518 BLOCK 28 006. LOT 43. THE LOT AREA IS 9.92944 ACRES. IT'S IN MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP IN THE RIO THREE RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND OFFICE ZONE. I CURRENTLY HAVE UP THE EXISTING FEATURES PLAN. IT WAS DATED JULY 18TH, 2024. LAST REVISED OCTOBER 31ST, 2024. IT IS NOT AN EXHIBIT. AS PART OF THE SUBMISSION PACKAGE THAT WE PROVIDED TO THE TOWNSHIP. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A 15,180 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING. IT WAS CONSTRUCTED AROUND 1984. IS A ONE STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH PARTIAL BASEMENT. IT HAS ROAD FRONTAGE ALONG SOMERSET COUNTY ROUTE 518, WHICH IS GEORGETOWN, FRANKLIN TURNPIKE. THE ACCESS TO THE FACILITY COMES THROUGH THE EXISTING 25 FOOT WIDE, TWO WAY ROADWAY THAT RUNS NORTH TO THE OFFICE BUILDING. THE ENTRANCE TO THE INTERSECTION WITH COUNTY ROUTE FIVE 518 HAS A SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE AND SITE EASEMENTS, AND THE SITE EASEMENTS ARE CURRENTLY RECORDED. THERE IS NO NEW EXPANSION TO THE EXISTING ENTRANCE IS PROPOSED AND OR REQUIRED. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCREEN ON THE BOTTOM IS COUNTY ROUTE 518 TO THE EAST IS A 20 FOOT WIDE ROADWAY THAT COMES IN, AND CURRENTLY THIS IS AN OFFICE BUILDING. YOU TAKE A LEFT, THERE'S A DIRECTIONAL SIGN FOR PEOPLE VISITING TO PARK IN THE FRONT, WHICH IS ABOUT 19. PARKING SPACES ARE LOCATED IN THE FRONT, AND FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE STAFF WOULD ACTUALLY GO TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING WHERE THERE ARE 36 PARKING SPACES IN THE REAR. THE TRAFFIC PATTERN WOULD RUN IN A COUNTERCLOCKWISE DIRECTION, LOCATED AROUND THE LOOP AROUND THE BUILDING, AND THEN YOU WOULD EXIT OUT TO ROUTE 206. THERE IS AN EXISTING PARKING NORTH AND SOUTH OF THE BUILDING. THE TOTAL PARKING SPACES IS 55. WE HAVE TWO. TWO ARE ADA SPACES WHICH MEETS THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR OFFICE USES FOR MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE. THE ACCESS DRIVE AND PARKING LOT LIGHTING AS WELL EXIST ON THE PROPERTY. THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY YOU HAVE LIGHT POSTS THROUGHOUT IN THE REAR AND THROUGH THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE SITE. THERE ARE HALOGEN LIGHTS AND THERE ARE PLANNED TO BE REPLACED, BUT THEY ARE EXISTING AND CONFORMING. AT THE TIME THIS WAS BUILT, AS WELL AS EXISTING LANDSCAPING, THE AMENITIES THAT ARE AT THE SITE, THE EXISTING GRAVEL WALKWAY THAT RUNS AT THE PERIMETER PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE DASHED LINES ALONG HERE ALONG THE WHOLE PERIMETER IS A GRAVEL PATHWAY SYSTEM FOR EMPLOYEES AT LUNCHTIME TO WALK THROUGH THE PROPERTY AND THEN GET BACK TO WORK. THAT IS PLANNED TO STAY. THERE'S AN EXISTING GAZEBO WITH PICNIC TABLE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS IN DECENT CONDITION, AND I THINK IT'S A NICE AMENITY TO KEEP, AND WE'RE ASKING THAT TO STAY AS WELL. THERE'S AN EXERCISE TRAIL, EQUIPMENT TO THE WEST OF THE GAZEBO, WHICH HAS YOUR DATED EXERCISE EQUIPMENT LIKE PULL UP BAR AND SOME THINGS. IT'S OLD AND WE ARE GOING TO KNOCK THAT DOWN. THE EXISTING EXISTING BUSINESS HAS A MONUMENT SIGN THAT'S LOCATED IN THE FRONT OF THE ENTRANCE. IT'S IN THE CURRENTLY IN THE SITE TRIANGLE EASEMENT. SO A NEW MONUMENT SIGN WILL BE PROPOSED LOCATED OUTSIDE THE SITE TRIANGLE EASEMENT. IT IS EXTERIOR LIT. THE EXISTING UTILITIES FOR THE PROPERTY IS GAS AND ELECTRIC, WHICH IS PSEG SANITARY SEWER, WHICH IS PUBLIC, WHICH IS A SKILLMAN VILLAGE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. YOU HAVE WATER WHICH IS ON SITE. WELL, PHONE CENTURYLINK CABLE, COMCAST. AS FAR AS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AND CRITICAL AREAS, NJDEP FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND OR MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP CRITICAL AREAS, THERE ARE NO FRESH, FRESH WATER WETLANDS AND OR CRITICAL AREAS ON THE PROPERTY. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THIS IS A99 ACRE PIECE OF PROPERTY WITH NO CRITICAL AREA, WHICH IS EXTREMELY RARE. NJDEP LETTER OF INTERPRETATION 1813. DASH ZERO TWO. DASH 0006.2. ABSENCE ISSUED OCTOBER 2ND, 2009 HAS EXPIRED A SUBMISSION WAS MADE TO NJDEP ON OCTOBER 24TH, 2023 FOR A LETTER OF INTERPRETATION ABSENT AGAIN NJDEP IF YOU'RE ON THIS BOARD
[00:10:09]
LONG ENOUGH, IS TAKING FOREVER AND A DAY TO REVIEW THESE PROJECTS. IT IS A REISSUANCE OF AN ABSENCE AND WE HAVE NUDGED SEVERAL TIMES. OBVIOUSLY, I NUDGED THEM BEFORE THE NOVEMBER HEARING, AND I NUDGED THEM BEFORE THIS HEARING. AND WE DO NOT EVEN GET A RESPONSE BACK. SO WE'RE HOPING IF WE GET THIS PROJECT APPROVED WITHIN THE NEXT 3 OR 4 MONTHS, THAT WE'LL HAVE A DEP. OBVIOUSLY IT'S A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL AND OBVIOUSLY I HAVE TO HAVE IT IN HAND. SO WE'RE WORKING ON THAT. SO THAT'S THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY. AS I SAID, THE ZONING, THIS IS THE COLOR RENDERING THAT I PREPARED. IT'S A NEW DSC, DSC EXHIBIT. SO THIS WOULD BE EXHIBIT ONE. IT'S CALLED A1. IT'S CALLED RENDERING DISPLAY. AND IT'S DATED OCTOBER 21ST, 2024, PER JOSEPH SALMON, ZONING OFFICIAL APRIL 14TH, 2023 THE REO3 ZONING DISTRICT PERMITS MEDICAL OFFICES, WHICH INCLUDES A SURGICAL CENTER. SO PRIOR TO PURCHASING THIS PROPERTY, BILL HINES, WHO'S THE CLIENT AND I MET WITH JOSEPH SAMYAK AND WE DISCUSSED THE USE THAT WE WERE PROPOSING, AND HE ISSUED A LETTER, AS I JUST MENTIONED, APRIL 14TH. AND HE CITES THAT THIS COULD BE USED AS A SURGICAL CENTER. BUSINESS OPERATION, ORTHOPEDIC SURGICAL CENTER. OUR HOURS OF OPERATION MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 8 A.M. TO 4:30 P.M. SATURDAY, 8 A.M. TO 11 A.M.SUNDAY. IT WILL BE CLOSED. WE'RE ANTICIPATING EMPLOYEES OF 20 DELIVERIES UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, FEDEX AND OR AMAZON, WHICH WOULD HAPPEN ONCE, ONCE PER DAY. LABCORP AS NEEDED. AS ANTICIPATED, MAYBE ONCE A WEEK, AND MEDICAL WASTE AS NEEDED, WHICH IS VERY RARE THAT THEY NEED IT. AND THE LABCORP AND MEDICAL WASTE ARE ARE CALLED IN PICKUPS. THEY'RE NOT SOMETHING THAT'S SCHEDULED. THEY GET CALLED IN FOR WHEN THEY NEED TO GET THE SUPPLIES, AND THE MEDICAL WASTE. IT'S ANTICIPATED THAT THESE DELIVERIES WILL ENTER THE SITE FROM COUNTY ROUTE 518.
TO ACCESS DRIVE, FOLLOW THE DIRECTION SIGN TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, MAKE THEIR DELIVERY AND PICK UP AND EXIT IN THE SITE IN A COUNTERCLOCKWISE DIRECTION. JUST AS I SAID WITH WITH THE EMPLOYEES, YOU COME IN FROM 518, YOU COME IN, THERE'S A DIRECTIONAL SIGN LOCATED RIGHT AT THIS INTERSECTION BETWEEN THE TWO TWO ACCESS WAYS. YOU LOOK, YOU RUN TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THERE'S A PROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE IN THIS AREA. THEY PICK UP THE TRASH AND THEN THEY CONTINUE AROUND THE CIRCLE AND THEN EXIT THE PROPERTY ONTO 518 PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
THE BUILDING FACADE AND INTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO BE DISCUSSED BY STEVE LEON OF ARCHITECTURAL. AND THAT WILL NOT BE GO THROUGH MY TESTIMONY, BUT HE'LL COME UP AND GO OVER WHAT HE'S PROPOSING. THE FRONT FACADE IS THE FRONT ENTRANCE IS BEING RELOCATED TO THE WEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING, WITH THE CAR DROP AREA. OKAY. THE EXISTING ENTRANCE WAS LOCATED IN THE CENTER OF THE BUILDING, AND THE CURB WAS LOCATED RIGHT ALONG HERE. SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE EXPANDING THE PAVEMENT TO CREATE A DROP OFF AREA FOR THE PEOPLE TO GET DROPPED OFF TO THE FACILITY, AND THEN THE CARS WOULD THEN CIRCULATE IN PARK. WE FIND THAT IS IT'LL BE A VERY LONG DEPRESSED CURVE. SO THEY HAVE COMPLETE ACCESS AND IT'S A STEEP. STEVE WILL GO OVER TO THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING, AND IT LENDS TO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDING. THIS THIS DROP OFF AREA. THE EXISTING BUILDING IS 15,180FT■!S. THERE'S NO CHANE IN AREA. THE FLOOR IS 0.0351 WHERE THE PERMITTED IS 0.08. NEW ELECTRIC SERVICE AND TRANSFORMER IS BEING PROPOSED. I'M GOING FROM 5 TO 18. I'M RUNNING UP THE NEW ELECTRICAL SERVICE. I LOOP IT AROUND THE TRANSFORMER RIGHT HERE AND PROVIDE SERVICE TO THE EXISTING BUILDING. WE'RE PROVIDING THREE ADA COMPLIANT PARKING SPOTS. THE ORIGINAL PARKING SPOTS DID NOT HAVE THE VAN ACCESSIBLE ACCESS AREAS, SO WE WERE PROVIDING TWO NEW ADA PARKING SPOTS IN THE FRONT, AND WE'RE PROVIDING ONE ADA PARKING SPOTS IN THE BACK AND PER THIS FACILITY, PER THE SIDE, PER THE ADA REQUIREMENTS, THREE ADA PARKING WIDTHS ARE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING ADA PARKING SPOTS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THAT AGENCY.
THERE IS AN EXISTING GENERATOR LOCATED IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TO THE WEST. WE WERE
[00:15:01]
RELOCATING IT TO THE NORTH. WE'RE RELOCATING THE AC UNITS THAT ARE ALL LOCATED ON THE SIDES. THERE'S A SERIES OF AC UNITS ON THE WEST OF THE BUILDING. THEY'RE GETTING KNOCKED DOWN AND WE'RE RELOCATING A THE AC UNIT TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY WITH A TEN FOOT FIVE SCREEN TO SCREEN IT FROM THE PARKING LOT, AS WELL AS PEOPLE USING THIS, MINIMIZING THE NOISE, WE'RE ADDING A FOUR FOOT WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.ON THE SIDE OF THIS BUILDING, WE HAVE EXIT DOORS WHICH WERE THERE BEFORE, BUT YOU DO NEED TO HAVE TO HAVE A SIDEWALK CONNECTING TO A PARKING FACILITY OR A PLACE TO EXIT, AS OPPOSED TO JUST LAWN.
SO WE'RE ADDING A WHOLE FOUR FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING. WE'RE RELOCATING THE TRASH ENCLOSURE THAT WAS LOCATED IN THE REAR PARKING SPOTS, WHERE I HAVE THE MOUSE CURTAIN CURSOR. IT WAS FELT FROM THE APPLICANT TO, AS WE HAVE THE PROPERTY LINE OR PROPERTY AND NEIGHBORS ADJOINING TO THE TO US HAS A DUMPSTER HERE, SO WE THOUGHT WE WOULD RELOCATE THE DUMPSTER TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS. A RESULT OF ADDING THE AC UNITS TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING, THERE WAS A SIDEWALK CONNECTION POINT RIGHT HERE, WHICH IS NOT NEEDED FOR OUR FACILITY. AND SINCE THE AC UNIT IS GOING RIGHT ON TOP OF IT, WE'RE REMOVING THAT SIDEWALK. WE'RE ADDING TWO NEW PARKING SPACES TOTALING 57 PARKING SPACES, WHEREAS 51 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED PER THE ORDINANCE, 18 WILL BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT AND 39 WILL BE LOCATED IN THE REAR. PER THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMENTS AND THE REVIEW LETTERS, WE'RE ADDING TWO EV PARKING SPACES LOCATED IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, AND WE ARE ACTUALLY ADDING A FOUR FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK ALONG THE WHOLE FRONTAGE OF ROUTE 518, AND THAT WAS ALSO COMMON IN THE REVIEW LETTERS. ALL THE LIGHTING THAT WE HAVE ON THE FACILITY AND THE STANCHIONS THAT ARE EXIST, AS I SAID, THIS WAS BUILT IN 1984, ARE VERY OLD AND THEY WERE NOT WORTH REPLACING THEM WITH LED LIGHTIN. BILL HAYNES AGREED THAT WE SHOULD REPLACE ALL THE LIGHT STANCHIONS AND THE AND THE HALOGEN LIGHTS TO LED, SO WE CAME UP WITH A WHOLE NEW LIGHTING PLAN FOR THE FACILITY USING LED LIGHTING. AND WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW THE DARK SKY POLICY OF MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP. SO THEY'LL MAYBE NOT BE COMPLETELY COMPLIANT WITH THE PLANS WE HAVE NOW. THAT'S THE INTENTION, REPLACING AND RELOCATING THE BUSINESS MONUMENT SIGN AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE INTERNAL AT. WE'RE RELOCATING THE MONUMENT SIGN AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, AS THE EXISTING SIGN IS LOCATED IN THE SITE EASEMENT. SO MOVING IT BACK TO BE OUTSIDE THE SITE TRIANGLE EASEMENT IS CURRENTLY EXTERNALLY LIT, BUT WE'RE PROPOSING AN INTERNALLY LIT LED SIGN. AND THOSE DETAILS WERE JUST PROVIDED TO THE TOWNSHIP. WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING WALL MOUNTED SIGNS ON THE BUILDING, WHICH ALSO WILL BE CONFORMING. SO THE SIGNAGE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS CONFORMING TO YOUR STANDARDS. THIS IS ANOTHER EXHIBIT WHICH WOULD BE A TWO. WHICH IS A EXHIBIT BY EFFECTIVE SIGN WORKS. IT'S DATED JULY 9TH, JULY 9TH, 2020 FOR THE SIGN THAT'S LOCATED IN FRONT OF THE FACILITY WHERE YOU DRIVE IN, IT'S GOING TO SAY PRINCETON ORTHOPEDIC SURGICAL CENTER. 862 518. THIS IS THE DETAIL OF THE SIGN, WHICH IS INTERNALLY LIT. WE MEET THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 40FT■!S. SO WE'RE CONFORMING WIH YOUR ORDINANCE AND WE'RE ILLUMINATED, ILLUMINATED INTERNALLY AS FAR AS THE BUILDING WE ARE PROPOSING, I'M NOT SURE. THIS IS A BETTER ONE. YOU HAVE SURGICAL CENTER LOCATED IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING AND THEN OVER TO THE EAST OR TO THE RIGHT OF THE BUILDING. WE HAVE POHA, WHICH IS THEIR CALL MARK OR TRADEMARK SIGN FOR PRINCETON ORTHOPEDICS. SO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, SECTION 16 DASH 5.2. THIS IS NOT A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT. WE WILL BE DISTURBING THE SITE. WE WILL BE DISTURBING SITE GRADING UNDER A HALF ACRE, 21.780FT■!S AND WILLE LESS THAN 5000FT■!S OF NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE, NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE PROPOSED WITH THAT. THAT WOULD BE THE PULL OFF AREA AND THE EXTRA SIDEWALK. WE ARE AT 4647FT■!S. THE AREA DISTURBANCEF
[00:20:01]
19,862FT■!S, THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE FOR PER THE ROW IS 32.5%. AND WE'RE PROPOSING 21.38%. THE FLOOR AREA RATIO IS PER YOUR ORDINANCE IS 0.08, AND WE'RE PROPOSING 0.351, WHICH IS CLOSE TO HALF OF WHAT IS ALLOWED TO ANSWER SOME OF THE COMMENTS IN THE REVIEW LETTERS.ESTIMATED SOIL IMPORTED, EXPORTED. WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING IMPORTING ANY SOIL.
AND WE'RE NOT REALLY ANTICIPATING EXPORT EXPORTING SOIL. BUT WE ARE REQUESTING A WAIVER, IF NEED BE, TO ALLOW THE PROPERTY EXPORT UP TO 100YD■!T. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS WE HAVE A LONG WATER LINE THAT WILL BE EXPANDING, AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE SWELL IS, AND WE MIGHT NEED TO IMPORT IT. PER YOUR ORDINANCE, YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED 20YD■!T WITHOUT COMING BACK TO E BOARD. SO I'M ASKING TO HAVE 100YD■!T. SO I HAVE FIVE TRUCKS THAT I CAN, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I NEED IT, BUT I'M JUST ASKING FOR IT NOW. AND THAT NOTE IS PROVIDED ON SHEET EIGHT SHIPPING CONTAINERS ERIE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTIONS POINTS OUT THAT ON THE LAND SURVEY THAT I SUBMITTED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION PACKAGE SHOWS THREE SHIPPING CONTAINERS IN THE REAR LOCATED RIGHT IN THIS AREA WHERE THREE SHIPPING CONTAINERS. THE SURVEY WAS A LITTLE BIT OLD. THOSE SHIPPING CONTAINERS HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND THEY'RE NOT COMING BACK. THESE SHIPPING CONTAINERS DO NOT SHOW UP ON ANY OF MY PLANS. THEY JUST SHOW UP ON LAND SURVEY, LANDSCAPING, PROPOSED LANDSCAPING. IS THAT MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP RECENTLY ADOPTED TREE ORDINANCE. OH, OKAY. WHAT WE HAVE IS WE'RE KNOCKING DOWN SOME TREES BASED ON THE SIZE AND CALIPER OF THE TREES. WE'RE PROPOSING THE ADDITIONAL LAND LANDSCAPING. I BELIEVE WE'RE UP TO 19 TREES. IN ADDITION, LAUREN MASLANSKY POINTS OUT, ALONG 518, WE HAVE WE HAVE STREET TREES, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF TREES BASED ON THE HEIGHT. IT'S A KIND OF CONVOLUTED HOW YOU DETERMINE SPACING OF TREES. I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER FOR YOU GUYS. I UNDERSTOOD IT AND WE ADDED A COUPLE TREES. I THINK THREE TREES TO FILL IN THE SPACES SO THAT WE MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE STREET TREES. ANOTHER COMMENT FROM THE REVIEW COMMENTS WAS HOW IS THE EXISTING STORM SEWER SYSTEM AND THE SITE EXIST? THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM IS FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. THE CURBING IS IN SATISFACTORY CONDITION. ANY REPAIR OR ANYTHING THAT YOU KNOW, WE'RE SPENDING A SIZABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THIS BUILDING THAT NEEDS IF THERE'S A BROKEN CURB, WE'LL FIX IT. BUT EVERYTHING IS IN THE IN THE MOST PART IN IN SOLID CONDITION PUBLIC UTILITIE, PUBLIC, PUBLIC SEWER IS GOING TO STAY THE SAME. SKILLMAN VILLAGE IS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.
AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE'RE PUTTING IN A WATER LINE. THE EXISTING WELL THAT SERVICES THIS FACILITY RIGHT NOW IS GOING TO BE ABANDONED PER NJDEP REGULATIONS. WE'RE GOING TO ADD.
TWO LINES, WHICH WE'LL NEED. WE'LL NEED A FOUR INCH LINE FOR DOMESTIC WATER AND A SIX INCH LINE FOR FIRE PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF AMERICAN WATER COMPANY, AS YOU PROBABLY ARE SEEING THEM MORE AND MORE IS WE NEED TO HAVE AMERICAN WATER REQUIRES A SERVICE METER VAULT AND A BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY OR HOT BOX. THERE ARE LOCATED IN THE RIGHT OFF OF 518.
I THINK THE DISTANCE I HAVE IS ABOUT 75FT. THAT THAT IS PER THE REGULATIONS. I HAVE TO BE VERY CLOSE TO THE POINT OF MY CONNECTION. THEY CAN'T GET MOVED BACK, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE FOLLOWING THE AMERICAN WATER REQUIREMENTS AND WE HAD TO GO WITH A LITTLE BIT LONGER OR A LARGER FOUR INCH LINE FOR OUR DOMESTIC BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF THE RUN TO THE FACILITY IS PRETTY LONG AND WE HAVE A LITTLE LINE LOSS. SO WE A TWO INCH LINE IS NOT GOING TO BE SUFFICE. SO WE HAD TO UP IT. SO WE DID. YOU KNOW, WE'RE DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE ON OUR PART. PUBLIC ELECTRIC SERVICE GAS IS PSEG TELEPHONE CENTURYLINK AND CABLE IS COMCAST. SO THAT'S MY PRESENTATION ON WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING. WHAT WAS THERE. AND I WAS GOING TO GO INTO VARIANCES.
BUT IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON WHAT I DISCUSSED SO FAR, I WILL TAKE THEM. IF NOT, I'LL GO INTO THE WAIVERS AND VARIANCES. AND WE'RE ALSO GOING TO COVER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS RAISED BY SOME OF YOUR PROFESSIONALS THAT NEED MORE TESTIMONY OR CLARIFICATION. SO WE'LL GO THROUGH MR. DARGIE'S MEMO AND THE CLERK AND HENCE MEMOS AND THE OTHER MEMOS TO GO THROUGH ANY CLARIFICATIONS THAT ARE NECESSARY. OKAY. LET ME BEGIN. OH, I HAD A QUESTION THAT
[00:25:01]
CHEVRON ON THE SIGN. IS THAT A LOGO OR IS IT AN ARROW? THAT WOULD BE A BILL. BUT I WOULD THINK IT'S AN ARROW LOGO. OKAY. THAT'S THEIR LETTERHEAD. THAT'S THEIR TRADEMARK. OKAY, A LITTLE CONFUSING, BUT OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE WAIVERS AND VARIANCES. I HAVE A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER HERE TO JUSTIFY WHAT THEY ARE. BUT I'LL CITE WHAT, YOU KNOW, POINT THEM OUT ON THE PLANS AND WHERE WE'RE WHERE WE'RE AT. WE'RE ASKING I BELIEVE UP TO SEVEN.VARIANCES REQUESTED FROM MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 16, DASH 4.6 D, A MINIMUM DISTANCE TO REAR YARD SETBACK. REAR YARD OF 75FT IS REQUIRED FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS NOT WITHIN A SUBDIVIDED PARK. THE EXISTING GAZEBO TO REMAIN IS APPROXIMATELY 50FT 55FT FROM THE REAR YARD. THIS IS THE EXISTING GAZEBO THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS.
IT'S IN. IT'S IN GOOD CONDITION. IT HAS A PICNIC TABLE UNDERNEATH IT. IT SERVICES THE EMPLOYEES.
BILL HINES DOES NOT CARE IF IT GOES DOWN OR NOT. I THINK IT'S A NICE AMENITY AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD KEEP. IF YOU DECIDE NOT TO, THEN THEN WE CAN REMOVE IT. BUT JUST FURTHER INSPECTION ON IT. IT IS. IT'S A DECENT GAZEBO. IT'S IN GOOD SHAPE FOR, FOR THE I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT CAME UP. I KNOW THERE'S THE PLANNER HAS ISSUES ON DID WE GET THE PROPER PERMITS AND ALL THAT I WE DON'T KNOW. THIS IS THIS AGAIN WAS DONE IN 1984 WHEN THINGS WERE A LOT EASIER. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE VARIANCES THAT WE'RE CITING FOR. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED FROM MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 16 DASH 4.6 D, MINIMUM DISTANCE TO REAR YARD OF 75FT IS REQUIRED FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS WITHIN A SUBDIVIDED PARK. THE EXISTING GRAVEL AREA TO REMAIN IS APPROXIMATELY 47FT. THAT IS, IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. IT'S THERE IS EXISTING. WE DON'T PLAN ON CHANGING IT, BUT SO WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE ON THAT. AND WE HAVE OUR PLANNER TO GO OVER THE REASONS WHY. CAN I ASK ABOUT THAT GRAVEL. WHAT IS THAT USED FOR OR WHAT IS IT GOING TO BE PROPOSED TO BE USED FOR. IT'S NOT USED FOR ANYTHING. IT'S NOT WE'RE NOT IT'S THERE. I MEAN, IT COULD BE THEY COULD HAVE A ONE YEAR EVENT MAYBE. AND THEY PUT PICNIC TABLES THERE AND ATTENDANCE. BUT YOU REMOVE IT. YEAH. I MEAN IT'S, IT'S THERE'S, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY USED IT FOR. THEY DID HAVE THE SHIPPING CONTAINERS THERE AT ONE POINT. SO. BUT WHO KNOWS. IT IS TRUE. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED FROM MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 16 DASH 4.6 D, A MINIMUM DISTANCE TO OTHER BUILDINGS OF 50FT, IS REQUIRED FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS NOT WITHIN A SUBDIVIDED PARK. THE PROPOSED TRASH AND RECYCLING ENCLOSURE IS LOCATED 35FT FROM THE EXISTING BUILDING. THE VARIANCES REQUESTED, THAT IS LOCATED THE EXISTING DUMPSTER WAS LOCATED RIGHT NEXT TO THE GRAVEL AREA. THERE WERE THREE PARKING SPOTS WHERE I GOT THEM BACK. THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS PLAN. BUT THIS IS WHERE THE DUMPSTER WAS. WAS WHERE THESE THREE SPACES ARE. BILL THOUGHT IT WAS BEST TO MOVE IT OVER TO HERE, WHICH IS AWAY FROM THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, AND IT ALSO BRINGS A NICE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION FOR THE FOR THE TRUCK TO COME IN AS FAR AS FIRE SAFETY, THAT'S WHAT I PAY MY ATTENTION TO ON WHERE I PUT STRUCTURES IS TYPICALLY 20FT OR 35FT FROM THE BUILDING. THERE'S TRAFFIC PERFECT CIRCULATION FOR TRAFFIC EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO GET AROUND. MY DUMPSTER. AND I JUST THINK IT, YOU KNOW, DUE TO THE SITE CONSTRAINTS, IT'S EXISTING. YOU KNOW, FACILITY.
WHERE ELSE CAN YOU PUT IT? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE COULD FIND PLACES, BUT IT'S NOT THE SUITABLE PLACE FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE BECAUSE THE REAR OF THIS BUILDING IS WHERE THE MAINTENANCE IS. SO FOR THE PEOPLE TO TAKE OUT THE TRASH, BOOM. THAT'S WHERE THE TRASH ENCLOSURE, AND I THINK IT WAS A REASONABLE REQUEST TO REQUEST THIS VARIANCE. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED FROM MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION, SECTION 16 DASH FOUR POINT 6DA MINIMUM DISTANCE TO OTHER BUILDINGS OF 50FT IS REQUIRED OF ACCESSORIES, NOT WITHIN A SUBDIVIDED PARK. THE PROPOSED EMERGENCY GENERATOR IS LOCATED 32FT FROM THE EXISTING BUILDING. THE GAME AGAIN IS THE SAME REASONS THAT I SAID FOR THE TRASH ENCLOSURE, ALL THE MECHANICAL AND FUNCTIONS OF THIS BUILDING IS LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. IT'S A SHORTER RUN FOR THE CABLES AND EVERYTHING THAT'S NEEDED, AND IT'S SHIELDED FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TO KEEP IT WITHIN THIS AREA. WE DO HAVE IT COMPLETELY SHADED OR SHIELDED WITH VEGETATION. AND AGAIN, THERE'S ENOUGH. YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS LOOK AT FIRE SAFETY IS AN
[00:30:03]
ISSUE. DO WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ACCESS TO THE BUILDING AND THE ANSWER IN MY OPINION IS NO. SO WE'RE ASKING A VARIANCE FOR THE GENERATOR REQUESTED FROM MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 16 DASH 4.6 E FIVE. THE MINIMUM REQUIRED YARD AREA SHALL BE INCLUDE A PLANTED BUFFER OF 40FT WITHIN 40FT IN WIDTH, ALONG ANY COMMON PROPERTY LINE, WITH A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, A NORTHERLY 40 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS NOW PROPOSE, WHICH I ADDED TO THE REAR OVER HERE. I AM NOT ADDING A 40 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO THE WESTERN SIDE. WHICH IS OVER HERE. AS YOU CAN SEE ME ZOOM OUT. THIS WOULD BE WHERE THE 40 FOOT, NOT DARK SHADING IS NOT A BUFFER. THAT IS THE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY. SO I DON'T SEE A REASON WHY I SHOULD PUT A 40 FOOT BUFFER WHERE THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN ROAD IS. SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR THAT WAIVER. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED FROM MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 16, DASH 5.1 4C1C SIDEWALKS WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PROVIDED ON SITE FOR SAFE PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT BETWEEN PARKING AREAS AND ENTRANCES TO THE PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS AND BETWEEN PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS AND ANY EXISTING AND ANY EXISTING REQUIRED OR PROPOSED SIDEWALK ALONG THE STREET. NO PROPOSED. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY SIDEWALK FROM THE EXISTING BUILDING TO THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK. ALONG 518. WE ARE PROVIDING THE SIDEWALK ALONG 518 FROM POINT A TO POINT B EAST TO WEST. BUT WE'RE NOT PROVIDING A SIDEWALK FROM THE ENTRANCE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO OUR FACILITY, AS WE FEEL THAT THAT IS NOT NEEDED OR WILL BE USED. AND IF THERE WAS A NEED FOR IT, THEY COULD USE THE GRAVEL BIKE. THE GRAVEL WALKWAY THAT IS THERE. BUT WE FEEL THAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING TO THE FACILITY WILL BE DRIVING AND AGAIN, I HAVE A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER TO GO THROUGH THE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CRITERIAS. THE LAST VARIANCE I BELIEVE I'M REQUESTING IS FROM THE MONTGOMERY LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCES, SECTION 16 DASH 5.3 B NO WALL OR FENCE SHALL BE ERECTED OVER FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT. AS I MENTIONED IN MY EARLIER TESTIMONY, WE ARE RELOCATING THE HVAC UNITS TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. THE HVAC STUDENTS WERE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. WE WERE LOCATING THE UNITS TO BE LOCATED IN THE REAR, AND THE ARCHITECTS BELIEVE THE BEST SCREENING POSSIBLE FROM THESE HVAC UNITS WOULD BE A TEN FOOT SIX HIGH SCREENING WALL. I WHY WOULD WE NEED SUCH A HIGH SCREENING WALL? I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S THE HEIGHT OF THE HVAC UNITS. OKAY, SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT BELOW IT. AGAIN STEVEN SPIESEL IS HERE IF YOU WANT ANY MORE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE ON THE WALL. HE HE'S THE ONE IN THAT STAFF PREPARED THOSE PLANS. SO.OUTSIDE AGENCIES REVIEW MEMORANDUMS DELAWARE RARITAN CANAL COMMISSION ISSUED A REVIEW MEMO AUGUST 15TH, 2024. VERY MINOR COMMENTS. THAT WAS THAT WAS THAT WAS THEIR NUMBER 20 4-6161 SOMERSET COUNTY PLANNING BOARD OCTOBER 24TH, 2024, FILE NUMBER G528. COLON 000-246 AGAIN. MINOR COMMENTS ACCEPTED. THE ENTRANCE DRIVE. THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING REAL ISSUE TO DO WITH THE ENTRANCE OTHER THAN RESTRIPING THE STOP BAR AS THE EXISTING STOP BAR THAT IS THERE IS FAINT SOMERSET UNION SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT AUGUST 13TH, 2024 HAS APPROVED OUR SITE. OUR SUBMISSION FILE NUMBER 2024 6620. AND AS I MENTIONED, NJDEP LETTER OF INTERPRETATION IS PENDING. WE HAVE REVIEW MEMORANDUMS FROM CLERK CATE AND HINTZ, ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTION, ZINC, BRIGHT VIEW ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, SHADE TREE, OPEN SPACE, RICHARD BARTOLONE. AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANYTHING FROM FIRE CHIEF ADAM VERDUCCI. SO I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH ANY OF THESE REVIEW LETTER MEMORANDUMS OTHER THAN THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. I JUST WANTED TO GO OVER THE DO'S AND THINGS SO I DON'T LET'S COVER SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SOME OF THE PROFESSIONALS NEED CLARIFICATION FOR INSTANCE, THE CLARKE CATON HINTZ MEMO, WHICH WAS REVISED IN NOVEMBER 18, 2024, IS THE LATEST ON PAGE TEN. 3.3 PLANTED BUFFER GIVEN THE
[00:35:06]
EXISTING VEGETATION ON THE SITE, THE APPLICANT SHOULD PROVIDE TESTIMONY REGARDING THE PROPOSED BUFFER PLANTINGS YOU WANT TO ENLARGE ON WHAT YOU ALREADY TESTIFIED TO OR WELL, IT. WE ARE PROVIDING A 40 FOOT BUFFER EASEMENT AND IT IS FOUND, I THINK, ALSO IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT HE HAS IN HIS REVIEW MEMORANDUM THAT THAT DOES NOT NEED TO BE IMPLEMENTED WITH ANY MORE ADDITIONAL TREES, THOUGH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SUBJECT TO MAYBE RICHARD MALONE, WHO WANTS TO, BUT THERE WERE REALLY NO GAPS OUT THERE TO PROVIDE ANY MORE SHIELDING TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. SO I THINK WE SATISFIED THAT WITH PROVIDING THE EASEMENT AND THE EXISTING VEGETATION THAT IS THERE IS ADEQUATE. JAMES, WOULD YOU DO YOU CONCUR WITH THAT? LET ME JUST DO THIS. I'M GOING TO SWEAR IN ALL OUR PROFESSIONALS RIGHT NOW. GENTLEMEN, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY? THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. I DO, THANK YOU. SO IT'S A VERY LARGE SITE, AND THE VEGETATION IS THAT'S EXISTING, IS FOCUSED. IT'S AROUND THE BUILDING, RIGHT? WHEN YOU SCREEN, YOU TYPICALLY WANT TO SCREEN THE BUILDING, THE IMPROVEMENTS. SO WHAT DO WE KNOW IN OUR LETTER IS AS AS LIKE WAS ALREADY SAID BY MR. SCHMIDT IS THAT THERE'S EXISTING VEGETATION. IT'S FAIRLY ROBUST. IT'S JUST THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES IT TO BE AROUND THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY. RIGHT. IF THE BOARD FEELS THAT THE SCREENING, THE JOB OF THE SCREENING IS DONE BY THE PLANTINGS ALREADY CLOSER TO IT, THEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S VERY THAT'S MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO ME. I DID DEFER ANY ADDITIONAL ANY ADDITIONAL INSIGHT TO MR. BARTOLONE IF HE HAS A RECOMMENDATION FOR CERTAIN TREES TO GO AROUND THE BORDER OF THE PROPERTY LINE. BUT I THINK WHAT'S EXISTING DOES PROVIDE A FAIRLY EFFECTIVE SCREENING AS IS AND AS A COMMENT TO THAT. WE EVERYTHING THAT MR. BARTOLOME REQUIRES, WE AGREE TO WE HAVE NO ISSUES WITH WHATEVER MR. BALDWIN WANTS. IN HIS MEMORANDUM, RICHARD RICHARD ALLGOOD, YES, I APPRECIATE THE AGREEMENT WITH THE MEMO. I HAVE NOT REVIEWED THE BUFFERING IN THE BACK. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'D BE WILLING IF I COULD TAKE A LOOK AND CONFIRM OR MAKE SUGGESTIONS, I WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT. I USUALLY. YEAH, FINE. EASY TO WORK WITH. SURE. THAT WOULD BE THE EASIEST AND BEST WAY TO TAKE CARE OF THAT. THANK YOU. YEAH THAT'S FINE. YEAH. BUT COULD YOU, COULD YOU EXPLAIN AGAIN THE BUFFERING ON THE WEST THOUGH I DIDN'T QUITE GET THAT. SO YOU'RE NOT ADDING IT BECAUSE YOU SAID THERE WAS A MASTER PLAN ROAD. RIGHT THERE. RIGHT. THE. I MEAN, THIS WHOLE LENGTH OF PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO A MASTER PLAN ROAD. SO I WAS NOT PLANNING ON PUTTING ANY TREES WITHIN THIS AREA OF THE PROPERTY. AND THEN THE NORT. EAST AND THEN THE FRONT EDGE. WE HAVE THE STREET TREES. WE HAVE SUFFICIENT PLANTING ALONG THE EAST, AND WE HAVE SUFFICIENT PLANNING REGARDING IN THE NORTH.AND THEN THE WEST IS WHERE WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH PLANNING, BUT THAT'S WHERE THE MASTER PLAN ROAD IS GOING. THAT'S THE DARK SHADE THAT'S ON THE, ON THE, ON THE ON THE RENDERING THAT I HAVE. DAVE, WHAT IS WEST OF THE EASEMENT, THE HOUSE WEST OF THAT THING. NO, NO, NO, JUST JUST TO THE LEFT OF THE EASEMENT STILL IN THE PROPERTY. IS THAT IS THERE ANY BUFFERING THERE? NO, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE MONTGOMERY. WELL, THERE IS BUFFERING. THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S TREES ALONG RIGHT ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE. OKAY. IT'S TOO BAD. THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR ISN'T HERE TO COMMENT IF HE MIGHT BE, I DON'T KNOW. WELL, WE'LL FIND OUT. WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT. YEP. 5.2.1 ON PAGE 15. THEY WANT TO KNOW ABOUT SOIL OILING. OILING. WE TOOK CARE OF THAT. WE WANT 100 CUBIC FEET. CUBIC YARDS. EXCUSE ME, EXCUSE ME, EXCUSE ME. AND ON THE SAME PAGE 15 OF 26 OF THE COURT IN HIS MEMO, WE HAVE TO ON 6.1, WE HAVE TO FIX A INCONSISTENCY WHICH WE AGREED TO ABOUT THE LIGHTING. AS WE SAID, WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE LIGHTING TO LEAD LIGHTING WITH MONK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MONTGOMERY STANDARDS. AND 6.2 ON 16, WE FEEL THAT THE LIGHTING, THE LEAD LIGHTING WITH THE SHIELDS STILL PROVOKE, STILL PROVIDE FOR.
[00:40:03]
SECURITY AND SAFETY ON SITE AND 6.4.1. HEY, CAN WE JUST PAUSE THERE FOR A SECOND ON 6.2 JAMES I YEAH, I GOTCHA INDUSTRY STANDARDS. I DON'T KNOW IF SO. SO WHAT WE ASKED FOR SOMETIMES ORDINANCES ARE VERY SPECIFIC WITH THEIR LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS. SOMETIMES THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE GENERAL WHEN IT COMES TO THE GENERAL LIGHTING REQUIREMENT. IT'S BASICALLY IT'S WHAT MR. SCHATZMAN SAID. IT'S RELATED TO SAFETY AND SECURITY ON SITE. SO WHAT OUR OFFICE RECOMMENDS IS THAT ONE OF THE APPLICANT'S EXPERTS TESTIFY IN A MATTER THAT IS, I THINK, UNDERSTANDABLE TO THE BOARD. I THINK THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED THIS EVENING. ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE MAKE FOR EXAMPLE, AT THE ZONING BOARD ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO, THERE WAS AN AUTO DEALERSHIP. THE ISNA HAS A RECOMMENDED LIGHTING STANDARD FOR THAT USE, RIGHT. WHICH IS GOING TO BE A LOT HIGHER THAN LIKE A DOCTOR'S OFFICE. RIGHT? BUT FOR A MEDICAL OFFICE BEING BETWEEN, I THINK IT'S 0.5 AND ONE. IT KIND OF FLOATS IN THERE IS REASONABLE IN MY VIEW, IS A TYPICAL SERVICE BUSINESS, BUT WE PUT THAT IN THERE AS IF THE BOARD WANTS A DEFINITIVE STANDARD. THERE IS A PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION THAT DOES THAT, BUT AS FAR AS WE KNOW IT DOES FALL BETWEEN. I CAN'T SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO MEDICAL OFFICES IN THE ISNA. WHAT I CAN SAY IS GENERALLY SERVICES, RIGHT? LIKE MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WOULD FALL IN THAT RANGE. OKAY. YEAH. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE SELLING CARS AS FAR AS I KNOW. YEAH OKAY. HEARING NOTHING DIFFERENT I THINK WE'RE OKAY. THANKS. OKAY. MR. SHUSTERMAN, GO AHEAD. 6.4.1 ON PAGE 16, NON-GLARE LIGHTS, WHERE WE HAVE NINE GLARE LIGHTS. CORRECT? YES. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT 6.4.3 ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT THE COLOR TEMPERATURE? RIGHT. WE WILL COMPLY. OKAY.CIRCUIT TIMER 6.6. ON THE SAME PAGE, WE WILL HAVE CIRCUIT TIMERS. I PUT A NOTE ON THE PLANS I WE WERE GOING TO HAVE IT SHUT OFF AT 11 AT NIGHT, AND WE WOULD HAVE MOTION MOTION SENSORS OF SOME OF THE LIGHTS OF A CAR DID PULL IN. THEY WOULD KICK IN. OKAY. OKAY. AND THAT'S WITH CLERK KATE ENHANCED IT IN ITS REVISION ON PAGE 17, PARAGRAPH ACTUALLY STARTS ON PAGE 16.
PARAGRAPH 6.6. I THINK WE JUST COVERED THAT. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S THE TIMERS. YEAH. WE'RE PUTTING TIMERS. SIGNS THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH. AND JUST TO CONFIRM TOO WITH THE WE DID RECEIVE DETAILS ON THE FACADE SIGNS WHICH WAS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION. THEY DO COMPLY WITH THE 50 SQUARE FOOT STANDARD. IT'S BROKEN INTO TWO BASICALLY, BUT COMBINED IT'S LESS THAN 50FT■!S. OKAY. AND THN I WANT TO KNOW ON PAGE 20 10.4 EXISTING WALK WALKING PATH. THE WALKING PATH IS FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES AND NOT PUBLIC. OKAY. AND THERE'S NO EASEMENT. RIGHT.
THAT WAS THE QUESTION TOO. SO THERE'S NO EASEMENT. IT'S OWNED BY THE PROPERTY. NO EASEMENT OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN ON 11.1 ON PAGE 21, THE APPLICANT SHOULD CONFIRM IF THE EXERCISE TRAIL EQUIPMENT AREA WILL REMAIN AND UPDATE THE PLAN ACCORDINGLY. YOU WANT TO AS IT'S GOING TO BE OMITTED. WE'RE GOING TO OMIT THE NOTE WE CITED IT TO BE REMOVED AND I DIDN'T TAKE IT OFF THE VARIANCE. SO IT'S AN ERROR ON MY ON MY BEHALF. THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTION ZINC DATED NOVEMBER 18TH. THE GENERAL COMMENTS THREE TESTIMONY SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON THE FOLLOWING NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES. DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION. DISSIPATED DELIVERY. TYPES OF VEHICLES. WHERE ARE YOU? EXCUSE ME. MR. MR. WHAT DO YOU WHERE ARE YOU NOW? WHAT ARE YOU WHAT ON PAGE TWO ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. YEAH. OKAY. NO, WE. MR. NUMBER THREE, WHAT ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE ON PAGE ONE? NOT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. COMMENTS. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES NUMBER 18. OKAY. OH, OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NOW, ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTIONS OKAY. WE'RE ON PAGE TWO. WE TESTIFIED TO NUMBER FOUR THAT THE CONTAINERS HAVE BEEN REMOVED. AND AS FAR AS FIVE AND
[00:45:10]
SIX ON PAGE THREE, WE'LL MAKE THOSE CORRECTIONS. AND AS FAR AS AID IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE ADA SPACES, WE'LL MAKE THAT CORRECTION. AND 910 AND 11 AND 12, NINE AND TEN WILL MAKE THE CORRECTIONS. 11 TESTIMONY SHOULD BE PROVIDED REGARDING THE CONDITION OF THE EXISTING DRAINAGE FACILITIES. DO YOU WANT. IT IS NOTED THAT A INLETS WILL BE INSTALLED. THE EXISTING 15 INCH REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE TO ACCOMMODATE PROPOSED ROOF RUNOFF IS THAT YOU'RE DOING. NO, WE ARE INSTALLING ALIENS. AND I DID ADD A DETAILED SHOWING WHERE THE DISCHARGE HEADER SYSTEM IS CONNECTING TO THAT INLET. SO YES, WE'RE PRETTY MUCH COMPLIANT WITH EVERYTHING IN REQUEST LETTER THAT, YOU KNOW, AS WE DISCUSSED IN THE WORK MEETING AND THEN FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH THE REVISIONS, THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT I DID COMPLETE, SOME THINGS I DIDN'T, BUT I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH ANY OF THE ITEMS IN ENVIRONMENTAL, ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTION INC'S REVIEW MEMORANDUM, RAKESH. OKAY, HOLD ON, HOLD ON, HOLD ON. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ON PAGE THREE, THE APPLICANT, WE'RE GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE WHAT MR. DARJEE WANTS AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD PROVIDE TESTIMONY TO WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT IMPASSABLE OCCURRED WITH AN ADDITIONAL 4647FT■!S OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE SHOULD THESE IMPROVEMENTS INCREASED OVERALL IMPERVIOUS. SINCE 2004, STORMWATER MEASURES MAY BE REQUIRED. WE AGREE WITH THAT, AND AS BEST WE CAN TELL, IT'S EITHER 19. SINCE THE LATE 70S WHEN THE SCHIZOPHRENIC BUILT THIS AND THEN IT WAS CONVEYED TO THE SECONDARY MISSION TEST BOAR. AND THIS IS THE THIRD OWNER OF THE IMPROVEMENTS. I GUESS JUST REGARDING THAT COMMENT. HEY RAKESH, CAN YOU GRAB A MICROPHONE? RAKESH, FEEL FREE TO GO BACKWARDS. I WILL, I WILL ABSOLUTELY. SO JUST WITH THAT, THAT ONE COMMENT THOUGH, WHAT WE WERE ASKING IS SINCE 2004, THEN YOU'RE ADDING 4600 527. LET ME GET THE NUMBER. SORRY. .4527.YES. THAT'S WE SAY ACRES, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY TWO SQUARE FEET. SQUARE FEET. YEP. YOU'RE ADDING 40 500FT■!S. SO I GUESS WHAT WEE SAYING IS SINCE 2004, HAVE THERE BEEN AN ADDITIONAL 500FT■!S IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING. SO I'M GOING TO I CAN RESEARCH THAT FOR YOU BY LOOKING AT AERIALS. BUT THAT'S THE BEST I CAN DO. AND THEN I GUESS THE OTHER THING THAT WE JUST WANT TO BRING TO LIGHT IS THAT IF THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL ANY ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ADDED GOING FORWARD TRIGGERS, THEN IT WOULD TRIGGER THIS TO BE A MAJOR PROJECT. AND IT'S NO LONGER A MINOR, EVEN IF EVEN IF YOU'RE COMING IN AND ADDING, LET'S SAY A 500 SQUARE FOOT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WOULD ADD A CONCRETE PAD FOR SOMETHING THAT YOU'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND ACTUALLY DO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE AS WELL. SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF. AND IT'LL BE DOCUMENTED IN THE RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL AS WELL. DAVE. THAT MAKES SENSE. YEAH. WE DIDN'T DESIGN THIS UNDER THE THRESHOLD. WE DESIGNED WHAT WE NEEDED. AND IT JUST WORKED OUT THAT WE WERE UNDER IT. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE AND THAT'S AS ENGINEERS YOU THAT'S WHAT YOU LOOK AT. SO I MEAN, IF THERE WAS IF WE WERE CLOSE, I WOULD CUT THINGS OUT. BUT THIS IS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN THAT WAS PROVIDED TO ME. THE ARCHITECT. AND THE NUMBERS ARE WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE. AND YEAH, THE RULES THAT HE'S CITING IS TYPICAL. IT'S, YOU KNOW, YOU EAT UP YOUR, YOUR, YOUR TOTAL NUT ANYTHING OVER AS DE MINIMIS AS YOU MAY THINK IT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT SOMETHING IN. RIGHT.
THAT'S WHY I'M MAKING A LIVING OFF OF THAT. YEAH. ME TOO. OKAY. WELL IT'S IN THE RECORD NOW JUST TO GO BACK REAL QUICK, COMMENT NUMBER SIX, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THAT THE THAT THE RELIEF TO ALLOW 100YD■!T OF IMPT OR EXPORT AS MR. SCHMIDT HAD TESTIFIED. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT COMMENT NUMBER 11. WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS YOU'RE TYING IT TO THE EXISTING PIPE.
HAS THERE BEEN ANY INVESTIGATION DONE TO THE AS TO THE CONDITION OF THAT EXISTING PIPE? JUST A FIELD INSPECTION LOOKING DOWN THE HEADWALL AND DOWN THE INLET ITSELF, IT SEEMS TO BE
[00:50:04]
CONVEYING. FINE. THAT'S AS MUCH AS WE'VE DONE SO FAR. YOU PLAN ON TELEVISING IT AS OPPOSED TO APPROVAL TO MAKE SURE. WELL, WE'RE PROBABLY WE'LL MAKE IT. IT'S NOT A VERY LONG PIPE, BUT WHAT WE'LL DO IS WHEN WE'RE GOING TO PUT THOSE INLETS IN, IF THOSE PIPES DON'T LOOK GOOD AND WE'RE PUTTING THE SIDEWALK ON TOP, IT'LL BE BEST TO REPLACE THE WHOLE PIPE. OKAY. SO YOU PUT MAYBE WOULD YOU OBJECT OR WOULD YOU BE AGREEABLE TO, I SHOULD SAY, TO PUTTING SOME NOTATIONS TO THAT EFFECT THAT, YES, WE EVALUATED AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION AND REPAIR TO REPLACE IT'S UNDER BILL'S INTEREST. BEST TO REPLACE THAT PIPE IF IT'S DETERIORATED. BUT IT DID NOT LOOK DETERIORATED THROUGH THE UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM INSPECTION THAT I DID. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR TO THAT EFFECT THAT IT WOULD BE THE PIPE WOULD BE EVALUATED AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION. IT'LL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE TOWNSHIP ENGINEER. SO NOT NOT JUST TO LOOKING AT IT. IT'LL BE EVALUATED WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, VIDEO EVALUATED, YOU KNOW. YEAH, WHATEVER THE BEST JUDGMENT IS OF THE TOWNSHIP ENGINEER AS FAR AS EVALUATING IT. OKAY. BUT IT'S OUR PIPE. YEAH, IT IS SO IT'S I MEAN, IT'S YOUR PIPE. I UNDERSTAND ALL THIS, BUT IT IS OUR PIPE AND IT'S UNDER BILL'S BEST, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE MACHINERY IS OUT THERE NOW, IT'S BETTER TO RIP IT UP AND PUT IT DOWN. ABSOLUTELY. IT'S IN EVERYONE'S BEST INTEREST, ACTUALLY. SO. SO THAT THAT WAS THAT. AND I THINK THAT CATCHES US UP. I'LL LET MR. SHANAHAN KEEP YOU CAN I GUESS, GO ON AND ADDRESS ANY OTHER COMMENTS I GUESS IN THE MEMO, MR. CHAIRMAN. YES, SIR. THE REST WE AGREED TO AS FAR AS THE DEED RESTRICTIONS RECORDING EVERYTHING ELSE AND INFORMATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON WHAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE VARIOUS AREAS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED, SUCH AS EXISTING SIDEWALK AREAS, TRASH ENCLOSURES WHICH THE RESTORATION. WE'RE JUST PUTTING GRASS. SO YEAH, I HAVE TO I IT'S NOT IDENTIFIED. I HAVE TO IDENTIFY THAT. YES. AND THAT'S IT FOR HIS MEMO. I BELIEVE AND AS I SAID, WE AGREED EVERYTHING MR. BARTOLOME WANTS. OKAY, LET'S JUST HOLD. LET'S HOLD OFF ONE ONE MINUTE. RAKESH FINISHED YOUR MEMO. I THINK MR. SCHATZMAN AND MR. SCHMIDT COVERED A LOT OF IT THROUGH MR. SCHMIDT'S DIRECT TESTIMONY AND GOING THROUGH THE COMMENTS JUST NOW, I DON'T HAVE ANY ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT WITH REGARD TO MY MEMO. THEY'VE AGREED TO SATISFY OBVIOUSLY HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME.WE'LL WE'LL GET WE'LL GET TO OUR COMMENTS AFTERWARDS. BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR, FOR THE APPLICANT, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MR. BARTOLOME, WE AGREE TO EVERYTHING HE WANTS. HE POINTS OUT THAT WE COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE ABOUT THE NUMBER THREE, SAYS THAT THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT QUANTITY OF 19 TREES IS CONSISTENT WITH TOWNSHIP STANDARDS AND IS ACCEPTABLE TO THIS OFFICE. HE WANTS THE SIZE OF THE PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREES INCREASED, WHICH WE WILL AGREE TO. AND SOME CHANGES IN THE PLANS THAT INSTEAD OF CALLING ONE DOGWOOD TREE THE WRONG DOGWOOD TREE, WILL DO, WILL DO EVERYTHING HE WANTS. NUMBER EIGHT, HE WANTS A MIXING, NO MIXING OF THE TWO SPECIES OF EVERGREEN TREES. WE'LL DO WHATEVER HE THINKS IS BETTER. EITHER THE WHITE PINE OR THE NORWAY SPRUCE. AND HE POINTS THAT OUT. IF WE DO THAT, IT'LL BE BETTER BUFFERING. AND SO THAT'S ABOUT IT FOR HIM AND RICHARD. YOU'RE GOOD WITH THEM ACCEPTING ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS. YES. OKAY. THANKS. AS FAR AS THE SHADE TREE COMMITTEE WILL, AS FAR AS THE SPECIES OF TREES WILL GO WITH, WITH WHAT MR. BARLOW WANTS. THERE'S ONE QUESTION IN THE BRIGHT VIEW ENGINEERING THAT WE'LL HAVE MR. KENDALL TESTIFY TO KRISTEN. SERGEANT POINTS OUT THAT SHE MAKES A ERROR. SHE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN WATER FROM NEW JERSEY AMERICAN WATER COMPANY FROM 518. SHE STILL THINKS THE WELL IS GOING TO BE SERVICING THE PROPOSAL, WHICH IT WILL NOT BE. I DO I DO WANT TO ADD, THOUGH SHE DID WRITE A PREVIOUS MEMO. SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2024, AND IT WRITES THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE PROPERTY IS PROPOSING TO CONNECT TO PUBLIC WATER AND THE WELL NEEDS TO BE ABANDONED BY A LICENSED WELL DRILLER, WHICH WILL REQUIRE NJDEP AND LOCAL APPROVAL. SO THAT WAS HER FIRST INITIAL, WHICH IS SPOT ON. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE TO DO. IT'S NOTED ON THE PLANS. OKAY, SO SHE MIGHT HAVE LOOKED AT A COPY AND PASTE. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I KNOW KRISTEN, BUT SHE DID HAVE A WRITE REVIEW MEMORANDUM THE FIRST TIME
[00:55:01]
AROUND. YEP. WE AT THE PRESENT TIME WE ARE NOT PROVIDING A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT, BUT WE'LL CONSIDER IT LATER ON. WE'RE COMING IN. THIS IS I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. THIS IS LAUREN WALTZ MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 30TH. WE'LL CONSIDER IT LATER ON FOR THE. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE MASTER PLAN ROAD AND SHE STATES ON THREE A THAT 11 TREES ALONG ROUTE 518, WHICH DOES NOT MEET THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT. YOU TESTIFIED WE'RE GOING TO ADD MORE TREES. WE DID ADD MORE TREES THERE. SO. THE AND SHE POINTS OUT THIS OFFICE ON FOUR ON PAGE TWO. THIS OFFICE COULD NOT LOCATE A TOTAL CALCULATION FOR LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE. THE APPLICANT SHOULD PROVIDE THIS IN THEIR TESTIMONY. AND ON FUTURE REVISED PLANS. THAT'S YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT. IT'S THE IT'S ON THE PLANS. IT'S ON SHEET EIGHT. SHE MISSED IT. THAT'S ALL. OKAY. AND THEN FIVE ON PAGE TWO OF HER MEMO. NEWLY PLANTED TREES MUST INCLUDE DEER PROTECTION. AND WE'RE GOING TO.YEAH. THIS IS A WE'RE NOT A NEW MEMO BUT THAT HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE PLAN. SO IT'S BEEN A NOTE.
WE ADDED MOTIONS DOWN ON PAGE THREE. THE THREE MOTION SENSORS AND OUR TIMER SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO ANY LIGHTING DESIGN TO MINIMIZE THE USE OF LIGHTS IN IN UNOCCUPIED AREAS.
WE'RE DOING THAT. THE PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY LIGHTING, INDICATE ANY LIGHTING. THE APPLICANT SHOULD PROVIDE TESTIMONY REGARDING ANY LIGHTING. I BELIEVE YOU SAID IT'S GOING TO BE. IS THAT IS THAT LIGHTING INTERNAL OR IS IT EXTERNAL? IT'S INTERNAL. IT'S INTERNAL. INTERNAL INTERNAL LIGHTS OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE LIGHTING THE TEMPERATURE LIGHTING WE'RE GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE PLANNER AM I CORRECT. YEAH. WE DEGRADE IT. YES OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION HAS A MEMO DATED SEPTEMBER 26 2024.
THE APPLICANT SHOULD PLANT A NUMBER OF TREES REQUIRED UNDER MONTGOMERY TREE REPLACEMENT ORDINANCE. WE ARE THE SPECIES. WE'RE GOING TO DEFER TO. MR. BARTOLONE. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT THE WILDFIRE? MEADOW? WE DON'T WANT TO GET HANDCUFFED. I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK INTO THAT.
IT WAS BEAUTIFUL. I REMEMBER IT WAS THERE. SO BILL HANZLIK HAS NO OBJECTION, BUT WE DON'T BE HANDCUFFED TO THE APPROVAL THAT HE'S SUBJECT TO BEING HAVING A WILDFIRE. SO HE'S GOING TO LOOK INTO IT. AND IT WAS A VERY NICE AMENITY. I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH IT COST, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL WE'LL DEFINITELY LOOK AT IT AS AN ALTERNATIVE OF PLANNING BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE TO CUT THAT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAINTAIN IT WITH LAWN. SO AND PLEASE JUST COORDINATE THAT WITH RICHARD AS WELL. YEAH THAT'S FINE I'LL LOOK INTO THAT. BUT WE JUST DON'T WANT IT AS A CONDITION. IT WAS JUST A RECOMMENDATION OR SUGGESTION. AND BILL IS ALL FOR IT. I MEAN BUT AS I SAID, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE A I DEAL WITH RESOLUTION APPROVALS TEN YEARS DOWN THE LINE AND SAY, HEY, YOU'RE SUBJECT TO THAT. I YOU KNOW, IT'S USABLE LAND AT SOME POINT. SO YES, I THOUGHT IT WAS A IT WAS NICE THAT HE BROUGHT IT OUT ENERGY. WE SUGGEST THE SOLAR PANELS BE INSTALLED ON THE ROOF OF THE BUILDING. NO. OKAY. THE ARCHITECT WILL TAKE CARE OF HEAT EXCHANGE, HVAC AND HOT WATER, ELECTRIC CHARGING STATIONS. ON PAGE TWO. WE ARE PROVIDING ELECTRIC STORAGE, CHARGING STATIONS. WE SAW THE PROPOSED DRYWELL ON THE PLAN. STORMWATER. WE ALSO SUGGEST THAT ANY NEW PAVEMENT BE PERMEABLE PAVEMENT TO FURTHER REDUCE STORMWATER RUNOFF. WHAT DO YOU WANT ABOUT THAT? WELL, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING JUST PUTTING FOR THE LITTLE AMOUNT OF I MEAN, STORMWATER PERVIOUS PAVEMENT IS A COMPLETE UNIT. YOU JUST DON'T PUT A LITTLE SECTION IN AND PUT PERMANENT PAVING THE SIDEWALK. THE SIDEWALK WOULD BE THE SIDEWALK IS INCLUDED. CORRECT.
ISN'T THERE? A NEW SIDEWALK IS INCLUDED. SO THERE'S JUST A LITTLE AREA OF NEW PAVEMENT AND THERE'S SIDEWALK. SO YOU JUST DON'T PUT POROUS PAVEMENT FOR A LITTLE AREA, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE UNDER DRAINS, AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE GRAVEL. SO IF YOU RIPPED UP EVERYTHING. YEAH, THAT IT'S ALSO NICE STORMWATER EFFECTS. I MEAN, IT ANSWERS A LOT OF PROBLEMS, BUT WE'RE NOT THERE. WE'RE ONLY WE HAVE MAYBE 2 OR 3000FT■!S OF NEW PAVEMENT, AND THE REST IS SIDEWALK. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO WITH POROUS PAVEMENT ON SUCH A SMALL SCOPE. BUT IF THERE IS A FUTURE
[01:00:03]
EXPANSION, I KNOW BOARDS HAVE BEEN PREFERRING THE POROUS PAVEMENT, WHICH IS AS AN ENGINEER, IT HELPS. SO THE ANSWER IS NO FOR THAT. FOR THIS, FOR THIS APPLICATION.RECREATION. THE SITE INCLUDES WALKING PATHS AND WE HOPE THE APPLICANT WILL KEEP AND MAINTAIN THOSE FOR THE USE OF STAFF AND CLIENTS. WE GRANT THE VARIANCE WE WILL. WE ALSO RECOMMEND PARK BENCHES AND A PICNIC TABLE. WELL, THE GAZEBO HAS A BENCH AND A AND A PLACE WHERE A NICE.
WHETHER THE STAFF CAN GO OUT AND HAVE LUNCH. SO IF YOU GRANT THE VARIANCE, IT'LL BE THERE.
SIDEWALK SHOULD BE INSTALLED ALONG ROUTE 518. MR. SCHMIDT'S TESTIMONY IS THAT IT WILL BE WE ALL SUGGEST, A BIKE RACK BESIDE THE PARKING LOT, WHICH WILL DO. WE'LL PUT THAT AS WOMEN, AS WELL AS TO. I THINK WE'VE TALKED WE'VE TALKED ABOUT LIGHTING, THE LIGHTING POINTED DOWNWARDS. AND AS MR. SCHMIDT TESTIFIED TO IT, COMPLIES WITH THE MONTGOMERY DARK SKIES POLICY. AND THAT'S NUMBER ONE FOR G ONE. THE LIGHT SHOULD BE TURNED OFF AS EASILY AS POSSIBLE IN THE EVENING AS THEY CAN BE SET ON A MOTION DETECTOR. AND APPLICANT MAY MIGHT CONSIDER SPECIAL PROTOCOLS SUCH AS EARLY CLOSING OR BRIEF SHUTOFFS DURING THE SPRING AND FALL MIGRATION. WE'LL CONSIDER IT. BUT WE FOR SECURITY WE'RE THE TESTIMONY IS IT'S AN HOUR AFTER CLOSING. AND WHAT'S THE HOUR AFTER CLOSING? I WAS HAVING THEM SET OFF AT 11, AND I WAS HAVING THEM ON MOTION SINCE SOME OF THEM ON MOTION SENSORS FOR SECURITY REASONS. RIGHT. OKAY. AND THREE. AGAIN LIGHTING. WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW THE DARK SKY ORDINANCE OF MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP. AND SO THAT'S THE MEMOS FOR MR. SMITH. MR. SCHMIDT TO TESTIFY TO THE DARK SIDE. OKAY. AND WE WILL SAVE OUR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS UNTIL THE END ON THE BOARD. OKAY. I'LL BE HERE. THANKS, DAVE. MR. LEONE, PLEASE. OH, SORRY. YEAH, WE WENT TO THE PLANNER. YOU JUST SCROLL DOWN HERE. YOU GOT IT? YEP. I'LL PUT IT BACK IN MOTION AND THE MOUSE WORKS. YOU. WANT TO SWEAR, MR. LEONE IN? PLEASE, SIR, COULD YOU STATE YOUR FULL NAME FOR THE RECORD, STEVEN LEONE, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. I DO, THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO GIVE US YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND AND YOUR PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND? CERTAINLY. I'M A PRINCIPAL WITH SPIESEL ARCHITECTURAL GROUP. I AM LICENSED IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY AND SIX OTHER STATES GRADUATE OF NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY WITH A BACHELOR'S DEGREE IN ARCHITECTURE. I HAVE TESTIFIED BEFORE A NUMBER OF BOARDS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND I HAVE OVERSEEN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE DOCUMENTS. OKAY, I SUGGEST THAT HE'S A LICENSED ARCHITECT, AND I ASSUME THAT THESE PLANS WERE EITHER PREPARED BY YOU OR UNDER YOUR DIRECTION. THAT IS CORRECT.
OKAY. AND OF COURSE, YOU VISITED THE SITE. I HAVE DO YOU WANT TO GO OVER THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR THE BOARD CERTIFICATION? SURE. SO AS HAS BEEN THE BOARD, THE BOARD ACCEPTS YOUR YOUR QUALIFICATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AS HAS BEEN TESTIFIED PREVIOUSLY, THIS IS A BUILDING MEASURING 15,180FT■!S. AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING SIMPLY A RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING FACILITY. THERE'S NO EXPANSION BEING PROPOSED. THE ONE STORY BUILDING WITH A PARTIAL BASEMENT WILL BE COMPLETELY RENOVATED ON THE INTERIOR AS WELL AS THE EXTERIOR. WHAT YOU SEE IN THE EXHIBIT BEFORE YOU IS A VIEW OF THE PARTIAL BASEMENT FLOOR, WHICH WILL NOW HAVE, AS PROPOSE, BETTER ACCESS TO AND FROM BY WAY OF A NEW STAIR AND AN ELEVATOR. GOING ON TO THE FLOOR, THE MAIN FLOOR ABOVE THIS WILL HOUSE A FULL ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY SUITE. AS HAS BEEN STATED, THE EXISTING ENTRANCE HAS BEEN MOVED TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER, AND THAT IS TO PROMOTE A BETTER FLOW ON THE INTERIOR OF THE SURGICAL SUITE SO THAT YOU HAVE PROPER FLOW FROM THE PUBLIC ENTRY POINTS AND
[01:05:03]
TO AND FROM THE OPERATING ROOMS POST OPERATING AND THEN EXIT. ULTIMATELY, THE CURB CUT HAS BEEN PULLED BACK TO ALLOW FOR DROP OFF IN THE CORRECT DROP OFF MANNER THAT IS ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. OFTENTIMES FOLKS ARE GOING TO NEED SOME ASSISTANCE IN GETTING TO AND FROM THE ENTRY POINT. SO TO MAKE THAT ENTRY POINT AS EASY AS POSSIBLE, THAT IS WHAT DROVE THE DESIGN TO SHIFT THE ENTRY POINT. AGAIN, THE ENTIRE FACILITY IS BEING RENOVATED ON THE INTERIOR. WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE MECHANICAL SCREEN THAT IS SHOWN HERE ON THE NORTH ELEVATION. YOU CAN SEE THAT IT COMES ACROSS THE BACK SIDE AND THEN TURNS ITS WAY DOWN ALONG THE EAST EAST SIDE OF THE FACILITY. THE ELEVATIONS ARE ALSO GOING TO BE FULLY RENOVATED. THE PROPOSAL IS TO INCLUDE METAL PANEL PREDOMINANTLY ON THE SOUTH FACADE AND ON THE WEST FACADE, PARTIALLY ON THE EAST FACADE, AND THEN STUCCO TO CONTINUE AROUND THE EAST AND THE NORTH FACADE. THE METAL PANEL SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVELY A COMPOSITE SYSTEM, NOT DISSIMILAR TO MANY OF THE PRODUCTS THAT YOU SEE COMMONLY USED IN THESE TYPES OF FACILITIES. THE COLOR PALETTE IS ESSENTIALLY A MUTED GRAY PALETT. THE METAL PANEL WILL SIT ABOVE A STONE BASE OF APPROXIMATELY TWO 2.5FT IN HEIGHT, ALSO IN A GRAY SCHEME, BUT WITH A LITTLE BIT OF VARIED COLOR IN IT. IN EARTH TONES, STONE TONES, AND YOU WILL SEE THAT AT THE ENTRY POINT TO MARK THE ENTRANCE, TO ALLOW FOR PROPER WAYFINDING, AND TO RECOGNIZE WHERE THE ENTRY POINT IS. WE'VE GOT A CANOPY ALSO IN ALUMINUM, IN A GRAPHITE COLOR, A DARKISH GRAY. AND THEN TO HIGHLIGHT THAT ENTRANCE POINT AND DEMARCATE IN PART THE ENTRANCE AND IN PART TO SUPPORT THE OPERATOR, A SORT OF A PITCHED ROOF SALTBOX SHED STYLE CLAD IN A DEEP BLUE COLOR. ALSO A METALLIC COMPOSITE PANEL. AS WE CIRCULATE AROUND THE BUILDING TOWARDS THE NORTH FACADE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE THERE'S A THE SCREEN, THE MECHANICAL SCREEN IS LOCATED IN THIS BOTTOM RIGHT DRAWING THE NORTH ELEVATION THAT IS INTENDED TO COMPLETELY SHIELD THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT THAT IS PROPOSED. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IS A CHILLER SYSTEM THAT WILL BE ALL SELF-CONTAINED AND SERVICED THE BUILDING. THERE WILL BE NO ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT PROPOSED. HOW HIGH IS THAT EQUIPMENT? BECAUSE I KNOW THE FENCE IS TEN FEET.HOW HIGH IS THAT? IT'S. IT'S RIGHT ABOUT RIGHT TO THE TOP, TO THAT EDGE. THE EQUIPMENT MIGHT BE JUST A HAIR LOWER. OKAY. AND YOU KNOW, AS WE, AS WE GET FURTHER ALONG AND THEN YOU START TO PRICE OUT THE EQUIPMENT AND YOU GET THE EQUIPMENT IN THERE, IT MAY VARY A BIT, BUT THE INTENTION IS THAT WE'LL KEEP THE SCREEN UP ABOVE THE SIGHT LINE OF THE EQUIPMENT. AND YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO. ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. THERE ISN'T ANY INTENTION AND ANYONE WANTING TO SEE THAT EQUIPMENT OKAY. AND SO THE POINT IS THAT THE SCREEN IS ALSO GOING TO BE CLAD IN A SIMILAR METALLIC ALUMINUM PANEL. IT MAY BE FLUTED, IT MAY BE GROOVED, BUT IT'LL MATCH THE IT'LL BLEND INTO THE BACKGROUND BEHIND IT. SO THE INTENTION IS TO MAKE IT KIND OF BLEED AWAY. THAT IS THE EQUIPMENT SCREEN WE HAVE. AS I SAID, WE HAVE A CANOPY TO PROTECT THE OCCUPANTS FROM ENTERING AND EXITING BOTH ON THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH SIDE. AND I BELIEVE THAT IS THE EXTENT OF MY TESTIMONY IN TERMS OF THE CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING. NOW, ONE THING THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION SAYS WE RECOMMEND THIS IS IN THEIR MEMO OF SEPTEMBER 26TH. ON PAGE ONE, WE RECOMMEND HEAT EXCHANGE, HVAC AND HOT WATER. WOULD YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT? WE ARE VETTING OUT DIFFERENT TYPES OF MECHANICAL SYSTEMS, AND CERTAINLY WOULD LOOK AT THAT AS A POTENTIAL. OKAY. AND THEN I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT FOR THE BOARD THAT THE CLARKE CATON HINTZ MEMO POINTS OUT ON 8.3 ON PAGE 18, IT SAYS SOLAR ACCESS PER SECTION 16 HYPHEN, 5.5 E ALL LOTS AND OR BUILDINGS ON LOTS SHALL BE ORIENTED FOR SOLAR ENERGY ACCESS WHERE POSSIBLE AND DESIRABLE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING WINDOWS ALONG ALL FACADES EXCEPT FOR THE EAST ELEVATION. THIS COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENT AND THEN IN 8.2 THEY GO ON ON A NARRATIVE OF THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING, WHICH MR. LEONI ALREADY TESTIFIED TO.
[01:10:05]
SO THAT'S MR. LEONI TESTIMONY. I JUST POINTED OUT THAT THEY COMPLY. IT'S A QUESTION THAT COMES UP SOMETIMES DURING HEARINGS. SO WHEN I KNOW I WAS JUST NOTING THAT IT'S COMPLIANT.THANK YOU, MR. LEONI. ARE THESE COLLECTIVELY THEN OR MR. SCHATZMAN EXHIBIT A THREE. YES.
AS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. YES. THANKS. OKAY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? I JUST HAVE MR. I JUST WANT TO HAVE MR. KENNEL COMMENT ON ONE THING, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE PLANNER TESTIMONY. OKAY. HOLD ON, HOLD ON. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE ARCHITECT FROM THE BOARD? OKAY.
THANK YOU. MR. THANK YOU MR. KENNELS. PLEASE. I SWEAR, I KNOW. I'M SO SORRY, SIR. CAN WE GET YOUR FULL NAME FOR THE RECORD? YES. SCOTT KENNEL K E N N E L WITH MCDONOUGH AND ASSOCIATES. AND DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. YES, I DO, THANK YOU. OKAY. MR. KENNEL, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE US THE WHO YOU WORK FOR AND YOUR EXPERIENCE AND WHAT YOUR INVOLVEMENT WITH THE THIS APPLICATION IS? YES. AGAIN, IT'S SCOTT KENNEL WITH MCDONOUGH AND RAY ASSOCIATES. I'M A PRINCIPAL WITH MCDONOUGH AND RAY ASSOCIATES WITH OVER 35 YEARS OF TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING EXPERIENCE. I'VE APPEARED BEFORE THIS BOARD, LAST TIME I RECALL, WAS ON THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON RIVER ROAD. I'VE TESTIFIED IN OVER 2000 SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS AND OVER 100 MUNICIPALITIES, AND I'VE BEEN QUALIFIED IN NEW JERSEY SUPERIOR COURT AS A TRAFFIC EXPERT. AND HERE. SO THANK YOU. WELCOME BACK. ALL RIGHT. ON MR. FISCHINGER'S MEMO OF NOVEMBER FIFTH, 2024. HE ASKED, NUMBER ONE, HOW WILL PICK UP AND SLASH DROP OFF BE ACCOMMODATED. THIS IS ON PAGE FOUR. IN THIS AREA WITHOUT A SIDEWALK. WHAT IS HE TALKING. EXPLAIN TO THE BOARD WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT. AND THE ANSWER TO THAT. WELL, I MEANT TO DEFER TO MR. FISSINGER, BUT WE PROVIDE SIDEWALK FOR APPROXIMATELY 100FT OF THE DROP OFF AREA CLOSEST TO THE NEW RELOCATED BUILDING ENTRANCE, WHICH CAN ACCOMMODATE 3 TO 4 VEHICLES. AND WE ALSO PROVIDE SIGNAGE. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE CHEVRON STRIPING TO PROVIDE THE DEMARCATION FOR DROP OFFS AND PICKUPS. UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE I MEAN, WE'RE WE'RE I'M SURE WE CAN WORK WITH JOE IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT JOE WOULD LIKE TO OFFER JOE AND THE WHOLE REASON FOR THIS COMMENT IS IF YOU LOOK THERE, THERE'S ESSENTIALLY ON THE, THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE BUILDING OR THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, THERE'S ONLY SIDEWALK ALONG HALF OF THE DROP OFF AREA. AND THE QUESTION IS, AND SCOTT, HOW MANY CARS DID YOU SAY WOULD FIT ALONG THE WHERE THE SIDEWALK IS? I WOULD SAY AT LEAST 3 TO 4. AND THEN THERE'S AT LEAST TWO CARS WHERE IT'S DEMARCATED FOR THE DEPRESSED CURB, WHICH WAS PROBABLY THE LIKELY PLACE THEY WOULD BE DROPPED OFF GIVEN THE PROXIMITY TO THE TO THE NEW ENTRANCE. SO JUST THE ONLY THING I WOULD SUGGEST JUST FOR, FOR CLARITY IS I THINK YOU ALREADY HAVE SIGNS THAT SAY PICK OFF, PICK UP AND DROP OFF ONLY NO PARKING. I WOULD SUGGEST THE ONES WHERE THERE IS NO SIDEWALK JUST SAY NO PARKING OR NO STOPPING OR STANDING. AND THEN THE PICKUP DROP OFF. ESSENTIALLY USE TWO DIFFERENT SIGNS SO THAT IT'S CLEAR NO PARKING. THAT'S JUST FOR PEOPLE TO PULL UP. AND I ASSUME TO CUE WITH IF BY SOME REMOTE CHANCE YOU HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE ALL DROPPING OFF AT ONCE, WHICH I, I DOUBT I DON'T WANT TO PUT TESTIMONY. RIGHT. NO, BUT YOU'RE CORRECT. I MEAN, IN MY OPINION, 2 TO 4 VEHICLES OR TWO IS PROBABLY A LOT, BUT TO HAVE FOUR IS A VERY UNUSUAL SITUATION. SO THAT WE CAN ADD ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE BEYOND THE SIDEWALK THAT SAYS, NO, NO STOPPING OR STANDING. NO. YEP. WE'D RATHER HAVE A SIGN THAN MORE CONCRETE. OKAY, OKAY. AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS EVERYTHING ELSE IN MY MEMO WAS EITHER ADDRESSED BY MR. SCHMIDT OR WAS, YOU KNOW, STATEMENTS OF ANALYSIS. IF YOU DIDN'T READ IT, WE BASICALLY I TOOK THEIR TRIP GENERATION NUMBERS, VERIFIED THEM, AND MADE SURE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS DOESN'T REALLY CHANGE. IT'S A SEA WITH THE COUPLE EXTRA ADDITIONAL TRIPS THAT THIS IS GOING TO GENERATE, AS OPPOSED TO A REGULAR OFFICE. JOE, I HAD A QUESTION THAT I DON'T THINK WAS ADDRESSED, MAKING A LEFT TURN OUT OF THE PARKING LOT. IS THAT GOING TO BE
[01:15:07]
LIKE GOING BACK ONTO 18? ONTO 518? YEAH. 518 THAT WAS THE ANALYSIS I RAN. I TOOK THE HIGHER TRIP GENERATION WITH VOLUMES THAT I HAVE FOR 518 AND CONFIRMED IT'S STILL A C LEVEL OF SERVICE. THERE'S NO PROBLEMS MAKING A LEFT TURN OUT OF THERE. OKAY. AND I BELIEVE THEY'VE ALREADY CONFIRMED THAT ANYTHING WITHIN THE SITE TRIANGLES. I THINK THE SIGN WAS IN THERE. NOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE THAT OUT THAT'S OUT. SO 518 IS RELATIVELY FLAT AND STRAIGHT THROUGH THIS AREA. THERE'S GOOD SIGHT DISTANCE IN EACH DIRECTIO. YEAH. OKAY. GOOD. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE SIDEWALKS ON SITE WHERE A DESIGN EXCEPTION IS REQUIRED. THAT WAS PAGE 12 OF 26. AND IT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT IT SAYS THAT THERE IS NO SIDEWALKS PROPOSED ON 518 AT THIS TIME.AND THAT'S WHY YOU'RE ASKING FOR A DESIGN EXCEPTION. WHAT IF THERE IS EVENTUALLY SIDEWALKS ON 518? ARE YOU THEN TELLING US THAT YOU WOULD PUT IN A SIDEWALK CONNECTING YOUR FACILITY TO 518? OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE HAVE TO PUT IN THERE NOW TO SAY, IF WE GET SIDEWALKS ON 518, THEN YOU WOULD LOOK INTO CONNECTING YOUR SIDEWALK TO 518. I THINK YOU ARE GOING TO PROVIDE THAT. CORRECT.
OKAY, I MISSED THAT. YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. THERE THERE'S A SIDEWALK ON 518. YES. WE'RE BUILDING A SIDEWALK. OKAY, OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I MUST HAVE MISSED THAT. COULD I CLARIFY JUST TWO THINGS? AND THIS IS WHY I THINK IT MIGHT SEEM CONFUSING TOO, IS THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS. THE ONE IS ALONG THE STREET WHICH THEY ARE PROVIDING, AND THE SECOND IS WITHIN CERTAIN PROPERTIES HAVING A CONNECTION BETWEEN YOUR PARKING LOT AND THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ASKING. THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN EXCEPTION FROM. BUT THEY ARE PUTTING A PUBLIC SIDEWALK ALONG 518. OKAY. AND THE EXCEPTION BETWEEN THEIR PARKING LOT AND THE I'M SORRY WE ARE OKAY WITH GIVING THEM THAT EXCEPTION FROM THE PARKING LOT TO THE GIVEN GIVEN THE TYPE OF USE AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE, IT'S PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC IS NOT EXPECTED. I MEAN, IF YOU HAD SOMETHING MORE OF A RETAIL TYPE USE, THEN HAVING A SIDEWALK CONNECTION BETWEEN 518 IN THE BUILDING WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. BUT GIVEN THE NATURE OF THIS USE, IT'S OUR OPINION. IT'S NOT WARRANTED. AND ALL THE PARKING WILL BE RIGHT AROUND THE BUILDING, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND EVEN FOR THE EMPLOYEES YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE ANYBODY EVER TAKING. NOT THAT WE HAVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN MONTGOMERY RIGHT NOW, BUT IF WE EVER HAVE A BUS AND YOUR EMPLOYEES ARE GETTING OFF, YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE. I'M JUST LOOKING AHEAD NOT TO TODAY OR TOMORROW, BUT MAYBE FIVE. IT WOULD BE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. BUT IF THAT'S THE CASE, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE DRIVEWAY IS LOW VOLUME. THAT SOMEONE COULD SAFELY WALK ALONG THE DRIVEWAY WITH THE LOW SPEEDS OF VEHICLES AND REALISTICALLY, HOW FAR OFF THE DRIVEWAY IS, IS THE PATH. IT'S HARD TO TELL. I'LL HAVE TO DEFER TO MR. SCHMIDT ON THAT.
BECAUSE I THINK, MAYOR, I THINK THE PATH WOULD PROBABLY COULD I KNOW I'M THINKING IN THE FUTURE, ALL GOOD. HOW FAR? TEN FEET. MAYBE. IN THIS PATHWAY RIGHT HERE. OKAY. SO THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE. THEY COULD UTILIZE THE EXISTING GRAVEL PATH TO WALK FROM, FROM, FROM THEY WERE DROPPED OFF IN THE FRONT. THEY COULD TAKE THE PATH. OKAY OKAY. AS LONG AS THERE IS SOME POSSIBILITY, WILL THERE BE A CONNECTION BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THAT GRAVEL PATH? NO NO, NO.
CAN WE PUT SOME GRAVEL IN TO DO THAT? I MEAN, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S VERY FAR. NO, NO.
YEAH, THAT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. JUST HAVING A POSSIBILITY THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU NEVER KNOW. PEOPLE MAY NEED TO WALK. WE COULD DO THAT. AND EVENTUALLY THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THE SURGERY THAT PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO WALK. NOT THAT DAY BUT EVENTUALLY. RIGHT. OKAY.
YEAH. AS LONG AS I THINK THE PATH CONNECTS TO THE SIDEWALK, I THINK WE'RE GOOD WITHOUT HAVING TO PUT ANY MORE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON THERE, I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. YEAH, THAT'D BE GOOD. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE FOR THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER? I HAVE A QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TRAFFIC ENGINEER OR WHAT, BUT AMBULANCES DO WE I MEAN, IT IS A SURGERY CENTER. AND THEN BARRING HOPEFULLY NO PROBLEMS WITH SURGERIES BUT AN AMBULANCE, WHERE WOULD THEY BE COMING IN AND OUT OF, YOU KNOW, WHERE WOULD THEY BE PARKING IF THEY HAD TO COME MAKE A PICKUP? WELL, I WOULD IMAGINE THEY WOULD UTILIZE THE DROP OFF AREA IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, BUT I'LL DEFER TO EITHER THE ARCHITECT OR THE OPERATOR. AS FAR AS HE'S
[01:20:02]
NODDING IN THE BACK. YEAH, SEEMS LIKE. YEAH, WHY DON'T YOU ANSWER THAT, BILL, DO YOU WANT TO COME UP HERE AND ANSWER THAT? COME TO A MICROPHONE. IF YOU COME UP, YOU HAVE TO BE SWORN IN. ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD. KEVIN. MR. HENSICK, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY? THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. YES. THANK YO. SO THE. AND WHY DON'T YOU STATE WHAT YOUR POSITION IS WITH THE APPLICANT? I'M THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR PRINCETON ORTHOPEDICS. I'VE BEEN WITH HIM FOR OVER 38 YEARS. AND THIS IS THE SIXTH BUILDING THAT WE OWN. AND OPERATE IN NEW JERSEY. THANK YOU. HOW MANY AM I? HOW MANY AM MONTGOMERY? PARDON ME? HOW MANY IN MONTGOMERY? NOW? THIS IS THE SECOND BUILDING IN MONTGOMERY. WE HAVE ONE IN PRINCETON. 1 IN 2 IN MONROE TOWNSHIP. AND NOW ONE IN HILLSBORO. RIGHT? YEAH. OKAY. MISS. MISS KEENAN ASKED, HOW ABOUT THE AMBULANCE? HOW THE AMBULANCE IS THE AMBULANCE WOULD PULL UP IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. TO THE RIGHT OF THE MAIN ENTRANCE IS THE EXIT AREA OUT OF THE POST-OP AREA WHERE ANY PATIENT WOULD BE TRANSPORTED FROM. DO YOU ENVISION MUCH USE? I MEAN, BECAUSE YOU HAVE OTHER SURGICAL CENTERS, CORRECT? YES.OKAY. AND THEN HOW ABOUT WHAT'S THE USE OF AMBULANCES THAT ARE NONSCHEDULED? I GUESS ACTUALLY THE USE OF AN AMBULANCE FROM OUR OFFICES IS A LOT MORE FREQUENT THAN FROM OUR SURGERY CENTERS. I THINK PROBABLY MAYBE ONE A YEAR. OKAY. AT THE MOST PATIENTS THAT ARE THAT, THAT GET SURGERY AT THOSE FACILITIES ARE VERY WELL SELECTED BASED UPON COMORBIDITIES AND OTHER ISSUES WHERE PATIENTS THAT COME TO OUR OFFICE ARE NOT PRESCREENED. SO WE HAVE A FREQUENTLY WE HAVE TO CALL THE AMBULANCE TO TAKE PATIENTS TO THE ER FOR CARDIAC ISSUES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
OKAY. GOOD TO KNOW. OH THAT'S INTERESTING OKAY. THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK YOU THANK YOU.
THERE CAN ALSO BE A SCHEDULED AMBULANCE VISIT NOT EMERGENCY AMBULANCE VISITS WHICH DEBORAH WAS ASKING ABOUT BUT SCHEDULED AMBULANCE VISITS. I KNOW I GOT TAKEN OUT FROM FROM MY FIRST TWO HIP REPLACEMENTS, GOT TAKEN BY AN AMBULANCE TO FROM WHICH WERE IN THE HOSPITAL. GOT TAKEN TO REHAB BY AMBULANCE. YEAH. OUR PATIENTS WILL BE WILL BE DISCHARGED TO HOME. OKAY, OKAY.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MR. FLYNN, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. SIR. COULD YOU STATE YOUR FULL NAME FOR THE RECORD? MATTHEW FLYNN. FLYNN? AND DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. I DO THANK YOU. MR. FLYNN. WILL YOU GIVE US THE BENEFIT OF YOUR EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE AND YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE? SURE. MY EDUCATION COMES FROM RUTGERS. I HAVE MY MASTER'S DEGREE IN PLANNING AND PUBLIC POLICY. I HAVE MY PROFESSIONAL PLANNERS LICENSE IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AS WELL AS MY ACP LICENSE, WHICH IS THE NATIONAL LICENSURE FOR PLANNERS.
I HAVE TESTIFIED BEFORE, I THINK THE ZONING BOARD IN MONTGOMERY, AS WELL AS OVER 100 OTHER BOARDS ACROSS THE STATE. OKAY, OKAY. PROCEED. YOU PREPARED A PLANNING REPORT? I PREPARED A PLANNING ANALYSIS. YES, YES. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A BUNCH OF C VARIANCES. AND WOULD YOU GIVE THE YOUR REASONS FOR THE POSITIVE CRITERIA AND THE LACK OF THE NEGATIVE CRITERIA? SURE.
SO I GUESS THE EXHIBIT THAT'S ON THE SCREEN HERE WILL BE EXHIBIT A2. NO UP TO A4, A4, A4. OKAY.
SO EXHIBIT A4 FOR THE RECORD IS A FOUR PAGE EXHIBIT CONSISTING OF SOME DRONE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY MY OFFICE EARLIER TODAY, DECEMBER 9TH, 2024. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A BETTER VIEW HERE. SO JUST STARTING OFF WITH SHEET ONE, HERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AN OVERSIZE PROPERTY PER ZONING. THIS IS A PROPERTY THAT'S OVER NINE ACRES IN AREA. WHEREAS THE ZONING MINIMUM IS ONLY FIVE ACRES. AND HERE BASED ON COVERAGE ALONE, WE'RE LOOKING AT A LOT THAT IS LESS THAN A QUARTER PERCENT, LESS THAN 25% COVERED WITH IMPERVIOUS COVERAG. AND WE CAN SEE THIS SUBSTANTIAL FRONT YARD FROM ROUTE 518. SO REALLY IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS, THIS IS NOT AN OVERDEVELOPED PROPERTY BY ANY MEANS. THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS AND WILL REMAIN. AND OF COURSE, WE CAN SEE SOME BUFFERING ON THE WESTERN PROPERTY, PROPERTY LINE OR ON THE LEFT OF THE PAGE HERE. I GUESS IT DOESN'T TECHNICALLY
[01:25:02]
MEET THAT 40 FOOT BUFFER REQUIREMENT, BUT THERE IS THAT BUFFERING THERE TO THAT RESIDENCE. ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND OF COURSE THE WALKWAY THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, I THINK THE BOARD CAN GET A GOOD VIEW OF THAT AS WELL, WHICH DOES ACTUALLY BRING PEDESTRIANS UP TO THE FACILITY, UP ON THE TOP OF THE PAGE. SO THAT IS A NICE AMENITY TO HAVE. THEN JUST FLIPPING AROUND NOW, DO WE KNOW IF THAT WEST BUFFERING IS ON THIS PROPERTY OR ON THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY? I BELIEVE IT'S OUR PROPERTY. OKAY. YEAH. SO NOW JUST LOOKING EAST, GIVING THE BOARD ANOTHER VIEW OF WHAT'S ON THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY, AGAIN, NOT EXPANDING THE DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT PER SE. REALLY WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET FROM A MASSING STANDPOINT.JUST MOVING ALONG HERE. LOOKING SOUTH, MORE OF THE SAME. AND THEN FINALLY SHEET FOUR GIVES A NICE VIEW OF THE SUBSTANTIAL BUFFERING IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. COULD YOU GO AS THE OTHER TWO SIDES, THE EAST AND WESTERN SIDES? WE SEE SOME NICE BUFFERING AS WELL ON THAT.
EXCUSE ME, COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE THIRD ONE JUST. YEAH, JUST THIS ONE. JUST GIVE ME A MOMENT.
SURE. THANK YOU. SO WHILE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, JUST TO GIVE THE BOARD SOME JUST HIGH LEVEL BACKGROUND, WE ARE IN THE RIO THREE RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND OFFICE ZONE. WE ARE, OF COURSE, LOOKING AT A PERMITTED USE. SO WE'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY D VARIANCES. THIS IS SIMPLY A APPLICATION WITH SOME C VARIANCES EXISTING CONDITIONS. WE HAVE THIS ONE STORY, 15,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING THAT HAS BEEN HERE FOR APPROXIMATELY 50 YEARS. AGAIN, TO REMAIN AND TO BE FIT OUT TO HAVE THIS ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON FACILITY MOVING IN, WHICH, AGAIN, IS A PERMITTED USE IN THE ZONE. IN TERMS OF THE C RELIEF, WE'RE REALLY ONLY TALKING ABOUT, I THINK, FOUR NEWLY CREATED VARIANCES. THE PLANNERS REPORT DID NOTE SEVERAL OTHER EXISTING NON-CONFORMING CONDITIONS THAT ARE REALLY NOT CHANGING AS A RESULT OF THIS APPLICATION, BUT I WILL GO THROUGH THOSE BRIEFLY AS WELL. IN TERMS OF THE C VARIANCES, I'LL START WITH THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. ALL OF THE SETBACKS COMPLY EXCEPT FOR THE EXISTING REAR SETBACK, WHERE WE HAVE 164.66FT, WHEREAS 200FT IS REQUIRED. AGAIN, IT'S AN EXISTING CONDITION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT BUILDING THAT THAT WE SEE ON THE ON THE SCREEN HERE. THAT IS NOT BEING PROPOSED TO MOVE ANY CLOSER TO THAT REAR PROPERTY LINE IS THAT'S THE GAZEBO THAT YOU REFER TO? NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BUILDING. I'M JUST SAYING JUST ON ON THIS PICTURE HERE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT THE POINT TO THE GAZEBO WOULD BE, YEAH, THAT'S THIS STRUCTURE HERE. THAT'S THE ONE THAT HAD BEEN REFERRED TO THAT IS STAYING FOR YOUR INFORMATION, MR. CAMP. YES. I SUPPLIED THE CLERK AND HIS PEOPLE WITH THE EXISTING CONSERVATION EASEMENT BETWEEN THE BACK LINE OF OUR PROPERTY WITH THE UNITS THAT ARE BUILT IN THE BACK. AND IF YOU ADD THOSE TWO TOGETHER, IT'S RECREATIONAL AREA, WHICH YOUR ORDINANCE ALLOWS, ALTHOUGH IT'S PASSIVE AND IT DOES MEET THE 200 FOOT SETBACK. BUT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT ACTIVE RECREATIONAL. IT'S A CONSERVATION EASEMENT. AND AGAIN, WE DO HAVE SOME NICE BUFFERING TO THAT PROPERTY IN THE BACK AS WELL. AND I THINK JUST TO AGAIN GIVE THE BOARD THE SCALE OF THAT GAZEBO, IT IS RATHER SMALL IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS. AND I THINK IT IS. WELL I WAS JUST CONFIRMING OF COURSE. YEAH. THE GAZEBO. YEAH. AND THOSE, THOSE THREE RED THINGS, THOSE ARE THE STORAGE THINGS THAT ARE GOING AWAY. I ASSUME. JUST JUST STRAIGHT AHEAD. JUST IS THAT THE GARBAGE OR THE. IS IT THE GARBAGE? OH, NO. THOSE ARE TEMPORARY DUMPSTERS. OKAY, OKAY. YEP. SO JUST MOVING ON NOW, GETTING INTO THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES LIKE YOU HAD JUST MENTIONED IN TERMS OF THE EXISTING GAZEBO, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A REAR SETBACK OF 55FT, WHEREAS 75FT IS REQUIRED.
AGAIN, IT'S AN EXISTING CONDITION. IT'S NOT CHANGING. WE DO FEEL LIKE IT'S A NICE AMENITY TO THE WORKERS OF THIS FACILITY TO GET THAT OUTDOOR OUTDOOR OPPORTUNITY. ALSO THE GRAVEL AREA AGAIN REAR SETBACK HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 47FT. WHEREAS 75FT IS REQUIRED. THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY A STRUCTURE. IT IS THAT GRAVEL AREA THAT I THINK MY MOUSE IS ON AT THE MOMENT. AGAIN, THAT'S AN EXISTING CONDITION WITH NO CHANGE. PROPOSED. SO GETTING
[01:30:03]
INTO THE NEWLY CREATED VARIANCE, THE NEWLY CREATED TRASH ENCLOSURE, WE'RE PROPOSING 35FT, WHEREAS 50FT IS REQUIRED. THE EMERGENCYOR ON THE CONCRETE PAD. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 32FT, WHEREAS 50FT IS REQUIRED. THE WALL HEIGHT, WHICH IS THAT SCREENING WALL IS 10.5FT AGAIN, TO MATCH THE HVAC EQUIPMENT, WHEREAS FOUR FEET IS THE REQUIREMENT A LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. AGAIN, I THINK I POINTED THAT OUT ON SHEET ONE ON THE LEFT OF SHEET ONE OF EXHIBIT A4. THERE IS SOME NICE BUFFERING THERE CONVENIENTLY WHERE THAT RESIDENTIAL DWELLING IS LOCATED. AND THEN FINALLY THE SIDEWALK THAT PROVIDES ACCESS FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE OFFICE BUILDING. OF COURSE, THAT'S A VARIANCE. HOWEVER, WE HAVE, I THINK, FOUND A NICE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET THE INTENT OF THAT ORDINANCE BY MAKING USE OF THE EXISTING WALKWAY THAT WE HAVE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH AGAIN, IS A NICE AMENITY THAT THAT THE EMPLOYEES CAN UTILIZE FOR THAT OUTDOOR OUTDOOR OPPORTUNITIES. SO TO TIE ALL OF THAT INTO THE STATUTORY CRITERIA, I THINK WE CAN LOOK TO THE C2 BALANCING TEST, THE BENEFITS OF THE APPLICATION AS A WHOLE SUBSTANTIALLY OUTWEIGH ANY DETRIMENTS. THE POLAND CASE TELLS US THAT WE NEED NOT LOOK AT EACH INDIVIDUAL VARIANCE AND THE POSITIVES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH. WE CAN LOOK AT THE APPLICATION AS A WHOLE AND ASSESS THE SAME. SO TO LOOK AT THE BENEFITS, WE LOOK TO THE MUNICIPAL LAND USE LAW AND THE PURPOSES OF ZONING SET FORTH THEREIN. I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT PURPOSE, A PROMOTION OF THE GENERAL WELFARE, OBVIOUSLY, IMPROVED HEALTH CARE ACCESS WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP IS TO THE DIRECT BENEFIT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. WE ARE FULFILLING THAT RECOMMENDATION OF THE 2005 MASTER PLAN REGARDING THAT QUOTE UNQUOTE, OUTER LOOP ROAD PURPOS, G VARIETY OF USES AND APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS. AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PERMITTED USE HERE, RETROFITTING AN EXISTING BUILDING WITHOUT EXPANDING THAT DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT. AND I THINK BY VIRTUE OF THAT PERMITTED USE STATUS, THERE IS THAT IMPLIED COMPLIMENTARY PATTERN WITH THE OTHER PERMITTED USES AND OTHER USES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.PURPOSE I DESIRABLE VISUAL ENVIRONMENT. WE ARE PRESERVING PRESERVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD HARMONY HERE, NOT REALLY INCREASING THE LOT COVERAGE OR THE FAR WHICH ARE WELL BELOW THE REQUIREMENTS WHICH I WILL GET INTO IN TERMS OF THE NEGATIVE CRITERIA AND FINALLY, PURPOSE M IS EFFICIENT USE OF LAND. AGAIN, THIS IS ADAPTIVE REUSE MEETING THE DEMANDS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT EXPANDING THE DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT OR AVOIDING ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION ELSEWHERE THROUGHOUT THE TOWNSHIP. SO THE FLIP SIDE TO THAT IS THE NEGATIVE CRITERIA, NO SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC OR TO THE ZONE. LIKE I KEEP SAYING, WE'RE NOT EXPANDING THE DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT. WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS ESSENTIALLY THE SCALE THAT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN TERMS OF ZONE COMPLIANCE, FAR FLOOR AREA RATIO. WE'RE PROPOSING 0.035, WHEREAS WE CAN GO UP TO 0.08. SO WE'RE LESS THAN HALF OF THE PERMITTED F.A.. WE'RE ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THE PERMITTED LOT COVERAGE LIKE WE CAN SEE ON ON THE EXHIBIT HERE. OUR FRONT SETBACK IS OVER THREE TIMES THE REQUIREMENT OF 125FT. OUR SIDE SETBACK TO THE EAST IS ALMOST THREE TIMES THE REQUIREMENT, AND OUR SIDE SETBACK TO THE WEST IS ALSO COMPLIANT. WE ACTUALLY NEED 200FT ON THAT SIDE BECAUSE WE'RE ADJACENT TO A RESIDENCE. AND WE HAPPEN TO MEET THAT AS WELL.
ALSO COMPLIANT WITH BUILDING HEIGHT. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE THAT ALL OF THESE NEWLY CREATED VARIANCES ARE REALLY THE RESULT OF LIKE I KEEP SAYING, THIS ADAPTIVE REUSE, MAKING USE OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY TODAY. AS WE CAN SEE, THIS BUILDING COULD CONCEIVABLY BE MOVED UP IF THIS WERE STARTING FROM SCRATCH. BUT AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MAKING USE OF AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND HAVING TO LOCATE THESE CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN RELATION TO WHAT'S OUT THERE TODAY. SO WITH THAT, I THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE APPLICATION. IT'S RELATIVELY SIMPLE. SEE RELIEF. ALL OF THESE VARIANCES FOR SETBACKS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY BUFFERED. AND AGAIN, IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT OVERDEVELOPMENT OR ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO STAND OUT IN THE PUBLIC EYE AGAIN BY VIRTUE OF THAT SUBSTANTIAL FRONT SETBACK. EVERYTHING'S GOING TO BE BEHIND THE BUILDING. AND SO THIS ISN'T GOING TO CONSTITUTE A MAJOR CHANGE IN THE IN THE LANDSCAPE.
SO UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S THAT'S THE PLANNING TESTIMONY. OKAY. MR. FLYNN, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, MR. CAVALLI'S MEMO ACTUALLY HAS TWO BULK STANDARD CHARTS. ONE IS ASSUMING
[01:35:01]
A DEDICATION AND THE OTHER NO DEDICATION OR NO RIGHT OF WAY. SO WHICH ONE IS THE APPLICANT? REQUESTING. YEAH, YEAH. I AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, AND I'M LOOKING AT IT NOW, THE ACTUAL RELIEF IN TERMS OF LIKE LOOKING AT IT NUMERICALLY IS ACTUALLY THE SAME EITHER WAY. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE REALLY IS THE SIZE OF THE LOT. OBVIOUSLY, SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CUTTING IT RIGHT. BUT I AND PERHAPS SOME OF THESE OTHER ONES, BUT THE VARIANCES THEMSELVES ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.IT WOULD BE THE I THINK WE ARE ASSUMING IT THE RIGHT OF WAY IS BEING DEDICATED. I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE ENGINEER SAID TOO. SO IT WOULD BE TABLE TWO IF THAT JUST MAKES IT SIMPLER FOR WRITING THE RESOLUTION. IT'S THE SECOND TABLE, AND MR. FLYNN IS EXACTLY RIGHT WITH THE ONLY DIFFERENCE. BUT IF JUST TO SIMPLIFY THAT. AND JAMES, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON NO, NO, NO, I THINK THEY LET'S DO THIS SO THAT EVERYONE CAN HEAR IT. I, I THOUGHT AND FORGIVE ME IF I HAVE THIS CORRECT THAT THE ENGINEER WAS ALSO ASSUMING THEY ALSO DESIGNED THE SITE AS IF IT WAS GOING TO BE DEDICATED AT SOME POINT. AND SO USING THE MORE STRICT STANDARD WOULD BE EVERYONE WAS KIND OF ON BOARD WITH THAT, AS IF THIS WOULD BE DEVELOPED, THE ROAD WOULD BE DEVELOPED AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE. CORRECT. SO WE ARE SO TABLE TWO THEN IS WHAT THE SECOND TABLE, SECOND TABLE. YEAH. NO, NO I THINK IT'S ALWAYS GOOD THAT WE COMMUNICATE. YES I, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT ALL I AGREE IT'S A IT'S A VERY LARGE LOT. AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS MONTGOMERY PRIORITIZE. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IS ONE OF THEM. AND NOTHING IS MORE SUSTAINABLE THAN USING SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY THERE. SO I AGREE AND UNLESS THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER WITNESSES. OKAY. LET'S OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, MR. SCHATZMAN. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO RESERVE THE 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, RESERVE IT ALL RIGHT. SO BOARD MEMBERS, THAT WOULD BE A RESERVATION FOR A YEAR. THAT'S UNDER THE MUNICIPAL LAND USE LAW, AND WE CAN'T USE IT ANY WA. WE'RE COMING BACK. WE'RE COMING BACK FOR AT SOME POINT IN TIME, MR. HAYNES TALKED ABOUT IT AND WE'LL AT THAT TIME, WE'LL PROBABLY JUST GIVE AN EASEMENT TO THE TOWNSHIP. FEE SIMPLE TO THE TOWNSHIP. LAUREN WALTZ MIGHT WANT SOME WALKING PATHS THERE.
WE'LL SEE WHAT SHE WANTS, AND WE'LL PUT THE PACKAGE TOGETHER, BECAUSE AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THERE'S REALLY NO RATIONAL NEXUS BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IN THIS APPLICATION AND BY RESERVING IT. AND YOU CAN PUT IT IN THE RESOLUTION. WE DON'T HAVE TO YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY US MONEY UNDER NJSA 40, COLUMN 55 D HYPHEN 44, WHICH IS THE STATUTE FOR THAT. YOU KNOW, MR. CASEY, OF MASTER PLAN ROADS AND MASS OPEN SPACE. ET CETERA. ET CETERA. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS, AT THE TIME WE GO IN FOR ANY EXPANSION WHICH WE PLAN ON DOING AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE WILL THEN, YOU KNOW, JUST DEED IT OR. GIVE YOU AN EASEMENT OR A FEE. SIMPLE. WHATEVER YOU WANT. AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. ONE THING THOUGH, ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IS IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD A MASTER PLAN ROAD, THERE IS A QUESTION ON THE CROSSING OF BEANS BROOK AND MY OFFICE IS IN MONTGOMERY COMMONS. AND IF YOU GO IN FROM MONTGOMERY COMMONS FROM 206, THERE'S A BIG 80 FOOT CARTWAY I CALL APPLEGATE DRIVE. I DID THE APPROVALS FOR LARRY GARDNER ON THAT. THERE'S ALSO AND THAT WAS A MASTER PLAN ROAD THAT WAS GOING TO CONNECT WITH LINDEN DRIVE ON THE SEA. SEAGULL MORALE PROJECT HOUSING PROJECT OF 518, WHICH I ALSO DID. LINDEN DRIVE ALSO IS A WIDE PARKWAY, SO THE IN THAT CASE, I SAID TO LARRY GARDNER, I SAID, YOU KNOW, IF
[01:40:13]
YOU'RE GOING TO GENERATE THIS, THIS RELATES, EXCUSE ME, IS THIS IS THIS RELEVANT TO THIS? I'VE YOU'VE LOST ME ON THIS ONE. CAN WE JUST I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS REAL. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS RELEVANT. I THINK WHAT MR. SCHATZMAN IS TRYING TO SAY IS THE TOWNSHIP OUGHT TO DO. YOU COULD TAKE IT. FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I THINK WE'RE GOOD, THOUGH. I THINK WE'RE GOOD. I THINK WE'RE GOOD. I THINK WE'RE GOOD. YEAH, YEAH. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TELL US WHAT WE HAVE TO DO, SO WE'RE OKAY. SO IF YOU NOTICE LINDEN DRIVE DOESN'T CONNECT. LINDEN DRIVE DOESN'T CONNECT WITH APPLEGATE ROAD AND VICE VERSA. AND WHEN I ASKED DON JOHNSON AT THE TIME, THE TOWNSHIP ENGINEER, HE SAID THERE ARE ALL THESE WETLANDS THERE I NEVER GOT. I NEVER GOT, I NEVER, NEVER GOT A WETLANDS, NEVER INVESTIGATED WETLANDS. AND SO AT THE TIME, I RAN INTO BOB KRESS, WHO WAS THE MAYOR AT THE TIME, I SAID, ARE YOU EVER GOING TO DO ANYTHING? HE SAYS, OH, NO. HE SAYS, WE CAN'T CROSS THOSE WETLANDS. IT'S GOING TO COST US MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. THIS IS 1988. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD A MASTER PLAN ROAD, THAT'S FINE, BUT DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE THAT WAS DONE IN 1988. AND YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY IN THE TOWN NOWADAYS, BECAUSE OF THE RAIN THAT'S BEEN FALLING SINCE 1988 AND FLOODING THE TOWNSHIP, YOU'RE PUTTING IN ALL THIS IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE. THAT'S NOT GOOD. THAT'S NOT DOING ANYTHING FOR YOU BECAUSE THE MASTER PLAN ROAD. OKAY, THANKS. OKAY. CAN WE MOVE ON NOW THAT UNLESS WE MOVE ON, CAN WE GET. I'M JUST POINTING THAT OUT. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU SIR. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. WHAT I HAD STARTED TO EXPLAIN TO THE BOARD WAS SIMPLY THAT UNDER THE LAND USE LAW PROVISION THAT MR. SCHATZMAN HAS CITED, THE APPLICANT WILL RESERVE THE DEDICATION AREA FOR A YEAR OR LONGER IF THEY AGREE TO A LONGER PERIOD. FOLLOWING THAT PERIOD THOUGH, IF THE TOWN THEN DECIDED SOMETIME LATER, DO THE MASTER PLAN EXPANSION, THEY WOULD NEED TO PURCHASE THAT FROM THE APPLICANT AND WHAT THAT SECTION OF THE LAND USE LAW INDICATES IS THAT UNLESS THE PROJECT, WHAT SHOULD WE SAY GENERATES THE NEED FOR THE MASTER PLAN WIDENING. AND IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT'S TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND OUR OWN ENGINEER HAVE AGREED THAT IT'S A VERY MINIMAL OR ALMOST THE SAME TRAFFIC IMPACT. SO I ASKED BECAUSE I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ONE FOR THE RESOLUTION AND TWO, THAT WILL BE USING THAT TABLE TWO IN TERMS OF DETERMINING THE DIMENSIONS.OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT? NO, NO. OKAY THEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT OKAY. WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. GOOD EVENING. WE NEED WE'RE GOING TO NEED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. RIGHT. OR IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE. YEAH. MY NAME IS ANDREW DAVIS. I'M A RESIDENT OF SKILLMAN AND I HAPPEN TO LIVE IN THE TAPESTRY DEVELOPMENT, WHICH ABUTS. RIGHT. MR. DAVIS WILL SWEAR YOU IN. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM ANY TESTIMONY YOU GIVE THIS EVENING WILL BE TRUTHFUL. I DO, THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO FIRST, I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE APPLICANT DID COME TO GIVE OUR COMMUNITY AN INFORMATION SESSION, AND WE APPRECIATE THAT. AND IT WAS VERY HELPFUL. AND I DON'T THINK I THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING, EVERYBODY IN THE DEVELOPMENT IS SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. ANYTIME YOU CAN REUSE A VACANT BUILDING, GET SOME IMPROVEMENTS, LIKE THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO DO, I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING. SO JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK COMMENTS AND MAYBE A QUESTION OR TWO, JUST TO BE SURE. THE MAIN IMPACT, POTENTIAL IMPACT OBVIOUSLY TO OUR DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE JUST LIGHT NOISE, ETC. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AND I THINK THIS IS THE CASE, THAT ANY OF THE WALLS THAT ARE SCREENING IN THE HVAC WILL MINIMIZE ANY POTENTIAL INCREASE IN NOISE THAT THE LIGHT, THE LIGHTING BEING THAT IT'S OUR RESIDENTS FACING DOWN, FACING DOWN AS POSSIBLE. YEAH. AND OFF AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE. I THINK THAT THAT'S THE CASE. BUT I JUST WANTED TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS AND I ALSO HEARD TESTIMONY THAT ON THE WEST
[01:45:06]
SIDE OF THE BUILDING, THERE'S SOME NEW EQUIPMENT GOING IN. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WOULD BE SCREENED AS WELL. AND IT WOULDN'T LIKE WHERE THE GENERATOR IS. I KNOW THERE'S A GENERATOR THERE NOW, SO I THINK ANYTHING THAT GOES, IT'S GOING TO BE POTENTIALLY GENERATING MORE NOISE IS ALSO SCREENED IN. AND I BELIEVE THAT IS THE CASE. SO THAT'S THE LIGHT NOISE ISSUE IS THE FIRST ISSUE. THE SECOND ISSUE I WOULD RAISE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS IN BETWEEN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AND THE TAPESTRY DEVELOPMENT. SO WE'RE A LITTLE CONFUSED WHERE AND WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR. THAT OPEN SPACE. NOW, I KNOW IT'S A DEDICATED OPEN SPACE. AND THE REASON I RAISED THIS IS IF WE COULD JUST GET SOME CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THERE WAS SOMETHING IN THE PLANNER'S MEMO OR SOMETHING ABOUT TESTIMONY AS TO WHO'S RESPONSIBLE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT TAPESTRY IS RESPONSIBLE. LIKE IF A TREE FALLS. AND THIS REALLY DID HAPPEN SEVERAL YEARS AGO. THERE'S LARGE TREES THERE, A LARGE TREE FELL TOWARDS THE TAPESTRY DEVELOPMENT. WE REMOVED IT. WE TRIED TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE PRIOR PROPERTY OWNER. WE COULDN'T GET IN TOUCH WITH HIM OR HER OR WHOEVER. IT WAS RIGHT? BECAUSE WHAT WE WERE TRYING. YES, THAT'S THE STRIP RIGHT THERE BETWEEN THE HOUSES AND THE PROPERTY LINE. THE REASON I RAISE THIS IS THAT THERE'S A COST TO DOING REMOVING SOME OF THESE 100, SOME OF THESE TREES ARE 100 YEARS OLD OR VERY TALL. OUR UNDERSTANDING FROM SPEAKING WITH THE TOWNSHIP AT THE TIME WAS THAT IF THE TREE HALFWAY THROUGH THAT OPEN SPACE, IF THE TREE WAS ON THE TAPESTRY SIDE, IT WAS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CUT IT UP AND GET RID OF IT. IF IT WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE AND IT WAS A BUILDINGS, IT WAS THEIRS. WE COULDN'T GET IN TOUCH WITH THE BUILDING, SO WE JUST GOT RID OF IT. WE PAID THE MONEY TO GET RID OF IT. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY HAS ANY ANSWERS, BUT I'M SEEING SHAKING HER HEAD. NO. SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, WOULD THE PROPERTY OWNER BE WILLING TO WORK WITH US IN THE EVENT THAT WE HAVE TO REMOVE A TREE? AND I COULD GIVE YOU MY CONTACT INFORMATION JUST SO WE COULD GET IN TOUCH WITH SOMEONE IF SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS IN THE FUTURE, TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO GET RID OF THE TREE. YOUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAND BETWEEN THE NORTH PART OF OUR PROPERTY AND YOUR PROPERTY. THAT'S CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND IT'S MAINTAINED. IT'S PART OF YOUR IT'S PART OF YOUR CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT. OH, YOU'RE SAYING 100 100% OF THAT IS TAPESTRY RESPONSIBILITIES, NOT YOURS. YOUR HOUSE ON PROPERTY LINE. THEIR PROPERTY LINE AND OUR PROPERTY LINE. IT'S ALL HOMEOWNERS, YOUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. BUT ON OUR PROPERTY, IT'S TREE FALLS AND HITS YOUR THAT THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO. WE WOULD HAVE TO FIX IT. OKAY. WELL, THE ONLY THING I WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE BENEFITING FROM THAT BUFFER AND YOU'RE MEETING SOME REAL REQUIREMENTS, MAYBE THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF COMMITMENT OR OBLIGATION TO TAKE CARE OF A PROBLEM IF IT EXISTS. I MEAN, YOU'RE YOU'RE BENEFITING FROM IT, BUT THERE'S NO THAT'S A COMMON LAW. I MEAN, IT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE LAW. OKAY. WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE CARE OF TREES THAT FALL. THANK OSTENSIBLY OR THEORETICALLY, YOU PAY MONEY TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, DO YOU NOT? YOU'RE ON SUFFOLK DRIVE, RIGHT? NO, I 100 HOMEOWNERS ALL PAY A MONTHLY ASSESSMENT. OKAY? OKAY. YEAH. THIS ISN'T MEANT TO BE A DIALOG. THIS IS MEANT TO BE PUBLIC COMMENT. SO THANK YOU. I JUST SPEAKING ANY REAL THING IS MOSTLY IF THERE'S ANY CLARIFICATION, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS LIKE IF THERE'S ANY SITE PLANS OR ANYTHING THAT DEMARCATES WHO KNEW FROM WHAT I'D JUST BE INTERESTED IN GETTING A COPY OF IT. BUT IF THERE ISN'T, THERE ISN'T. SO THAT'S REALLY ALL. THAT'S PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR THE TOWNSHIP. YEAH, IT'S DULY NOTED. AND I GUESS SOMEONE WILL GET BACK TO YOU. YEAH. MAY I POINT OUT THAT IN A FOREST, WHEN A TREE FALLS, IT IS BEST FOR THE FOREST. IF THE TREE STAYS THERE, IT PROVIDES HABITAT FOR WILDLIFE AND FOR PLANTS. IT IS A PLACE FOR NEW TREES TO GROW AND IT I HAVE ON MY PROPERTY THREE ACRES OF WOODS. AND WHEN THERE'S, SAY, AN ASH TREE THAT MIGHT FALL OVER A PATHWAY, WE GET IT CUT DOWN. BUT WE GET IT. WE HAVE IT LEFT THERE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE[01:50:08]
PATHWAY BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S THE BEST THING. IT SAVES IT SAVES MONEY, A LOT OF MONEY.WHAT HAPPENED WAS THIS CASE. IT WENT ON TO PROPERTY OWNERS YARD. SO THAT'S WHAT HAD TO BE CLEARED. YOU COULD STILL HAUL IT BACK INTO THE WOODS AND LEAVE IT THERE. WELL, WELL IT'S A PRETTY STRONG PEOPLE TO DO THAT BUT OKAY. YEAH. WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT. YEAH. WE DON'T WANT TO DEAL IN IN POSSIBILITIES. SO WE. YEA. YOUR COMMENT IS ABSOLUTELY DULY NOTED. PRINCETON ORTHOPEDIC HAS BEEN A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. YEAH, I'M SURE I'M SURE WE'RE IT'S A POSITIVE THING. SO YEAH, I SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE PUBLIC COMMENT. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE? PUBLIC COMMENT. SO MOVED SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR I OKAY BOARD QUESTIONS DISCUSSIONS TONY. YEAH QUESTION FOR MR. DARCY THE TESTIMONY I BELIEVE IS THAT SINCE THE THERE'S BEEN VERY LITTLE CHANGE TO IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE THAT THE STORMWATER SITUATION HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF BY THE CURRENT SITUATION. I SEE NO DETENTION RETENTION BASINS OF ANY TYPE. WHAT IS THE STORMWATER SITUATION AND CONSIDERING THAT THE STATE HAS MODERATE, HAS CHANGED ITS REQUIREMENTS RECENTLY, DOES IT STILL CONFORM SO THE I'LL ANSWER THE LAST QUESTION FIRST. IT DOES CONFORM THE PROJECT ITSELF DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA FOR A MAJOR PROJECT AS DEFINED BY THE STATE AND DEFINED BY OUR ORDINANCE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT MORE STRINGENT THAN THE STATE. WE ACTUALLY TIGHTENED THE THRESHOLD FOR WHAT IS CONSIDERED A MAJOR PROJECT WHEN WE DID OUR STORMWATER ORDINANCE. AND IT FALLS BELOW THAT, THAT THRESHOLD, AS WELL. THE STORMWATER CURRENTLY IS GOES TO THE TO THE COUNTY SYSTEM IN ROUTE 518, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONTINUE THE CURRENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. A STORMWATER DRAINAGE PATTERNS. SO TYPICALLY WHEN A PROJECT DOESN'T MEET THE MAJOR CRITERIA, IT MEANS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO MEET THE RECHARGE AND ALL THE WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY REQUIREMENTS AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS. BUT WHAT WE DO IS WE LOOK FOR IT TO MEET, NOT MEET ANYTHING BUT BUT MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T ADVERSELY IMPACT ADJOINING PROPERTIES OR THE ADJOINING DRAINAGE SYSTEM. AND THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS SORT OF SHOWN THAT THEIR PIPING EVERYTHING INTO THAT EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEM. AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT GOING TO ADVERSELY IMPACT THE ROADWAY OR THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES. AND THAT'S WHAT THEIR, THEIR BURDEN IS. THANK YOU. YEP. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT ON ON THE WALKING PATH. I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLANNERS DRONE PHOTOS, THE SPECIFICALLY THE THIRD ONE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE GRAVEL WALKING PATH ACTUALLY CONNECTS TO A PATH THAT IS IN TAPESTRY.
SO AND I KNOW THAT WE SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO PUBLIC EASEMENT, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE PEOPLE MAY USE THEM ANYWAY, LIKE PEOPLE WALKING IN TAPESTRY MAY WALK DOWN THAT PATH AND TAPESTRY AND CONNECT TO THESE. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE SHOULD BE A PUBLIC EASEMENT FOR THE WALKING PATHS HERE, BECAUSE I THINK OTHER PEOPLE BESIDES THE EMPLOYEES WOULD USE IT. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY EASEMENTS. AND I THINK WE WERE CONNECTING TO THE TAPESTRY EXACTLY WHERE THE MASTER PLAN ROADWAY IS GOING TO BE. SO, I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO I HATE TO PUT AN EASEMENT ON AND THEN VACATE AN EASEMENT. I THINK, AS YOU SAID, THEY'RE PROBABLY USING IT ALREADY. IT'S JUST NOT IN A EASEMENT. IT'S MORE OR LESS SO WHY MUDDY THE WATERS WHEN SOMETHING'S WORK? THAT IS BASICALLY WHERE THE CONNECTION OF THE MASTER PLAN ROAD IS TO, TO WHERE THAT WALKWAY IS. AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF PROBLEMS. ONE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PATIENTS COMING AND GOING INTO A MEDICAL OFFICE. SO YOU'VE GOT TO TAKE A LOOK AT HIPAA AND SEE ABOUT THE PRIVACY REGULATIONS. AND ALSO IF YOU HOOK IT IN TO PUBLIC, THERE'S LIABILITY IN CASE SOMEBODY TRIPS AND FALLS. AND THEY WOULD NO DOUBTEDLY SUE THE ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATION. SO FOR THE TIME BEING WE'RE KEEPING IT AS A PRIVATE WALKING PATH FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR
[01:55:02]
PRINCETON ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATES. SO THERE'S TWO ISSUES THAT HAS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF, BOTH FOR HIPAA AND FOR LIABILITY ON PRINCETON ORTHOPEDIC ASSOCIATES, PART. PEOPLE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WALK IF IT'S FOR THE PUBLIC. YEAH. THERE HAPPENS TO BE A STATUTE THAT SAYS THAT IF THE PUBLIC USES A PUBLIC WALKING PATH, THERE'S A FAIRLY RECENTLY ENACTED STATUTE THAT THERE'S NO LIABILITY FOR THE PUBLIC FOR THE FOR THE MUNICIPALITY. BUT THERE IS LIABILITY FOR A PRIVATE PERSON. SO THAT'S GOT TO BE WORKED INTO. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF STRICT REGULATIONS FOR A DOCTORS OFFICE ABOUT PRIVACY OF PATIENTS. SO, YOU KNOW, SO NO, NO. SO NO EASEMENT. SO NO, NO EASEMENT OKAY. VERY GOOD. WE'RE WE'RE GOOD, WE'RE GOOD, WE'RE GOOD, WE'RE GOOD. THERE I THINK HE'S SICK OR SOMETHING. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. EXCUSE ME. BUT I'M JUST SAYING, YOU KNOW, IT'S A THERE ARE ISSUES. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT I UNDERSTAND WHY THERE'S NO REASON TO HAVE AN EASEMENT. IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. IT WAS A GOOD QUESTION THAT HE BROUGHT UP, THOUGH. SO WE CAN MOVE ON. YEAH. OTHER COMMENTS. QUESTIONS. OKAY.THEN, KAREN, CAN WE GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THE MOTION WILL BE? YES. IF THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION, THE APP AS CONDITIONS, THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THEY WILL COMPLY WITH ALL THE COMMENTS AND THE REVIEW MEMOS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE REQUEST FOR A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT. WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO INSTALL SOLAR PANELS. THEY WILL CONSIDER A HEAT EXCHANGE, HVAC AND HOT WATER. THEY WILL CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO TURN OFF THE LIGHTS AS EARLY IN THE EVENING, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE INDICATED WHAT THEIR TIMER LIGHTS WILL BE, THEY WILL CONSIDER A WILDFLOWER MEADOW AND AS FAR AS THE TYPES OF TREES, THEY ARE GOING TO DEFER TO, MR. BARTOLOMES RECOMMENDATIONS. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT WILL RECEIVE THE BOARD'S APPROVAL FOR UP TO 100YD■!T OF IMPORT OR EXPORT OF FILL. THE APPLICANT WILL RESERVE THE AREA FOR A MASTER PLAN ROAD DEDICATION FOR A YEAR OR LONGER IF THE APPLICANT SO AGREES. PURSUANT TO NJSA 40 COLON 50 DASH 44, THE APPLICANT WILL ADD ADDITIONAL GRAVEL TO CONNECT THE GRAVEL PATH TO THE SIDEWALK AND THAT IS WHAT I HAVE AS OH, I'M SORRY. AND THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION FROM MR. FISSINGER. I THINK HE WANTS SEPARATE SIGNAGE FOR NO PARKING AND FOR PARKING DROP OFF AREAS. IS THAT RIGHT, JOE? THAT'S FINE.
I THINK IF YOU WRITE IT IN A, YOU KNOW, REVISE THE SIGNAGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MY OFFICE, I THINK WE CAN WORK IT OUT WITH THEM THAT IT MAKES SENSE. OKAY. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION? SO MOVED. SECOND. VERY GOOD. ROLL CALL, PLEASE. HAMILTON. YES. KEENAN.
YES. BONNIE. YES. ROBERTS. YES. SINGH. YES. GLOCKLER. YES. KHAN. YES. AND CAMPEIUS. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND CAN WE JUST HAVE EVERYBODY HOLD FOR TWO MINUTES? WE HAVE ONE MORE THING TO DO. APPROVE MINUTES AND WE'RE DONE. OKAY. JUST SO WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A MASS EXODUS.
[VI. MINUTES]
OKAY. LAST ITEM IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 25TH, 2020 FOR THE REGULAR MEETING. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ROLL CALL PLEASE.HAMILTON. YES. KEENAN. YES. CONN. YES. MONEY. YES. ROBERTS. YES. AND. SINGH. YES. THANK YOU.
VERY GOOD. OUR NEXT MEETING IS JANUARY 13TH OF 2025, WHICH IS THE REORGANIZATION AND REGULAR MEETING. AND WITH THAT, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE YEAR? SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.