PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 1 DECEMBER 15, 2016
In compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act of the State of New Jersey adequate notice of this meeting has been mailed to The Daily Record and posted at the Municipal Building.
ROLL CALL: Members Present: Joe Fleischner, Brian Schaechter, Henry Fastert, Dan Nelsen, Scott Van Ness, Kim Mott, John Batsch, Howie Weiss
Members Excused: Nelson Russell, John Mania
Professionals Attending: Eugene Buczynski, Township Engineer, Scott Eveland, Esq., Catherine Natafalusy, Planning Administrator/Secretary
Professionals Excused: Chuck McGroarty, Planning Consultant, Edward Buzak, Esq.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES AUGUST 18, 2016 PUBLIC MEETING
MR. WEISS: Thank you. We have one set of minutes for approval which is August 18th, 2016. Dan, will you please move those?
MR. NELSEN: I move to accept the minutes from August 18th, 2016.
MR. WEISS: Thank you, Dan.
MR. FASTERT: I’ll second.
MR. WEISS: Thank you, Henry. Any conversation, comments, seeing none, roll call.
ROLL CALL: Brian Schaechter ‐ yes Henry Fastert ‐ yes Dan Nelsen ‐ yes John Batsch ‐ yes Howie Weiss ‐ yes
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PB 15‐13, JERSEY GIRL BREWING (AMENDMENT TO CONDITION IN RESOLUTION), BLOCK 8300, LOT 5
MR. WEISS: We have one resolution from last week, PB 15‐13, Jersey Girl Brewing, which is an amendment to condition in the resolution. Brian, would you please move that resolution?
MR. SCHAECHTER: I would love to move PB 15‐13, Jersey Girl Brewing, amendments to conditions in the resolution.
MR. NELSEN: Second.
MR. WEISS: Thank you, Brian. And that was Henry? Dan? Dan, thank you. I did notice I was going through this resolution and I did see…you know…I was just making sure because we had a bunch of things on there. And I was pleased, Scott legal, that we did have…we didn’t make a comment that we’re essentially giving them 6 months to come back and I like the way it was written that we noted it in this resolution that they have 6 months to come in where we will waive their fee. I don’t think we need to make change anything to it but I got to remember we gave them 6 months. We bent over backwards for this applicant. I know that there are some issues but I would say I have it on my calendar that on June 8th if we do not hear from this applicant, I think that the Planning Board through its enforcement efforts should get very aggressive with this applicant. We bent over backwards, we’ve noted 6 months based on the time frame that the applicant gave us. If there is radio silence in 6 months, I have it in my book; I think we will look to pursue whatever option we have to remedy the situation. So, that’s all I had.
MS. NATAFALUSY: It’s just to clarify it’s the application fee not the escrow.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 2 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. WEISS: It’s what?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Application not the escrow.
MR. WEISS: Yes, the application fee. That’s what is says, right?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Yes.
MR. WEISS: I did say…fee…but the application fee, correct.
MS. NATAFALUSY: Just have to be careful.
MR. WEISS: Yes, ok, I stand corrected. It was simply the application fee as noted in the resolution.
MS. NATAFALUSY: Right.
MR. WEISS: So, it’s been seconded. It’s been made seconded. Any other comments, seeing none, Catherine, roll call.
ROLL CALL: Joe Fleischner ‐ yes Brian Schaechter ‐ yes Henry Fastert ‐ yes Dan Nelsen ‐ yes Kim Mott ‐ yes John Batsch ‐ yes Howie Weiss ‐ yes
COMMITTEE REPORTS
MR. WEISS: Committee Reports. Nelson is not here. Council, John’s not here. Joe?
MR. FLEISCHNER: No, it’s Henry.
MR. WEISS: I’m sorry. Henry, Environmental Commission?
MR. FASTERT: No, nothing today.
MR. WEISS: Ordinance Committee, Joe?
MR. FLEISCHNER: We did conclude discussion on one ordinance which was recommended by our esteemed collogue in the white shirt which will be…let me see if I can get it right…Catherine correct me if I’m wrong…but we will not be a fee for the smaller properties if they wish to put a cover over the front door, etc. because of the setbacks.
MS. NATAFALUSY: No, what we…yes, we are going to relax the setbacks for what we are going to call the cottage homes in the old Budd Lake section and old Flanders that were built prior to 1950 and can’t adhere to the setbacks…like some of them were built in the 1800’s. So it’s going to be a minimum of 10 feet from the front lot line if you want to put just like a front porch, portico, landing, something like that…just…and some people cannot afford the fees that are in these smaller homes. So we are trying to assist them getting through the process. But it’s only like portico, landings, front steps, and small front porch. No wrap around, nothing like that.
MR. FLEISCHNER: And it’s really small…very small properties…very small properties…that are quite ancient.
MR. WEISS: Regardless, that would come in front of the Planning Board, before a decision is made?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Well, it will go to the Governing Body and it will come back here for recommendation, but Scott had recommended that we look into doing something like that, so… PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 3 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. FLEISCHNER: And it made sense.
MR. VAN NESS: (inaudible)
MR. WEISS: I wasn’t going to say that but thank you for making the record clear, Scott.
MR. VAN NESS: I just wanted to be sure.
MR. WEISS: Alright, anything else, Joe?
MR. FLEISCHNER: No, that’s it.
MR. WEISS: I have nothing from Street Naming Committee. Open Space, Kim?
MS. MOTT: Yes, actually we had a meeting on Monday and the last work group which was quite a few people finished the trail from Silver Spring all the way down 206 and now we just to have one of our committees and GPS it to make sure we stayed on our property which we are 99.9 percent sure. But, he’s just going to GPS it so we can map it out and put it back on the website when complete.
MR. WEISS: Alright, thank you, Kim.
MS. MOTT: Sure.
MR. WEISS: Brian, anything from the Board of Ed?
MR. SCHAECHTER: No, we gave quite an extensive report last time.
LAUGHTER
MR. WEISS: You did, alright. Scott, anything from us?
MR. EVELAND: Nothing on the legal side right now.
MR. WEISS: Gene, anything?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: No, not really.
MR. WEISS: Alright. That’s fine that was a good answer. We have an extension request tonight but before we get into that though just for the record Applicant PB 16‐13, Eye Spy Media Corp, which was supposed to be on the agenda for the use variance for their billboard at 98 Route 46 has asked to be withdrawn from the agenda this evening. They are rescheduled for February 9th, 2017. There will be no further notice. Eye Spy Media will be moved to our agenda on February 9th. So that is not on the agenda tonight.
EXTENSION REQUEST PB 15‐20, LEONARD CHOLISH, BLOCK 6900 LOT 29
MR. WEISS: It brings us to our extension request which is PB 15‐20, Leonard Choish…
MS. NATAFALUSY: He’s not here.
MR. WEISS: What?
MS. NATAFALUSY: He’s not here.
MR. WEISS: Ok, well I suppose we’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and we’ll come back at the end of the meeting and we’ll just move this application…this issue…to the end of the application…into the evening.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 4 DECEMBER 15, 2016
DEVELOPMENT MATTER PB 16‐24, OAKWOOD REAL ESTATE LLC, BLOCK 4600 LOT 11
MR. WEISS: We have one developmental matter on our agenda tonight which is PB 16‐24, Oakwood Real Estate LLC, preliminary and final site plan with variances, property located at 185 Route 206, it’s block 4600, lot 11. Tonight we have in front of us Mr. Calli.
MR. CALLI: We do, Mr. Chairman, how are you? You are moving this agenda along very smoothly, Mr. Chairman. My wife is going to thank you if and when I get home early enough to do some chores.
INAUDIBLE
MR. CALLI: Thanks for hearing us tonight folks. For the record, Larry Calli with the firm Porzio, Brombert & Newman on behalf of the applicant, Oakwood Village. About six years ago we were here…same development team as here tonight. Our engineer and our artichect will be here shortly. The property is under new ownership. Same property though…very large tract…170 acres or so…it’s 185 Route 206…for the record it’s block 4600 lot 11…large multifamily sprawling residential apartment complex with accessory structures throughout. So six years ago when we were here, we were trying to modify and successfully did so before this board a small maintenance structure…some of you may recall about…less than 2,000 square feet about 1,700 square feet into a fitness center for residents. We didn’t anticipate…and this was under the prior ownership…that many residents would be utilizing it. They thought it was just a nice convenience to have maybe on a brochure…a renting brochure…say we also have a fitness center with some treadmills and equipment in there and it was a good adaptive re‐use of that maintenance shed. Never was realized although approved and new ownership comes along and fast forward six years later and here we have the new entity pursuing a more ambitious and I think appropriately sized project which is what we’ve called a Leasing Office, a Clubhouse, it’s effectively a two‐story accessory structure over the location where the tennis courts currently are which are completely underutilized and an eyesore and antiquated in many respects. And this new Clubhouse is going to put some property management offices in this one building for leasing offices. It’s going to take those folks who are employees out of existing units. Right now they are occupied in units for their small office on the property. They are going to come out and go into a more appropriately size and located structure which is essentially…leasing office. And the other level is going to have a fitness center. Looks very nice, very sharp, the applicant took their time to design this right. We actually had two…I don’t want to call them completeness meetings…but two sort of concept meetings with your professionals, with your engineering planner. Came back twice, think it was well received both times. It’s a sharp looking structure. So, we are here tonight essentially for the site plan approval of that. Chuck did note in his planning report and we talked about it ahead of time that the accessory structure height…it’s a little bit grey in the zone…but if we apply the 15 foot standard that should apply…we don’t need it because it’s a varying height with the typography and the grade changes. We got up to about 31 feet in spots with our structure. It doesn’t get taller than the other structures but as an accessory structure it triggers a bulk variance. So we are here tonight for that bulk variance relief and the site plan. But like last time six years ago, we want the board to have a very good understanding of the operation so what we’re going to do shortly when our artichect, Jim O’Brien, gets here is take you through the interior layout. You’ll get a sense of who’s going to there, what hours they are going to be there and how we anticipate this working based on our existing operations. The applicant, by the way, has about a million square feet of real estate that they manage around the country. So, this is not new to them. This is prototypical for them. And they think that this property deserves this kind of a product. So, that’s why they are looking to…you know…endeavor to develop notwithstanding the significant costs to do so if it’s realized. But, we don’t expect to take up much of your time tonight, but we want to answer all of your questions so if there is nothing now, Mr. Chairman, what I’d like to do is call our Site Engineer, Steve Parker, give you the lay of the land as existing and as it’s going to change.
MR. WEISS: Perfect. Welcome, Mr. Parker, our attorney will swear you in.
(STEVE PARKER IS SWORN IN FOR THE RECORD)
MR. CALLI: Steve, would you briefly give the board the benefit of your background, personal experience, and education?
MR. PARKER: Yes, excuse me; I’m licensed as a professional engineer in the State of New Jersey. I’m an owner of Parker Engineering & Surveying. I testified before this board six years ago as well as many other boards throughout the area, Morris County, Somerset County, for applications similar to this. And I’ve been qualified as an expert in the field of engineering for those meetings. PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 5 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. WEISS: You’ve been in front of this Planning Board, Mr. Parker?
MS. NATAFALUSY: I think it was the Zoning Board.
MR. PARKER: Oh, was it the Zoning Board? Ok, I’m sorry, the Zoning Board, then.
MR. WEISS: Alright, anybody have any questions for Mr. Parker?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Now it’s a merged board.
MR. PARKER: Ok.
MR. WEISS: I have no questions. Mr. Parker, we will welcome you as an expert engineer.
MR. PARKER: Thank you.
MR. CALLI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ok, Steve, I thought…you know…we don’t have an easel with us this evening, Mr. Chairman, so if you could bear with us or if we could rent an easel from you that might help too.
MS. NATAFALUSY: We had one.
MR. FLEISCHNER: We had one, where did it go?
MR. EVELAND: Glasson took it.
MR. CALLI: There is someone stealing easels everywhere all over the state. Steve is looking for his still. Steve, if you could maybe take the board through…
MS. NATAFALUSY: Could you put it on a chair maybe?
MR. CALLI: That’s fine, yes. Take the board through since this is a very large property. We’re spot in on this area. Take the board through…a sense as to what’s located here now…what’s immediately around us…before we get into the proposed…proposed structure if you could.
MR. PARKER: The…yes…this is…as Mr. Calli described…you know…is a use of an existing area on the property. It’s really one…one recreational use for another recreational use. It happens to be fitness center in this case. So this is located in the northwest part of the property itself. It’s an existing tennis court, really it does not get used that much. And so in that regard…you know…there’s really not much that going to be changing for the project here. Other than of course we are building a building there but as far as the site goes, there’s the infrastructure is there, the utilities are there, there’s not a lot of grading that’s going to occur here because we have a nice flat tennis court that we are going to work with. The building is going to be…there are two stories. The entrance for the leasing office is going to be on the second story from the expanded parking lot. I’ll explain that in a minute. And the fitness center is downstairs. It’s on the lower level and so the back part of the building is going to be exposed for two stories. You’ll see that the fitness center…that’s how you are going to access in the fitness center. But this…this…what I’m pointing here…this is Sheet Number 2 of the plans that were submitted to the board. It’s from our office. These are not rendered in any way. They are no different than the plans that the board has in front of them so if you want to look at Sheet Number 2 of the plans…you can see that what’s being proposed is the dashed line that kind of surrounds the proposed…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Give us one second…the original date on that plan is 10/25?
MR. PARKER: This is 10/25/16, yes.
MR. CALLI: We won’t need to mark it because it’s already submitted as part of your application and plans.
MR. PARKER: That is correct and there’s no difference than the board has right now.
MR. EVELAND: And you’re referring to Sheet Number 2?
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 6 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. PARKER: Right, because Sheet Number 2 really shows what’s being proposed here as part of the…overall improvements. And so right now on the easterly side of the tennis courts there’s a wall…a rock retaining wall or boulder wall that kind of lines the parking lot. It’s along the eastern edge of the…of the tennis court because the tennis court is a little bit lower…a little bit lower elevation than the parking lot…and so that’s part of the reason why we’re...the building has been designed in the way that it has to take advantage of that slope difference there. But what we’re going to do is we’re proposing to eliminate that rock wall and actually just continue the edge of the existing parking lot. We are going to be adding about 15 parking stalls in the area right next to the tennis court, going to straighten out the parking lot line because right now it…the parking lot comes in, it jogs over, it’s on…you know…back this way…and then back up…and so this part of the parking lot…well it’s not parking lot…it’s going to be parking lot but it’s where the tennis court is right now. So it’s at…the building is at the intersection of Mountain View Way, Oakwood Drive, it’s got…it’s a nice…nice property location there and…what’s being proposed is the building right here…there’s going to be a sidewalk, access from the parking lot to the leasing center on the second floor and then there’s going to sidewalk access around the backside for the fitness center that’s going to go out also by another sidewalk out to the parking lot. You know…we’re going…of course…next to the existing utilities that are there this will require a connection to the sewer system and the water system as well but other than that it’s…there’s really not a whole lot of site work that’s going to be happening here. There is overall reduction in the amount of impervious coverage on the property. I think it’s about 2,000 square feet reduction in impervious coverage because the tennis court is so large. But that’s really the essence of the application, that’s what we’re proposing as far as the site work and the changes in the site to itself.
MR. FLEISCHNER: Where do you get rid of the refuse from the building? I don’t see…where you’re going to throw the trash?
MR. PARKER: They…they’ve got a plan. The owner of the property has a plan. I know the refuse has been somewhat of an issue with the owners out there now and I think they are kind of working through that as we speak. They have a plan…or a…they are working on a plan in place to…right now the way I understand is they collect refuse every night from the entire site. Residents are supposed to put it outside, they collect it, and there is a…there’s a common collection point where they store it in containers. That’s my understanding of how it works. I can tell you a little more about that. They…the applicant…property owner has a pending violation with the township is my understand and it’s subject to come back to municipal court on the 19th I believe. They have other counsel representing them in connect with that. But, I became as familiar as I need to as related to this. My understanding is you’ve got a valet system in place with a company that does this for about 1,500 properties including I think 65 military sites or so and their system…which I think cost them more than if they had buckets everywhere…is six night a week valet system…you put your garbage out to a specific location…it’s collected…it’s brought to a central location…and then three times a week or so…it’s collected at that central location off site. It ended up being…a solution to an on‐going problem is my understanding with people doing illegal dumping coming in off the highway. Some contractors who live on the property dumping construction debris in the dumpsters, this ended up being the solution. The township, I think, doesn’t like that solution or maybe needs to understand it a little bit better to maybe appreciate it or not but that’s all subject to on‐going violations which will be resolved next week. And my position on that is if the township sees it their way and it’s different than the applicant’s way, we’re going to be back here with another site plan probably for a bunch of accessory structures around the entire property showing dumpster pads everywhere. But for now, this little area…the impact is typical office trash…there was a lot of e waste these days…there really is no paper trash it’s employees maybe throwing a yogurt away occasionally. It’s not much. The fitness center has no waste. They’re not selling anything. There was a Health Department memo that questioned whether or not there would be any vending. There’s not. It’s people exercising and going back to their homes. The employees…we’re going to have a maximum of eight here…they are right now elsewhere on the property so it’s just a reallocation of their day or day trash which like I said might be the remnants of their sandwich and a few pieces of paper that they tear up that they don’t file somewhere. There is really no waste being generated by this portion of our proposal. I do understand there is a concern with the balance of the site. And I think that...candidly you might see us back here on an amended site plan for that…
MR. FLEISCHNER: I don’t want to go to the rest of the site…
MR. PARKER: Yes.
MR. FLEISCHNER: …because I’m just concerned with this…
MR. PARKER: Sure.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 7 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. FLEISCHNER: …and even if there…there has to be trash. And my feeling is you need to have a spot here where trash is going to go. Because it’s not going to pile…I mean…I don’t…in any business somebody does the trash once a day. So, like where is the…when the trash is cleaned out of the offices where on this site does it get stored? I mean, I don’t see anything on the…on the map. Even if there’s just like a little area that’s marked off that says “Trash Will Be Placed Here”. Looking at this, I don’t see anything. That’s…that’s a concern.
MR. PARKER: Sure.
MR. FLEISCHNER: I’m just concerned.
MR. CALLI: No, I absolutely understand. There isn’t one right now on this plan. We are certainly open ears. And subject to this approval if the board votes favorably, we can work it out with Gene’s office as to a suitable location. The reason…the reason…I’ll let Steve testify to this…is there really wasn’t much trash generation based on this use…this structure…I think that’s simply why but I don’t want to take away from Steve’s testimony. He should explain to you why we’re not locating an area for refuse on here but we can certainly work that out to your satisfaction.
MR. WEISS: Scott?
MR. VAN NESS: Does it generate trash?
MR. CALLI: There will be some trash, yes.
MR. VAN NESS: You will need a place put it.
INAUDIBLE
MR. FLEISCHNER: …I’m just looking…right…I’m just looking at this saying there’s going to be trash.
MR. WEISS: Catherine, do you know anything about…I know Mr. Calli made reference to the fact that there’s a pending violation.
MS. NATAFALUSY: 46.
MR. WEISS: How many?
MS. NATAFALUSY: 46.
MR. SCHAECHTER: 46 violations?
MR. WEISS: That’s a lot more than a “pending violation”.
MR. CALLI: They have been consolidated. My understanding is and I’m not trying to sugar coat this because I…frankly…between me and this board…I don’t care what that violation is because it’s a different issue. My understanding from the applicant is that there was two occasions where they were cited. And it was multiple citations issued each time. So, it was one or two events with a handful of violations each time. They are all being heard on December 19th before a municipal judge I suppose. An expert…and actually an expert report has been filed bigger than anything filed in this case in support of their system which I’m not here to defend tonight. This is not the body to do that before, but they think they have the trash figured out. It remains to be seen.
MR. FLEISCHNER: I mean to me that’s a whole separate issue.
MR. CALLI: It is.
MR. FLEISCHNER: To me the issue is, you’re going to generate some trash here, you got to have a place that you’re going to store trash until whomever…if it sits there for 50 years, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 2 days…nobody is coming into the building to empty out trash cans whoever picks up the trash. So there has to be a place that you’re going to store trash and not that I go to fitness gyms anymore because I’m too old for that stuff…don’t say anything…
LAUGHTER
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 8 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. FLEISCHNER: …but there is trash generated.
MR. CALLI: Absolutely.
MR. FLEISCHNER: So, I think somewhere you need to say we are going to need to store trash here…somewhere…and we’re going to block it off so people don’t have to look at it.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Joe, what I was thinking of maybe what they have to do is they have this plan for the rest of the site, maybe they have to go back to their…back to the managing and tell them that they need something on this site and it has a conditional approval if it gets approved tonight one of the conditions would be they must provide revised plans…the location of the dumpster area to be approved by the township planner…township engineer prior to the resolution being passed.
MR. FLEISCHNER: I’m fine with that. I just think there has to be something…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: This way we’re covered…
MR. SCHAECHTER: You know the sites…you know they’ve already got a problem. Ok, there’s no…there’s no solution that’s on the plan.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Right.
MR. SCHAECHTER: They didn’t even think of it. And…you know…they are still figuring out what they’re doing over there. I’m not comfortable moving forward with a condition of what they’re doing. The whole site is…not in compliance. I mean we know that…well…might not be in compliance.
MR. CALLI: Well, I can say this, if there’s a condition of this approval that says the plan has to have a dumpster at X location subject to the satisfaction of the township engineer, we can’t build this out without satisfying that condition. So it’s self‐policing in that respect. The balance of the site is…is…I’d like it be up for grabs too…but it’s not today before this body. Like I said, I think it might be. I think you might see us back here on a site plan with Steve showing you 160 acre site spotting it on a dozen locations where we have to locate dumpster but I don’t know how…it’s going to come out.
MR. WEISS: Can I ask you a question? Why do you say that? Why do you think they’re going to come back? It sounds like with 46 violations, they’ve got no interest in taking…
MR. CALLI: No, what I’m saying is…what I’m saying is…if the court ruling comes out and says your valet system is not adequate, look at dumpsters. And they try to location dumpsters, and it’s flagged by the town as triggering a site plan for accessory structures, that’s why we’d be back here. That’s all I’m saying.
MR. SCHAECHTER: But that site already had dumpsters there for years. I mean I’m in town for almost 17 years and there’s…
MS. NATAFALUSY: We met with them back in March when this whole thing started and at that point they said…well we…you know…this is what they’re doing…the valet service but that they were going to put in for dumpsters. That’s what we were told back in March but I don’t believe that’s happened yet…
MR. CALLI: And I unfortunately can’t speak to any of that because…you know…it’s…I haven’t been representing…What I have been doing is relaying the township’s position to my client for…you know…for the last couple months when I would speak to Chuck on different matters, Catherine and I spoke a few times, we spoke at those concept review meetings, the applicant is aware the township does not like and is not a fan of that current system. But they…you know…they have a pending matter before the municipal court. So I mean it sounds like that’s getting resolved before years’ end. And I candidly hope it gets resolved to everyone’s satisfaction because they’re not interested in the site, it doesn’t work. You’re not interested in the property of the town, it doesn’t work. So…
MR. WEISS: It’s just…I know it’s frustrating we can go years and years without ever having an applicant that comes in front of us for the new kind of zoning or health department violations and now two in a row. And I’m just concerned that we get involved with the same thing last week. We get involved with the situation where trash removal is a major problem and how do we feel about the applicant coming in and asking for more when they can’t handle what’s already there? I don’t know. I know it’s not Larry’s…he can’t really help us with that. I hear him. I’m just…I’ve gotten concerned. I PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 9 DECEMBER 15, 2016 think it sounds like the offer was made for a condition to put in a dumpster. Is there room on the property, Gene, do you feel…for a dumpster?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Well, there’s plenty of room to put a dumpster.
MR. WEISS: I think the condition if we so chose to accept it would be that a dumpster would be…must be placed on the property in lieu of an overall plan by the management company of this property. That would be satisfactory to the engineer. The location would be satisfactory to the engineer…the location would be satisfactory.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Yes, but dumpster enclosure too. Right, Catherine?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Yes, it’s got to be enclosed.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: So, you’d have to show the location and the detail in the plan.
MR. FLEISCHNER: Well, there’s only one problem with that. I think we have to be…Scott, you correct me if I’m wrong. In that we don’t know what the judicial system is going to decide with regard to Issue B…
MR. EVELAND: Right.
MR. FLEISCHNER: We’re dealing with Issue A. I think if we…if we were to even approve this with conditions it has to have a suitable trash removal system as approved by our engineering, etc., municipal employee. I don’t know if we can say a dumpster or an incinerator…
MR. EVELAND: You make a good point because you can put a dumpster there and the dumpster could be overflowing if nobody’s picking it up if there’s no system in place so you could have…you can put in addition to that you can…you have that other…
MR. FLEISCHNER: What Gene is saying, I want to see…
MR. EVELAND: A plan.
MR. FLEISCHNER: A plan that is acceptable to the…our professionals within the township.
MR. EVELAND: If they are going to want to tie it into whatever plan that they end up deciding on…
MR. CALLI: I imagine…yes, it’s more streamline.
MR. EVELAND: It’s going to have to be tied into that. You know…
MR. FLEISCHNER: That’s all I’m saying is…we can’t…because I don’t know what…I don’t know what’s out there to be honest with you.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Well also depending on what the court says. If they say their valet service is workable for them, not the dumpsters, then this site is going to be under that same valet system.
MR. CALLI: Correct.
MR. FLEISCHNER: But did…but this system…whatever…what we’re discussing tonight in my opinion has to have a suitable trash removal system that’s approved by our sitting professionals.
MR. CALLI: I think language like that captures it very well.
MR. EVELAND: Yes, I think so too. As I said, it’s going to be in your client’s best interest anyway after they get…whatever the judicial determination is that this is all tied in with what’s ever agreed to in the trash removal system. So maybe we could put it…assuming they want to approve it…we’ll put something in there even to the resolution of whatever that pending matter is because it does effect in there. Granted it’s…they are kind of separate issues but they kind of affect this because we’re increasing intensity of use in this particular area. More people come into this area. It affects the overall plan but we’ll…we can tie something in there with whatever the resolution is with those pending matters whatever the approved trash removal system is going to be. PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 10 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. CALLI: I mean, that’s fair, makes sense.
MR. VAN NESS: Tossing a bag in the parking lot is not acceptable.
INAUDIBLE
MR. WEISS: Any other conversation? John?
MR. BATSCH: Yes, just a clarification. You said this is going to be an office and rental office administration and fitness center?
MR. PARKER: That’s correct, yes.
MR. BATSCH: And eight employees will cover all of those activities?
MR. PARKER: Yes, and that’s on the high end of the shift is our understanding from the owner.
MR. BATSCH: And this is all business hours for the office?
MR. PARKER: Nine to six, Monday thru Friday; ten to five, Saturday. We anticipate four visitors a day. Visitors being…let’s say a non‐employee…visitor…someone that accesses the fitness center and not an employee. Average visit is under 60 minutes.
MR. BATSCH: And the hours of the fitness center?
MR. PARKER: its 24 hours a day. You access it with a fob, a locked fob, residents only.
MR. BATSCH: Thank you.
MR. FLEISCHNER: It’s not open on Sunday, the rental office?
MR. PARKER: No.
MS. NATAFALUSY: So, the fitness center has no employees?
MR. PARKER: No.
MS. NATAFALUSY: Just go in, do your thing.
MR. PARKER: The idea and it might be for insurance reasons, it might just be because of protocol and their experience in this business it that one of the employees will check in on the fitness center to make sure that…that everything is clean down there, to make sure that nothing is happening, that nobody got hurt. But beyond that, there’s not…there’s not a staffed gym employee who’s going to be sitting down like a lifeguard watching you exercise all day and all night. But when the leasing center is open, you will be able to get an employee down to the fitness center if you need them. Off hours, you are…you know…on your own.
MR. VAN NESS: Is there access to the…inaudible?
MR. WEISS: Ok, so we should address that…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Question, so I can a concern for the health and safety standpoint. What happen if somebody goes in by themselves, the only person there, and he has a heart attack? Who gets him?
MR. WEISS: Coroner.
LAUGHTER
MR. BUCZYNSKI: I mean it’s not funny. It happen…it happened at the Y a couple years’ ago with a guy.
MR. PARKER: Yes.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 11 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. BUCZYNSKI: At least there are other people there.
MR. PARKER: That’s a great question.
MR. BATSCH: Is there going to be security cameras or anything?
MR. PARKER: Yes, there are.
MR. CALLI: When Jim testifies he will give you more but there are some…there are some measures in place so it’s not…
MR. SCHAECHTER: They’re not going to put someone in here? You’ve got towel service going in, you’ve got showers, you got a fitness studio, and does this mean there’s going to classes?
MR. PARKER: There could be…there could be a class that a resident wants to run and a few people go but that’s…you know…those are scheduled events.
MS. NATAFALUSY: And it’s only for residents, right?
MR. PARKER: Only for residents.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: So somebody comes home from work at the end of the night…12:00 or so and he wants to work out before he goes home.
MR. WEISS: Go ahead, Scott.
MR. VAN NESS: Is the gym solely operated by the complex?
MR. PARKER: Yes.
MR. VAN NESS: Or will it be leased out to a different company to run?
MR. PARKER: No, it’s operated by the ownership.
MR. WEISS: Ok, so let’s go back to Steve was reviewing the plans with us. I know we spoke a little about trash…
MR. NELSEN: Mr. Chair?
MR. WEISS: Yes, go ahead,
MR. NELSEN: Fitness center? Is there an additional fee to be charged to the residents to use that?
MR. PARKER: I’m not certain but my understanding is it’s just an accommodation for residents. If you’re a resident here, you can utilize it. I don’t think there’s an added assessment for users versus non‐users.
MR. CALLI: Mr. Chairman, that’s about all I have as far as that…the testimony goes. There are some letters…some review letters from the professionals. We can go over and review those if you’d like to do that next.
MR. WEISS: Yes, I think we can turn it over to Gene. I’m looking at some of Gene’s comments, on the second page, something to be address. Gene?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Sure, technical issues on Page 1 there are simple ‐ to items on there.
MR. CALLI: No issues with that.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Matter 3, it’s just the fact that I think they stated before the zone increased impervious coverage so there’s no need for any detention on the site. Matter 4 regarding the retaining wall we just need design calculations…
MR. CALLI: Yes, we’ll provide that. PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 12 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. BUCZYNSKI: …signed by a professional, once approved…you know…prior to construction. And also as far as the handicapped ramp to the parking lot…show detail for the pressed curb.
MR. CALLI: Yes, no problem.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: And then the approvals you need.
MR. CALLI: Right.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: That’s all from mine. From Chuck’s…
MR. WEISS: Yes, just really quickly then, I’m looking at Number 6. Perhaps when there are no issues and the applicant is certainly agreed to update his plan as you suggested in 1 through 5. Six are certifications that we certainly make a…inaudible…but there will be conditions. Ok, that resolves Gene’s report. I don’t know if we want to testify to Chuck’s report at this point. Chuck’s report is planning.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: You can do it…I mean…there are just more technical items…some of them.
MS. NATAFALUSY: I think he already drafted to 6.1…inaudible…exclusive use of the residence…and that’s been addressed already.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Item 6.2 is regarding the parking testimony to address any existing parking area that would be assigned to the new building. But I guess you need 17, you have 15 spaces that were added.
MR. PARKER: Yes, there is no plan to add…I don’t mean to de‐note those for just specifically either the fitness center or the leasing office. There’s just going to be parking stalls that are out there. Again, we really anticipate…you know…we’ve testified that there will be eight employees maximum there. They don’t anticipate having employees there most of the time. And with 4 to 5 visits per day…you know…they think that certainly the amount of parking that we are providing based upon the experience operating facilities like this is more than sufficient for what they are doing here. You know most of the residents are going to probably walk down to the fitness center if they are going there and they use it after hours anyway.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: …the basis for the office component…
MR. PARKER: We can…right…we think that’s more than enough.
MR. WEISS: How many tunnel spaces are there going to be, 7 to 15?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: On that site plan?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Fifteen.
MR. PARKER: New parking stalls? Yes.
MR. WEISS: And so…the…the quorum is for 17?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: That’s what’s in the ordinance.
MR. WEISS: So, we are looking for a waiver? Is that…
MR. PARKER: Yes, that’s correct, yes, I’m sorry, that’s correct. That’s based upon just the square footage…you know…times the multiplier and 17 is the number. That’s…that’s…it exceeds…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: The parking…in the arrangement for the parking.
MR. PARKER: Correct, yes.
MR. WEISS: Of those 15 spaces, are one of them handicapped?
MR. PARKER: Yes, two of them are. PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 13 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. WEISS: I know we talked about in Gene’s report. Ok, two of them are handicapped. Is there anything…your calculations…is there any way to get more parking spaces in there to avoid the waiver?
MR. PARKER: I mean…we could expand the parking lot. What we were…it would require a lot more effort on the…it could be done on the ends of that parking lot. We are just going to fill in the gap really that was left there. Could we add two more stalls? Sure, yes, the answer is yes, we could. What that most likely involve would be expanding…you know…adding…you know…one or two stalls onto the ends of where the current parking lot ends. It wouldn’t be in the area in front of the fitness center. It would be more…kind of more toward the end of the aisle there.
MR. WEISS: You’re building a beautiful building. It would be a shame if people can’t park there. I know I agree with you, many people will walk. But it’s a fairly large complex. People are not walking who live up at…
MR. PARKER: Oh no…and you’re right about that. I think…I think…again what they’ve experienced is that the peak usage times for the fitness center are usually for before hours…before office hours or after office hours and so they’re really…they’re really complimentary uses in that regard for sharing parking stalls. So, they don’t…and again that’s…that’s just based upon their…these guys operate as Mr. Calli said…you know…a lot…a number of facilities around the county that’s based upon your…
MR. WEISS: I would still think even if its 6:00 pm, you get more than 50 people there. You don’t see that that’s not the trend here?
MR. PARKER: We don’t think so…I mean their thought was that this is more of an accommodation on paper to lure…is the word coming to mind…I know it’s not a great word but to get tenants attracted to the site so they rent and then people just start to use it beginning of the new year…you know…it wears down and a lot of people have their own equipment. It’s really just a…
MR. WEISS: My thought is only this…it’s simply this…that if you had a tremendous hardship and you can’t put two extra spots…ok, that’s what we use a waiver for. In this case, I asked…you have the room. Gene?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: I hear you. I agree with you because also under the parking requirement for the 17 spaces they assumed no spaces for the fitness center mainly because it’s going to take…different uses. But you can’t tell me in the whole complex somebody during the day is not going to use the fitness center.
MR. WEISS: I just suggested it. If you have the space, you should put in the two spots and don’t ask us for a waiver. I think we’re fairly generous in offering them when you truly have a hardship…truly came and said, there’s no place to put them. If you have the space, I think you should put them in.
INAUDIBLE
MR. WEISS: Is the handicapped accessible parking spot next to the handicapped accessible door?
MR. FLEISCHNER: I don’t know.
MR. SCHAECHTER: It’s in the front where you go in the office…so if you’re going into the office it’s there. It’s a far trail around the building.
MR. PARKER: Yes, the handicapped stalls are located right in front of the Leasing Office assuming that most of the…that would be most of the handicapped use would be for the Leasing Office but there is a sidewalk…you know…that goes across the entire front of the parking lot. And there’s a sidewalk that…because the elevation change we’ve got to get from…you know…the upper level to the lower level. Would someone who would require that would come around the side into the back side over here. It’s…it’s…well…it’s not…you’re right…it’s not a straight path, it’s not as close but…you know…that’s…that’s I think the best accommodation for that. We can certainly put a stall…a handicapped stall over closer to this sidewalk.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 14 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. WEISS: Does that concern anybody on the Planning Board?
MR. FLEISCHNER: Gene, what do you think?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Well, I’m telling you regarding the sidewalk they mentioned from the parking lot the one side where it goes down towards the…inaudible…area, I think some of that won’t even meet ADA. Just look on your grades on the plan.
MR. PARKER: It’s got to be less than 1…well…we will have to look at that.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Just looking at the 996 and 994 on Page 3.
MR. PARKER: Right, right.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Looks like its kind of steep right there.
MR. PARKER: Yes, and maybe they’ll be able to move that and…you know…spread those out a little too.
MR. WEISS: Do we want to talk about other options?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: I think…I don’t know if there is any but if you want to look at them. You can’t assume there’s going to be no handicapped people that want to use the fitness center.
MR. SCHAECHTNER: Therapy?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: For additional therapy. I mean they go to another place but they want…you know…a couple of extra days during the week, right?
INAUDIBLE
Mr. PARKER: I think we can accommodate that…that the ADA Requirements by just adjusting the grading on that sidewalk there. It looks like…you know…we’re going to be basically the sidewalk is at roughly elevation 1,000 the basement level of the fitness center is about 992 which is about 8 feet lower than that and we’ve quite a bit of…of room that we can spread that out so we can basically, you just want to make it a longer flatter path.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: It’s not an easy mark for somebody. All the parking is in the front. I’m not sure how else they…what else can do to provide an access to that opening back…unless they…I don’t know. There are no elevators, so…
MR. SCHAECHTNER: There are elevators inside the building but the building is going to be closed on Sundays. The Management Office will be closed on Sundays.
MR. VAN NESS: And overnight.
MR. SCHAECHTNER: And overnight.
MR. CALLI: I mean at the end of the day, it’s got to be ADA complaint whatever the drawing is and the handicapped space protocol is to locate it as close as you can to the entry point. We are willing to shift stuff around, Mr. Chairman. We hear you on those two extra spaces. We’ll do it. I’m not sure what else we could do from aside from complying with ADA standards which we have to do. We are not asking for any relief on that. You know…we can’t.
MR. WEISS: Just let Gene review it.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: The one thing we just talked about here is maybe what we have to do is relocate one of the handicapped spaces to be closer to that sidewalk…
MR. PARKER: We can do that, sure. What will happen is we’ll probably lose one of the parking stalls then for the…you know…for the loading area next to that…that stall. Because we need…we will need one by each handicapped stall.
MR. WEISS: Handicapped accessible. PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 15 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. PARKER: Right, right.
MR. WEISS: Obviously at that point then we’ve…by doing sometime very positive…you know…
MR. PARKER: Oh, sure.
MR. WEISS: I can see a better…I can see a better use for a waiver in this particular case. So, you’re going to move one handicapped spot closer to the sidewalk entrance and by doing so you’re going to also lose one parking spot that you’re going to need for the van accessibility.
MR. PARKER: Correct.
MR. WEISS: So, at the end of the day you’re going to end up with 16 parking spaces?
MR. PARKER: Well, I mean…there’s…there’s a total of more than that in this parking lot. We were adding 15 new stalls as part of the application so basically there’s going to be a net increase of 14 new stalls then.
MR. WEISS: What about the two that you were just going to give a couple of minutes ago?
MR. PARKER: I’m sorry, yes, two more, yes correct. So, there will be two more, right.
MS. NATAFALUSY: So, it’s 16 new…?
MR. PARKER: Yes.
MS. NATAFALUSY: So, we just need a waiver for one.
MR. WEISS: So, we need a waiver for one. And that’s acceptable to me. Anybody have…that’s a nice compromise. Need a waiver…ok…Gene, want to go one with Chuck’s report?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Ok, 6.3 as far as the number of employees, is there going to be eight that includes the property manager and staff?
MR. PARKER: That’s what’s anticipated, yes. Eight is the maximum we anticipate.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: We’ll go back to 61.4, Chuck went back to the parking. As far as what I said before, there’s no…there was no stalls actually associated to the fitness center. He just brought that up his in report also.
MR. WEISS: Ok.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Do you want to address the concern 6.5 regarding lighting?
MR. PARKER: Lighting will address…we’ll comply with that…there’s…we are proposing new lights along there and we’ll comply with that requirement.
MR. WEISS: Ok, 6.6 address the purpose of the concrete utility bed.
MR. PARKER: Yes, it’s just for HVAC equipment. You can see it shown to the north of the building there. So, it’s just a pad for utility equipment.
MR. WEISS: Ok, we’ve certainly beat up 6.6…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Will there be…back to the 6.6, any of the trucks…a comment…regarding the HVAC unit will have appropriate screening around it?
MR. PARKER: Yes.
MR. BATSCH: Mr. Chair?
MR. WEISS: Yes. PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 16 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. BATSCH: Question, on 6.5…you said the fitness center is 24/7? So lighting will be on all night?
MR. PARKER: Yes, well either that or some kind of motion sensor or something like that, yes.
MR. BATSCH: Does it specify that in the design?
MR. PARKER: We will.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Ok, 6.7 I think we’ve beat that to death already. 6.8, I don’t think…transferred those existing trees…inaudible…
MR. PARKER: Yes, so he’s talking about the pines that are shown on the plan and I think the concern is that when that concrete work and sidewalks go in they may not survive so I’m not sure how we want to do that. We’d like to keep them if we can, of course, because they are larger trees.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Right now it looks like to me I think you’d be able to save them.
MR. PARKER: And that’s our goal. We would prefer to do that as well just because of the size of them and they are a benefit certainly to the site. You know…if there’s something…if we can relocate maybe some of the sidewalks…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: That’s what I was going to say, when you get out there you can lay it out just move the sidewalks over…sidewalk over, that’s all.
MR. PARKER: Yes, and we will show it that way on the plan, we can move the one sidewalk over and move it further away from the tree area.
MR. WEISS: You’ll have a meandering sidewalk I guess.
MR. PARKER: Right.
MR. WEISS: Ok, it works.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Chuck just refers to have the plan labels…preliminary and final site plans…
MR. PARKER: That’s fine…yes, that’s fine.
MR. WEISS: Does anybody else on the Planning Board have any questions regarding Chuck’s report? Gene, you’ve reviewed it fairly well?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Yes.
MR. WEISS: Ok, Steve, I’ll go back to you if…I know you had said you had nothing else.
MR. PARKER: That’s all I have, Mr. Chairman.
MR. WEISS: Ok and we’ll just make sure for the record we’ve addressed the Department of Health memo that you have…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Anything from the Fire Marshall?
MS. NATAFALUSY: No.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: I guess there’s a…inaudible…plan, right?
INAUDIBLE
MR. WEISS: So, Item Number 1 again it goes back to the trash and I don’t think we need to spend any more time on that. Number 2, just they want to make sure you have provision in place to prevent air, water, and noise pollution in mitigation during the construction.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 17 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. CALLI: Well certainly there’s going to be a soil erosion and sediment control plan that needs to be approved as part of the application, that’s one of the conditions that was in Mr. Buczynski’s letter. So that will be there I think as far as the noise goes, you know what? There’s going to be noise, it’s a construction site. I think what…what they are going to operation a portion in accordance with the township limits on times and days and that kind of thing. But there is going to be some noise temporarily while they are doing that. Once it’s done, it’s going to be pretty minimal.
MR. WEISS: And then I know we briefly discussed Item Number 3, that there will be no vending but there will be no food or drink, nothing offered, water fountain…
INAUDIBLE
MR. VAN NESS: …or is it vending by third party…will they have a machine with Gatorade…
MS. NATAFALUSY: It doesn’t say they can’t have it, they just said if they do the letter of intent and plans detailing equipment and layout must be provided…
MR. CALLI: Right, that’s exactly right. But the plan right now is no vending. There is no like that little C store equivalent you see at the gym exit where you can buy a protein shake or a bar or something. That’s…you know…wheatgrass or whatever people drink, I don’t know. That’s not planned. Bring your own water.
MR. WEISS: But the plans show that there is nothing you don’t intend but if you do, then you will have to, of course, conform with whatever process there is in the Health Department.
MR. CALLI: Exactly.
MS. NATAFALUSY: Right.
MR. WEISS: Ok, fair enough. That will be up to you if you decide to add such and I don’t think the Planning Board is saying it’s good, bad, or indifferent. But if you do decide to add a vending machine, for example, you will get the proper Health Department approvals. Right? We’re satisfied with that? Ok, that handles the three letters that I have in front of me. Steve, are you done?
MR. PARKER: I am completely done.
MR. WEISS: Let me just officially…let me open it to the public, if anybody from the public has any questions for Mr. Parker based on the testimony he delivered today, and seeing no one here from the public, I’ll close it to the public. Anybody else from the Planning Board? Mr. Parker, thank you very much.
MR. CALLI: Mr. Chairman, so now our second and final witness, Mr. Chairman, our architect, Jim O’Brien. Jim was involved with the last application back in 2010 and he is the artist of record for this nice new building that we got before you today. We might be marking exhibits now I’m guessing. Yes, Jim, new stuff you are going to show the board? We will have one exhibit to show you. We really want to show the board…you understand the bolts…the nuts and bolts of this now as to who is working where and what is going where but I want Jim to give you a comfort level of the layout of these two floors but also the skin of this building because it’s very sharp looking. I think you’ll appreciate it. So, let’s get you sworn in Jim.
(JAMES P. O’BRIEN IS SWORN IN FOR THE RECORD)
MR. EVELAND: Your name for the record.
MR. O’BRIEN: James P. O’Brien.
MR. WEISS: And business address also for the record.
MR. O’BRIEN: Sure, Jim O’Brien, Architects, LLC, at 46 Headquarters Plaza, Morristown, New Jersey 07960.
MR. WEISS: Ok.
MR. CALLI: Briefly Jim, your professional background and experience. PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 18 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. O’BRIEN: And if I could just say, I’m…I have a cough drop, if I talk too much this week, I start coughing. So, I just want to let you know if I’m short on words as well…
MR. WEISS: That will work right with our schedule to get home early.
LAUGHTER
MR. O’BRIEN: Couldn’t move this, right? It’s actually quite difficult, that’s why I stepped out earlier. Just to let you know if I seem like I’m a little bit short on words tonight. I have a cough drop in my mouth.
MR. WEISS: So, maybe we’ll just…we’ve heard Mr. O’Brien in front of this board before, Catherine?
MR. O’BRIEN: I have appeared in front of this board on a similar matter…on this property…zoning an architect with a license since 1993 in New Jersey prior…after working for several other architects I started my firm 12 years ago. I practice general architectural commercial and residential and projects such as this. And I’m qualified as an expert in architecture we’re focused on architect and interior design in my firm, qualified in several municipalities throughout the state including this one.
MR. WEISS: So in an effort to keep Mr. O’Brien’s voice at a minimum, I certain can accept Mr. O’Brien as an expert architect and welcome you tonight, unless anybody else has a question for Mr. O’Brien, welcome.
MR. O’BRIEN: Thank you.
MR. CALLI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ok, Jim so we went through a lot of the operations which you were going to discuss so not to be redundant, let’s go through a little bit of this nice building that you designed here. How it lays out and what it’s going to look like.
MR. O’BRIEN: Ok, we can start with the exterior.
MR. CALLI: Very good.
MR. O’BRIEN: So, the one item that I have is the first one. That would be a new…since we submitted all the drawings of architectural and site to you; it would be this one sheet here with two renderings.
MR. CALLI: And we want to mark that as Exhibit A‐1.
MR. O’BRIEN: A‐1, yes.
MR. CALLI: Jim, is there a date or a title on that?
MR. O’BRIEN: This is called Drawing R‐1 and it’s we went ahead and dated it the same as the other submissions so 9/9/16, board review.
MR. CALLI: Thank you.
MR. O’BRIEN: Ok.
MR. WEISS: If you would mark that please and you can just mark it….
MR. O’BRIEN: A‐1 is that right?
MR. WEISS: With today’s date of 12/15.
MR. O’BRIEN: It is 15 right? A‐1.
MR. WEISS: Thank you.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 19 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. O’BRIEN: I believe the board members have a series of 11 by 17 sort of black and white images of the 3D Models so we’ve since flushed it out and worked on colors with the clients so what you see on the top on the front and the rear view. So, we call the front facing the parking lot. So, you’ll see a little bit more of texture materials. A high quality cedar look siding in a grey kind of natural grey color. A wood look roof, asphalt shingled roof with a wood look texture roofing and then after that, you’ll just see white. You’ll see white trim, white windows, white gutters, some white columns populating the front entries, and a series of white columns along the back lower level. So it has a shingled style look, very residential look, like a big clubhouse residential style look. And it has essentially several entrances but from the front it has the two entrances directly from curb line from the sidewalk at the curb what we will call leasing entry and a property management entry. And at lease at this at this rendering you can see. So on the rear rendering which is essentially on the southern side, an entrance into the fitness center area there and there’s also sort of an entrance/exit at the end of the building here. So, there’s a walk along the side of the building a little more patio space at that point. I think this might give you the best view also of the sort of covered porch. One of the best ways to kind of show the property and I’ll leave it at this, we can move on. Regarding the exterior and what we try to achieve is angle of the building for this sort of southwestern view. It’s got a great sunset; it’s got a great view southwest anytime. So when you’re up at the first floor level, in this sort of walk out basement situation that we have to be able to come out to a covered porch so rain or shine or snow you can show perspective tenants or the people living there can use this clubhouse to relax in this area, you can walk out to a covered porch and still have the best view. So we took advantage of that and then the windows along the bottom kind of do the same thing from the fitness center as you exercise using cardio machines, you’re kind of looking out and have the same view. So that’s in a nutshell sort of the ideas of the exterior.
MS. NATAFALUSY: Did you call it a clubhouse?
MR. O’BRIEN: I’m sorry?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Did you call it a clubhouse?
MR. O’BRIEN: Clubhouse, I’m not sure if that’s the best term but…
MS. NATAFALUSY: Right.
MR. O’BRIEN: …it’s got three functions going on in there. So you have leasing, property management, and fitness. So short hand leasing center, clubhouse, I’m not sure if it’s going to get a name so this will be…
MR. FLEISCHNER: I don’t think you can call it a clubhouse.
MS. NATAFALUSY: I don’t think…
MR. VAN NESS: It’s not going…it’s not going to be used for rentals and for parties and stuff is it?
MR. O’BRIEN: No.
MR. VAN NESS: It’s not designed to be that in any way?
MR. O’BRIEN: No, the upper level here…what I mean by upper level is that area is to show the property and it’s kind of a wide open area. If you think of the plan it’s a wide open area behind this covered porch. The way in which the client leases it to walk with a prospect who’s come to lease show them on the table and on this interactive table showing a map of the property, show them the view, allow people to relax, maybe wait to speak to someone, maybe wait to sign a lease. So it needs a clubby feel. It needs a feel where…you know…a place you can relax. And that’s the idea of leasing. And leasing is separate from property management. They deal with other issues. They deal with complaints, they deal with renewing leases, they deal with other issues, yes leasing has that sort of clubby feel we need to make…inaudible. I mean it’s probably good to look at the…floor plan…each level of the floor plan.
MR. CALLI: Why don’t we do that now, Jim, yes, please?
MR. O’BRIEN: So this would not be a new exhibit, this is Sheet A2 of your packet; it’s the Upper Level Floor Plan. And if I can describe the flow now from each front door, so where I’m standing here coming into the leasing center…coming through this door…we have sort of a front desk so there’s visual access to the people walking in…a little bit of a waiting area. As you come in you’ll get…you’ll be PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 20 DECEMBER 15, 2016 able to look straight through and look out…that’s one intention. There’s an open stair as you walk into you’re left, there’s what we call interactive table this little…locate of a large map, a touch screen that you can zoom in and move around then walk around this table. It’s about 4 feet by 6 feet so it’s a good leasing tool and there are other places to sit. There’s a high top area. There’s a billiards area with refreshments. There’s kind of a TV, it looks like a living room setting, in this area. And another area here with the table a glass wall here that may be movable or maybe fixed so you get some privacy here. So I’m just describing this area as you look at it to the right side of the plan most of this floor…a little more than half…is the leasing function and as people trickle in and the employees are there…you know…you are dealing with one, two, three, four, different groups of people at a time. They can sit at different places and talk about their property and then go out, look at an apartment, and come back. The intention is also to walk that person down the stair, show them the fitness center, and then bring them back up, either by stair or by elevator. So that sort of round trip, if you will, is to show a prospect the fitness center, come back up, look at an apartment, come back here, and sign a lease. That’s separate, if you will, from property management. So, kind of the easy part is to look at the right hand doors you face the building and come in. Property management also has a type of reception a little bit of waiting and has the intention of two full‐time…the assistant and the senior property manager working there today. And open end desk area and files to accommodate what they currently have as file needs, not file room. They have existing leases…agreements they need to hang on to. And a break room for the staff, for the workers that work here, the break room conference room. So you see that is less than half of the floor there and to access there can be controlled…access to the leasing can be controlled separately…inaudible…the hours…you can monitor access into both doors, who’s coming in for property, who’s coming in for leasing. And if I just flip one page and show you downstairs…inaudible…
MR. WEISS: Before you do that, let me ask a question then. I’m not making any commentary but what is the thought process by putting in a pool table and a lounge with televisions? What is the need for that?
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, I use the word our client’s use, aspirational. So, that didn’t come out right. Aspirational. So they want the tenants to aspire to a life style so in some of the remodels they’re doing they’ve done some great interior design with flat screen TV’s and a sort of sitting area even a fireplace that looks like that living room area. Now, do they have any billiard tables in the apartments? No, but aspirationally they are looking to draw people in and just feel like this is a fantastic place that their life will be better here. So that’s it. There’s no…there’s no program of playing billiards.
MR. WEISS: And some…it probably wouldn’t be a problem then if we just added a condition that this building will not be used for social gatherings like banquets and parties and you know the local Women’s Club of Oakwood Village wants to use it on a Saturday night and have their party in here. Is that a…
MR. O’BRIEN: It hasn’t been mentioned to me but I want to defer to Larry for a second. Is that anything that would be…
MR. CALLI: We’d be fine with a condition, Mr. Chairman, that this not be an area of general congregation, alright.
MR. WEISS: There’s nothing wrong with a billiards table. I don’t have…I have no commentary about it. I just…I just want to make sure that we don’t turn this into something that you’re not presenting it to be.
MR. CALLI: In place of assembly, or something, yes.
MR. WEISS: Aspiration was totally fine with the Chairman. I just want to make sure…we don’t end up with a party hall when we are being told it’s a leasing aspirational visional center which makes total sense to me. I can understand it. But make sure it’s used for that.
MR. O’BRIEN: That is a lot that drives this type of business.
MR. WEISS: You guys are the experts. That sounds totally fine. But let’s just make sure that doesn’t end up being something that it’s not because it’s set up already. You’ve got two thirds of the party. It’s already there. So that’s all.
MR. FLEISCHNER: It’s a great place to put files.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 21 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. WEISS: Well, that’s not aspirational. That’s all. I had my say. I had my say. I don’t challenge. I think it sounds lovely and…
MR. O’BRIEN: So long as counsel has no…no problem with whatever eventual language about…
MR. WEISS: Ok.
MR. CALLI: I understand your concern about it turning to this place of some sort of general get together to assembly. I think the goal is that as effectively furniture that may drive and motivate people to do something with their lives one day and we can certainly work out the language as condition of approval that gets your comfort level where it needs to be.
MR. WEISS: Ok. You can certainly go to the lower level.
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, sure. Well much like many people a whom like myself don’t find any time to work out, I guess the gym might be the same, the aspirational to walk. So, I’m now on the A‐1, the lower lever, and to walk a perspective tenant down the staircase and get a glimpse of the gym as soon as I come out of the staircase, and just kind of look at it again, it’s just to show the gym in a general tour and one could walk through the equipment and walk back, take the elevator up or take the stairs back up and you know what’s remaining is you…I’m sure that you’ve all seen the men’s and women’s room with a shower in each, and a little bit of a sort of front lobby if you will with some…some counter top that…it may have towels, I wrote the word towels, I’m not sure if there’s any intention for towel service but a refrigerator maybe some water. We have to have drinking water by code on each level. And a fitness studio that’s about 300 square feet so a room where something could be done separate from the noise or televisions of the cardio area and no there’s no intention of any classes or teaching. However, we can set up a television in there and do some video. We could do workout to a video in that studio.
MR. WEISS: I think earlier there was a conversation about perhaps a resident wants to lead a class of yoga…I wouldn’t limit yourself to not allow that. I think a fitness room is a fitness room to be used for fitness. That’s ok.
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, that could happen. I was here when that comment was made.
MR. WEISS: Ok.
MR. O’BRIEN: So, as far as the interior exterior walk through, Larry and Members of the Board, that would be the end of the story, if you will. Those are the functions and the purposes of the spaces.
MR. WEISS: Ok, does anybody have any questions for Jim on the testimony?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Yes, just a quick question regarding…you know…they way I see the main level plan, the lower level…
MR. O’BRIEN: Lower level, ok.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Why is the door all the way in the far end to get in the fitness center?
MS. MOTT: I was just going to say that.
MR. O’BRIEN: This over here?
MS. MOTT: No the one in the back.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: In the back, you got to walk all the way around the building, all the way to the back to get in.
MR. O’BRIEN: Well that…that’s a great question and it needs to be remote. We think of that as the exit. That’s sort of the one of two exits upon the floor that should be separated as much as possible. The true day to day entrance can be either one but we’re thinking that it’s the other one on your far right…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: On the right side?
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 22 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, on the far right. Here I’m pointing to it.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Ok.
MR. O’BRIEN: And that’s off of a bigger terrace and kind of closer to where the side wire…
MR. BUCZYNSKI: That’s…the main entrance there will be that one?
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, that’s what we believe.
MR. VAN NESS: Is it wheel chair accessible?
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, no step, no curb here. And just to reinforce prior our commentary while Steve Parker was talking was to be ramp access around so that however the sidewalks are graded they are going to be complaint with ADA ramping to get from parking this way. So whether you can use the elevator or come this way it will be ramping…
MR. NELSEN: Ok, when…how steep will that ramp be?
MR. O’BRIEN: Maximum 1 on 12 sections that don’t exceed very deep just following the code.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: I guess what was confusing was they thought Mr. Parker said to get into the fitness center you have to go the rear of the building and that’s not the case.
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, I walked in when some of that was being discussed and let’s just air it out. You can get to the fitness center…you know…from an upper level and take the elevator down.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: You can?
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, you can.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: We were just thinking, why can’t you come in…up a level and take the elevator…when it’s opened?
MR. O’BRIEN: Right. So, yes, I would say sometimes you can do that and in order to assure 24/7 accessible access the sidewalk needs to be accessible.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Exactly, ok, thank you.
MR. WEISS: Jim, you haven’t addressed and maybe there won’t be but will there be any signage on the building? Will there be any signs that introduce this building as a fitness center or as the entrance?
MR. O’BRIEN: Not necessarily on the building and I’m not going to be an expert in the exterior signage ordinance…not today an expert on it. So, I say that caveat in that if on the building without needing signage approval there’s a small sign that might say “Leasing” on the wall or the leasing door and “Property Management” by property door. That could be useful. We haven’t designed directional signage yet. In addition to that, the owners would like signage…you know…signage low, signage that means the ordinance is out on the grass or the sidewalk that would say something like “Leasing, Fitness, Property Management” to direct you towards that.
MR. PARKER: Yes, effectively directional signage.
MR. O’BRIEN: Directional signage.
MR. WEISS: Should we, Gene, should we see some detail on signage?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: Well I guess if they are going to submit a separate signage permit, Catherine, correct?
MS. NATAFALUSY: Yes, they should submit a permit…
MR. O’BRIEN: Yes, that’s the idea just to make separate. So I want to be honest and say that I would imagine they want some of that. But no, we have not been hired to design or… PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 23 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. BUCZYNSKI: As long as the signage complies with the ordinance…
MR. PARKER: Of course.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: …they won’t come back.
MR. WEISS: So, Larry, you don’t think there’s any sign to be attached to the building that says “Fitness Center”?
MR. CALLI: No, as of right now, it’s what Jim said. It might be an ID placard that you might see at a doctor’s office…you know…Dr. Smith this way…you know…Dr. Regan that way and directional signage but it hasn’t been spec’d out yet.
MR. WEISS: Ok, so plans will ultimately be submitted for what the signs are.
MR. CALLI: And if it’s bigger than what’s allowed…you know..like I’ve said, you’ll see us again.
MR. WEISS: Ok, anybody else have any questions for Jim? Gene?
MR. BUCZYNSKI: No.
MR. WEISS: Let me open it to the public. If anybody from the public has any questions for Mr. O’Brien based on the testimony he delivered tonight, and seeing none from the audience, I will close it to the audience. Anything else, Jim?
MR. O’BRIEN: No, thank you, I appreciate the time.
MR. WEISS: Ok, thank you. Larry?
MR. CALLI: Thanks, Jim. I just want to thank the board for hearing us tonight. I know that this time of year is real tough to get a quorum and all you folks were here and so I do appreciate your time. I know the applicant does. I wish this weren’t somewhat clouded by an on‐going issue on the property because this really truly is a betterment of this property. I know the board understands what we are doing here. I think it’s a nice accessory improvement. I wish more property owners would do this with their property as opposed to just sort of just letting them sit idle in many respect so it’s a better and more intense version of what this board saw about six years ago. I think it’s going to look pretty sharp. We hope to work out that other issue separately that’s before the township. And again I just want to thank you all for your time and hearing this case.
MR. WEISS: Thank you, anybody have any comments? We have a list going here with some conditions.
MR. EVELAND: Yes, we do. Would you like me to go through them?
MR. WEISS: Let’s review some of these conditions.
MR. EVELAND: Alright. One of the conditions was we had some comments about revising the plans in accordance with the engineer’s comments. We made notes on those. Part of that also was going to be to revise the plans for trash container and that would include an enclosure and obviously I and Mr. Kelly are going to work on language in terms of conditioning that on a trash removal system on whatever or settled in the ongoing matters before the township. There’s going to be a waiver for parking of one spot and there’s going to be two handicapped spaces there’s going to be also adjust where the grade at the sidewalk to the fitness center for the ADA revision there.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: One ADA space to be relocated.
MR. EVELAND: Yes, and ADA space to be relocated closest to the sidewalk, screening around the HVAC pad that was 6.6 in Mr. McGroarty’s report. You also revised to address the foot candle distribution on the plans, Department of Health memo, no vending or sale of food and beverages.
MR. WEISS: I don’t know if that was a condition. I thought…
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 24 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MR. EVELAND: Well, it was a representation, so whatever you guys want to do.
MR. WEISS: I think we should take that out because if they chose to do it, they are certainly entitled as long as it’s a…
MR. CALLI: Yes, I think that comes out because if it’s a condition we have to come back into amend it then so I think the intent is that there not be any vending now but it there were, the intent is to obviously comply with the Health Department which I think is a submission of a…of a cut sheet of the equipment and stuff like that…
MR. EVELAND: Ok, that’s fine.
MR. CALLI: Thank you.
MR. EVELAND: And then also in the leasing and management area, it’s not going to be used for gatherings, parties, rentals, or congregational type of events. Signage approval complies with the ordinance.
MR. BUCZYNSKI: The parking lot to be expanded to provide 16 spaces…
MR. EVELAND: Yes, ok, those are the ones that I have, Mr. Chairman. Is there anything…
MR. WEISS: No, I just obviously just the ones that are in Gene’s report are pretty much there, we can come right off the report, talking about the approval from the outside agencies that should be noted in the resolution that this so pass…let me just read you Chuck’s…I think you handled Chuck’s comments as well. I think maybe you just make a note about the side…the tree…what does the applicant attempt to save the tree by moving the sidewalk.
MR. EVELAND: Ok, 6.8, yes.
MR. WEISS: Right and that was 6.8, in overlooking the township Department of Health that was addressed in Chuck and Gene’s report so that’s all I have. So those conditions being read…you want to have a conversation about it, if not, I will certainly look for someone to make a motion on this application.
MR. NELSEN: I’ll make a motion.
MR. WEISS: And that motion is?
MR. NELSEN: To accept PB 16‐24…
MR. FLEISCHNER: With the?
MR. NELSEN: With all the provisions mentioned.
MR. WEISS: Alright, thank you, Dan. Second?
MR. BATSCH: I second.
MR. WEISS: John, thank you on the second. Is there any comment, any conversation? I actually have something, a couple of things to say. I really applaud these gentlemen. I think Larry did a great job making it simple. Jim, I think your…inaudible..is great and…you know…Steve the engineer, you really simplified something that’s really quite simple. So, my comments, I feel bad making these comments because what I’m about to say doesn’t really have anything to do with you but, I sit here as the Chairman and I’m fairly aware what goes on around the town and I’m to say I’m disgusted at the behavior of the applicant, all due respect, not the gentlemen in front of us tonight. How they handled the trash up at this facility is disgusting. And we’ve had to resort, and Catherine, you blew me away when you said there are 46 violations which tell me that this applicant has interest whatsoever in taking care of an emergency situation. And I’m calling it an emergency. I understand and I think Larry made it very clear. They are working on it. But when you are dealing with person’s livelihood, you’re talking about trash; you’re talking about a basic…a basic service for someone who is living in this facility and for this applicant to do absolutely nothing about it except wait for the court. My position is why should we give them anything else until they address the issue? And so as much as I think this is a wonderful plan, a beautiful building, there comes a point in my mind where I need to stop them and until they come to PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 25 DECEMBER 15, 2016 the table and address the major problem that exists today, I’m not voting for this application. I’m going to vote no. And I think we need to take a good look and this and kind of get tired of what’s going on with some of these applicants that just snub their nose at the township, figure the court will work it out or a system is better or maybe it’s cheaper to be fined then it is to provide dumpsters. And I do apologize because that’s just an opinion. So, I’ve had my say. I feel better saying it, all due respect, no cause of yours.
MR. CALLI: No, I understand that, Mr. Chairman.
MR. WEISS: So, if…
MR. SCHAECHTER: To add to that, I mean this is two weeks, you’ve had two applicants come in front of us with violations with things that shouldn’t be on their property or property not being taken care of. I think they’re sending the right message…
MR. CALLI: Can I ask that your counsel advise you…inaudible…I understand what you are saying, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that because if this was my town and I had to see that, I would have a problem too. So, I understand the passion with that issue. My concern here is just from a legal standpoint, it’s a site plan application with a bulk variance and a waiver. And the basis for denial would have to be that on the balance of the C‐2 criteria wasn’t satisfied and the waiver is not appropriately…appropriately established and I’m not sure that this is in my opinion a viable legal basis for a denial. I understand what you’re saying from a citizen standpoint and a member of this community, but from a Planning Board voting standpoint, I…think there’s a disconnect is the problem. I’m just concerned.
MR. WEISS: Hold on a second.
MR. CALLI: It concerns me from a voting standpoint.
MR. WEISS: I appreciate that.
MR. FASTERT : I know exactly where you are coming from, a question for Scott. You know…we go ahead and approve this, but do not schedule memorialization of this until this is resolved. Is that…I think that solves your issue, Howie, and they don’t have to come back.
MR. EVELAND: That could be done. We’d have to have consent with the time period within which we’d have to memorialize the resolution.
MR. CALLI: Which I would grant because I understand what you’re saying, Mr. Chairman. And what I’m saying is that there’s a basis for appeal on the denial for that reason. While I understand your reason, I think the nexus to this application is not there.
MR. EVELAND: ….and you have the right to make your case at the appropriate time.
MR. CALLI: Absolutely, and it’s not a threat of an appeal. I’m just saying…
MR. WEISS: I understand.
MR. CALLI: I think if I know my applicants going to go with that, we end up somewhere even worse than today. We would consent to an extension of time for this…memorialize the approval pending the outcome of the violations matter which might allay your concerns, Mr. Chairman. It might change your vote, it might not. But it might get us out of this weird…what I think is a problematic issue and basis for denial.
MR. EVELAND: I think that would be a viable basis for a compromise on it because I think since they have something pending it would address your concerns and your issues which…you know…with all due respect to counsel, I think it does relate to the application. There is an intensification of use on here, there’s no provision for trash removal, you’re intensifying how many people are going to be coming to this area and there’s been no provisions for it. So, but that being said, it is pending in Municipal Court which means there’s probably going to be a resolution of it. There is going to be some type of resolution because the property owner is not going to want to have violations here and they are going to want to come to a compromise with the town or something that’s going to be agreeable. I think by…we might even be able to pass the memorializing resolution depending on where they are with court right now before we even need the extension. But, it’s good that counsel has already given us the PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 26 DECEMBER 15, 2016 extension beyond the 45 days, I think it is…45 days for adoption memorializing resolution. And I think it’s a balance that addresses your concerns which I can understand also just like counsel said. I could understand my town and…you know…I’ve sat on Planning Boards too, not just as a lawyer, and I understand where you are coming from with that. So all in all I think it’s a good compromise and it also prevents any potential litigation.
MR. CALLI: Yes.
MR. NELSEN: I’d like to amend my motion to include that…the extension of the memorialization.
MR. WEISS: For how long?
MR. CALLI: For how long? Well that would be…
MR. EVELAND: I guess…
MR. CALLI: Pending the resolution of the municipal court matters or…
MR. EVELAND: Yes.
MR. CALLI: And actually I don’t even know if we need to amend the motion for that because counsel and I are going to…by correspondence say he’s going to give me…you know..the consent to extend the time period within which you have to do the memorializing resolution.
MR. EVELAND: Right, I’ll just give you consent with…what time to act which goes beyond the 45 days from this evening.
MR. CALLI: Yes, which goes beyond…that really…I don’t think you have to amend your motion.
MR. WEISS: Ok, compromise on the table. Anybody else have any comments? Catherine, roll call.
ROLL CALL: Joe Fleischner ‐ with the compromise, I’ll vote yes Brian Schaechter ‐ same, yes Henry Fastert ‐ yes Dan Nelsen ‐ yes Scott Van Ness ‐ no Kim Mott ‐ yes John Batsch ‐ yes Howie Weiss ‐ no
MR. WEISS: So, I had tremendous faith in my Planning Board, Larry. I know exactly what I was saying. I know exactly that was going to be your response. Obviously, when I vote no, it’s an approval anyway. So, I’m going to vote no and I certainly hope that they’ll share displeasure of this Planning Board with the applicant.
MR. CALLI: I certainly will.
MR. WEISS: And I do apologize for having you have to address my concerns because I do agree with you and believe you wholeheartedly that it’s not your doing.
MR. CALLI: I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman, that’s very kind of you to say and I do understand your concerns and I will relay them as I have been and like I said I’m sorry this is clouding the otherwise nice application.
MR. WEISS: I understand.
MR. CALLI: but…you know…there’s a concern in the community and I get it. I totally get it.
MR. WEISS: So, this application passes with vote of 6 to 2.
PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC MEETING 27 DECEMBER 15, 2016
MS. NATAFALUSY: Six to two.
MR. WEISS: Wonderful. Congratulations, gentlemen, enjoy the Holidays.
MR. CALLI: You too. Happy Holiday, folks.
INAUDIBLE
MR. WEISS: Ok, we’re going to jump back to the extension request and that applicant is not here. What is the best way to get them back to the…
MS. NATAFALUSY: I’ll send a letter to…that they did not show up and no action taken.
MR. WEISS: No action taken, no prejudice.
INAUDIBLE
MR. WEISS: You think he didn’t know that he had to be here?
MS. NATAFALUSY: I think he probably forgot.
MR. WEISS: This is a homeowner…
MS. NATAFALUSY: He’s a businessman; he’s trying to sell a piece of property.
MR. WEISS: Yes, I remember him. Let’s put it on the next agenda.
INAUDIBLE
MR. WEISS: So, we’ll try to do this January 19th, if it works for Mr. Cholish. Any other business, any other comments?
MR. VAN NESS: I want to say thank you for the great 12 years, I guess I’ve been on the board. This is my last official meeting. I’ll be retiring from the township in 2017. And going south forever.
LAUGHTER
MR. WEISS: Oakwood Village ran him out of town. Well, Scott, we valued, I certainly valued your expertise as you brought it from your perspective as a safety office it was…actually I’m not just saying it because I did urge the Mayor with your replacement to find somebody with similar background and whether we can officially make the comment or not, the Mayor will be appointing Carl Mase who had similar background. I think Scott’s backgro und…Scott’s experience will be extremely missed, so, Scott Van Ness prodigy coming to the Planning Board.
INAUDIBLE
MR. WEISS: Dan, is there something on your mind?
MR. NELSEN: No.
MR. WEISS: You look like you were ready to say something. Anything else? Ok, then we will then wish everyone a Happy Holiday and will make a motion to adjourn.
MR. VAN NESS: Motion to adjourn.
MR. WEISS: Scott, Henry, all in favor?
MR. FASTERT: Second.
ALL IN FAVOR (MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:28 PM) Transcribed by: Mary Strain, Secretary Planning Department