MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWNSHIP OF JACKSON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT June 20, 2012

Transcription

1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWNSHIP OF JACKSON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT June 20, 2012 The June 20, 2012 Jackson Township Board of Adjustment meeting was called to order by Chairman Barry Calogero at 7:00 p.m. with a salute to the flag by all present. Board Attorney Sean Gertner read the Open Public Meetings Act Statement. ROLL CALL: ABSENT: Stephen Costanzo Kevin DiGesu Dr. Sheldon Hofstein Joseph Schulman (Alt. #1) John Burrows (Alt. #2) Vincent Sgro John Suttles Secretary Peter Maher, Vice Chairman Barry Calogero - Chairman ALSO PRESENT: Board Attorney Sean Gertner, Evan Hill, Board Engineer, Anna Wainright, Board Planner, Mark Kataryniak, Traffic Engineer, Jeffrey Purpuro, Zoning Officer, Stephen McCrystal, Court Reporter, and Janice Kisty, Zoning Board Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS Recording Secretary Janice Kisty announced the following resolutions and those eligible to vote: Bruce & Cecilio Almodovar Block 14101, Lot 4, 246 New Central Avenue - Zone R-1 Granting a variance to construct a 6 solid fence. Motion to approve by SUTTLES/Schulman. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Hofstein, Schulman, Suttles, Maher Qader Rafiqi Block 23001, Lot Ridge Avenue Zone RD-1 Granting a variance to construct a fence in his front yard Motion to approve by SUTTLES/Hofstein. YES: Costanzo, Hofstein, Suttles, Calogero Peter and Corrine Rickerd Block 18503, Lot 41 4 Hidden Hollow Court- Zone PV Granting a variance for a solid fence in the front yard Maria & Ioannis Gkionis Block 5804, Lot 38-6 Deer Lane Zone R-15 Granting approval of a variance to construct a single story addition to the principal structure Amy Stacey Block 5803, Lot Sunnywoods Lane Zone R-20 Granting a variance to construct a solid fence and shed Andrew and Vivelo Davis Block 7703, Lot 3 31 Adelphia Drive Zone R-9 Granting approval of variances to allow the installation of an above ground swimming pool and required accessories Motion to approve the foregoing resolutions by DiGESU/Maher. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Hofstein, Suttles, Maher, Calogero Steven & Rebecca Hersker Block 5102, Lot Victoria Circle Zone R-20 Granting a variance to construct a 6 solid fence on their corner lot Motion to approve by HOFSTEIN/Maher. YES: Costanzo, Hofstein, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF June 6, 2012 Motion to approve by DiGESU/Maher. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Hofstein, Schulman, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS Motion to approve a voucher in the amount of $ for the Recording Secretary and $ for McCrystal Reporting for this evening's meeting by MAHER/Hofstein. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Hofstein, Schulman, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. ANNOUNCEMENT Mr. Gertner the Board professionals for turning around the minutes so quickly during the minimized amount of time between meetings, enabling him to do the seven resolutions so quickly. The Board professionals were sworn and their positions announced for the public. BOARD MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION - none APPLICATIONS 1. Ronald Crudo, Block 14401, Lot 3.01, 2 Blue Heron Drive, Zone R1 Ronald Crudo was sworn. He is asking for a variance for a shed on his corner lot, 30 from property line, 60 required. Mr. Calogero asked if there is any other location, and Mr. Crudo said he will have a pool soon, and did not want the shed in the middle of the yard. Ms. Wainright asked if any tree removal, noting the wooded lot, and was told not at

2 Page 2 of 8 - Zoning Board Minutes of June 20, 2012 present, but when the pool is installed, trees would come down. Ms. Wainright said trees would shield the view of the shed; Mr. Crudo said there is a fence. Mr. Purpuro clarified the fence was approved by this Board for a previous owner. Public portion opened; no one came forward; public portion closed Mr. Costanzo asked if the permit is issued for the pool and Mr. Crudo said no; it is two years out, but he will have the proper setbacks for the pool. Motion to approve by DiGESU/Hofstein. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Hofstein, Schulman, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. 2. Susan Pope, Block 7602, Lot 5, 1 Westminster Drive, Zone R-15 Susan Pope was sworn. She has a small corner lot and wants to utilize it better for play space and her pool. There are trees on the other side and one tree is almost into her house. Mr. Calogero said there is an older fence now, and Ms. Pope said it is in disrepair. She would like the new fence 3 from the sidewalk and there is no sight issue. Mr. Hill said this is an older subdivision, and no shade tree utility easement was required at the time. Ms. Pope said the fence line has been marked, and she has to be within 18 of the utilities. Mr. Hill said on newer subdivisions, the town requires a 6 wide easement, so utility companies can maintain if needed and 3 is tight; he would recommend 6 off the property line just in case they have to maintain it and that would also protect her. She asked if she could take the risk. Mr. Calogero said variances run with the land. Ms. Pope said if she sells, she would remove the fence. Mr. Hill said there are no sight issues. Mr. Costanzo asked if Certificate of Occupancy would be denied for a fence and was told no, not if the Board approves it. Mr. Calogero asked if she would accept the 6 setback and she said it would look funny. Public portion opened; no one came forward; public portion closed Dr. Hofstein suggested angling the fence and Ms. Pope said she is unable to do so due to underground wires. Mr. Hill said that is why 6 is required; it doesn t exist here now. Ms. Pope said 6 would be awkward. She would remove at her expense. Mr. Suttles asked what side this is on and Mr. Hill said along Buckingham. Mr. Costanzo asked the distance of the utility box to the fence and that was unknown. It was hard to tell where the lines would come from. Mr. Schulman suggested an angled fence near the utility box to give the utility company room to work. Mr. Hill said boxes are usually a junction, and they would have to dig more, which would be difficult. You can t get equipment into a 3 spot. Between back of sidewalk and fence, he recommends 6 consistent with today s requirements. Mr. Calogero said the Board professionals say 6, and she needs 30. The Board would like to see 6. Motion to approve the fence with a 6' setback from the sidewalk on Buckingham by DiGESU/Hofstein. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Hofstein, Schulman, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. 3. Todd & Linda Zeek, Block 2802, Lot 4, 654 Anderson Road, Zone R-3 Todd Zeek was sworn. He lives on a corner property and requests a variance for a 12 x 28 shed with variances for setback. His house is now over his setback, 80 instead of 60, and an existing shed needs a variance. He does work on small engines. The shed is for storage and stage two will be to operate a small business. It started with neighbors, and the business is growing. Mr. Hill said this application is for the placement of shed, and had no concerns. Mr. Costanzo said Mr. Zeek mentioned a business, and he is concerned. Mr. Calogero said that is not a concern for this application. Mr. Costanzo said the applicant made testimony. Mr. Calogero noted this is not for commercial purposes at this moment. Mr. Gertner asked if there would be electricity, and Mr. Zeek said not at this time, and no heat. Public portion opened; no one came forward; public portion closed Mr. Schulman asked if the ordinance requires anchoring of the shed and Mr. Hill said that is a building code issue. Mr. Schulman asked how it would be anchored and Mr. Purpuro said it would need a footing. Setback was noted to be 45' from the front property line and 5 from the side property line, per Mr. Purpuro. Motion to approve by DiGESU/Suttles. YES: DiGesu, Hofstein, Schulman, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. No: Costanzo. 4. D & S Motors, Maintenance and Repair LLC/Denise Thiel, Block 503, Lot 1, 335 Bismark Road, Zone LM Jeff McWeeney of King Kitrick represented this applicant. He appeared at a prior meeting with this client for another site. There was a request to secure documents from the Condo association and they found the property was foreclosed on, so they could not move forward. They found this location instead, which they believe is better suited and addresses some of the Board s prior concerns on the other site. Steven Thiel, applicant, was sworn. Denise Thiel, his wife, is also an applicant. Mr. McWeeney said this is a small business and this site is located on a dead end road off Diamond Road. It has a paved parking lot, and they feel this is a good location. One owner owns the building, separated into 4 units. There is no association. Other businesses include a false teeth business, vintage Corvettes, and another empty unit. He chose the smaller unit, which has a 12 garage door, two small metal doors, an office, painted parking spots, is lit and maintained. The interior is warehouse space with a high ceiling, cement floor, no drain, bathroom with drain in the floor. He reviewed the professionals' review letters. In the 6/11/12 report from R&V for chemicals, he calls Safety Clean and they recycle all chemicals safety. There are no drainage pits. A hydraulic lift is floor mounted on top of cement, with a 4-gallon, self-contained reservoir. Small engine repairs are seasonal, and include snow blowers, lawn mowers, jet skis, auto diagnostic and repair. The Corvette business does complete restoration. There is a pull up door for equipment to go in and out. It is paved with six parking spaces, with room for more, if needed. No gas pumps are proposed, no storage of junk vehicles; none are there now. Travel on a dead end road, there is a sign, a driveway in, parking on 3 sides, another way out to the back. It backs up to Route 195. There is one residential house on the road; he did not believe it would be a problem as there are other businesses. He proposes no changes to the building. In the 6/15/12 report from Innovative Engineering, there is on site septic for the bathroom, and all other concerns were addressed.

3 Page 3 of 8 - Zoning Board Minutes of June 20, 2012 Ms. Wainright felt this application improved over the prior one and questions from the prior application seem to be addressed. Mr. Hill recommended a variance plan in lieu of site plan. He recommended waiver of site plan, no additional site improvements are proposed; however, the variance plan is needed to memorialize on a plan what was testified to. It is generally submitted during resolution compliance. The surveyor who prepared the plan is present this evening and Mr. Hill explained he would like to see the survey to be called a variance plan and identify parking, and notes of no outdoor storage. Mr. Calogero asked the Board to consider Mr. Hill's comments. Dr. Hofstein asked about signage. Mr. McWeeney said there is a sign on the property, approved at time of building and no new sign is proposed. Dr. Hofstein asked about the for sale sign and Mr. Thiel said that is for property across the street. Mr. Calogero asked the hours of operation and was told 7 a.m. To 6 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7 a.m. To 1 p.m. On Saturday. Public portion opened; no one came forward; public portion closed Motion to approve by COSTANZO/Maher, with a variance plan to be provided. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Hofstein, Schulman, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. Recess at 7:44 p.m. reconvened at 7:50 p.m. 5. Rosario Pollina, Block 11701, Lot 8, 495 W. Veterans Highway, Zone PVC-2 Mr. DiGesu stepped down; Mr. Burrows sitting for this application Robert Rothstein represented the applicant with Graham MacFarlane of PDS, engineer and planner, and Scott Kennel of McDonough and Rea as Traffic engineer, were sworn and their credentials accepted. Mr. Rothstein said they received the use variance previously and tonight is for Preliminary and Final site plan for an existing bank building, and preliminary approval for the rest of the project as they are unsure what will be going into it. Mr. MacFarlane marked the site plan A-1, 6/20/12. It shows a proposal for a 34,000 square foot shopping center located on an existing bank building site and will be a restaurant. Also, there will be two smaller buildings toward the front of the property and two larger buildings located to the rear, a septic on the left hand side, 200 parking spaces with 209 required, and storm water facilities. Changes were made to this plan. The westerly driveway was shifted further from the property line for a buffer with lot 7, and some existing vegetation will remain. A bank with drive thru lanes is proposed on a pad site. They are seeking Preliminary and Final approval for the new restaurant and preliminary for the new buildings; there are no tenants yet. They will come back for final as tenants are signed. Two rear buildings show retail office space and restaurants. The site will contain permitted uses. The Phase 1 site plan was submitted to the Board and marked A-2, 6/20/12, sheet two of the set. It shows what will be constructed in Phase 1, with the bank to be converted to a restaurant and 900 square feet added to it. It shows drive circulation; the existing driveway to be removed and a new driveway constructed nearer to the building, 40 parking spaces, 54 required, which they feel is adequate. A new plan was submitted for signage and marked A-3, 6/20/12, handed out to the Board and professionals. A-1 erroneously showed a ground sign and free standing sign; they now want a free standing sign in an island in the driveway, and a ground mounted, 4' high by 7.5' deep sign near the west driveway, 5 off the property line for adequate (400') visibility for approaching motorists, 30 required and needs a variance. They wish to erect a free standing 16' sign in the island and 16 deep, it, too needs a variance. The existing sign is about 10 high, 8 deep. There will also be building-mounted signs. Mr. Hill had significant issues with the placement of the sign in the island, stating they need mountable curb and the sign will be a barrier approaching the stop bar. He feels there is adequate space on site to have it without safety issues. Mr. Kataryniak agreed, adding the island is narrow and susceptible to impact. Mr. MacFarlane was agreeable to locate the sign to the east of the island. It is not proposed for Phase 1 and is required for Phase 2. will place in same location as ground sign on original plan. Mr. Hill said from location standpoint, would prefer to see sign where ground sign was, are proposing free standing sign. MacFarlane said at 30 does not offer visibility. They feel it is important to have the sign as close t the main driveway as possible and would like the freestanding sign where the ground sign was proposed on the original plans. Mr. Hill said that was 10 off the property line, 35 from edge of pavement and that is reasonable; Mr. Kataryniak agreed. Mr. Gertner asked if they agree the signage is appropriate with the type of development. Mr. Hill said it is not uncommon for multi tenant signs for a shopping center, but whether it is too large or small is up to the Board. Ms. Wainright said there would be multiple signs if the property was subdivided. Mr. MacFarlane said 30 square feet is not enough for multi tenants. The sign is backlit; no LED. A ground sign is preferable to a freestanding sign. Ms. Wainright asked the distance from the ground and Mr. MacFarlane said 4, where it is usually 7, but it isn t in the sight angle, so everyone is agreeable. Ms. Wainright said Phase 1 shows restaurant/retail and asked what that means. Mr. MacFarlane said both are proposed. Mr. Kataryniak asked if retail is independent of the restaurant. If complementary to the restaurant use, there would be different parking qualifications. Scott Kennel, Traffic Engineer, prepared the traffic study dated 4/18/12, which includes an inventory of existing conditions, traffic counts in March 2011 and focused on weekday and Saturday midday for accuracy. They counted 320 trips for weekday and 440 for Saturday. Mr. Calogero asked for the traffic counts for the bank that was there, and Mr. Kennel said daytime trips. Traffic projections added to the 10% growth rate gave fruit to their analysis of exiting movements to be C or better, Conor Road C or better and left turns and turns into Conor Road would operate at an A level of service. The westerly driveway is right turns in and right turns out. Traffic on Conor would be level C and no change. Phase 1, 54 spaces required, based on parking rate for restaurant and retail proposed. Mr. Purpuro asked how that was calculated and Mr. Kennel said the restaurant would be 2,400 square feet and retail space is 850 square feet, and the town ordinance is 1 space for 50 square feet for a restaurant. Usually in the restaurant business it is 1 space for 3 seats, conservatively, 1 for 2 seats. Mr. Kataryniak agreed other towns count the parking spaces for seat count. There are 44 seats in this restaurant and usually there is an add on 1:3 is common, 1:2 is conservative, then employee spaces, and 850 square feet of retail adds one space for 200 square feet. 22 spaces for the restaurant at a 1:2 ratio and x amount for retail. He asked for testimony on employee spaces; 40 spaces seems like a good amount of parking based on testimony tonight. Mr. Costanzo asked if the size of the spaces is regulated and Mr.

4 Page 4 of 8 - Zoning Board Minutes of June 20, 2012 Kataryniak said 9 x 18 spaces are required. Dr. Hofstein asked the number of handicap spaces and was told 2 for Phase one; two are on the plan, inclusive of the 40 spaces provided. Mr. Kataryniak said 11 of the spaces are gravel and not paved, which he was comfortable with, and this fits in with Phase 2 so they don t have to rip it up. They could add more parking easily if needed. Mr. Hill suggested to green bank the spaces and build them if there is a compliance issue; they are 14 spaces short by ordinance. Dr. Hofstein asked if there is a bar or lounge in this restaurant and was told no; it might be a BYOB, per Mr. Rothstein. Mr. Kataryniak suggested a restriction of 44 seats in the restaurant and no bar or lounge areas, as it would affect parking. Mr. Hill said parking for Phase 2 will not disturb the operation of Phase 1. Details on the new submission are adequate to meet the requirements for preliminary and final site plan. Ms. Wainright asked for testimony for green bank parking for phase 2. Mr. Kataryniak also asked for additional details on removal of existing driveway aprons, curbing full height along West Veterans and remove curb cuts. Speaking of Phase 2, 209 parking spaces are required and 200 provided. 6 spaces per 1,000 square feet is required and the industry standard is 4.5/1,000, or 160 spaces. They are providing 5.8/ 1,000 square feet and in his opinion, what is shown now with banked spaces would be more than enough to support the center. Mr. Calogero said since they don t know all the uses, what about parking. Mr. Kataryniak suggested waiting to Final for Phase 2 parking. Green bank parking along the western drive aisle is suggested as a precursor to final site plan. The applicant agreed. Mr. Kennel reviewed circulation for large based wheeled vehicles and positive circulation. The driveway design to was sent to the Ocean County Planning Board and is subject to their approval. Mr. Hill said for Phase 2, he met with the applicant s engineer, and the westernmost driveway is now delivery only, occurring earlier in the day or later in the day, which he thought was positive for this application. The bank at pad site helps the internal circulation better than original plan. Additional tweaking needs to be done. Phase 1 septic and storm water management, there is an existing septic, and they need approvals from Ocean County Health Department and Pinelands to continue to use the septic. For storm water management, they look at net increase in impervious coverage, and they helped minimize the net increase by using gravel parking, giving a slight increase, but they have to comply with Pinelands standards for storm water management. Mr. Kataryniak concurred improvements are good; there are some outstanding issues that the applicant should look at the internal drive aisle, and modify for safety for final. For Phase 1, circulation and layout, one other variance is required and would be eliminated with the Phase 2 drive aisle. This is a temporary situation. Ms. Wainright agreed with the redesigned plan, but she was concerned with testimony that these are not the ultimate uses, and she would prefer to hear what uses are going in there, otherwise she is satisfied. Public portion opened John Boyle, 1 Conor Road, sworn. He is concerned with the configuration and Conor Road is main thoroughfare into the Phase 2 property. Mr. Hill said the entrance to the shopping center aligns with the intersection of Conor Road. Mr. Boyle is concerned with increased traffic on his road. Kids play in the street now and he is concerned with multiple uses, and cars coming from Route 571 through his street. Mr. Hill clarified the traffic pattern he was concerned with. Mr. Boyle felt a 2,400 square foot restaurant could handle 70 seats. Mr. Calogero said 44 seats would be a requirement in the resolution. Dan Goncharoff, 500 West Veterans Highway, sworn. He reiterated the traffic issues. Shortcut traffic is not an issue now, because there is no business between Conor Road and Thomson Bridge Road now, and while the incentive isn t there now, it might be, with this shopping center. The need for a sign is dramatically out of scope with PVC-2 zoning. This is a large sign and there is no justification presented to allow it. Zoning regulations don t allow the large sign. Four smaller signs would be better in the area; the larger sign is better in a commercially zoned area. Mr. Costanzo said they would be allowed four, 30 square foot signs. Mr. Goncharoff wanted the rules followed. Ms. Wainright said they would be allowed 4 individual everything, but this is already granted a use variance for a shopping center that needs a legible sign so people don t make mistakes and pass the site. The one larger sign is preferable. Mr. Hill agreed that would discourage people from entering Conor Road to turn around. Mr. Goncharoff just wanted the rules to be followed. Mr. Hill said they are proposing a multi-tenant freestanding sign where the ground sign was proposed. Mr. MacFarlane said they need a 30 setback and they are asking 10. Dr. Hofstein asked where the separate signs would be; Mr. Gertner said the 4 signs were brought up to help the public understand that this proposal could have been subdivided to four separate lots and developed separately. The use variance helps to make a better argument for one larger sign. Mr. Gertner asked what could be done to make the sign more amenable. Mr. Hill asked Mr. MacFarlane for the hardship from 30 and he said it would not provide adequate visibility for the motorists, and landscaping would be in the way. Mr. Calogero asked if they would compromise to 20 and Mr. MacFarlane still didn t think that would be good. Mr. Calogero said the Board would take it under advisement. Exhibit A-4 is architectural plans. Mr. MacFarlane showed the facility is designed for uniformity and is consistent with what they believe the town is seeking. Mr. Goncharoff said the uses are permitted, but in this zone, they should follow those rules in the zone. This area should have businesses for that zone and signs to go with it. John van Oostendorp, 19 Peach Tree Street was sworn. He is concerned with the size of the sign and the light that would emanate. Mr. MacFarlane said the timer would go off at 11 p.m. Mr. van Oostendorp asked if there would be signs on the buildings and Mr. MacFarlane said yes; the ordinance allows it. It is up to the Board if signs are turned off; Mr. Calogero said that would be at final. Mr. Gertner said that is because they don t know the uses yet. Mr. van Oostendorp said he works for a utility company and asked if the sign would interfere with overhead wires, and was told the sign is 35 off the road and away from the wires. Mr. van Oostendorp asked about the buffer and was told the western side is a road with a 5 buffer; Mr. MacFarlane said there is a 15 wide buffer of existing trees. Mr. Hill said the neighbor asked for a solid board on board fence and the area is already vegetated. They would green bank spaces there and build them, if necessary. The buffer could be more like if the spaces aren t built. Mr. van Oostendorp was concerned with storm water runoff and that the property would flood. Water runs off a footpath now; it is a swamp back there. Mr. Hill did not observe that, but when they construct buildings and pave, they have to manage the storm water with basins and underground piping. The Town and the Pinelands must review it; they are very strict. Mr. van Oostendorp had an issue with the lighting from the signs. Mr. Calogero asked if he would be satisfied that the lights turn off at 11 p.m. and he said yes; but he is not happy about it. Mr. Hill mentioned parking area lights. Mr. MacFarlane said those will be on timers as well and they would provide details at final, because some lights would remain on for security. Mr. van Oostendorp was concerned with backlit signs and how bright they would be and if the

5 Page 5 of 8 - Zoning Board Minutes of June 20, 2012 light would shine into bedrooms. Dr. Hofstein asked if storm water control is adequate for Phase 1 and Mr. Hill replied yes; they have to satisfy the Pinelands requirements. Aldino Sprauve, 2 Pole Brook Court was sworn. He is concerned with traffic and how the new restaurant will impact homeowners on Conor Road. Things are moving with the economy; they wouldn t be building otherwise. Conor Road is a cut through; there is a high volume of traffic. The restaurant and bank will increase the traffic, and he thinks they are low-balling the numbers. In the two years he has been here, he has seen an increase in the traffic. Conor Road will be impacted. Mr. Calogero said the use variance is granted; this is for site plan approval. Concerns about the lights and parking should be addressed. Mr. Calogero also said the impact on the neighborhood is a 100% concern. Mr. Sprauve did not receive prior notice for the use variance and he is upset about it. He is concerned with traffic. Brenda Burke, 14 Conor Road, was sworn. Traffic through Conor Road concerns her; this is the first time she heard about it. She respects the fact of open business, but something should be done about the traffic. She lives on the curve and had an accident. The residents are concerned with the traffic. Mr. Calogero asked Mr. Kataryniak for alternate possibilities. Mr. Kataryniak said it is safer to align the intersections than to offset them, because they would have to be offset by 150. There is a tendency to cut through but to make a left turn onto Conor Road from Route 571 where a light exists, the light is safer, and most people would use the light rather than cut through a residential neighborhood. You have to assume people obey the law. Imposing no left turn onto Conor Road would inconvenience the residents who live there. There would be discussion with the Township engineer, Police and County. Mr. Schulman asked if they could install speed humps on Conor Road and Mr. Hill couldn t say that an applicant would do that. The Town Council could be petitioned, but the Board can t impose that. Susan Devrous, 515 West Veterans Highway, was sworn. Giving historical information, her home was built in 1932, and while it is non-conforming, it was here first. She tried to sell it as a commercial property in 2006 and had no buyers. The residents in this area want to be treated as residential homeowners. She is opposed to the shopping center as it will negatively impact her life. She is opposed to the removal of mature, healthy trees. Her property is on the western side, with parking close to her property line. She is concerned with the early morning deliveries next to her property line. She asked for a buffer as people could see her back yard and pool; she has an 18-year-old daughter. She is concerned that water will drain on her property. She has no wet basement now and is concerned with the impact on her home; her septic might be impacted. Leaving the mature trees would be better for drainage. What would be her recourse? She is concerned the water supply would be adequate. What happens if the property is sold? She is not opposed to the concept of commercial property as she will probably be a customer, but she is opposed to Phase 2, noise from delivery, construction and customers. They should be required to have required setbacks and environmental impacts. Mr. Rothstein took her comments under advisement. A fence is proposed along her common property line and a buffer of trees is provided. Don Allen, 12 Conor Road, was sworn. He agreed with Ms. Devrous comments for the applicant to consider the neighborhood. There are a lot of kids on the street; it is quiet. They want the entrance to the shopping center to be moved. Conor Road is a cut through now. Mr. Calogero asked what his feelings are for Phase 1. Mr. Allen was concerned with crime and the effect on their homes. Crime could be increased and he is concerned with the traffic pattern. Public portion closed Mr. Rothstein was concerned with Phase 1, and they are asking for final approval. Most of the residents comments concern the existing center. He thinks traffic will be improved on Conor Road; people won t want to cut across. It will be easier for traffic to go to the traffic light. They are attuned to Ms. Devrous comments and giving her what she asked for [the board-on-board fence and mature trees not to be removed]. Mr. Sprauve wasn t notified because he is outside the 200 and he might be here for the next application. Storm water must be processed to stay on site. Mr. Gertner felt it might be helpful to determine what variances are needed for Phase 2, and was told signage as well as parking spaces [209 required, 200 provided, 23 green banked]. Mr. Gertner felt if Phase 2 is approved for Preliminary, then they would be bound by it. Mr. MacFarlane did not feel Conor Road would be a cut through. Mr. Calogero asked Mr. Kataryniak if there is any merit to moving the entrance. Mr. Maher didn t disagree with getting to the site, but leaving the site, they might cut through. Mr. Kataryniak said if the choice is a slight offset or lining it up, to line it up, or construct it 150 away, and then the internal circulation would have to be reviewed. Mr. Calogero asked if that could be done. Mr. Kataryniak felt there are two issues, cut thru and light intrusion from headlights, parking lots and signage. They should re-evaluate the landscaping plan. Mr. Suttles asked relocating the entrance will reduce the impact on the surrounding area. Mr. Kataryniak felt the signage must be placed near the driveway. There is no additional impact with offsetting the driveway. Mr. Rothstein asked for preliminary on Section 2 and discussion of relocating the driveway. He doesn t know what Ocean County Engineering would require. He would change it out of respect for the residents. Mr. Gertner asked the hours for the parking lot lights for Phase 1; Mr. MacFarlane said 11 p.m. The Board is voting on Preliminary and Final for Phase 1 restaurant and retail, and Preliminary for Phase 2 with different plans to accommodate the residents on the entrance. Mr. Gertner noted conditions on Phase 2 as an alternative plan or a basis why the plan would not work [possibly the County saying no], additional landscaping, lighting, more information needed for variance for 200 parking spaces where 209 is required, and Mr. Kataryniak asked for more detail on additional 14 green banked spaces for Phase 1, and he recommends the Board restrict lighting and signage for Phase 1, and better landscaping to diffuse headlights for properties across the street. The applicant agreed. Mr. Calogero said those conditions were mostly to consider the residents. Dr. Hofstein asked if they should break it up to two votes. Mr. Calogero felt this way is better so they come back with consideration for the residents. Mr. Burrows asked if turning movements could be controlled to right and left turn only out of the shopping center, to prohibit cars from going straight across to Conor Road.

6 Page 6 of 8 - Zoning Board Minutes of June 20, 2012 Motion to approve Preliminary and Final for Phase 1, based on recommendations of the Board experts, and Preliminary for Phase 2, that the applicant heed the concerns of the residents for final by SCHULMAN/Hofstein. YES: Costanzo, Hofstein, Schulman, Burrows, Suttles, Maher, Calogero. Dr. Hofstein thanked the residents for the way they handled their concerns during the testimony, Mr. Suttles was not completely comfortable with Phase 2, Mr. Maher agreed with Dr. Hofstein and thanked the applicant for speaking with the residents, Mr. Calogero felt they were almost there, hopefully will satisfy most of the residents concerns; not everyone is happy, but this is better that what was originally proposed. Recess at 9:47 p.m.; reconvened at 9:55 p.m. 6. Jennifer Steinman, Block 11602, Lot 19, 520 W. Veterans Highway, Zone NC Ray Shea represented the applicant along with Graham MacFarlane of PDS, planner, Jennifer Steinman, applicant, and Ron Salvatore 2045 Sprint Blvd, Apopka, Florida, who were sworn. The application is for a use variance and waiver of site plan. The site is currently the Cassville Post Office; Ms. Steinman is contract purchaser to create a pet crematorium, the first in Jackson and Ocean County. Wall Township recently approved the 5 th pet crematorium in the State. The pet crematorium will have memorial services as well, offer family grieving areas and memorial objects. It is not very different from human services for people who have lost their pets and get referrals from the veterinarian for disposal of the pet. Mr. MacFarlane marked the aerial map as A-1, 6/20/12; the map is dated 6/20/12. A-2 is the Use Variance Plan. A-1 shows the existing site and surrounding area. A-2 shows the proposed plan. The existing building does not conform for setback. They are seeking approval for one sign located in front of existing building, 10 from the property line; the ground sign in accordance of the zone. Mr. Shea stated there is no inherent use for crematoriums or funeral homes, but it is for the public good. Mr. MacFarlane discussed goals and objectives of the township Master Plan and stated this is providing economic development, is well suited to the area, considers intensity and traffic generation. It furthers the purposes of zoning in MLUL, State Statute 40:55D-2. Mr. MacFarlane read from that section of MLUL. The building is currently occupied by a public agency and no outside construction is proposed. Because this application advances one or more purposes of zoning, the Board can grant the special reasons variance. Other permitted uses in the Neighborhood Commercial zone were named from the ordinance, this activity four employees, there is minimal traffic, and is a less intense use of the post office facility and other permitted uses in the zone. There is more than ample parking. Perhaps 6-8 people would attend services, parking spaces might be needed, and there are 21 on site. There is security fencing and lighting to the rear. The floodlights on the building will be removed. They will construct a trash enclosure and a 30 square foot ground sign, 6 high in front of the building. Reviewing the Board engineer s letter (Innovative Engineering), a handicap ramp to be provided if required by building code. The sidewalk is in disrepair and would be fixed; the parking lot would be re-striped and the fire lane identified. The applicant agreed to submit the plan to the Fire Official and Police for approval. Mr. Hill asked about site lighting; there is one pole on the left side to be shown on the plan. Hours of operation are 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday to Saturday. Mr. Hill said all of his other comments were addressed. Reviewing the Board planner s letter (R&V), parking was addressed. Ms. Wainright asked if there would be burials on site and was told no; this is a funeral home and crematorium services. Addressing smoke, smell and noise, they need a DEP permit. No hazardous material to be stored on site. Interior modifications will be made. Ms. Wainright wanted testimony from the applicant for what the use would be. Mr. MacFarlane said they can satisfy zoning, and more testimony would be given from the other witnesses. Jennifer Steinman s resume was introduced as A-3. Ron Salvatore of Florida testified. He is with Matthews Cremation, a division of Matthews International, a manufacturer of crematory equipment since the 1950s and is recognized worldwide. There are 3,000 human and pet cremation services worldwide, 35 in New Jersey. Pet units are more prevalent. He has been with his Company for 25 years. He is a trainer and operator, and is qualified as an expert. Under DEP regulations, they must approve an application prior to construction. It takes days to review an application that the equipment complies and there have been no prior issues with board-issued approvals. They have had no problems; their track record is clean. Pet cremation is a retail business. Vets prolong the animals lives as long as possible. When the pet passes, the grief is borne by the owners. Ms. Steinman is a trained professional to help them through the process, similar to a funeral home director. The cremation unit is the same as one for a human, but it is smaller for pets. Mr. Calogero asked how they mitigate the smoke. Mr. Salvatore said they have combustion engineering; they re-burn the gas prior to expelling it into the air and there is no odor. Mr. Schulman noted his experience with an afterburner for a barbeque business, and it eliminates smoke and odors. Mr. Maher said there is a crematorium in Toms River and the seven lot subdivision across the street won t sell because it smells like roast beef around 1:00 p.m. Mr. Salvatore said that is a DEP issue, and they have the right to make specific conditions. They usually allow 10% but the typical state standard is 1 30%; they are at zero percent. It is complete combustion. They have to be able to operate without creating an impact to the surrounding area. Technology minimizes the consumption of the fuel. Ms. Wainright asked what the life expectancy of the equipment is and was told and years, if properly maintained. There is no visible smoke and no odor. The units is maintained every 2 years. Ms. Wainright said if it is similar to a use allowed in the zone, then there is no negative side to this. The Master Plan could not have anticipated this; they are looking for no negative impact. Applicant Jennifer Steinman is a licensed and certified funeral director; she holds several degrees. It is her passion to help those grieving loss. She is a Jackson resident and wants to help the community in not just pet loss, she is certified in all loss. The business is to be a place of peace, quiet and tranquility. She plans to offer memorial retail, pet urns, and a viewing room if people want to view their pet being cremated. There will be a visitation room for memorial services. She wants to maintain peace with her neighbors; she moved here a year ago and wants to stay. Mr.

7 Page 7 of 8 - Zoning Board Minutes of June 20, 2012 Calogero asked if hers is a private business or if she will work with County or animal facilities. She had asked what happens to road kill and was told it goes to the landfill. Mr. Calogero asked if there is a limit on machine use and Mr. Salvatore said it is not for mass volumes of animals, just one at a time. Mr. Costanzo asked how many per day and was told it depends on the size of the animal and fat content, and perhaps 3-4 maximum. They did not know if the volume is there but that is the capability. Ms. Wainright said the Fire Official had no concerns. Mr. Salvatore said the unit is UL listed, built to their requirements, or perhaps a two hour fire separation. There is minimal heat from the unit; it operates at 1600 degrees, and permanent records are kept to verify the unit is in compliance with that temperature. There is some radiation in the room. The machine operates on natural gas or propane. Dr. Hofstein asked if she would seek business from veterinarians or the County animal shelter. She said she would help the County shelter on a limited basis; her main concern is the private customer. Dr. Hofstein asked about refrigeration. Mr. Salvatore said there could be small batches, might only be one at a time. The primary source of business is retail. Dr. Hofstein asked about the floor plan and if there is a bathroom; he was told there is. Mr. Hill asked if she would use propane or natural gas and she has to use propane. Mr. Hill asked what size tanks and where they go. Mr. Shea said on the right hand side. Mr. Calogero asked if any medical waste and was told no; bone is returned to the family once processed. Public portion opened Steven Sachs, attorney for four objectors, which he named. This use is not a permitted use in any zone. The property is located in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone, and it is not listed in the Industrial zone. He could not believe this use was not considered for the Master Plan. Ms. Wainright said a lot of uses aren t contemplated in a Master Plan or Zoning Ordinance. It is not unusual that it was left out. Mr. Sachs did not see it as an inherent use to the town or in the area. Neighborhoods should not have a crematorium. Mr. Sachs did not hear Mr. Salvatore s credentials; he is a salesman and not an engineer. There are emissions, this is a pollutant. Mr. Shea objected and asked if there were proof of that. The Board took the comments under advisement. Mr. Sachs said machines malfunction and he asked what happens to defective units. He did not feel this complies with the statute and asked the Board not to allow the use of the crematorium. Mr. Calogero asked why a funeral home is not allowed in the zone. Ms. Wainright felt this is a less intense use than an funeral home. 3-4 dogs versus 100 people is less intensive. Mr. Shea said three funeral homes in Jackson aren t in the Highway Commercial Zone; two, in fact, are in a residential zone. Ms. Wainright said this is on a smaller scale. This use is contained in the structure and there is no impact to the area; the existing post office has more people coming and going. Mr. Sachs said there is an outdoor restaurant down the street, and a restaurant to be put in across the street. He compared the use to a nuclear plant. John van Oostendorp, 19 Peach Tree Street, was sworn. He lives behind the property in the cul de sac. He can see right into the property because there are no trees. He is very concerned with the smell that comes from this. He called two places in New Jersey and was told it smells. Fat is a combustible, it will smell. He has a wood burning stove and you can smell it. The property is bordered on every side by a house. 40 uses for the NC zone, not one mentions crematorium. He could prove a negative impact; no one would move next to it. Kelly Ann Keown, 17 Peach Tree Street, was sworn. She lives right behind the post office. She is concerned about the smell and her children. She can t imagine the summer time, they are outside all day, and can t imagine smelling it and her property value will go down. Mr. Calogero asked if privacy screening would help. She said they put trees up, she is concerned with the odor. They give off carbon monoxide according to what she read. Dan Goncharoff, 500 W. Veterans Highway, was sworn. He lives two houses down from the post office. He is concerned with an unregulated business. No one inspects if the business is running properly. It is not a funeral home; animals are dead and there is no concern for the treatment of animals. If the business is run badly, he will suffer the consequences. He could only contact the Department of Consumer Affairs. It is not an approved use and has no right to be there. It is a new business and is not well-tested. He doesn't know what happens to a badly run crematorium. Mr. Gertner said Code Enforcement would address those issues. Mr. Hill agreed, they could inspect. Mr. Goncharoff would have recourse just like any other citizen. Mr. Hill said the DEP would govern the use. Ms. Steinman renews her license every 2 years. She doesn t have to have that license; she has it to hold a higher standard. Mr. Gertner said the variance runs with the land. The DEP might examine the equipment. Mr. Shea recalled Mr. Salvatore because of the testimony concerning smell and emissions. Mr. Salvatore said there is no smoke, no scent and no smell. He said you could put that representation into any resolution of approval. He is very knowledgeable. This is licensed by the DEP. Ms. Steinman is a member of CANA (Crematorium Association of North America); this is not a wood burning stove. Tom Howse, 13 Peach Tree Street, was sworn. He contacted a crematorium, was told there is odor and he is concerned about property values. Ms. Wainright asked if the crematorium was for people or pets, and Mr. Howse said pets; however that couldn't be corroborated. Rich Mitchell, lives directly across the street at 525 W. Veterans, and was sworn. He is concerned about smoke, smell, and property value. He is looking at $100,000-$200,000 less than what his house is valued. He would not want to buy across the street and asked for this application to be denied. Sonia Youmans, 516 W. Veterans Highway, was sworn. She is an adjoining property owner, and for the same reasons, she does not want this business to go there. John van Oostendorp, sworn. He asked if this is approved, is it a final approval or will the applicant have to come back. Mr. Gertner said this is a use variance and if approved, there would be no site plan. The Board is voting tonight. Mr. Van Oostendorp then asked for all buffers to be put back that the Post Office removed, stating the back of the place is an eyesore. He was concerned with road kill and refrigeration. Public portion closed

8 Page 8 of 8 - Zoning Board Minutes of June 20, 2012 Mr. Shea recalled Ron Salvatore. Regarding smoke and scent, there is none. For emissions, Mr. Salvatore read from an EPA document and said the 1999 Federal Clean Air Act oversees sources such as this. Federal Register 2004, crematoriums, pet cremation services, emissions are very low compared to other types of burning. He read from the paper. It is up to the State to regulate the emissions. Emissions from a wood-burning fireplace cause ½ pound of particulate expelled, and pet crematorium,.024#. Restaurants emit 74# particulate matter per day. Pet crematorium would be ½# day under maximum operating conditions. He works with the engineers; his degree is in communication. Mr. Suttles clarified Mr. Salvatore is a certified trainer and was told yes. Mr. MacFarlane said this site is particularly suitable located in a commercial zone for service uses to residents, low density, frontage on a County highway and they are reusing an existing building, preserving natural resources. Mr. Shea said the use satisfies the legal criteria, this is a positive introduction into the community, people fear what they don t know. It is a less intensive use than the three funeral homes in residential neighborhoods in Jackson, and he asked for approval. The biggest concern of the Board is the property and unknown smoke and odor; a use variance needs five of seven votes. Mr. Suttles asked about the buffering; the applicant agreed to provide it. Mr. Schulman asked if she looked at other sites. Ms. Steinmann said yes; she wanted to be close to home. She said this building is in her budget, has good access, and this is her preferred site. Mr. Calogero asked if she would submit maintenance records to the Zoning Officer and she said absolutely yes. Mr. Schulman asked how large the retort is and if it could be moved easily, and was told it is easily moved, 5 wide and 10 in length. Then there is an afterburner chamber, limited to 300# per burn. Mr. Maher noted Mr. Salvatore has crematoriums in New Jersey; the new one is in Wall Township, and there are 30 human crematoriums throughout New Jersey. Ms. Wainright stipulated if the business is successful, they would only have one retort in that location; if she wants another, then she has to come back. Mr. DiGesu asked if the refrigeration is a walk in box and was told it was a question of use and it might be a chest type freezer. Walk-ins are expandable within the building. Mr. Burrows said if there are no odors and other than the sign, it might not be obvious to the public that it is there. They will put a 3' flue above the roof peak, 24 wide. Mr. Schulman was concerned with odor in the neighborhood. Given his experience with afterburners, they reduce noticeable smells, but they weren t completely gone. Will it live up to the no smell, no smoke? If it doesn't, it will be a major problem. Mr. Suttles said there was a lot of testimony, and when they testify no smell, no smoke, they have to believe it. Mr. Maher said it is a difficult application, and was inclined to believe the no smell testimony until he heard reference to the Ocean County Memorial Park, which is the exact location he was referring to earlier this evening. Dr. Hofstein agreed with Mr. Maher about the impact on the surrounding properties. Perhaps there is a better area for this use. Mr. Burrows wasn't voting, but agreed with Mr. Suttles. The zoning could be a more intense use. He was concerned with the smell as well. Mr. DiGesu said they have to weigh what is better for Jackson and its residents. The location is good, testimony of little smell or smoke. Mr. Costanzo said the residents' concerns are well-heeded. There is an ignorance factor, we don t know 100%, heard testimony and don t know; fear of the unknown. He will base his vote on the testimony. Mr. Calogero agreed, we don t know the impact, which is unknown. There is no evidence, we have heard sworn testimony stating no smoke and no odor. He is leaning toward it. 5 votes needed for this D variance. Motion to approve with buffer reinstalled, maintenance records to be submitted annually, sign variance, pre existing setback, and Mr. Hill to meet with the applicant on an acceptable buffer, to which the applicant agreed, by DiGESU/Suttles. YES: Costanzo, DiGesu, Schulman, Suttles, Calogero. NO: Hofstein, Maher. Motion to adjourn at 11:34 p.m. by DiGESU/Suttles. YES: Unanimous among those present. Respectfully submitted, Janice Kisty, Zoning Board Recording Secretary