Joint Land Use Board

THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JOINT LAND USE BOARD FOR THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2019 WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M. AT THE LINDENWOLD BOROUGH HALL. SUNSHINE ANNOUNCEMENT FLAG SALUTE PRESENT: JEFF HANSON, PE, CME – ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTIONS KATHLEEN MCGILL GASKILL, ESQ. – BOARD SOLICITOR (BY PHONE) MEMBERS PRESENT: MAYOR RICH ROACH COUNCILWOMAN LINDA HESS MR. CRAIG WELLS MR. JOE VANDERGRIFT MS. JOY JACKSON MR. SAM FIELDS MS. PAT STRIPPOLI MEMBERS ABSENT: MS. KATHY FITZPATRICK MR. WALT LENKOWSKI BOARD SOLICITOR STATING LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT THE BOARD SOLICITOR IS PARTICIPATING THROUGH A TELEPHONE CONFERENCE MS. STRIPPOLI ENTERTAINED FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 24, 2019. MAYOR ROACH MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE, MOTION SECONDED BY MR. VANDERGRIFT. ROLL CALL WAS UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED. MS. STRIPPOLI ENTERTAINED FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION, JLUB-19-6, HOUSE OF GRACE, BLOCK 98, LOT 6. MR. VANDERGRIFT MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE, MOTION SECONDED BY MR. FIELDS. ROLL CALL WAS UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED. MS. STRIPPOLI ENTERTAINED FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION JLUB-19-14, NEXT LEVEL SJ NONPROFIT, BLOCK 122, LOT 9. MAYOR ROACH MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE, MOTION SECONDED BY MR. WELLS. ROLL CALL WAS UNANIMOUS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MR. FIELDS WHO ABSTAINED. MOTION CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS APPLICATION JLUB-19-16 RICCARDO TORRES 11 N. BERLIN ROAD BLOCK 92, LOT 1.01 CHANGE IN USE & VARIANCE EMPTY UNIT TO MAKE CHURCH 1 BOARD ENGINEER – GIVING OVERVIEW OF APPLICATION (REVIEW LETTER) (MINOR SITE PLAN WAIVER-CHANGE IN USE FOR CHURCH, STONE PARKING LOT ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF BUILDING, I WAS INFORMED AFTER LETTER WAS WRITTEN THAT THE PARKING AREA ON THE EAST SIDE IS ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE RAILROAD, THE EAST SIDE HAS ONE STONE APRON/ACCESS TO NORTH BERLIN ROAD AND ONE STONE APRON/ACCESS ONTO LINDEN AVENUE, PARKING AREA ON THE WEST SIDE HAS TWO STONE APRONS/ACCESS TO NORTH BERLIN ROAD, I DID NOT RECEIVE ANYTHING FOR INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS BEING PROPOSED, PROPERTY FRONTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BERLIN ROAD, ZONED B1/NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS, CHURCH IS A PERMITTED USE, AS FAR AS COMPLETENESS THEY NEED TO ADDRESS THROUGH TESTIMONY THE ITEMS IN LETTER) DALE KEITH, ESQ. – ATTORNEY FOR APPLICANT JEFF HANSON, BOARD ENGINEER – SWORN IN JULIO GOMEZ RICCARDO TORRES BRYAN REYES GARCIA ALL SWORN IN DALE KEITH, ESQ. – GIVING OVERVIEW OF APPLICATION EXHIBIT A1 – ARIAL OF SITE (PARKING LOT, LANDLORD OWNS ONLY THE BUILDING, A SEPARATE ENTITY OWNS PARKING LOT LEFT OF THE BUILDING, HOURS OF OPERATION (WEDNESDAY AND SATURDAY 7:00 PM – 9:00 PM AND SUNDAY 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM). QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION BETWEEN BOARD ENGINEER, APPLICANTS ATTORNEY, APPLICANT AND BOARD MEMBERS (LAYOUT OF INTERIOR (ONE BIG ROOM WITH STAGE AND BATHROOM), NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS (10-15 PRESENTLY), WHO OWNS LOTS ON EITHER SIDE, YOU HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO OWNS THE BUILDING, THE INDIVIDUAL HAS A LLC WHO OWNS THE LOT, ANOTHER DISCUSSION ON NUMBER OF PARISHIONERS (3) CHURCH OFFICIALS AND (9) PARISHIONERS), ROUGHLY (5) PARKING SPACES NEEDED) GABRIEL TORRES – SWORN ON CONTINUATION OF QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION ANOTHER DISCUSSION ON NUMBER OF PEOPLE, (3) CHURCH OFFICIALS AND (15) PARISHIONERS, (6) PARKING SPACES, CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT NEEDED FROM LLC TO OWNER OF BUILDING. DISCUSSION THAT PARKING IS NOT A PERMITTED PRIMARY USE, IT IS AN ACCESSORY USE, THEY WOULD NEED TO CONSOLIDATE LOTS OR SEEK AN USE VARIANCE. BACK TO BOARD ENGINEER GOING THROUGH HIS REVIEW LETTER (DRIVEWAY APRON, PARKING SPACES TO BE INDIVIDUALLY DELINEATED, PARKING BUMPERS, TRASH, NO FOOD PREP, VEGETATION TO BE CLEANED UP, SIDEWALKS, HANDICAP RAMP, ADA PARKING SPACE) APPLICANT IS NOT IN AGREEMENT TO DO DRIVEWAY APRON, PAVING LOT, SIDEWALKS, PAVING ADA PARKING SPACE, APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT FOR PARKING BUMPERS AND CLEANING UP VEGETATION. 2 SIGNAGE WILL BE ON BUILDING – MUST SUBMIT A DETAIL SECURITY SYSTEM – APPLICANT NOT IN AGREEMENT TO INSTALL AT THIS TIME BOARD ENGINEER STATING TO BOARD SOLICITOR WHAT IM HEARING IS THAT THE ITEMS WE WOULD NEED A MINOR SITE PLAN FOR, THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO PROVIDE. SO I DO NOT SEE ANY POINT IN HAVING A SITE PLAN. I DON’T KNOW HOW WE ARE GOING TO HANDLE THAT. AT THIS POINT I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO THE BOARD. BOARD SOLICITOR STATING THE BOARD HAS TO LIKE THE BOARD ENGINEER JUST SAID, THERE IS NO NEED FOR A SITE PLAN BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS NOT DOING A LOT OF THINGS THAT WOULD REQUIRE INPUT ON A SITE PLAN. THE BOARD HAS TO CONSIDERING WHETHER THEY WANT TO WAIVE THE SITE PLAN BECAUSE THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY PAVING ON THE PARKING AREA. BOARD ENGINEER STATING THIS DOESN’T HAVE ANY BEARING ON WHETHER THEY APPROVE THE RELIEF THAT IS REQUESTED, CORRECT, AS FAR AS THE VARIANCE THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED. BOARD SOLICITOR STATING IT DOESN’T HAVE ANY AFFECT ON THE VARIANCE, IT’S ON THE WAIVER OF THE SITE PLAN AND THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING THE BOARD TO DO. THE BOARD HAS TO UNDERSTAND THAT IN WAIVING THE SITE PLAN, YOU ARE ALLOWING THAT THERE WILL BE NO GRADING OF THE PARKING AREA, THERE WON’T BE ANY CONCRETE SIDEWALKS IN ON PORTIONS OF BERLIN ROAD, THERE WILL NOT BE ANY PAVING OF THE HANDICAP PARKING SPOT WHICH COULD BE VERY PROBLEMATIC AND THE APRONS WILL REMAIN STONE. KNOWING ALL THAT, DOES THE BOARD WANT TO WAIVE THE SITE PLAN? IF THE BOARD DOES WANT TO WAIVE THE SITE PLAN, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO TALK ABOUT SOME THINGS THAT WOULD BE MADE CONDITION OF THAT APPROVAL. BOARD SOLICITOR STATING TO BOARD ENGINEER WITH RESPECT TO YOUR REVIEW LETTER THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO DO THE CLEAN UP OF THE PROPERTY, THEY WILL REPLENISH THE STONE LANDSCAPING AND PARKING BUMPER. MS. STRIPPOLI STATING TO BOARD SOLICITOR DO WE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION ON WHAT YOU JUST WANT OVER? BOARD ENGINEER STATING WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO MAKE A MOTION REGARDING WHETHER OR NOT TO WAIVE THE SITE PLAN? BOARD SOLICITOR STATING SURE, IF THE BOARD WANTS TO PROCEED IN THAT FASHION, WE COULD. IF YOU FEEL THAT THE SITE PLAN IS CRITICAL, THEN WE SHOULD DEAL WITH THAT FIRST. BOARD ENGINEER STATING WITH THE ADA AND NOT HAVING A PAVED SPOT AND THE SIDEWALKS, I AM NOT RECOMMENDING A WAIVER OF THE SITE PLAN. UNLESS THE BOARD IS WILLING TO LET THE APPLICATION GO WITH WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED WITH IMPROVEMENTS WHICH IS MINIMUM. BOARD SOLICITOR STATING THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE TESTIMONY IS THAT WE CAN DEAL WITH THE PARKING ISSUES IN PART BY MAKING THE CONSOLIDATION OF BOTH LOTS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. THEN WE ARE BEING REQUESTED TO DO A VARIANCE FOR THE PARKING SPACES BECAUSE NOT IN THE NUMBER BUT THE FACT THAT THEY WILL BE UNPAVED. BOARD ENGINEER STATING THE OTHER ISSUES WOULD BE DESIGN WAIVERS SINCE THEY ARE NOT GOING TO COMPLY WITH OUR SITE PLAN ORDINANCE. BOARD SOLICITOR STATING YES AND I AGREE WITH THE BOARDS ENGINEER THAT WE REALLY AREN’T IN THE POSITION TO WAIVE THE ADA REQUIREMENT. AND THIS IS A LIABILITY ISSUE FOR THE APPLICANT. BOARD ENGINEER STATING THEY ALSO WILL NEED COUNTY APPROVAL, THIS IS A COUNTY ROAD. 3 BOARD SOLICITOR STATING WE CAN ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS AND SUBJECT THEM TO COUNTY APPROVAL. BOARD ENGINEER STATING AS FAR AS THE DRIVEWAY APRONS, BUT THE PAVING OF THE LOT AND ADA FALLS ON US. APPLICANTS HAVING A BRIEF DISCUSSION AMONGST THEMSELVES APPLICANTS ATTORNEY STATING THEY WILL AGREE NOW BOARD ENGINEER STATING WE ARE NOT SEEKING A MINOR SITE PLAN WAIVER NOW, THEY HAVE AGREED TO DO THE PAVING OF THE HANDICAP PARKING SPOT, PROVIDE AN ADA ASSESSABLE ROUTE, THE APRONS AND SIDEWALKS. MR. VANDERGRIFT ASKING ABOUT THE SHED IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING (DISTANCES AROUND IT, SHOULD THAT EVEN BE THERE) BRIEF DISCUSSION BOARD ENGINEER STATING APPROVAL WOULD HAVE TO BE BASED ON THAT GARAGE BE COMPLIANT AND MEETING ALL THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OR PROOF THAT APPROVAL WAS GRANTED FOR A VARIANCE FOR IT. MS. JACKSON STATING WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT BUILDING CAN TAKE BOARD ENGINEER STATING I ASKED FOR THE FIRE OCCUPANCY EARLIER AND THEY DIDN’T KNOW BOARD SOLICITOR STATING TO MR. KEITH COULD YOU OR THE APPLICANT TELL ME WHAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THIS SPACE IS. APPLICANTS RESPONSE WAS INAUDIBLE BOARD ENGINEER STATING HE SAID APPROXIMATELY 1200 SQUARE FEET. MS. STRIPPOLI OPENED THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC AND NO ONE STEPPED FORWARD BOARD SOLICITOR SUMS UP APPLICATION MS. STRIPPOLI ENTERTAINED FOR A MOTION, MAYOR ROACH MADE THE MOTION, MOTION SECONDED BY MR. FIELDS. ROLL CALL WAS (1) YES VOTE, (4) NO VOTES AND (2) ABSTENTIONS. APPLICATION DENIED. MS. STRIPPOLI OPENED THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC AND NO ONE STEPPED FORWARD. MEETING ADJOURNED NANCY DIDOMENICO BOARD SECRETARY 4