May 7, 2014

structural integrity of the tower before the modifications proposed by Applicant herein may be installed. 8. Applicant to confirm that the foundations of the existing tower are structurally sufficient to support the tower per the report of Consolidated Engineering dated January 16, 2014 at page 5. 9. Applicant to remove all of its unused equipment and antenna from the site. 10. Applicant to notify the site owner that the site needs to be cleaned up and to provide proof of such notice. No building permits shall be issued until the has been cleaned up. The Board voted on the Application as follows: Motion: Chairman Heller Second: Dr. Bagoff Bagoff: Yes Carlucci: Yes Eben: Yes Ghebremicael: Yes Gurland: Yes Klein: - Lester: Absent McCartney: Yes Weston: Yes Wilkes: Yes Heller: Yes DISCUSSION Technical Review Subcommittee Ordinance and Application Process Carried from the April 2, 2014 regular meeting. Mr. Weston gave a brief recapitulation of the discussion of the April 2, 2014 meeting regarding the Technical Review Subcommittee Ordinance and Application process. He said that Mr. Grygiel had issued a memo after that meeting regarding his comments and thoughts on the process. Mr. Grygiel said he had issued a memo dated April 9, 2014 for distribution to the Board. He explained the main points of the memo were questions he had posed at the April regular meeting. He said the primary question to be addressed - what was the purpose of Technical Review. He gave a brief recapitulation of issues for discussion. He explained that the existing rules and regulations were not being followed. The rules indicated that all applications were subject to technical review (including Zoning Board applications); the committee was supposed to include only one member of the Planning Board; and it was unclear if Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL) allowed a committee to review applications that did not require site plan approval. He opined that the Board might consider reviewing the ordinance to clarify exactly when site plan approval was required. He stated the ordinance itself had issues; he asked the Board to decide if the ordinance should be followed as written, or amended. He discussed how the Downtown Alliance could take over design review for downtown businesses, however, that would not address businesses outside the SID zone. He cited examples of how other townships

He discussed how the Downtown Alliance could take over design review for downtown businesses, however, that would not address businesses outside the SID zone. He cited examples of how other townships determined the review process. He suggested the Board might consider going in the direction of establishing a Site Plan Review Advisory Board to vet both Planning and Zoning applications. Council President McCartney said the original intent of the Technical Review Subcommittee was to be an advisory entity. It was important for a business owner to be aware of the requirements of all departments within the Township in order to open a new business; she said the advisory committee should facilitate the process. Mr. Eben said he wanted to make sure there was consistency in submissions; when was a site plan required; what plans were required for submission. He said that commercial properties required submissions prepared by licensed professionals; only homeowners could submit hand-drawn plans. He 5-7-14 Minutes Approved