July 2, 2014

TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 2, 2014 The Township of West Orange Planning Board held a regular meeting on July 2, 2014 at 7:30 P.M. in Council Chambers, 66 Main Street, West Orange, New Jersey. Vice Chairman Weston called the meeting to order at approximately 7:30 P.M. It was announced that notification of this meeting was given to the Township Clerk, and posted on the Township Bulletin Board on November 21, 2013 in accordance with the requirements of the “Open Public Meetings Act”. PRESENT: Robert Bagoff, Joanne Carlucci, Jerome Eben, Tekeste Ghebremicael, Gerald Gurland, Council President Susan McCartney, Vice Chairman Ron Weston ABSENT: Chairman Ben Heller, Lee Klein, Jason Lester, William Wilkes II ALSO PRESENT: Paul Grygiel, AICP, PP, Acting Township Planner, Frank Russo, PE, Omland Engineering, Patrick J. Dwyer, Esq., Board Attorney, Robin Miller, Board Secretary, Debbie Dillon, Audio-Digital Transcription Service PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Chairman Weston requested all persons stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Robert Bagoff, Joanne Carlucci, Jerome Eben, Tekeste Ghebremicael, Gerald Guriand, Chairman Ben Heller, Lee Klein, Jason Lester, Council President Susan McCartney, Vice Chairman Ron Weston, William Wilkes II ANNOUNCEMENTS The next Planning Board regular meeting will be held on August 6, 2014 in Council Chambers at 7:30 P.M. Vice Chairman Weston announced that Mayor Parisi had reappointed the following Planning Board members to the interim term July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014: Ms. Joanne Carlucci, Mr. Jerry Eben and Mr. Jason Lester. ADOPT MINUTES The minutes of the May 7, 2014 Planning Board meetings were unanimously adopted. 7-2-14 Minutes Approved

SWEARING IN Paul Grygiel, AICP, PP, Acting Township Planner Frank Russo, PE, PP, Consulting Engineer RESOLUTIONS Amendment to the Rules and Procedures of the Planning Board of the Township of West Orange Vice Chairman Weston advised the Board the amendment was to change its annual reorganization date so that it occurs at the same time as the Township Council's reorganization. The Board voted on the Resolution as follows: Motion: Vice Chairman Weston Second: Dr. Bagoff Bagoff: Yes | Carlucci: Yes Eben: Yes Ghebremicael: Yes Gurland: Yes | Klein: Absent | Lester: Absent | McCartney: Yes Weston: Yes | Wilkes: Absent | Heller: Absent PB-14-04/Essex County Country Club Block: 156; Lot: 1; Zone: R-2 350 Mt. Pleasant Avenue Preliminary and Final Site Plan with “C” variances. DISCUSSION None. The Board voted on the Resolution as follows: Motion: Dr. Bagoff Second: Mr. Eben Bagoff: Yes | Carlucci: Yes| Eben: Yes Ghebremicael: - Gurland: Yes | Klein: . Lester: - McCartney: Yes Weston: - Wilkes: - | Heller: Absent PB-14-08C/County of Essex-South Mountain Recreation Complex Block: 163; Lot: 13; Zone: R-1 560 Northfield Avenue Courtesy Review Application to construct a 5-Level Parking Deck. DISCUSSION None. The Board voted on the Resolution as follows: Motion: Dr. Bagoff Second: Council President McCartne Bagoff: Yes | Carlucci: Yes Eben: - Ghebremicael: - Gurland: Yes | Klein: Absent | Lester: - McCartney: Yes Weston: - Wilkes: - Heller: Absent 7-2-14 Minutes Approved

PB-14-09T/Seo Myung Ja d/b/a Valley Cleaners Block: 2.01; Lot: 11; Zone: B-1 156 South Valley Road Technical Site Plan to lease retail space for drop-off dry cleaning and alterations. DISCUSSION Council President McCartney gave a brief recapitulation of the Application approved with the following conditions by the Technical Review Subcommittee on June 12, 2014: (a.)Applicant shall obtain all necessary building permits required for site improvements; architectural plans prepared by a licensed New Jersey architect to be submitted to Construction Official; (b.) There will be no customer parking in the rear of the property; (c.} There will be no storage of hazardous maierials on site; (d.) Applicant to apply for sign permit; signage to be approved by the Zoning Official; (e.) Prior to issuance of Temporary or Final Certification of Occupancy/Approval, the Building Department shall confirm all building codes and safety codes are compliant; (f.) Before a Temporary or Final Certification of Occupancy/Approval can be issued, the Applicant shalt execute and submit to the West Orange Zoning Official, an Affidavit of Compliance certifying that all conditions of approval agreed to by the Applicant and set forth herein have been fulfilled and satisfied; (g.) All findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth herein are deemed conditions that are binding on the Applicant. Mr. Eben said a New Jersey licensed architect should have prepared the plans submitted as part of the Application; he said he did not believe the conditions of approval would be met. He said the building was in terrible condition and had been so for over twenty years; the building should be fixed. Vice Chairman Weston said the Board could bring to the attention of the Building Official the concern that there were safety and health issues that should be addressed. Vice Chairman Weston requested Mr. Dwyer draft an additional condition that prior to issuance of the CCO, the Building Department confirm that all building code and safety codes were compliant. Ms. Carlucci stated the Building Department did inspections before issuing a CCO; Vice Chairman Weston said the condition would reinforce the concern the Board had regarding the state of the building. Mr. Gurland asked for clarification regarding the Building Department requirement that a New Jersey licensed architect would be submitting plans;

rn the Board had regarding the state of the building. Mr. Gurland asked for clarification regarding the Building Department requirement that a New Jersey licensed architect would be submitting plans; Mr. Weston stated that it was a condition of approval that the plans would be prepared by a New Jersey licensed architect. The Board voted on the Resolution as follows: Motion: Vice Chairman Weston Second: Dr. Bagoff Bagoff: Yes] Carlucci: Yes Eben: No Ghebremicael: Yes Gurland: No | Klein: Absent | Lester: Absent | McCartney: Yes Weston: Yes | Wilkes: Absent | Heller: Absent APPLICATION PB-14-06/AutoZone Northeast, Inc. Store No. 4744 Block: 60; Lots: 1.01 and 2.01; Zone: B-1 7 Main Street Preliminary and Final Site Plan with Variances and Subdivision. EXHIBITS A-1: Site/Subdivision Plan (Drawing C1.0), prepared by Gregg E. Ursprung, P.E., Bergmann Associates dated January 16, 2014, revised June 27, 2014; 7-2-4 Minutes Approved

A-2: Landscape Plan (Drawing L1.0) prepared by Gregg E. Ursprung, P.E., Bergmann Associates dated January 16, 2014, revised June 27, 2014; A-3: Exterior Elevations and Notes (Drawing A-2) prepared by Lew Ellis, dated January 14, 2014; A-4: Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Gary W. Dean, P.E., P.P. and Elizabeth Dolan, P.£., Dolan & Dean Consulting Engineers, LLC dated July 1, 2014. DISCUSSION Frank DeVito, Esq. addressed the Board; he said he was the land use attorney for AutoZone in New Jersey; the Application was to build a store at 7 Main Street. The store would be approximately 7,381 square feet; he said he believed the required parking was for 30 to 36 spaces, however the configuration of the lot was unusual; there were some setback issues. Mr. DeVito said there were several issues raised at the Technical Review meeting (June 12, 2014) that had been addressed; there was a request to reduce the size of the free-standing sign to match the monument, which the Applicant had agreed to do; it was requested that there be better landscaping to protect the view from the church; the Applicant’s revised plan would put landscaping on the top of the retaining wall. Mr. DeVito said the Application was in excess of the maximum lot coverage because they were obligated to deduct some of the steep slope. Gregg E. Ursprung was sworn in; he said he was a New Jersey licensed professional engineer. Mr. Eben voiced concern that Mr. Ursprung’s firm was not a New Jersey licensed architectural firm; Mr. Ursprung stated his firm was a New Jersey licensed architectural firm; however, he was not an architect, nor would he be testifying as one. He was a New Jersey licensed professional engineer. His firm was not the architect for the building; his firm had only done the site design. Mr. Eben advised Mr. Ursprung that his firm was in violation of the New Jersey Architects Title Block Law. Vice Chairman Weston stated that the Board accepted Mr. Ursprung to be a professional engineer and would testify in that capacity. Referring to Exhibit A-3, Mr. Eben said Mr. Ursprung did not prepare the drawing; he had a problem with Mr. Ursprung testifying to the elevations. Mr. DeVito opined that Mr. Ursprung was the project engineer; he was familiar with the plan, and could testify to it. Referring to Exhibit A-1, Mr. Ursprung said the property was 1.15 acre parcel located along Main

ed that Mr. Ursprung was the project engineer; he was familiar with the plan, and could testify to it. Referring to Exhibit A-1, Mr. Ursprung said the property was 1.15 acre parcel located along Main Street; the proposed building was 7,381 square feet; a total of 36 parking spaces were provided; the required number of parking spaces was 30; there were 11 spaces located in front of the store; 10 along the side; and 15 in the back; there would be a 10 ft. by 40 ft. loading space, which was the minimum required by Code. The number of employees would be a maximum of five to six; the hours of operation were Monday through Saturday 8:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M., Sunday from 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. New water and sewer services would be provided to the building; they would be connected to the mains out in the municipals mains out to Main Street; all Township and County storm water management requirements would be met. The existing on-site impervious coverage with gravel was 0.08 acres; the proposed impervious coverage would be 0.69 acres; a reduction in impervious coverage, The storm water system would be connected on the adjacent parcel; there were two catch basins located in the parcel, both in the City of Orange. The Applicant would be connected in to the storm line that ran to the north; there would be no increase in the storm water runoff. Mr. Ursprung said the disturbed area was less than an acre; a NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit would not be required. Landscaping had been increased along Main Street to include twenty-seven purple maiden grass, ten sea-green junipers and twenty-four catmint. A sidewalk would be added from the Main Street sidewalk, 4 7-2-14 Minutes Approved

across the Jandscaped area in the front; it would come up to the handicap isle and provide access to the building. In the rear parking area there would be a concrete curb. There would be landscaping added to the top of the retaining wall to help screen the views of the building; there would be substantial landscaping, arbor vitae and evergreen trees. Mr. Ursprung said he had reviewed both the Omiand memorandum dated June 18, 2014 and the Township Planner’s memorandum dated June 16, 2014; he said the Applicant would agree to the majority of comments; a few needed clarification. Regarding the building signage; the maximum area permitted was 96 square feet; the Applicant was proposing 116.74 square feet; the maximum height allowed was 2 feet; the Applicant proposed 3.3 feet. Regarding the freestanding sign; the Applicant was proposing to reduce the width of the sign from 10 feet to 6 feet; which was the same width as the base of the monument. Council President McCartney said she was at the Technical Review Meeting (June 19, 2014), it was discussed that the building would be non-sprinkled; the Fire Official asked about the location of the fire hydrant; the paving of the parking lot up to the existing Karl’s property was also discussed at Technical Review. Mr. Ursprung said he had visited the site and identified the location of the fire hydrant; it was right in front of the building; the tot would be paved up to the property. Mr. Gurland said that the landscaping plan showed plantings along the east side of the project; Mr. Ursprung said the landscaping was increased along Main Street; he said the landscaping that was provided along the west side, facing the church was substantial and would provide very good screening of the proposed building. Mr. Gurland asked what type of trees would be planted and what was their size; Mr. Ursprung said there would be dark green arbor vitae, six to eight feet tall; also Atlantic White Cedar, six to eight feet tall. Mr. Eben said the plan was for 36 parking spaces, but the requirement was for 30. He opined he would like to have the parking reduced and the landscaping increased; he suggested making a peninsula with two isles; he said it would put an island in the middle of the parking lot to separate the two buildings and create more landscaping. Mr. Ursprung said it would be possible to do, but he did not recommend it;

s; he said it would put an island in the middle of the parking lot to separate the two buildings and create more landscaping. Mr. Ursprung said it would be possible to do, but he did not recommend it; approval from the City of Orange would be required; AutoZone wanted to keep all improvements within their own property. Mr. Eben opined it was one lot, one property; Mr. DeVito stated they were separate lots; the Karl’s store and lot was located in the City of Orange. Mr. Eben stated AutoZone was not the property owner; just the Applicant with a land lease; but the property owner also owned the Orange property. Mr. DeVito said two separate entities owned the lots. Mr. Eben stated the new proposed AutoZone driveway entrance/exit was about 25 feet to the east of the existing Karl’s driveway; he stated a variance would be needed; two driveways less than fifty feet apart were not permitted: Mr. DeVito said there might be cause for a variance except for in this case because the existing driveway was in a different municipality. Mr. Gurland said he wanted to clarify for the benefit of Mr. Eben’s question regarding property ownership, that it was discussed at the Technical Review meeting that there were two separate legal entities that owned the properties; however, the principal (owner) in each entity was the same person. Vice Chairman Weston inquired if in order to have the drive isles function property had access from the adjacent property been addressed, was there an easement agreement; Mr, DeVito said the Applicant had contacted the adjacent property owner who had agreed to give AutoZone access across the property; he was in the process of obtaining written documentation. Vice Chairman Weston advised the easement documentation should be a condition of approval; Mr. DeVito agreed. Vice Chairman Weston stated that there were more variances requested than discussed; (1) the accessory use setback, (2) the minimum side yard, (3) the maximum lot coverage, and (4) the signage. He requested the Applicant 7-2-14 Minutes Approved

clarify for the Board all the requested variances. Vice Chairman Weston stated the project was located in the downtown district and was next to a historic property; Mr. DeVito said he had received input from the Downtown Alliance and the Historic Preservation Commission; some of the landscaping and parking modifications that had been made were the resuit of their comments. Mr. Grygiel said he was concerned about the distance between the (two) driveways; Main Street was a County road; had the Applicant applied to the County for approval. Mr. DeVito said it was in the process of being approved by the County. Mr. Grygiel stated the County would have to weigh in on the access issue; he opined it was not an ideal situation. Mr. Grygiel asked for clarification regarding the street tree landscaping; Mr. DeVito said there were three existing street trees that would be replaced with three new street trees. Mr. Grygiel inquired if the Applicant had brought extra sets of plans for the Board to examine regarding the crosswalk and the changes in circulation; Mr. Ursprung said he did not have additional plans, only the Exhibit. Mr. Weston asked Mr. Grygiel if he wanted to hold any questions regarding clarification of the variances requested for the Applicant’s Planner; Mr. DeVito said he could summarize the requested variances; (1) side yard buffer, (2) parking aisle, (3) fagade sign and height, and freestanding width, and (4) disturbance of steep slope. He opined the other one might be for the two driveways but since it was a County road; the County would decide. Referring to his report (dated June 16, 2014), Mr. Grygiel said the list of requested variances aiso included the maximum lot coverage; and minimum off-street parking setback from the property line where five feet was required and zero feet was proposed; he stated that because the parking lots were adjacent to each other, it was a technical variance. Mr. Grygiel stated the variance for the maximum freestanding sign width was eliminated because the proposed sign had been reduced to meet the six feet requirement. Ms. Carlucci stated the Police Department had issued a memo suggesting a surveillance camera and security lighting; Mr. DeVito said he had not seen the memo. Vice Chairman Weston said that since the Police Department brought up the issue, it could be included as a condition of approval; Mr.

a and security lighting; Mr. DeVito said he had not seen the memo. Vice Chairman Weston said that since the Police Department brought up the issue, it could be included as a condition of approval; Mr. DeVito agreed. Mr. Eben stated that within the past eight or nine months a retaining wall had been built on the site; he asked if the wall was to be taken down to construct the building; Mr. Ursprung said that a portion of the retaining wall had been recently built; it was a segmental wall that connected in to an existing wall; the plan included modifying the existing retaining wall. Mr, Eben stated the existing concrete wall was probably eighty or ninety years old; he said he had many questions for the architect regarding the building. Mr. DeVito said Mr. Ursprung had designed a hundred buildings for AutoZone; he should be allowed ta answer questions on the architectural plans. Vice Chairman Weston stated that Mr. Ursprung could not testify as the architect; he opined that Mr. Ursprung could weigh in on the architectural exhibits for an engineering opinion only. Referring to the Omland Engineering memorandum dated June 18, 2014; Mr. Russo asked Mr. Ursprung to identify the comments with which the Applicant took issue; Mr. Ursprung said comment #13 — the memo suggested connecting in to the existing sanitary sewer on the adjacent property; AutoZone preferred to have their own connection, not to rely on another party; the existing connection was a private sewer line. Mr. DeVito said the existing connection was in another City; the Applicant did not want to get involved with (the City of) Orange. Mr. Russo opined that regardless; AutoZone would need approval from the City of Orange; he said that from an engineering perspective it made more sense to provide a short gravity connection than to have to install a pump. Mr. Weston asked Mr. Russo if there was some other statutory requirement that would require the Applicant to get approval from the City of Orange; Mr. Russo said that AutoZone would be discharging storm water in to a system located in the City of Orange; so at some point the system would be connected to the public system in the City of 7-2-14 Minutes Approved