May 21, 2015

Chariman Buechler asked Mr. Staigar if he helped with the design of the parking and the space between the aisles. Mr. Staigar replied yes and that the parking aisles are minimum of 24 feet. Chairman Buechler asked if there was any issue with the parking circulation. Mr. Staigar responded that no, there is adequate room for all types of vehicles such as delivery vehicles, even a fire pumper would be able to get into the site. Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Staigar if it would be a reasonable condition that to say no deliveries on Thursdays during the temple’s peak operational hours between ten a.m. and two p.m. Mr. Staigar agreed that it would be logical. Mr. Buechler asked Mr. Staigar if he examined the traffic flow or sight distance or any issues at the corner of Barton Drive and Laurel Avenue and the impact of this site from that intersection. Mr. Staigar replied that there would be no impact. Chairman Buechler asked if he did any traffic counts at the corner of Barton Drive and Laurel Avenue because he did not see them in his report. Mr. Staigar responded that he did not think they were pertinent. Traffic counts were taken but they were taken for the first application which was a number of years ago and he has been to the site on numerous times and hasn’t seen any congestion of Barton Drive traffic. Chairman Buechler asked based on the proposed design if Mr. Staigar had any issues with sight distance from the two driveways on the site for ingress and egress based upon where the bushes and the trees are situated. Mr. Staigar replied no. He further stated that the sight triangles are designed for the driveways and those bushes and trees are outside those triangles. Ms. Weiss asked if Mr. Staigar if he thought it was difficult today to sight from Barton Drive. Mr. Staigar replied that though there is some sight impediment it doesn’t meet or exceed the AASHTO standards there is at least three hundred and twenty five feet of sight distance at Barton Drive today. There was a dialogue between Mr. Staigar and Ms. Weiss regarding the ability to see coming out from Barton Drive. It concluded that there was not endless or infinite visibility but enough to execute a safe movement out. Mr. Bullock asked Mr. Staigar what he meant by some impediment. 15

Mr. Staigar replied that some of the buses that are within the right-of-way are overhanging. There is also a curve in the road further down but it’s much further than the distance you would need to safely move out of the site. He further stated that in his professional opinion there is no safety deficiency on Barton Drive today or will be in the future. Chairman Buecler asked if any other members of the Board had questions for Mr. Staigar. Ms. Gabry asked Mr. Staigar if he had any idea what the traffic is in and out of the caretaker’s driveway. Mr. Staigar replied that there is only two garages. So it would be similar to a single family home. Chairman Buechler asked if Mr. Keller or Mr. Grygiel had any questions for Mr. Staigar. Mr. Keller responded no. Mr. Grygiel asked assuming the project is approved and the facility is built if the congregation changes the day of worship to Saturday or Sunday would it still be at non-peak hours as far as the traffic impact. Mr. Staigar replied that the peak time are the typical week day morning, week day evening peak hours seven to nine, four to six. Even if the days changed the impacts would be the same because it would not be during morning rush hour or evening rush hour during the week. Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Grossman if he had any questions. He responded he did not. Chairman Buechler asked if any member of the public had any questions. He acknowledged Ms. Kasher. Ms. Kasher stated her name for the record. She asked Mr. Staigar how many days did he measure the traffic. Mr. Staigar replied most recently they went out there three days. He explained that he had been working on this site for a number of years since 2009. He stated that he has been on Laurel Avenue probably fifty times. There was much dialogue from Ms. Kasher concerning gaps in time of the traffic counts Mr. Staigar performed for this site. Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Williams to confirm that his notes were correct regarding the hearing dates. Mr. Williams confirmed the prior dates stating that this was the fourth hearing. Ms. Kasher continued to ask Mr. Staigar why he hadn’t presented new data for these traffic counts. A discussion resulted explaining to Ms.Kasher that he did new data and it was presented 16

at the meeting that evening. She continued with a barrage of statements one of which is she was representing many people who live there which Mr. Williams objected to. Ms. Weiss stated that the Board is very concerned about the neighbors and thought the applicant was too since they have gone to great extent to try and alleviate the problems of the neighbors. Ms. Kasher asked Mr. Staigar when he recently did the traffic counts. Mr. Staigar gave the dates of the prior traffic counts he performed and said the most recently updated report is dated November 5, 2014. Ms. Kasher asked how many hours in the last count did you measure on Laurel Avenue. Mr. Staigar replied six hours between eleven a.m. and one p.m. and the between four p.m. to 6:30 p.m. to get comparative purposes. There was dialogue between Ms. Kasher and Mr. Staigar referring to the times that the congregants would be coming to the site for services; if in the future there would be other activities for different purposes in the facility. There was an extensive discussion between Ms. Kasher, Mr. Staigar, Chairman Buechler and the Board regarding left hand turns into the site from Laurel Avenue and various concerns Ms. Kasher had regarding the ingress and egress from her property. Chairman Buechler asked Ms. Kasher if her concern was that this generates too much traffic for Barton Drive and that it shouldn’t be built. Ms. Kasher replied that it generates a hazard the all the traffic on both sides of Laurel Avenue. Chairman Buechler asked Ms. Kasher if she looked to see what somebody could build on this property without getting a variance to see what kind traffic could theoretically generate. Ms. Kasher answered no. Chairman Buechler if anyone else had questions for Mr. Staigar. Mr. Benzvi indicated he did he was invited to the podium. Mr. Benzvi stated that he read Mr. Staigar’s reports one from 2014 and then a revised one. He questioned the schedule for prayer session which was submitted for the two other days as being held six p.m. to 8 p.m. with a typical attendance of 40 people not eleven a.m. to one p.m. like it stated in the report. A discussion between Mr. Benzvi, Mr. Staigar, Ms. Weiss, and Chairman Buechler arose regarding where in the report was the schedule for prayer session for the other two days as being held six p.m. to eight p.m. 17

Mr. Staigar claimed that he did not prepare this report [exhibit A-6] and would be presenting a new one that would be updated to May 2015 to show the time period. Mr. Staigar further stated that his testimony is that the main services for this house of worship will be between eleven a.m. and one p.m. Chairman stated he wanted to clarify that the traffic on Laurel Avenue does not impact Mr. Benzvi personally because he lives on Barton Place and does not exit out on to Laurel Avenue in front of the site. Chairman asked Mr. Benzvi if he had anything further for Mr. Staigar. Mr. Benzvi questioned the day of the traffic count Mr. Staigar did in September. It had September 14, 2014 in the report which was a Sunday not a Wednesday as Mr. Staigar had stated and which would make a difference in the count. Mr. Staigar stated that he did not count on a Sunday but a Wednesday. Upon a dialogue between the Board and Mr. Staigar it was determined that it was a typo on page 3 of the report the actual traffic count is at the end of the report and is Wednesday, September 17, 2014, Mr. Benzvi stated that he found in a report Mr. Keller submitted, in September, he asked you to install an automatic traffic recorder for a period of seven to 10 days and asked Mr. Staigar to explain what this was. Mr. Staigar explained that an automatic traffic recorder is tubes in the roadway if you want to take 24 hour counts for seven days, rather than have someone actually count cars. Mr. Benzvi asked Mr. Staigar if this was done and is it in the November report in anyway. Mr. Staigar responded he did not do an automatic traffic recording he didn’t think it was necessary since the key point is that it is to know what the volumes are midday. There is a differential between midday volume and peak hour volumes of 400 vehicles. This site is not going to generate anywhere near 400 vehicles. This site will generate traffic during non-peak hours. Mr. Benzvi asked Mr. Staigar if he thought this report was necessary. Mr. Staigar responded he did not believe it to be necessary. Mr. Benzvi stated there is no left turn from Laurel Avenue if you are coming from 280 into the site. He asked Mr. Staigar if there was a plan to change that. Mr. Staigar asked if there was a restrictive sign for left turns. Mr. Benzvi responded that there were double yellow lines. 18

Mr. Staigar stated there are no signs that disallows left turns into the site and explained that double yellow lines indicate no passing. It is legal to make a left turn across solid double yellow lines. Mr. Benzvi stated that in his report Mr. Staigar wrote that the amount of parking provided meets the Township Ordinance but Mr. Petry testified that they are required 78 spaces not 48. Mr. Staigar replied there is a variance and we do not meet the requirements of the specific technical requirements of the Ordinance because the Ordinance requires the calculation based on the entire floor area. So it is an error on his part. Chairman Buechler stated before he excuse Mr.Staigar if Mr. Keller could look at his November 17, 2014 memorandum to the Board item 38. The original report recommended a seven to ten day continuous traffic count. Based on the information Mr. Staigar provided was the need for the continuous traffic count retracted. Mr. Keller replied that it was. Chairman Buechler excused Me. Staigar and called for a 10 minute break. (The Board recessed from 10:02 p.m. to 10:12 p.m.) Chairman Buechler announced that they were back on record and asked Mr. Williams if his next witness was the architect. Mr. Williams called Drazen Cackovic to the podium where he was sworn under oath. Chairman Buechler stated that he previously testified on September 18, 2014 and was qualified by the Board as an architect. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Cackovic that since the last meeting here on February 19, 2015 we revised the plans at the request of the neighbors and comments from the Board and he submitted a new A-100 which is marked A-16 for the record and amended through April 30, 2015. Mr. Cackovic responded that this was correct. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Cackovic to highlight for the Board the changes that were made to the temple floor plans. Mr. Cackovic stated that the main changes included the addition of the mediation room that was moved from the caretaker’s cottage to the temple building and the reduction of the size of the lower level story. He pointed out to the Board that there was much less of the lower level that is exposed. Mr. Cackovic continued that there are three major changes that have been made to the building, in addition to revising the exterior design and changing the materials. 19

Ms. Weiss asked a question about the exterior. She want to know if it is red brick now. Mr. Cackovic responded affirmatively. Ms. Weiss asked Mr. Cackovic if they are keeping the stone on the caretaker’s house. Receiving an affirmative reply from Mr. Cackovic she stated that the stone on the new plan didn’t seem to match the plan on the temple. Mr. Cackovic referred to exhibit A-19 which shows the caretaker’s house. He continued that in the upper left corner you see the front elevation and you see the simulation of what the existing stone front looks like which will remain exactly the same. Ms. Weiss asked if the color of the caretaker’s house would be beige referring to the pictures she had. Mr. Cackovic referring to Exhibit A-20, which showed the actual materials and colors, affirmed that the color was beige. Ms. Weiss asked if the roof of the temple would stay the same as per a previous discussion. Mr. Cackovic stated that they were proposing to make a change. Referring to Exhibit A-17 stated they previously proposed a metal roof but now have changed it to a standard asphalt shingle roof. Typical for residential houses in than neighborhood. Chairman Buechler asked what the proposed total square footage of the temple and if it was for both floors. Mr. Cackovic replied 9,539 square feet for both floors. He further stated that the previous submittal had 12,507 square feet. So it has been reduced even though the mediation room was added. He continued that they have actually reduced the size of the building by reducing the lower level area. Ms. Weiss asked if changes were also made to the caretaker’s house square footage wise. Mr. Cackovic replied that the last submittal had 3,098 square feet for the caretaker’s house. It is now 2,257 square feet. It went down 700 square feet approximately the size of the mediation space that was moved to the temple. Mr. Sussman asked if the reduction on the size of the temple is because the lower level was made smaller or is it a smaller first floor as well Mr. Cackovic answered that it is mainly the lower level. Mr. Sussman stated that then the first level is essentially the same size as it was before and asked for the square footage breakout for that floor. 20

Chairman Buechler stated the first floor couldn’t be the same size because the mediation room was added. Mr. Cackovic stated that it is smaller. It went from 6,303 square ft. to 6,139 sq. ft. due to a couple of small changes. The bathrooms, the kitchen and storage areas were made smaller. Chairman Buechler asked if the bathrooms were still ADA compliant and Mr. Cackovic replied they were. Mr. Sussman asked if Mr. Cackovic could give him the same two numbers for the lower level. Mr. Cackovic responded that previously the lower level was 6,196 square ft. and is now 3,400 square ft. There was dialogue between Mr. Cackovic and Chairman Buechler regarding an elevator connecting the first floor to the lower level; how many means of egress from both the first floor and the lower level to the outside and if deliveries would go through the front door. Ms. Gabry stated that Mr. Cackovic previously testified that the basement would only be for storage and wanted to know if that was still the case. Mr. Cackovic replied that was still the case. There is a large storage area under the prayer hall, a smaller to the right and the rest is mechanical, electrical, elevator and one bathroom only. Mr. Sussman asked if there had been an office down there. Mr. Cackovic replied there was but its gone. Mr. Willams stated that the kind of got off track and suggested highlighting Exhibit A-30. Mr. Cackovic proceeded to show the proposed brick and roofing material. He proceeded referring to Exhibit A-17 to describe the main elevation and entrance to the temple; a disabled accessible ramp and the rear and side elevations. Mr. Williams stated that they were also proposing a sign. Mr. Cackovic proceeded to describe the sign for the building to be three and half feet wide by two feet high with written text not illuminated. There was a dialogue between Mr. Cackovic and certain Board members regarding the brick size; a sprinkler system for the building; the components of the structure; an additional room to be used as an office in the caretaker’s house. The Board members were satisfied by Mr. Cackovic responses to these matters. Chairman Buechler asked Mr.Keller, Mr. Grygiel and Mr. Grossman if they had any questions all responded they did not. 21

Chairman Buechler asked if any members of the public had a questions for the architect. Chairman Buechler recognized Tal Benzvi. Mr. Benzvi asked Mr. Cackovic what the footprint of the large temple previously and now. Mr. Cackovic responded that the footprint previously was 6,303 square ft. and it is now 6,139 square ft. There was a dialogue between Mr. Cackovic and Mr. Benzvi regarding adding a bathroom to the office space on the main level; the size of the mediation chapel and capacity codes; the storage kitchen/pantry area installing a filter and consideration to adding a sprinkler system. Mr Benzvi was satisfied with Mr. Cakovics responses to these matters. Chairman Buechler asked if any other members of the public had questions for Mr. Cackovic. Seeing none he excused Mr. Cackovic. Mr. Williams stated there was one further witness, Mr. Peter Steck, but he is in Byram Township and will not be able to get here. He continued to ask that this be carried to the June 18" meeting and would complete Mr. Steck’s testimony at that time. Chairman Buechler stated that this matter will be carried to the Board’s regular meeting on June 18, 2015 at eight p.m. No further notice is required. He continued that the applicant has one more witness. After that witness is concluded with direct and cross examination members of the public will have the opportunity to make statement to the Board. With that we are concluded. The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Buechler at 10:37 p.m. Adopted: October 15, 2015 pond grb : Joanne Carlucci Acting Board Secretary 22