May 21, 2015

Mr. Williams approached the podium. He said once again he was appearing before the Board on behalf of the applicant stating that the prior appearances were September 18, 2014, January 15, 2015 and February 19, 2015. Mr. Williams continued that during all the meetings there was a great deal of dialogue between the Board, applicant and members of the public. He continued to update the Board stating that after the February 19, 2015 they met with community objectors who partook in the hearings subsequently, revised plans were submitted which they will give evidence to this evening. Mr. Williams further stated that due to the significant changes made to the site in response to the Board and the neighbors comments he would like to call Mr. Michael Petry up to describe them. Chairman Buechler had a question concerning the plans submitted last November. Mr. Williams said they could be discarded. Ms. Weiss stated that she had some questions on the old pictures which she had brought with her regarding the exterior. Mr. Williams stated that the architect was present and he would go over Ms. Weiss’s concerns. Mr. Williams called Michael Petry to the podium. He was sworn under oath. Chairman Buechler stated that Mr. Petry was previously accepted by the Board as an expert in the field of engineering and would continue with that designation for the evening. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Petry to describe to the Board the changes that have been made to the site from the last proposal which was marked exhibit A-2 on 1/5/15 and the new proposal that has been revised through 4/30/15 marked A-22 for the record. Mr. Petry stated in general what was done was to make modifications in response to the comments that were made by both the Board and by the neighbors. The garage with the apartment above it that was in the back of the building was eliminated which allowed the applicant to increase the setback of the proposed building to over 70 feet; move the daily prayer chapel from the caretaker’s house to the right side of the main building leaving the caretaker’s house as just that; remove the surface basin located along the Laurel Avenue right-of-way which was perceived as a potential hazard/maintenance headache and finally increase the landscaping buffer in the rear and along both sides of the property to increase the screening between the applicant and the adjacent

as a potential hazard/maintenance headache and finally increase the landscaping buffer in the rear and along both sides of the property to increase the screening between the applicant and the adjacent neighbors. Chairman Buechler asked if the size of the main building was increasing or decreasing in square footage. Mr. Petry responded that he would let the architect specifically address this, but it had decreased in size.