February 18, 2016

the applicant would prove the need for the variances without a Planner. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Regan if Mr. Staiger prepared a written report; he said no. Mr. Regan said that if the Board does require that Mr. Staiger submit a written report then they will come back next month. Chairman Neuer stated that rather than carry this over to the next meeting, he will accept Mr. Staiger’s testimony subject to whether or not the other Board Members would like to have a written report. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Regan to present his case. Vice Chairman Buechler stated that when the applicant came before this Board in 2013 asking for preliminary and final site plan approval for the site, he specifically asked the applicant whether they plan to have a free standing sign and they replied no. Vice Chairman Buechler read from the adopted minutes of the September 12, 2013 meeting when he asked Mr. Regan if the applicant is proposing a monument sign and he replied no. He then read from the adopted minutes of the October 28, 2013 Zoning Board meetings when he asked Mr. Burgis, the applicant’s planning consultant, if the applicant is seeking to erect a monument sign on Prospect Avenue and he replied he did not know. Vice Chairman Buechler said that it is one thing for an applicant to come back for unforeseen issues but in this case they are asking for a free standing sign that, when asked if they are proposing a free standing sign during the 2013 Zoning Board hearings, they replied no or that they were not planning on doing that. Vice Chairman Bucchler asked Mr. Regan why the Board should consider this when they already gave them site plan approval and a variance for signs. He said that in part this is a legal question and also the Board does not act on applications in a piecemeal fashion. Mr. Regan said that he is not disputing the testimony given at that time but he does not recall saying that are not going to have a monument sign. He said that his recollection at the time was that they did not know the dimensions of the sign and he thought that they indicated that. Chairman Neuer stated that Mr. Regan’s statements and Mr.Burgis’ testimony are the minutes that are taken by the Board Secretary and the Board Members review them very carefully. Mr. Regan said, once again, that he is not disputing the testimony; he said that it was his recollection that they were not

en by the Board Secretary and the Board Members review them very carefully. Mr. Regan said, once again, that he is not disputing the testimony; he said that it was his recollection that they were not certain of the dimensions of the sign at the time. Mr. Regan said that, never the less, they are here now requesting the Board’s consideration of a monument sign that is allowed in the OR zone. Chairman Neuer said that he agrees with Vice Chairman Buechler stating that the legal issue is as to whether or not the applicant is barred because they submitted an application that included a very comprehensive sign package and the Board granted them the variances for it.