February 3, 2016

DISCUSSION Carmine D. Campanile, Esq., on behalf of Joseph A. Vena, Esq., attorney for Applicant, presented the Application for a Home Professional Office; he advised the Board the plan submitted as part of the Application conformed to the requirements of Ordinance 25-9.10. The area to be used as the wellness center was less than 50% of the entire area of the house, and it was less 1,000 square feet. He said the plan prepared by Peter T. Ricci, AIA, indicated the wellness center would be 49% of the entire square footage; it would be 438 square feet. Chairman Weston asked if there would be any other witnesses. Mr. Campanile said the plan spoke to the requirements of the Ordinance; he had no further witnesses unless the Board had questions. He discussed the Township’s memo dated September 16, 2015 which stated some items needed to be completed; Mr. Campanile said all items had been completed with the exception of #5; the applicant maintained the slates were not loose, that was the way they were placed, and #7; the Applicant maintained he was not the owner of the fence. Mr. Campanile said all other items had been corrected; however, all items would be subject to inspection by the municipality. Chairman Weston advised the Board this type of application was heard by the Technical Review Sub-committee prior to changes in the ordinance; since the changes, the applications are heard by the full Board. Dr. Bagoff asked if there was paved patient parking; Mr. Campanile said the rear lot was paved; there were four spaces for patients. Chairman Weston asked if the Applicant was aware of the signage requirements; Mr. Campanile said no signage was proposed. Councilwoman McCartney asked if there was currently, an orange post painted on Northfield Avenue; Mr. Campanile said he was unaware of an orange post but there was a light fixture on the property. Mr. Grygiel said there was a change in the ordinance that Mr. Campanile had adequately summarized. The Applicant had submitted an application stating all conditions had been met. Councilwoman McCartney asked if there were any conditions from the Site Plan Review Advisory Board (SPRAB) meeting. Mr. Grygiel advised the Board the Applicant had previously appeared before SPRAB. There were some questions that the Applicant’s attorney had addressed including the type of (medical) treatments performed, and whether the doctor

d the Applicant had previously appeared before SPRAB. There were some questions that the Applicant’s attorney had addressed including the type of (medical) treatments performed, and whether the doctor lived on premises. SPRAB did not have the authority to place conditions on applications; it was an advisory entity. Mr. Dwyer said the resolution should reflect as a condition of approval, that the Applicant met all requirements of the ordinance. Dr. Bagoff asked about the loose slate; was it an issue to address. Mr. Grygiel said the Secretary had written the memo to him; it was information based on her site visit observations; the information had been shared with the Zoning Official, and brought to the Applicant’s attention at the SPRAB meeting. No formal action was taken.