Town CrierWest Orange, New Jersey
← Back to search

Minutes · Jun 16, 2016

June 16, 2016

Preserved file SHA-256253a94c91bec574f97543afba7f222f88ee1d694b1f417ce2228cd41464aabdd

Indexed text · page 14

Show all pages
Page 14

Jersey. He said that his license is in good standing. Chairman Neuer accepted Mr. Fiorie as an expert in architecture. Mr. Fiori stated that there were originally 1500 seats proposed in the grandstands; 900 on the home side and 600 on the visitor side. He said that the amended plan proposes 1476 seats which is 24 less. Mr. Fiori said that two toilets were added in the concession stand and no other changes were made to the original plan. Mr. Schwarzbaum asked Mr. Fiori if they are still proposing to use portable bathrooms; he said the original plans provided a space for them and nothing has changed. Mr. Sussman asked Mr. Fiori how many additional seats on the baseball field will there be; he said between the football field and the baseball field there are 109 additional seats over and above what was approved. There were no further questions for Mr. Fiori from the Board Members or the Board Professionals. There were no members of the public that had any questions for Mr. Fiori. Vice Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Stewart if, during the break, he checked to see if there were any other revisions to the plan that were not specified during testimony; he said yes and there were none other than what he identified and the sidewalks on either side of the grandstands. Vice Chairman Buechler asked Mr. Stewart if the applicant has complied with all of the conditions of the prior approval yet; he replied no. Mr. Williams called his next witness. Peter Steck approached the podium and was sworn under oath. He detailed his professional background as a professional planner licensed in the State of New Jersey. Chairman Neuer accepted Mr. Steck as an expert in professional planning. Mr. Steck referred to his report dated 6/3/16 and said that the applicant is proposing several modifications to its previously approved site plan. He stated that although recreational facilities do not meet the newer school conditional use setback and buffer standards, the applicant remains subject to the provisions of the prior adopted resolution and can be viewed as an expansion of a non-conforming use. 14

File revisions (1)