April 7, 2021 Adopted Planning Board Minutes

y long life. There’s a decorative masonry that wraps along the front as well as around the perimeter of the base of the building which is articulated with a larger smooth decorative masonry bit with a projected canopy that utilizes some of the look aluminum plank that are accenting other areas of the building with flat roof specifying a white Energy Star roofing on the energy. Based on comments from the Planner, the reason for placement of the bike racks is that it worked a little tight on space and didn't have any available to allocate to bike parking which is bike racks were placed outside of the building to accommodate the residents who wanted bicycles and serve anyone in community who rides a bike lock it up in order to visit retail spaces. -Mr. Guarino asked a couple of questions 1) Any ability for solar installation on this building there are no plans for solar panels to be installed we do have mechanical equipment on the roof and as it's shown in the rendering here this is just a bit of a depiction there will probably be more so Ms. Johanessan responded that she didn't know that it could even physically accommodate an adequate number of panels for that purpose 2) What are the storage capabilities for the tenants? 3) Will the tenants have access to the large parking facility that Mr Albert might be the best to address that I know it's a large facility Ms. Johanneson responded that she didn’t know how much it's being used by the current tenants but it would take stress off particularly if people had visitors and you don't want this traffic -Mr. Johnson had a few questions in regard to the height that goes beyond the roofline that it would be sufficient and also soften aerial views of the buildings next door. Ms. Johannsson responded that 2 foot parapet is an attractive architectural detail to accentuate the entrance can we talk about parapets though to hide any mechanical equipment that's 11

on the roof. I guess it's so high that not really the reason I was wondering if you can comment on that the height of the building equipment near the edge where it would be visible from the street - Mr. Smeraldo asked public safety related questions regarding the Fire Protection equipment I guess NFPA standards in regards to roof access and any elaboration to the about mechanical equipment on the roof. Ms. Johannsson explained standing looking at the pictures and access points is that correct building will be having automatic fire suppression system throughout NFPA 13 because of the height it will also have standpipes in stairwells which is another NFPA requirement access to the roof at this time is my roof hatch through two stairs which are located at the end of each wing the mechanical equipment on the roof is limited to bath exhaust fans HVAC for the common areas and there will not be a lot of it other things on the roof that do tend to take up space different vents and things pipes that come through so there's not a significant amount of equipment proposed for the roof. Mr. Smeraldo responded to Ms. Johannsson's saying that this is a 60 foot building and the only way to get to the roof through scuttle holes and there's no direct access (no staircase) Ms. Johanneson answered in the affirmative that the standpipe system which would be located in the stairwell not the entire building will have fire suppression and automatic fire suppression in all the common areas, all commercial areas, all the utility areas and everything will be have automatic fire suppression. - Mr. Trenk had one question in regard to an electric vehicle charging ordinance and if it fully complies with that that new construction. Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. McPherson to write that as a condition for the application. Mr. McPherson said that they read the ordinance and would have to come back and discuss that. Mr. Sullivan responded that they wouldn't want to come back and they will comply with whatever the ordinance required. Mr. Trenk followed that with handicap spots whatever the number of spots is requires the same number of electric vehicles so they only come back then you have to make sure it's included yes that was recent bill yeah if it applies obviously studied comply but assuming it applies on considering the size I would so I would proper condition that I would like to sce two

sure it's included yes that was recent bill yeah if it applies obviously studied comply but assuming it applies on considering the size I would so I would proper condition that I would like to sce two electric charging stations we can see where the ordinance falls in there but will have the board discussed after a facility this large are there any electric charging stations in 22 central with the other project I don't believe so OK well considering that the country is going green and putting in the a proposed station for somebody to ask for they would have to know that is available if they ask for it as opposed to is physically there which will all auto manufacturers are now talking about electric cars so it stands to reason that a project of this talking about the future we should look to the future with this project also so we'll see what the board says BOARD PROFESSIONALS -Mr. Hess asked two questions. One is we had raised the question in regards to letter Mail pick up that there's going to be a mailroom in the building and that the applicant will be verifying with the postmaster to ensure that second one is on the trash pickup testimony earlier was Central Ave was four Lane road 2 lanes in each direction trash truck is going to have to pull up someone will have to go in concerned about possible traffic impacts do you have any idea on the time of day when that would take place make sure that that's not going to cause a problem in traffic Mr. Sullivan responded that Mr. Alpert is going to comment regarding the hauling it is public or private and comment on timing and scheduling. 12

-Ms. Spach Trahan asked if the architect could confirm nation of the sign identification sign as it was said that it would be similar in size to the Central Avenue sign would it be still located on the west wing on that black brick area. Ms. Johannsen responded yes and in regards to the electric vehicle charging stations, she believes the reason that one space is identified site plan is that the municipal land use law was updated in 2019 to require that for all I can't speak to the to the ordinance in regards to the bike rack I No Public Questions Ms. Johanneson testimony concluded. -Mr. Alpert was sworn in by Mr. McPherson. Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Alpert covered topics in rapid succession. 1st would be I don't know the answer should you do the trash pickup for this building it must be the same for the other two buildings so they added another two times a week so the Superintendent works with both the municipal pickup and the private pick up knowing when they come the truck is never waiting for pick up. -Mr. Smeraldo asked if there was anything in between yeah park cars between the parking lot Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. McPherson to put that down to discuss. that I want to ensure that the firefighters are safe and if my mind would be if we have to very this for that that would make sense to me but let's discuss it with the board and the and the and Mr. Alpert it also might be worth now Mr. McPherson order on the spot in a lot of towns structures like that don't count towards building height just making make sure that our firefighters are secure as possible and it's also probably going to be good for any of your guys that need to do maintenance and is just trying to make sure that we identify the limit of the variance. -Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. Alpert about the parking at the facility on the Orange side that facility holds about 162 spots in the building Mr. Alpert responded that they set aside units for overflow as it turns out we have a lot of capacity in there we've had zero requests from the 22 Central building believe it or not we saw the lot of capacity so if it happens that this building which is 11 building further app has a desire to use it plenty of capability for access parking but would allow the people from 22 Central and 18 Central park there. -Councilwoman McCartney, asked about the current status of the New Jersey Transit station and the

f capability for access parking but would allow the people from 22 Central and 18 Central park there. -Councilwoman McCartney, asked about the current status of the New Jersey Transit station and the status because that was a topic of conversation when we were reviewing the 22 Central Ave application. Mr. Alpert responded that they have been working on this since 2006 with no end in sight it seems. Questions from Professionals -Mr. Hess’ only question had was on the trash pickup and how it's going to function. (ie: What time of the day would trash be anticipated to be picked up?) Mr. Alpert responded that his son is actually the property manager and sometimes in the morning, the super does it first thing and he rolls it out within 10 minutes of the pickup. Mr. Hess’ reiterated that he just wants to make sure it's not conflicting with the time on the road. Mr. Alpert responded that he doesn't think it is. -Miss Spach Trahan wanted to comment on the idea of having a stair bulkhead above. It's not interest in the redevelopment plan, but. The ordinance does permitted up to 10 feet. 13

And not be included in the height. That's what I thought, so it won't change the variance of risk. No Public Questions Mr. Alpert testimony concludes. - Mr. Charles Heydt entered on the record, sworn in by Mr. McPherson and was accepted by the Board as an expert in Planning. - Architecture for this application relates to the design and agrees that the additional building height does provide for some architectural comments through the main location, but noticing elevation residential lobby also increased the rate to account for the flood hazard area. -Mr. Heydt explained that these plans substantially comply with all the other requirements of this redevelopment plan. Eventhough the signage was raised an issue the applicant will comply. With respect to the substantial detriment and public welfare, that staircase should be exempt with spectrum building height calculation. He then suggested moving the staircase closer to Central Ave as it would probably be a beneficial location for that. This application is trying to limit the impact on general welfare, but I don't see any substantial impact here with this application. Board Questions -Mr. Johnson asked about density per acre and if it is mixed use. Mr. Heydt answered that it is approximately 70 per acre. - Mr. Johnson asked about the amount of buffer areas. Mr Heydt said there were two instead of one and both of them require a variance. - Mr. Johnson asked about the rationale for the staircase being moved. Mr. Heydt said that Central Ave is an impact street so visually speaking to mitigating the impacts of the back to Pop Element. But Central Ave is more the primary St, so sometimes you just watt to reduce impact altogether. -Councilwoman McCartney asked about a traffic study. Mr. Heydt responded that from this sort of mixed use development there wasn't one required. Professionals Questions -No questions ftdrn Mr. Hess. - Ms. Spach Trachan said heard the planner testify about the building height variance to the parapet and asked Mr. Heydt to provide testimony about the building, the variance to the lower roof lines. Mr. Heydt said that 22 Central Avenue is a five story structure as well. If you look at them, they are materially similar. Public Questions/Comments No questions/comments from Public Public Portion of Application is Closed Discussion - Chairman Bagoff read into the record the

look at them, they are materially similar. Public Questions/Comments No questions/comments from Public Public Portion of Application is Closed Discussion - Chairman Bagoff read into the record the “Pro Forma Site Plan- Conditions of Approval”. -Mr. McPherson discussed the conditions as the ones that were specifically mentioned and try to run through this. Clients with the color ordinance bill was that specifically mention yes yes OK. The other one I have here is the easement needed for the public. I guess the public parking easement or other legal document. OK. And the easement should be in perpetuity. Moving ahead sustainability checklist to be submitted. OK, this is the applicant shall work with the DP and conjunction with the township's office of the Manage of Emergency Management. On this is on the. I forgot what particular I think what I would 14

suggest Ken is obviously already have. Term is already read that we have permit from DEP to that we submit our. Our plan to OEM for review, right? Alright. What else we have? With the new EV charging station and Sustainability Ordinance, yes, thank you very much council on it. -Mr. Smeraldo, mentioned that in conjunction with the Fire Department, believes the Board should consider the approval of the staircase. But I think to let the professionals understand to have point of where this should be. If it's in the center of the building, it's almost equal distance for the firefighters. It's going to be at one of the two stairwells, though. -Chairman Bagoff said besides the first seven pro forma conditions terms mentioned. -The applicant shall comply with all applicable COAH ordinances related to affordable housing that's Council on affordable housing. -The applicant shall execute a writ providing the Township and easement to the public parking. -The applicant shall submit and make notations on sustainability checklist. Add the applicant shall submit its plan to the Office of Emergency Management for its review. - The applicant shall comply with the electric vehicle charging station sustainability ordinances. Applicant will will comply with all points agreed to in the letter from Mr. Hess dated April Sth, 2021 - The applicant shall figure out a word bill this the agreement acceptable to the Township on the public parking spaces that's incorporated into the easement condition. Tomorrow the applicant will provide access to the roof via a stairwell in conjunction with the fire Department, and I think the last one you mentioned, Mr. Chairman. -The applicant has requested relief for the height of the building, lot, non-buildable area coverage, two landscape buffers and the size of a one bedroom apartment. PB-20-03/The Alpert Group, LLC Motion: R. Bagoff Second: P. Smeraldo MOTION PASSES/RESOLUTION PASSES Bagoff: Y Smeraldo: Y Guarino: Y Trenk: Y Johnson: Y Wilkes: Y Klein: NA McCartney: Y McNair: Y -Councilwoman McCartney votes yes with the variances considering this long awaited major improvement to this area. MEETING ADJOURNED at 11:16PM. Called by witty Adopted: 9 A loa 2] id HULL Yt] Myla Diaad L. Chandler Township of West Orange Planning Board