April 15, 2026, Planning Board Regular Meeting Meeting Minutes

ders for gates. Mr. Cardoza asked whether affordable housing units would have equal finishes and amenities. Ms. Moore confirmed that affordable units would be indistinguishable from market-rate units. Affordable residents would have equal access to amenities and common areas. The only distinction would be income qualification under affordable housing regulations. Mr. Cardoza also requested stronger visual striping and safety markings around the garage ingress and egress points, especially near the western entrance adjacent to Sheridan Avenue. Mr. Facchino stated the applicant agreed to consider additional warning measures. Ms. Kapferer asked if crosswalks will be provided across the driveway entrances off of Northfield. Mr. Facchino stated there’s a crosswalk on the westerly one, but both can be done. Ms. Kapferer asked whether any modifications to the culvert itself would be required. Mr. Facchino stated the project would not significantly alter the culvert. The design intentionally minimizes fill over the culvert. Existing drainage paths and inlet connections are largely being preserved. The work mainly involves tying new roof drainage into existing structures. Ms. Kapferer asked whether inlet capacity analyses had been performed to ensure the new stormwater inlets would adequately capture runoff. Mr. Facchino confirmed that an analysis had been completed in the stormwater report and can handle the flow. 15

Mr. Cardoza asked how garbage collection would operate within the parking structure. Mr. Facchino stated large front-loading garbage trucks would not fit. Smaller rear- loading garbage trucks would likely be used instead. Pickup frequency would depend on the building’s actual waste generation. PROFESSIONAL QUESTIONS Ms. Apte asked if there would be circulation issues as the tandem spaces are being used. Ms. Moore deferred the question to the traffic engineer. Ms. Apte requested revised circulation diagrams showing safe maneuvering for garbage trucks on both the eastern and western sides of the site. Mr. Facchino agreed to provide circulation analyses using appropriately sized trucks. Several board members deferred many operational questions to future architectural testimony. Ms. Apte requested written confirmation from the township fire department regarding the revised location of EV charging spaces and ADA spaces. Ms. Moore agreed this could be made a condition of approval. Ms. Apte asked how snow removal would be handled in open parking areas and whether stackers would be impacted! Mr. Facchino stated snow would be managed using small equipment. Minor storms would allow on-site snow stacking. Major storms would require snow hauling off-site by truck. Ms. Apte discussed landscaping adjacent to a proposed modular block wall. Mr. Facchino stated the wall would only reach approximately two feet in height. The township forester would review the plan. Ms. Apte asked if revised landscaping submissions had already been sent to the Township Forester. Mr. Facchino stated it was submitted, and was told to go forward with the approval process. Ms. Apte raised concerns about lighting levels along Sheridan Avenue. Mr. Facchino stated he personally visited the site at night and agreed additional lighting would improve visibility and aesthetics. Ms. Apte revisited earlier concerns regarding steep slope disturbance. Mr. Facchino testified that revised plans eliminated all disturbance to steep slopes. Mr. MacNeill asked whether EV spaces would be installed immediately or phased as “make-ready” spaces. Mr. Facchino initially stated state law allows phased installation. Ms. Moore then clarified the developer intends to install all EV charging infrastructure from the outset rather than phase installation over time. Mr. MacNeill asked whether the applicant could

tion. Ms. Moore then clarified the developer intends to install all EV charging infrastructure from the outset rather than phase installation over time. Mr. MacNeill asked whether the applicant could comply with remaining technical stormwater management comments from his April 10, 2026 review letter, particularly regarding the O&M manual, recording requirements, and minor revisions. Mr. Facchino confirmed the applicant would comply with those engineering comments. PUBLIC QUESTION Kevin Malanga (Ridge Road) asked Mr. Facchino about endangered species on the site. Mr. Facchino confirmed he was unaware of any endangered species on the property. Mr. Malanga asked if Mr. Facchino is an environmental biologist and what the basis of his statement is. Mr. Facchino said he is not an environmental biologist. Mr. Facchino emphasized that the applicant is not disturbing the steep slopes.

Mr. Malanga asked about the dimensions of the current and proposed buildings. Mr. Facchino stated existing building frontage was stated to be approximately 150 feet long. The proposed building frontage was stated to be approximately 408 feet long. Mr. Malanga questioned the existing building height listed as 31 feet. Mr. Facchino said the height was likely measured to the roof peak. Mr. Malanga asked whether the applicant considered the proposal an improvement over the existing nonconformity. Mr. Facchino said he was not claiming the nonconformity itself was improved. Mr. Malanga asked regarding tree placement in the parking lot under Township Ordinance 25-12.10. He asked whether the applicant would install trees inside the parking lot instead of primarily along the perimeter. Mr. Facchino said he preferred perimeter planting because interior parking-lot trees would receive limited sunlight due to surrounding buildings. Edith Behr (Dogwood Drive) asked about pedestrian circulation, she asked whether sidewalks and pedestrian pathways would exist throughout the site or whether people would walk through parking areas. Mr. Facchino deferred the question to the architect and traffic engineer. Seth Weisleder (Howell Drive) asked about roadway changes, he confirmed with Mr. Facchino that the current deceleration lane on Northfield Avenue is paved and part of the county roadway. Mr. Weisleder asked if Mr. Facchino has been in communication with the county regarding the lane. Mr. Facchino said he had met with the county during a pre-application meeting and they indicated no objection to removing the deceleration lane. Mr. Weisleder also asked about gate operations and vehicle stacking. Mr. Facchino explained resident access would use a full gate, not a simple arm barrier. Mr. Weisleder asked how many vehicles could queue before backing onto Northfield Avenue. The question was deferred to the traffic engineer. Richard Gajdek asked why no retaining wall was proposed. Mr. Facchino responded that the revised plan intentionally avoided disturbing the steep slopes, eliminating the need for a retaining wall in his view. Mr. Facchino added that the additional vegetation and evergreen plantings would help stabilize the area naturally. o Mr. Gajdek argued that proposed landscaping appeared to be located at the base of the slope rather than on the slope itself and

tion and evergreen plantings would help stabilize the area naturally. o Mr. Gajdek argued that proposed landscaping appeared to be located at the base of the slope rather than on the slope itself and therefore would not adequately stabilize it. o Mr. Facchino agreed to consult with the project forester about adding additional plantings if necessary. Mr. Gajdek requested additional visual buffering because the proposed structure would sit significantly above neighboring properties. Mr. Facchino said the project was already required to add 16 additional trees and offered to work with neighbors and the township forester on the placement of evergreen screening trees. Sasha Eaton (Lenox Terrace) raised concerns about visibility and slope stability. She said her home overlooks the parking lot area and asked how high the building would appear relative to the slope top and surrounding terrain. Mr. Facchino deferred visual/elevation questions to the architect and stated the applicant would consider additional trees if required. Christine Bosco (Mason Place) discussed prior mudslide issues. Ms. Bosco strongly advocated for a retaining wall because of continuing erosion concerns. Mr. Facchino stated that the redesign aimed to avoid disturbing the steep slopes and stated he would need a geotechnical engineer to determine whether slope stability requires intervention.

- Ms. Bosco also raised concerns about an open brook on the east side of the property and drainage conditions. - Ms. Bosco asked about EV charging stations and lighting near neighboring homes. Mr. Facchino confirmed EV charging stations would be located at lower grade near the neighboring properties. He stated all lighting would be downlit and directed away from homes. - Ms. Bosco reiterated the need for substantial tree planting regardless of whether a retaining wall was built. - Rachel Klein (Howell Drive) asked whether the applicant had completed an off-site sewer capacity analysis. Mr. Facchino admitted that analysis had not yet been completed. - Ms, Klein asked what would happen if the municipal sewer system could not handle approximately 100 additional residential units. Mr. Facchino explained DEP approval would require downstream capacity analysis. He stated that if the system lacked capacity, the applicant would be required to upgrade the town system before proceeding. - Justin Goldsman (Moran Road) asked if the car lift parking system would only be available to residents, not visitors. Mr. Facchino confirmed that was correct. - Mr. Goldsman asked if the project lighting would use LED fixtures. Mr. Facchino confirmed yes. - Mr. Goldsman referenced environmental documents discussing heat-island and questioned whether rooftop planters on an amenity deck were sufficient mitigation for increased paved parking surfaces. Mr. Facchino deferred heat-island design questions to the architect. - Mr. Goldsman asked about visitor parking overflow and potential spillover onto nearby school and residential streets. Mr. Facchino said the parking calculations complied with Residential Site Improvement Standards and township requirements, including visitor parking demand. - Mr. Goldsman further asked whether wildlife impacts on the nearby Turtle Back Zoo had been considered during construction. Mr. Facchino said soil conservation inspections would monitor dust and erosion during construction. He believes the site is far enough from the zoo that construction noise impacts would likely be minimal, though he cannot provide testimony regarding sound. *The application has been carried to the next Planning Board regular meeting on May 6, 2026, without further notice in person, starting at 6:30 pm. * stomtin BAAS