← Paul Test
doc10233 _12202021-376.pdf
⬇ Export JSONBadge numbers are the reading order (depth-first). Nested children have dashed borders; grandchildren dotted. Hover a box for its type, text and attributes.
Page 1
25 item(s)
JSON
table (1)
table_cell (3)
text (20)
title (1)
1 · TITLE
2 · TEXT
3 · TABLE
4
5
6
7 · TEXT
8 · TEXT
9 · TEXT
10 · TEXT
11 · TEXT
12 · TEXT
13 · TEXT
14 · TEXT
15 · TEXT
16 · TEXT
17 · TEXT
18 · TEXT
19 · TEXT
20 · TEXT
21 · TEXT
22 · TEXT
23 · TEXT
24 · TEXT
25 · TEXT
Page 1 JSON
{
"document_id": 10233,
"page": 1,
"width_pt": 612,
"height_pt": 1008,
"rotation": 0,
"pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
"engine": "paddleocr_vl",
"source_run_id": 10344,
"item_count": 25,
"counts_by_type": {
"table": 1,
"table_cell": 3,
"text": 20,
"title": 1
},
"build_ms": 10,
"items": [
{
"id": "p1.1",
"order": 1,
"type": "title",
"bbox": {
"l": 204,
"t": 962.16,
"r": 415.92,
"b": 934.56
},
"text": "JACKSON TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD MEETING\nMONDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2021",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "doc_title"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p1.2",
"order": 2,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 914.64,
"r": 576.96,
"b": 871.68
},
"text": "The December 20, 2021 meeting of the Jackson Township Board was called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Planning Board Secretary, Denise Buono Morrison with a salute to the flag by all present. Attorney Sean Gertner read the Open Public Meetings Act Statement noting that adequate notice has been provided and advertised in the manner prescribed by law."
},
{
"id": "p1.3",
"order": 3,
"type": "table",
"bbox": {
"l": 58.8,
"t": 854.88,
"r": 435.6,
"b": 802.8
},
"text": "",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "table",
"n_rows": 1,
"n_cols": 3,
"integrity": {
"cells_checked": 3,
"cells_flagged": 0
}
},
"children": [
{
"id": "p1.3.1",
"order": 4,
"type": "table_cell",
"bbox": {
"l": 63.349984,
"t": 851.720739,
"r": 104.46081,
"b": 842.720741
},
"text": "ROLL CALL:",
"attrs": {
"row": 0,
"col": 0,
"rowspan": 1,
"colspan": 1,
"bbox_refit": true
}
},
{
"id": "p1.3.2",
"order": 5,
"type": "table_cell",
"bbox": {
"l": 135.349966,
"t": 851.720739,
"r": 214.047212,
"b": 804.830751
},
"text": "Tim Dolan\nDr. Michele Campbell\nMordechai Burnstein\nTsvi Herman- Alt #2",
"attrs": {
"row": 0,
"col": 1,
"rowspan": 1,
"colspan": 1,
"bbox_refit": true,
"merged_continuation": true
}
},
{
"id": "p1.3.3",
"order": 6,
"type": "table_cell",
"bbox": {
"l": 279.34993,
"t": 851.720739,
"r": 433.117449,
"b": 804.830751
},
"text": "Terence Wall, Township Representative\nJoseph Riccardi, Mayor's Designee- virtual\nLen Haring, Board Vice Chairman\nRobert Hudak, Board Chairman",
"attrs": {
"row": 0,
"col": 2,
"rowspan": 1,
"colspan": 1,
"bbox_refit": true,
"merged_continuation": true
}
}
]
},
{
"id": "p1.4",
"order": 7,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 61.2,
"t": 791.28,
"r": 337.92,
"b": 778.8
},
"text": "Absent: Jeffrey Riker, Manuela Brito-Alt #1, Martin Flemming, Councilman"
},
{
"id": "p1.5",
"order": 8,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 765.84,
"r": 573.84,
"b": 739.68
},
"text": "Also Present: Planning Board Attorney Sean Gertner, M.r. Peters, Board Planner, Doug Klee, Board Engineer, Denise Buono, Planning Board Secretary, Anthony Jacob, Township I.T. representative, and Danielle Sinowitz, Planning Board Recording Secretary."
},
{
"id": "p1.6",
"order": 9,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 61.2,
"t": 727.92,
"r": 575.76,
"b": 714.48
},
"text": "Motion to approve regular meeting minutes from November 15, 2021 by CAMPBELL/ Haring. Yes: Campbell, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.7",
"order": 10,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 703.2,
"r": 553.68,
"b": 676.8
},
"text": "Payment of Recording Secretary, Danielle Sinowitz, tor 12/20/21 motioned by HAKING/ Campbell. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.8",
"order": 11,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 664.8,
"r": 575.52,
"b": 639.12
},
"text": "Resolutions: 2021-26: Resolution approving meeting dates and times for the CY 2022- Motion to approve by Herman/ Haring. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.9",
"order": 12,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 626.88,
"r": 551.52,
"b": 601.44
},
"text": "2021-27: Casey Hunter, Block 4101, Lots 18 & 19, Jackson Woods- Motion to approve by HARING/ Dolan. Yes: Dolan, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.10",
"order": 13,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 589.68,
"r": 544.8,
"b": 564.24
},
"text": "2021-28: MAPLEWOOD ESTATES, Block 17201, Lots 36.01 & 36.13, Tuxedo Court- Motion to approve by HARING/ Campbell. Yes: Campbell, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.11",
"order": 14,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 552,
"r": 565.92,
"b": 527.04
},
"text": "2021-29: Jackson Properties, Block 2101, Lots 5.02 & 5.03, Hyson Road- Motion to approve by CAM PBELL/ Haring. Yes: Campbell, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.12",
"order": 15,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 515.04,
"r": 574.8,
"b": 488.88
},
"text": "2021-30: Jackson Woods, Block 4101m Lots 18 & 19, Jackson Woods-Motion to approve by CAM PBELL/ Burnstein. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.13",
"order": 16,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 477.6,
"r": 569.28,
"b": 438.96
},
"text": "Changes to the Agenda: APPLICATIONS TO BE CARRIED FOR SCHEDULING: Application 2. W. Commodore Business Park, Block 2603, Lot 13, W. Commodore Blvd on this evening's agenda- Mr. Gertner suggested this be carried to the reorganization date of January 10, 2021. Motion to carry to CAM PBELL/ Dolan. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.14",
"order": 17,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 427.92,
"r": 543.6,
"b": 401.76
},
"text": "Lees Village, Block 11901, Lot 40, Leesville Road- Motion to carry to February 7, 2022 by RICCARDI/ Haring. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.15",
"order": 18,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 390.48,
"r": 563.28,
"b": 365.28
},
"text": "Denton Holdings, Block 20701, Lot 2, Denton Lane- Motion to carry to January 24, 2022 by RICCARDI/ Campbell. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.16",
"order": 19,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 353.04,
"r": 565.68,
"b": 327.12
},
"text": "146 N. County Line Road, LLC, Block 5301, Lot 12, 146 N. County Line Road- Motion to carry to January 24, 2022 by HARING/ Campbell. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.17",
"order": 20,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 316.32,
"r": 568.56,
"b": 289.92
},
"text": "BM H Property 1, LLC, Block 19701, Lots 13.01, 13.02, 13.03, 13.04 & 13.05, East Veterans Highway- Motion to carry to February 7, 2022 by HARING/ Burnstein. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.18",
"order": 21,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 61.92,
"t": 276.72,
"r": 577.92,
"b": 254.88
},
"text": "Rutherford Estates, Block 11701, Lots 9, 25, 26 & 33- Motion to carry to February 28, 2022 by CAM PBELL/ Burnstein. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.19",
"order": 22,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 241.44,
"r": 566.88,
"b": 215.52
},
"text": "28 N. Cooks Bridge Road, LLC, Block 8601, Lot 41- Motion to carry to February 28, 2022 by CAM PBELL/ Burnstein. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.20",
"order": 23,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 204.24,
"r": 573.12,
"b": 179.04
},
"text": "Mr. Peters asked if there will be revised plans. Mr. Alfieri- attorney for the applicant- stated if there are no plans submitted by February 28, 2022 this will be dismissed without prejudice"
},
{
"id": "p1.21",
"order": 24,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 61.44,
"t": 167.28,
"r": 566.88,
"b": 141.12
},
"text": "Application 4. Jackson Woods S.E Clubhouse, Block 4101, Lot 20.02, Freehold Road on this evening agenda- Motion to carry to February 28, 2022 by CAM PBELL/ Burnstein. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p1.22",
"order": 25,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 129.84,
"r": 556.56,
"b": 27.6
},
"text": "Board Matters for Discussion: Amended Housing Element and Fair Share plan 2017: Peter Van Den Kooy- CME Associates- sworn-\nstated this was with the 2017 fair share plan and there a number of reports with the court master and the reports were obtained by\nthe township and one condition of compliance was to comply with the court master plan and there were some housekeeping issues\nto be done during the court process and no numbers of units are changing its just an element in the 2017 master plan, and this is\nadding a care one facility and it has been updated to 10 units and there were 10 units created in that prior round and there were\nsome units carried and as a result in that there was a mechanism and there was a build out in the R-2 and R-3 zone and the units have\nbeen reduced and this will help maintain compliance. Mr. Klee agreed with the testimony placed on the record. Mr. Wall added this is\npart of insuring the town is in compliance and CME has been working with Mr. Serinian to assure the Mayor, Council, and Planning"
}
],
"excluded_furniture": {
"first": [],
"last": []
}
}
Page 2
12 item(s)
JSON
header (2)
text (10)
1 · HEADER
2 · HEADER
3 · TEXT
4 · TEXT
5 · TEXT
6 · TEXT
7 · TEXT
8 · TEXT
9 · TEXT
10 · TEXT
11 · TEXT
12 · TEXT
Page 2 JSON
{
"document_id": 10233,
"page": 2,
"width_pt": 612,
"height_pt": 1008,
"rotation": 0,
"pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
"engine": "paddleocr_vl",
"source_run_id": 10344,
"item_count": 12,
"counts_by_type": {
"header": 2,
"text": 10
},
"build_ms": 4,
"items": [
{
"id": "p2.1",
"order": 1,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 980.16,
"r": 307.92,
"b": 967.92
},
"text": "Jackson Township Planning Board Meeting of December 20, 2021",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "header"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p2.2",
"order": 2,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 522.48,
"t": 980.4,
"r": 567.36,
"b": 968.4
},
"text": "Page 2 of 6",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "number"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p2.3",
"order": 3,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60,
"t": 955.68,
"r": 548.4,
"b": 890.88
},
"text": "Board and professionals are working with the set of professionals to assure everyone is working off the same material and want to assure the rules and regulations are compliant. Mr. Hudak asked if Mr. Wall was in agreement with the testimony. Mr. Wall said yes, and mentioned this is formally known as COAH and there are many different sides of the issue and the Township is trying to work with the people within the law and the obligations and the application process will help the residents and there should be someone with specialized services on the Board and that expertise is needed for all those involved."
},
{
"id": "p2.4",
"order": 4,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 880.56,
"r": 544.8,
"b": 855.6
},
"text": "Opened public comment; seeing no come forward motion to close public comment by HARING/ Burnstein. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p2.5",
"order": 5,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 842.88,
"r": 484.08,
"b": 829.68
},
"text": "Motion to approve by DOLAN/ Campbell. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p2.6",
"order": 6,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.52,
"t": 818.64,
"r": 555.6,
"b": 715.68
},
"text": "Ordinance No. 32-21 AN ORDINANCE AM ENDING CHAPTER 244-5701 ENTITLED \"M UNC/ HC MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER/\nHIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE\" TO PERMIT AN ADDITIONAL PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USE: Ord - M r. Peters stated the mixed use zone is the area near Glory's Market and that zoning has been in place for about 20 years and the Governing Body is adding an additional use in that area to be listed which generally includes things that are in the Neighborhood Commercial zone and based upon the land development patterns where this is a permitted use it was thought by the Governing Body to include this in the Jackson 21 area and the purpose is that there are no tenants brought in based on the existing permitted uses and upon review the additional was determined to help bring those properties to fruition and the Board should find it not inconsistent with the master plan. Mr. Gertner concurred and advised this has gone through the planning process by 1st reading."
},
{
"id": "p2.7",
"order": 7,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.24,
"t": 705.12,
"r": 551.76,
"b": 679.2
},
"text": "Opened public comment; seeing no one come forward motion to close public comment by CAMPBELL/ Haring. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p2.8",
"order": 8,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.24,
"t": 667.2,
"r": 485.52,
"b": 654
},
"text": "Motion to approve by DOLAN/ Burnstein. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p2.9",
"order": 9,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 641.76,
"r": 552.72,
"b": 590.64
},
"text": "Applications: 1. Wright Debow Road, LLC, Block 401, Lot 9, Wright Debow Road- M r. Klee stated this application is a continuation that involves 700,000SF where there is warehouse and office space and M r. Kennel was testifying on the intersection improvements that are imposed. M r. Peters stated there is a report dated December 20, 2021 and this zone has not changed and M r. Kennel testimony."
},
{
"id": "p2.10",
"order": 10,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.28,
"t": 579.6,
"r": 573.36,
"b": 425.76
},
"text": "Sal Alfieri- attorney for the applicant- welcomed the new Board members and stated to refresh the Board this as indicated is a permitted use in the zone and there are certain performance standards and there will be no retail sales and all materials will be stored inside the building and there is no chemical or hazardous materials and there is an appeal pending on A&A truck parts and that is at the Appellate division and if that is approved as a conforming use the use variance will be abandoned and there are 2 parking spaces encroaching and they have been eliminated and there is more than enough parking on site and all fencing requirements will be complied with and title 39 will be dedicated to the Town. Mr. Alfieri advised the engineering testimony was completed and Mr. Kennel did provide traffic testimony and there was a hold up on the intersection and marked as Exhibit A-5 in the last hearing and the 2 Zoning Board resolutions were noted and on the resolution that was adopted on August 7, 2017 there is a condition which says the application will address comments with the Ocean County officials and the Township Engineer and the applicant will pay the fair share and the recommended improvements, and the same condition can apply here and it's an offsite improvement and there is no argument there and the intersection improvement will be done and there has been a contract to put the road improvements into place and the final plans are not completed however that condition will protect the Board going forward."
},
{
"id": "p2.11",
"order": 11,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.52,
"t": 415.68,
"r": 577.2,
"b": 198.48
},
"text": "Scott Kennel- previously sworn and accepted- Mr. Alfieri asked as it relates to the intersection can that be described. Mr. Kennel stated there was a discussion with the Ocean County Engineer about the realignment with Wright Debow Road so when it intersects with Commodore it'll be a 90 degree angle and the realignment will be west of Burke Road so it will make a more traditional intersection and currently its off set and it will be two (2) off set \"T\" to accommodate the traffic. Mr. Gertner stated often this Board talks about the balance between the offsite improvements and the county process to demand for the fare share for improvement, and that has been spoken too. Mr. Alfieri stated the applicant will do the work not a fair share contribution. Mr. Gertner asked if that is because the applicant will be purchasing the property required to make the improvements. Mr. Alfieri said that was correct. Mr. Gertner asked if that removes the argument of the offsite improvements. Mr. Alfieri said that was correct. Mr. Gertner noted it is then part of the site. Mr. Kennel advised that was correct, the land needed to fix the road is being obtained. Mr. Alfieri stated the benefit here is that there is only a fair share contribution asked for and this is being improved fully. Mr. Peters mentioned in Mr. Kennel's June 14, 2021 report on page 6 the intersection of 536 and Wright Debow road, it was indicated there will be an improvement to entering and exiting Wright Debow road from 526 and it was noted there would be land to be acquired and doesn't the improvement need to be seen before approving it, there has to be a physical improvement associated with this site and it will be done with approval from the county. Mr. Hudak agreed, this Board needs to see the improvement and how it will be done and the professionals need to review and sign off and there are most likely residents who will have comment or concern as well. Mr. Alfieri agreed to extent, there should be preliminary approval and there will be a designed road and this will come back and if there is no approval then this will be a waste and there should be preliminary approval granted and before a CO is obtained the road should be completed. Mr. Gertner took no exception to the statement made."
},
{
"id": "p2.12",
"order": 12,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.28,
"t": 188.16,
"r": 574.8,
"b": 22.8
},
"text": "M r. Peters stated there was an intersection analysis done to route 526 and Wright Debow Road and from that location can there be testimony on what happens with the truck distribution when they get to this intersection. M r. Kennel stated all truck traffic will be oriented from Wright Debow Road, there will be no trucks permitted to go west to route 537 where the majority of that roadway is residential in nature and the character of that roadway is designed to have trucks go to Wright Debow Road and there were assumptions done on how the road is designed and approximately 75% of the traffic will be to and from Glory's for access to 195 and work west to 537 to access 195 and there is a signalized portion of truck traffic oriented to 195. M r. Peters asked what happens when 75% of this hits the Glory's intersection, are there conditions there that should be implemented. M r. Kennel stated as far as the county is considered there is nothing that has been accessed, there was comment to re-do that intersection and that is suited for improvement, and it's part of the Jackson Woods application and this site would be adding in the morning peak hour 25 to 28 trucks and 30 in the afternoon peak hours. M r. Peters advised the concern the Board has is a truck every 2 minutes during peak hour, and there is question if the Board asks the applicant or the county if there is a need for an improvement at that intersection. M r. Kennel stated that becomes an offsite condition and this is subject to Ocean County review and that intersection will have to be analyzed. M r. Peters hoped at some pint there would be a response from the county that says what will be going on, and it's not insignificant and it deserves some response from the applicant or the county. M r. Alfieri"
}
],
"excluded_furniture": {
"first": [],
"last": []
}
}
Page 3
9 item(s)
JSON
header (2)
text (7)
1 · HEADER
2 · HEADER
3 · TEXT
4 · TEXT
5 · TEXT
6 · TEXT
7 · TEXT
8 · TEXT
9 · TEXT
Page 3 JSON
{
"document_id": 10233,
"page": 3,
"width_pt": 612,
"height_pt": 1008,
"rotation": 0,
"pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
"engine": "paddleocr_vl",
"source_run_id": 10344,
"item_count": 9,
"counts_by_type": {
"header": 2,
"text": 7
},
"build_ms": 5,
"items": [
{
"id": "p3.1",
"order": 1,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 979.92,
"r": 307.92,
"b": 968.16
},
"text": "Jackson Township Planning Board Meeting of December 20, 2021",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "header"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p3.2",
"order": 2,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 522.48,
"t": 979.92,
"r": 567.36,
"b": 968.64
},
"text": "Page 3 of 6",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "number"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p3.3",
"order": 3,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.28,
"t": 955.68,
"r": 577.44,
"b": 525.6
},
"text": "stated the other intersection is being funded. Mr. Peters stated there is concern with the standard of the road and it may be 90% saying it's the town's problem however the town may need to be on notice to drive 70 vehicles an hour. Mr. Kennel advised there are other uses on Wright Debow Road with existing truck traffic. Mr. Peters mentioned it was glanced over and while Wright Debow Road is a Township Road, as engineers the roads need to be looked at to assure its sufficient and it may not be the applicant however someone needs to tell the town that something is happening and there should be a way to have the Board, the town and the Board Engineer to get together to make sure the town doesn't get into a bad spot and there should be a conversation had to assure the road is adequate. Mr. Alfieri stated there are no issues to contact the township engineer to determine the Wright Debow pavement and at final there will be a report. Mr. Hudak asked if a traffic study is done for offsite conditions. Mr. Kennel mentioned that typically with permitted uses the intersections that have more than 100 peak hour trips it's un canny and at route 526 there is not a 100 vehicle trip count and if there were a zoning application it's up to the purview of the Board to see how detailed the report or study would be. Mr. Hudak asked if the report took into consideration the approval on route 526 and Paterson Road. Mr. Kennel stated there was a project approved of 30,000 SF plus or minus as well as the warehouse of 50,000 SF plus or minus and the development on Paterson Road was a contractors warehouse and that would be 30 peak hour trips and that would be in the growth rate and if that is added to the growth rate the counts would be ok. Mr. Hudak asked if the intersection that will be improved with all the new traffic coming in and aligning it with Burke Road would there be a traffic signal required. Mr. Kennel advised if it were extended east the traffic is large enough for a signal however 250' west of Burke Road will be improved. Dr. Campbell raised concern about the \"T\", its taking from an angled street and squaring it off, and hearing the board members it can be pictured by some but not all and this time of year is crazy and these things need to be seen. Mr. Kennel mentioned a document has not been made because it's still in the works. Mr. Alfieri stated the use variance for the class a recycling center had 43 trips a day and they were required to pay a fair share contribution and those improvements may never be made so at least in this case it's going to happen. Mr. Gertner stated with regard to the Glory's Market intersection since it appears there has been request for preliminary approval, will the count discussions be reported back. Mr. Alfieri said yes. Mr. Dolan mentioned with talking about Burke Road and route 526 and Wright Debow Road, is there attention to Paterson Road as there are schools proposed with bus traffic. Mr. Kennel stated this site is adding 30-40 peak hour trips and it was intended to be evaluated and right now there is a deadline with the intersection improvement specifically. Mr. Hudak stated with all the approvals for Jackson 21 and how there is so much truck traffic going through the residential areas on roads that are not designed for this and competing with school buses, it's just not turning out the way it would be accepted in this area, not to mention the traffic going to 527. Mr. Kennel advised that was limited to passenger vehicles and employee vehicles and the site is projecting 34 peak hour trips in the morning and 37 in the afternoon with 2 way traffic on Wright Debow Road to Route 527. Mr. Hudak asked would it be possible to make left from Wright Debow to 537. Mr. Kennel said no, and stated it will be prohibited and that is the way the site plan was developed. Mr. Gertner stated the message of the Planning Board to the county has been loud and clear and the county needs to be more aware of the master plan of the Township and the county while it may be dualizing county line road from the Lakewood border to the lake its done nothing passed that to the west and for instance the Planning Board just found that to be consistent with the master plan and that consistency with the master plan has not been caught up to by the county and the Board direction is giving the applicant between preliminary and final approval to take the message to the county to look. Mr. Alfieri stated there is no problem taking the message to the County. Mr. Hudak noted safety is a concern and it needs to be taken into consideration.",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "abstract"
}
},
{
"id": "p3.4",
"order": 4,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 514.08,
"r": 559.68,
"b": 488.4
},
"text": "Opened public comment; seeing no one come forward, motion to close public comment by HARING/ Campbell. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p3.5",
"order": 5,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 476.64,
"r": 572.4,
"b": 451.44
},
"text": "Motion to approve preliminary approval with the stipulations place on the record for revised plan by CAM PBELL/ Burnstein/ Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p3.6",
"order": 6,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 439.68,
"r": 305.76,
"b": 426.96
},
"text": "Recess taken at 9:00 p.m. reconvened by Mr. Hudak at 9:15 p.m."
},
{
"id": "p3.7",
"order": 7,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.28,
"t": 414.96,
"r": 553.44,
"b": 287.28
},
"text": "3. Jackson Project, LLC, Block 7309, Lots 13 & 13- Mr. Klee stated this is an application for preliminary and final major site plan approval for an office building, and there is no basement in the application, the project does require variance approval for lot area and depth and the setback, there is a front yard variance setback required and there is some testimony that should be heard weather or not there are residential uses within the project, and the project should have hours of operations testified too and there has been a traffic impact analysis and the findings of that report should be placed on the record, there is a right in right out configuration and there is an internal safety isle required that is short of 10' and the applicant is compliant, and the grading and drainage should be spoken too and there is lighting and landscaping that should be spoken too and there are 2 sign variances identified and there is a ground sign setback variance. Mr. Peters stated there is a report dated December 13, 2021 and this site is located where office space is permitted use and the variances were listed and there may be an additional required for the dumpster structure and there are a number of design waivers listed and the parking report should be gone through as well as the lighting and landscaping.",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "abstract"
}
},
{
"id": "p3.8",
"order": 8,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 276.48,
"r": 546.72,
"b": 237.6
},
"text": "Sal Alfieri- attorney for the applicant- stated this is an undersized lot and there were buy sell letters and that should have been submitted as an exhibit and they can be provided, there was a response received and the owners of 7 Oak Drive had a discussion of selling the rear of the property which will be marked as Exhibit A-6"
},
{
"id": "p3.9",
"order": 9,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.04,
"t": 226.32,
"r": 550.32,
"b": 22.8
},
"text": "Graham Macfarlane- professional Engineer and Planner, licensed in the state of NJ and has been before this Board on numerous occasion and has been providing testimony on those planning and engineering matters- credentials accepted- sworn- handed out a package that will be Exhibit A-1 through A-5 and Exhibit A-1 is the site plan over view, and as said there were requests sent and after consolidation of lots 12 and 13 it would be 37,000SF and the minimum lot size is 40,000SF and if there was a portion of lot 4 to be bought or sold who had an interest their existing lot is 200x200 which is 20,000SF and buying a portion of that lot doesn't bring this into conformance and for information there is not one property that conforms to the minimum lot size in the area. Mr. Macfarlane mentioned there is also an Ariel that is Exhibit A-4 and that shows the proposed footprint and the existing buildings along County Line Road and it shows the existing lots and it shows lots 9-13 and 14-16 and the subject lot is 37,000SF where 40,000SF is required and buying another portion of a surrounding lot would not bring this to conformance. Mr. Gertner noted there is an obligation to respond indicating the positions that a partial purchase while it may bring this lot into conference it would further bring a non-conformity to the lot. Mr. Alfieri agreed to provide a response. Mr. Macfarlane mentioned when all that is in play this lot has a hardship to grant a variance for lot area and depth as the existing conditions again do not meet the standards, and the proposed building is in the center of the exhibit and within this zone the required front yard setback is 60' and there was a study done to the existing building pattern and it can be seen there were tabulations on the existing setbacks on the existing building on County Line Road, lot 10 is 31', lot 11 is 32', and on the subject premises there are currently 2 buildings and 2056 County Line and 2052 County Line were 26' and 17' from the right of way line and it was decided to put this building in an area that would not give an impact on",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "abstract"
}
}
],
"excluded_furniture": {
"first": [],
"last": []
}
}
Page 4
7 item(s)
JSON
header (2)
text (5)
1 · HEADER
2 · HEADER
3 · TEXT
4 · TEXT
5 · TEXT
6 · TEXT
7
Page 4 JSON
{
"document_id": 10233,
"page": 4,
"width_pt": 612,
"height_pt": 1008,
"rotation": 0,
"pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
"engine": "paddleocr_vl",
"source_run_id": 10344,
"item_count": 7,
"counts_by_type": {
"header": 2,
"text": 5
},
"build_ms": 5,
"items": [
{
"id": "p4.1",
"order": 1,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 979.92,
"r": 307.68,
"b": 968.16
},
"text": "Jackson Township Planning Board Meeting of December 20, 2021",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "header"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p4.2",
"order": 2,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 522.48,
"t": 980.16,
"r": 567.36,
"b": 968.64
},
"text": "Page 4 of 6",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "number"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p4.3",
"order": 3,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 955.2,
"r": 553.68,
"b": 727.68
},
"text": "another building and it was decided the proposed building be back 30' from the right of way line, and the building was pushed back 40' and that site visibility is 500'. Exhibit A-3 shows the landscape plan and the street scape was desired to be made very attractive and there was upgraded landscape and this design improves the street scape and benefits the community and that is why there was relief sought for the front yard setback and Exhibit A-5 is a rendering of the building and it can be seen that this building is proposed to be a gateway structure from Lakewood and Jackson and it's a vision to be unique and has value of presentation and there is a rendering to show the treatments of the building and one reason why this was stated it was not to be pushed through fully and there were some comments on the building and it was settled and it's an innovative design and it's a huge upgrade to what is on the site now and input is welcomed on the concept and there were discussions on a rooftop space or a me signee and it was decided to keep that removed and its a 2 story building and the applicant would like some use of the rooftop as an outdoor space for a break or a phone call, and there is some feedback from the neighbors behind the site and there was concern of the activity on the rooftop. Mr. Alfieri stated the applicant also agreed it would be for use of the tenants and it would be from 9 a.m. -5 p.m. so there would be no activity later than 5 pm. Mr. M acfarlane advised at the back of the site the ordinance requires a 20' setback where 10' is proposed and there is a privacy fence and landscaping proposed and the site identification sign is 72SF; 12x6 and 30SF is required and that is to small and it's hard to see when there is a multi-tenant facility and 72SF is appropriate for identification and there would be no impact of visibility and its proposed closer then what is allowed which is 25' and it's in the public interest to have that sign closer to the street at 15', there were design waivers that relate to the entrance, and what is designed is safe and it allows for 3 cars to stack on the entrance drive. Mr. Alfieri asked even though this is undersized does the site comply with the building coverage and impervious coverage. Mr. M acfarlane stated that is correct, there are waivers on those items aside from the front yard setback."
},
{
"id": "p4.4",
"order": 4,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.52,
"t": 716.16,
"r": 555.6,
"b": 475.2
},
"text": "Mr. Alfieri asked for testimony regarding the storm water management. Mr. M acfarlane stated when this was submitted there was no component other than on site collection and there were comments received back from the County and there was a recharge system added to the back of the building and that recharge system will promote ground water recharge. Mr. Alfieri advised Mr. Peters pointed out a dumpster variance. Mr. M acfarlane mentioned the dumpster may need relief for accessory structure setback, and if the variance is needed it would be located as far as possible from the side and its 25' from the rear and it's at 18' from the side and on Exhibit A-3 the dumpster can be seen. Mr. Alfieri asked how that is enclosed. Mr. M acfarlane stated there is a fence enclosure and landscaping. Mr. Alfieri asked for testimony on the EIS waiver. Mr. M acfarlane advised the ordinance requires an EIS for 20,000SF and we have 11,000SF, so it would be requested to be waived. Mr. Alfieri asked if that is in terms of the use it's a general office use, not medical. Mr. M acfarlane advised that was correct, with 1 space per 200SF. Mr. Alfieri asked if the parking is conforming. Mr. M acfarlane said yes and mentioned one technical item it was noted that one is on the back left corner is 6' wide and the design waiver would be required for the 10'. Mr. Alfieri asked for testimony on the lighting and landscaping. Mr. M acfarlane stated in the landscaping plan there is a planted area in front and there is landscaping along the frontage and in the rear of the property, and along with the landscaping in the rear there is privacy fencing. Mr. Alfieri asked for testimony on the site lighting. Mr. M acfarlane stated there will be 6 free standing poles all pointed to the inside so there is no impact on adjoining properties. Mr. M acfarlane advised there was comment in Mr. Klee's report that there was no loading zone proposed, and it's not necessary for this building, and Exhibit A-7 is the color rendering showing the outside of the building and Exhibit A-8 is similar to what was shown and there is no me signee space, and there is no basement. Mr. M acfarlane stated this application and the variances required meets the goal of the master plan and they are important points of the Jackson Township master plan and this bring the site into conformance a little more than it was and these variances can be granted without detriment to the zone plan."
},
{
"id": "p4.5",
"order": 5,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 464.64,
"r": 555.36,
"b": 133.92
},
"text": "Dr. Campbell was pleased to see a rendering and a plan for a unique building to welcome people into Jackson, and usually there is a suggestion or question about solar panels because flat roofs and no trees seem to be a good area for solar and it's un sure for the use of the rooftop, there might be some areas to consider solar possibly at the top of the staircase there is a window looking view and to the left there is open area for solar just enough to power the external lighting. Mr. M. Mcalerane advised there is no objection to reviewing solar. Mr. Wall mentioned the architecture is bazaar and asked what theme is it, also if the glass is mirrored because it would be interesting to see how the sun reflecting off the building will affect the cars. Mr. Wall also asked what the total height of the building is because there are going to be people standing on the roof. Mr. Mcalerane advised there will be people on the rooftop as it's an outdoor air open amenity. Mr. Wall asked how tall the buildings along the corridor are. Mr. Mcalerane advised there is no relief on the height and with flipping through the plan the proposal is not current, and the building will be 35' to the rooftop. Mr. Wall asked the height of the stairwell overhand. Mr. Alfieri stated the architect should address that question. Mr. Burnstein asked the height of the fence in the back. Mr. Mcalerane advised that it is a solid fence. Mr. Burnstein asked if that will suffice. Mr. Mcalerane mentioned it could be done however there would be a need for a variance. Mr. Peters noted on the right hand side of the building there is a second floor overhang that overhangs parking spaces, however what are the sizes of the parking spaces. Mr. Mcalerane advised the spaces are 8x18 and on the revised plans. Mr. Peters raised concern regarding the bollard taking space between the parking spaces and the building, and asked how much distance that is. Mr. Mcalerane said 17.5'. Mr. Peters stated there is not a lot of extra room in that area, and those spaces will be for tenants assuming that customers have no customers. Mr. Peters stated there is not a lot of extra room in that area, and those spaces will be for tenants assuming that customers have no customers. Mr. Peters stated there is not a lot of extra room in that area, and those spaces will be for tenants assuming that customers have no customers.\n\nMr. Peters noted on the right hand side of the building there is a second floor overhang that overhangs parking spaces, however what are the sizes of the parking spaces. Mr. Mcalerane advised the spaces are 8x18 and on the revised plans. Mr. Peters raised concern regarding the bollard taking space between the parking spaces and the building, and asked how much distance that is. Mr. Mcalerane said 17.5'. Mr. Peters stated there is not a lot of extra room in that area, and those spaces will be for tenants assuming that customers have no customers. Mr. Peters stated there is not a lot of extra room in that area, and those spaces will be for tenants assuming that customers have no customers. Mr. Peters stated there is not a lot of extra room in that area, and those spaces will be for tenants assuming that customers have no customers. Mr. Peters stated there is not a lot of extra room in that area, and those spaces will be for tenants assuming that customers have no customers.\ncan be made smaller and this isn't a 50' right of way with housing, it's a 4 lane highway with a full shoulder and a divider and when the testimony is bringing the building forward 20' and the sign forward 10', it needs to be thought that this is not going on a regular street in town, and the proposed variance can be addressed, the argument has been made on what exists on County Line Road and regarding to the waivers, the waiver that should be spoken too is the loading zone, they may not need a loading zone but they should have a drop off location and there should be a stripped delivery space and that would be the recommendation to the loading area. Mr. Klee noted there is a design exception relating to the drive islands, and there is question why can't it comply with 10'. Mr. Mcalerane advised the plans submitted shows 6' and that is adequate given the location, and it's not going to be visible to the street and it will be landscaped. Mr. Klee mentioned the others are 10'. Mr. Mcalerane stated the site would lose a parking space and the plan complies with 57 spaces and that is with the waivers requested. Mr. Klee mentioned this shows the building is too big."
},
{
"id": "p4.6",
"order": 6,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 123.6,
"r": 550.32,
"b": 20.64
},
"text": "Richard Tokarski- with Tokarski Millemann Architects, licensed in the state of NJ and has been before both Jackson Boards and other Board across the start- credentials accepted- sworn- Mr. Alfieri asked what the building is designed as. Mr. Tokarski stated its glass and not intended to be mirrored, it will be glass. Mr. Hudak mentioned when you look at this it's like art, some see it one way and others another way. Mr. Wall noted Mr. Tokarski has appointed as Township Architect. Mr. Gertner stated there is a conflict and there may be plan reviews before the Planning Board. Mr. Tokarski advised he has not done any official work for the Township. Mr. Wall asked is the height from the dirt to the top structure. Mr. Tokarski advised its 41' and the roof height will be 30' and the top of the stairs and sky light is 41' and there is a 4' parapet around the building. Mr. Wall asked if[p4.6.1] of the space will be open for the people on the roof. Mr. Tokarski said yes. Mr. Wall asked if its 41' where 35' is the building height requirement, how big is the top",
"children": [
{
"id": "p4.6.1",
"order": 7,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 123.6,
"r": 550.32,
"b": 20.64
},
"text": "2/3",
"attrs": {
"inline": true,
"text_offset": 890,
"text_span": 8,
"bbox_estimated": true
}
}
]
}
],
"excluded_furniture": {
"first": [],
"last": []
}
}
Page 5
17 item(s)
JSON
header (2)
heading (1)
text (14)
1 · HEADER
2 · HEADER
3 · TEXT
4 · HEADING
5 · TEXT
6 · TEXT
7
8 · TEXT
9 · TEXT
10 · TEXT
11 · TEXT
12 · TEXT
13 · TEXT
14 · TEXT
15 · TEXT
16 · TEXT
17 · TEXT
Page 5 JSON
{
"document_id": 10233,
"page": 5,
"width_pt": 612,
"height_pt": 1008,
"rotation": 0,
"pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
"engine": "paddleocr_vl",
"source_run_id": 10344,
"item_count": 17,
"counts_by_type": {
"header": 2,
"heading": 1,
"text": 14
},
"build_ms": 4,
"items": [
{
"id": "p5.1",
"order": 1,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.24,
"t": 980.16,
"r": 307.92,
"b": 968.16
},
"text": "Jackson Township Planning Board Meeting of December 20, 2021",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "header"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p5.2",
"order": 2,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 508.32,
"t": 979.92,
"r": 552.96,
"b": 968.64
},
"text": "Page 5 of 6",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "number"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p5.3",
"order": 3,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 956.64,
"r": 553.44,
"b": 613.92
},
"text": "over hang area, and how many people can fit there, and is that zoned office. Mr. Tokarski stated the sky light is 21x21 and the elevator bulk head is 18x9. Mr. Alfieri asked what the usable area for the roof activity is. Mr. Tokarski advised 70x90. Mr. Wall asked how many people fit on the roof. Mr. Tokarski stated it would be used for the people within the building and it's an amenity space, it's not being rented out, its space for the employees within the building and it's used from 9 a.m.-5 p.m. during normal business hours for the applicant. Mr. Klee asked if there would be furniture on the roof. Mr. Tokarski assumed there would be outdoor seating. Mr. Klee asked if there would be an umbrella or a grill. Mr. Tokarski said no. Mr. Alfieri stated the reason it was said this would not finish this evening because of the rooftop elements and the design. Mr. Peters mentioned at some point the proposed use should be put in detail and it would determine if it's calculated as building area and if there is seating there will be an undefined threshold and the ordinance does not show what is building space, there should be a detailed description of the proposed use. Mr. Alfieri stated that was looked at it does not apply however there will be a final answer when this comes back. Mr. Peters noted if there is a ground floor area that is large enough to be a cafe it would be space that can be used. Mr. Hudak advised there should be statement of operations to explain the roof top use, and there is also question on what the vision and inspiration was for this. Mr. Tokarski mentioned he has taken over the project from another architect and the design comes from the previous architect and there was an evaluation done and there were minor corrections done and the hexagon space is being used in contemporary architecture. Mr. Hudak asked is the materials are all tried and true weather resistant. Mr. Tokarski advised that was correct, insulated tinted glass and composite panels. Dr. Campbell stated she was always interested in new construction and many buildings are using roof space for break areas and for someone to go up with outdoor patio furniture, its new ideas and just because its new doesn't mean it shouldn't be embraced but it would be stipulated that it would not be intended as a workspace for someone, and the amenities are the type of things that help rent space and there were facilities toured this past weekend and the spaces with the roof top were renting out faster and for more money than the buildings without the new ideas and certainly there is no need to be opposed because it's not the norm, but there is a protection from the Board and for the residents, and the design is sounds exciting and the idea is desired of exterior space being used weather that be for getting out for fresh air but there is a need for more things in writing, and a suggestion would be signage where there can be no more than x amount of people on the roof and no smoking so there is a need for some type of requirement to take care of those things. Mr. Tokarski agreed. Mr. Dolan mentioned lighting was spoken too and it's not seen on the plans how the site would be lighted. Mr. M. Acfarlane stated there are pole mounted lights and there are LED lights. Mr. Hudak asked if there is lighting on the roof and what kind. Mr. Alfieri advised that is UN known at this time but when this comes back there will be an answer."
},
{
"id": "p5.4",
"order": 4,
"type": "heading",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 601.68,
"r": 165.84,
"b": 589.2
},
"text": "Opened public comment;",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "paragraph_title"
},
"level": 3
},
{
"id": "p5.5",
"order": 5,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 575.52,
"r": 543.6,
"b": 526.32
},
"text": "Mendel Trieger- 7 Oak Drive- sworn- was frustrated because there was a request to see what the plans were and there was no information provided and the plans were received and the owners were reached out too and the issues were addressed which was privacy and the main issue was the previous plans to what was seen and that has been changed on the roof, however what can be done to ensure there is no public access to the roof."
},
{
"id": "p5.6",
"order": 6,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 524.88,
"r": 541.68,
"b": 500.16
},
"text": "M r. Macfarlane stated the concept would be to have the front[p5.6.1] available and there would be a partition that would go across the entire roof to prohibit people going passed that area.",
"children": [
{
"id": "p5.6.1",
"order": 7,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 524.88,
"r": 541.68,
"b": 500.16
},
"text": "2/3",
"attrs": {
"inline": true,
"text_offset": 61,
"text_span": 8,
"bbox_estimated": true
}
}
]
},
{
"id": "p5.7",
"order": 8,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 487.2,
"r": 546.96,
"b": 464.4
},
"text": "Mendel Trieger-7 Oak Drive- suggested the solar panels as that would be a good way to keep people off that area, and if the hours are from 9 a.m-5 p.m., how will the roof access be handled."
},
{
"id": "p5.8",
"order": 9,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 462.96,
"r": 547.92,
"b": 437.76
},
"text": "Mr. M acfarlane stated the roof top would be limited to day time hours and the office space will be from 9 a.m-5 p.m. and 5 p.m. will be the closing time."
},
{
"id": "p5.9",
"order": 10,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 424.8,
"r": 543.12,
"b": 386.64
},
"text": "Mendel Trieger- 7 Oak Drive- referenced the second floor shown on Exhibit A-2, and said there is a lot of small office spaces which indicates there would be a large number of tenants, is the applicant not considering renting spaces to a large business. Mr. Macfarlane advised there are no tenants at this time however it could be a large business."
},
{
"id": "p5.10",
"order": 11,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 59.76,
"t": 373.92,
"r": 544.56,
"b": 349.68
},
"text": "Mendel Trieger-7 Oak Drive- said there has been conversation with the applicant and there was a right of way of bushes agreed to on the other side of the fence."
},
{
"id": "p5.11",
"order": 12,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 348.24,
"r": 371.04,
"b": 336.48
},
"text": "Mr. Macfarlane advised that will be showed on the plans for resolution compliance."
},
{
"id": "p5.12",
"order": 13,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 323.28,
"r": 531.84,
"b": 300.72
},
"text": "Mendel Trieger-7 Oak Drive- asked if there is any way to condition the fence and bushes to be put in before the construction is started"
},
{
"id": "p5.13",
"order": 14,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 297.6,
"r": 540.72,
"b": 273.36
},
"text": "M r. Macfarlane advised the applicant agreed to the fencing however the landscape can be installed as soon as the site is ready for landscape. Dr. Campbell asked if the fence will be 6' or 8'"
},
{
"id": "p5.14",
"order": 15,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 260.64,
"r": 552.72,
"b": 197.04
},
"text": "Mendel Trieger- 7 Oak Drive- said if there are bushes are planted the 6' fence would be fine as its been indicated it'll be a full screen. Mr. Wall asked if the developer will putting landscaping on private property. Mr. Alfieri advised it would be on private property. Mr. Wall noted the resolution would indicate landscaping on private property. Mr. Gertner stated it's an offsite improvement and the applicant recognizes the neighbor's request, and the resolution would articulate the lot owner of lot 4 and 5 there is an agreement of the landscape material on their property. Mr. Alfieri mentioned there will be revised plan to show the landscaping."
},
{
"id": "p5.15",
"order": 16,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 184.8,
"r": 552.72,
"b": 123.36
},
"text": "Shaya Cohen- 9 Oak Drive- sworn- said the variance being requested to be closer to county line works better for the home owners as its further away from the neighbors and its obvious this will attract a younger crowd which may bring partying on the rooftop and it's a concern and there needs to be enforcement on how the roof will be used from only 9 a.m-5 p.m. and in the plans there were no trees on Exhibit A-3 there are only bushes on the left not the right, and there should be more bushes put on the other side of the fence and the bottom of trees show no privacy."
},
{
"id": "p5.16",
"order": 17,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 121.68,
"r": 550.32,
"b": 46.32
},
"text": "M r. Gertner asked at what point the Township get involves to enforce agreements with the neighbors and the property owner, there is also concern that the bushes are agreed too and the trees could die, and who's responsible for those getting replaced.\n\nM r. Alfieri stated anything on the neighbor's site it would be their responsibility and on this site there are plants that survive the shade and the professionals will be met with and plants on this site will be maintained by the property owner. M r. Wall asked out of 36 trees how many are being removed. M r. Macfarlane advised that exact count will be given when this comes back. M r. Wall noted that will assist the Board to see what is being taken down and what is being put back."
}
],
"excluded_furniture": {
"first": [],
"last": []
}
}
Page 6
10 item(s)
JSON
header (2)
text (8)
1 · HEADER
2 · HEADER
3 · TEXT
4 · TEXT
5 · TEXT
6 · TEXT
7 · TEXT
8 · TEXT
9 · TEXT
10 · TEXT
Page 6 JSON
{
"document_id": 10233,
"page": 6,
"width_pt": 612,
"height_pt": 1008,
"rotation": 0,
"pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
"engine": "paddleocr_vl",
"source_run_id": 10344,
"item_count": 10,
"counts_by_type": {
"header": 2,
"text": 8
},
"build_ms": 1,
"items": [
{
"id": "p6.1",
"order": 1,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 992.64,
"r": 308.16,
"b": 979.2
},
"text": "Jackson Township Planning Board Meeting of December 20, 2021",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "header"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p6.2",
"order": 2,
"type": "header",
"bbox": {
"l": 508.08,
"t": 992.64,
"r": 552.96,
"b": 979.92
},
"text": "Page 6 of 6",
"attrs": {
"block_label": "number"
},
"level": 2
},
{
"id": "p6.3",
"order": 3,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 968.4,
"r": 521.28,
"b": 941.52
},
"text": "Seeing no one else come forward, motion to close public comment by HARING/ Campbell. Yes: Dolan, Campbell, Burnstein, Herman, Wall, Riccardi, Haring, Hudak."
},
{
"id": "p6.4",
"order": 4,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 931.2,
"r": 554.64,
"b": 891.36
},
"text": "M r. Alfieri thanked the Board and asked this to come back the earliest hearing available. M r. Gertner advised a number of M r. Alfieri's applications were moved to February 28, 2022 and depending on how those application move the Board and M r. Alfieri will be able to see how to move. M r. Alfieri stated that was fine."
},
{
"id": "p6.5",
"order": 5,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 881.52,
"r": 429.84,
"b": 867.36
},
"text": "Motion to carry to February 28, 2022 by HARING/ Burnstein. Yes: All in favor among those present"
},
{
"id": "p6.6",
"order": 6,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 856.8,
"r": 546.48,
"b": 830.4
},
"text": "Mr. Gertner announced with regard to this application, it is being carried to February 28, 2022 and the applicant has waived time to March 31, 2022."
},
{
"id": "p6.7",
"order": 7,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.24,
"t": 819.36,
"r": 534.24,
"b": 792.24
},
"text": "M r. Hudak announced this is Denise Buono's last meeting and said she has been so helpful to this Board and has gone above and beyond for so many years and said she is so appreciated and will be missed and good luck!"
},
{
"id": "p6.8",
"order": 8,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.72,
"t": 782.16,
"r": 412.32,
"b": 768
},
"text": "Motion to at 10:39 p.m. adjourn by HARING/ Burnstein. Yes: All in favor among those present"
},
{
"id": "p6.9",
"order": 9,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.96,
"t": 756.48,
"r": 160.56,
"b": 743.04
},
"text": "respectfully submitted by,"
},
{
"id": "p6.10",
"order": 10,
"type": "text",
"bbox": {
"l": 60.48,
"t": 707.52,
"r": 197.04,
"b": 680.64
},
"text": "Danielle Sinowitz\nPlanning Board Recording Secretary"
}
],
"excluded_furniture": {
"first": [],
"last": []
}
}
Page 7
0 item(s)
JSON
Page 7 JSON
{
"document_id": 10233,
"page": 7,
"width_pt": 612,
"height_pt": 1008,
"rotation": 0,
"pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
"engine": "paddleocr_vl",
"source_run_id": 10344,
"item_count": 0,
"counts_by_type": [],
"build_ms": 0,
"items": [],
"excluded_furniture": {
"first": [],
"last": []
}
}