{
    "document_id": 10749,
    "page": 4,
    "width_pt": 612,
    "height_pt": 792,
    "rotation": 0,
    "pipeline_version": "paddleocr-vl-1.6+paul-48",
    "engine": "paddleocr_vl",
    "source_run_id": 10860,
    "item_count": 1,
    "counts_by_type": {
        "text": 1
    },
    "build_ms": 2,
    "items": [
        {
            "id": "p4.1",
            "order": 1,
            "type": "text",
            "bbox": {
                "l": 68.16,
                "t": 719.76,
                "r": 542.4,
                "b": 78.72
            },
            "text": "report from RVE on Oct 5, 2026 and from Shari Spiro on Sept 28, 2026. They submitted exhibits late yesterday and all except for one were previously submitted, the only one is a colored landscape plan that was added yesterday. Mr. Alfieri stated he heard the Boards request last meeting that all documents be submitted at least 10 days in advance but added that the M LUL doesn't require it but they did say they would try and cooperate. Mr. Alfieri apologized and left it up to the Board to consider. Mr. Alfieri has Mr. MacFarlane here to testify as an engineer, the applicant is here to testify, Mr. Rea traffic engineer is here and Mr. Borden will put planning testimony. Mr. MacFarlane, previously sworn still under oath. Mr. MacFarlane started with exhibit A7 this is revised site plan that was submitted. This plan shows the changes they made, based upon Board input. They added a loading area on the left side of the building. The parking spaces that were in that area were relocated to the front of the building. They reconfigured the parking proposed, closer to lot 33. The initial buffer width was 15ft and now the smallest buffer proposed up from the original to 22ft. The buffer is proposed at 30ft at the front corner, 44ft at another corner, and along lot 30 the buffer is 27ft. The building is still the same size as originally requested. They have eliminated the need for relief for impervious coverage. They are proposing to use porous concrete for the sidewalk around the building perimeter, and that puts them at the allowable impervious coverage of 60%. They also shifted the building and moved some landscaping and gained an additional 3ft setback to the parking area, along Butterfly Rd. They now have 13ft proposed and originally they had 20ft proposed. They added fencing along lot 30 and along lot 33 for added privacy, 6ft high vinyl privacy fence. They added a decorative black fence around storm water management basin. They are requesting one design waiver, the ordinance requires 10ft wide island, they are proposing 6ft wide, with landscaping, and he feels this is a very diminimus request. He moved to exhibit A8, this is the landscape plan submitted in support of the application, and they added color to it. They increased the landscaping along Butterfly Rd, including shade trees, ornamental trees and shrubbery. E Veterans side, the building is set back further and there is no parking spaces along it and he does not think there is as much need for landscaping, they are still proposing shade trees and ornamental trees. Along lot 33 they are proposing shade trees, shrubbery and evergreen trees. They have landscaping proposed around the refuse enclosure, in accordance with ordinance requirements. Mr. MacFarlane advised that when the buffer is cleared and they have the meeting with the township engineer, if there are any areas that need supplemental plantings, they will agree to provide those and they have no objection to agreeing to any language that would outline the requirement for additional buffering. Mr. Alfieri added that the revised statement of operation has been changed to reflect the hours for the plaza to be 8am-8pm. Mr. Alfieri confirmed they received LVE review number 2 from Shari Shapiro, dated September 28, 2026. Mr. MacFarlane said they have no objections to comply with any technical comments. They also received a report from RVE, dated October 5, 2026. Mr. MacFarlane noted that loading space ordinance would require 12x35ft, the proposed loading zone is 12x24ft and they feel this is adequate to accommodate the type of vehicles discussed at last meeting, they are requesting a waiver for this. Mr. MacFarlane said the refuse is in the back corner and enclosed with a fence and landscaping and he believes that complies with township ordinance requirements. Mr. MacFarlane said they have no objections to the technical comments in the letter from RVE. Mr. MacFarlane said they have not made any changes to the building and signage, no change in any of the architect's testimony from last meeting. Mr. Alfieri reminded the Board, that Ernie Peters agreed, they do need a variance for the height of the building. They agree to comply with the ordinance for the facade sign and it will not exceed 80sq ft. Ms. Cipriani asked if they can go over the list of the all the variances they are seeking. Mr. Alfieri said the planner will go over them. This concludes Mr. MacFarlane's testimony. Mr. Silecchia asked if the refuse is within an area that is going to require a"
        }
    ],
    "excluded_furniture": {
        "first": [],
        "last": []
    }
}