Page 5 of 6

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.

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.

M r. Macfarlane stated the concept would be to have the front 2/3 available and there would be a partition that would go across the entire roof to prohibit people going passed that area.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Mr. Macfarlane advised that will be showed on the plans for resolution compliance.

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

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'

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.

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.

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. M 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.