professional office use is allowed as a conditional use but Jackson has attached conditions to that use for a reason. When they look at what this applicant cannot comply with, many of those conditions involve the very things intended to separate and protect residential areas from nonresidential areas. Jackson requires 55ft buffer adjacent to residential zoning, the applicant proposed 22ft. The required parking setback for Butterfly Rd is 20ft, the applicant proposes 10ft. The required parking setback as a residential use is 20ft, the applicant proposes 13ft. The same pattern continues in design waivers, 25ft buffer is required along the road frontages, the applicant no buffer. The ordinance requires screening treatment, including two rows of evergreens, instead this application proposes reduced and relies upon existing woods. The question the Board should ask is why so many of the protection are being reduced to accommodate this building. The applicant is asking for more coverage. It is asking for less buffer, smaller setbacks and reduced screening. This raises a fundamental question of this proposal: why shouldn't the building, parking, pavement and overall development footprint be reduced so the property can comply with more Jackson requirements. The circulation design raises some concern, Jackson requires 100ft between E Veterans and the parking aisle and major circulation drive. The applicant is proposing only one quarter of that distance. The Butterfly Rd requires 60ft and approx. 35ft is proposed and parking spaces access the major circulation drive. Those should not be viewed as 3 independent waivers, they all occur within the same circulation system. The Board should consider the combined effect of vehicles entering from E Veterans, vehicles circulating and maneuvering around pedestrians and potentially of emergency vehicles. Is the ordinance creating the problem or is the amount of development being placed on this property creating the need for all these deviations. There are environmental and site design concerns too. The plan shows substantial storm water infrastructure including underground infiltration and recharge facilities. She is also concerned with relying on the existing woods as a substitute for ordinance screening unless the woods are protected and there is a clear replacement obligation. There is a border plan issue, Jackson Master Plan and circulation policies emphasize the orderly and efficient movement of people and goods in consideration of the limitations of the roadway system. The township's Master Plan also address land use, circulation, environmental features, and ground water recharge and sewer service. This application should be considered with broader planning framework, not as a collection of individual dimension deviations. Most importantly is the d3 conditional use, the issue is not whether professional offices can exist in the zone, the issue is this site, with this particular plan remains appropriate for that conditional use despite failing to satisfy those conditions. And whether the site can accommodate the problems those conditions were designed to address. That distinction matters here. The governing body decided residential buffering, maximum coverage, parking setbacks, frontage buffers and screening all matter. There entrance and exit design standards for a reason. This application asks the Board to relax all those protections at the same time. Before granting these variances and waivers, she is asking the Board to ask if complying with the 55ft residential buffer, 25ft frontage buffer, parking requirements, screening requirements and circulation standards will require a smaller building and less parking or less intensive development, doesn't that tell us whether this particular site can accommodate the particular project at the intensity proposed. Based on the cumulative deviations shown on this plan, she does not think the applicant has demonstrated that it can. She is asking the board to deny the request for relief or scale back the design so it reduces the intensity of the development and bring the project much closer to the protection Jackson ordinances require.

Este Friedman, resident at 33 Imperial Place, duly sworn by Board Attorney. Ms. Friedman lives adjacent to this property. She has read the zoning ordinance and the technical review of this application. She wanted to make one important distinction. She agrees the ordinance creates a pathway for a