Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Well, you could just go and tell them.

Good evening. Welcome to the August 3rd regular meeting of the Township of Montclair Planning Board. In accordance with the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 72 of New Jersey's Public Laws of 2025, and amendments to Section 12 of the Municipal Land Use Law, adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by posting a copy of the notice on the first floor of the Musil Building on the Township of Montclair's official internet website and on the statewide legal notice listings of the New Jersey Department of State. This meeting is being broadcast live on Channel 34 and is streaming live and will be available on demand on YouTube. This meeting is a quasi-judicial proceeding, meaning the board has powers and procedures resembling a court of law, and we are obligated to objectively determine facts and draw conclusions from them in order to provide the basis of an official action. Any questions or comments must be limited to the issues or what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision. And the decorum appropriate to judicial hearing must be maintained at all times. Fire exits are to my right, your left, and the back of the room. As to the order of the evening, each application hearing begins with the applicant or their attorney giving an overview of the application and the variances that are required, if any. We then hear from any expert witnesses the applicant may have to help explain the application and why variances are required. The board members may ask questions of the applicant, the attorney, and their expert witnesses. If you are a member of the interested public but not a witness in the case, you will have two opportunities to speak. At the end of each witness's testimony, you will be given the opportunity to ask the witness questions about his or her testimony. That is not the time to tell the board what you think of the application. To ask questions, you'll have to come to the front of the room, give us your name and address, and then ask your questions related to the witness's testimony only. After the applicant's witnesses and any objector or objector witnesses have been heard, Members of the audience will have their second opportunity to step forward. At that time, you may express your opinions, positive or negative, about the application. Comments are generally limited to three minutes per person. An additional time that the public may be heard is when one or more residents present to the board as an objector to the application, present to the board as an objector to the application. Objectors may be represented by counsel and present their cases, including independent evidence and witnesses for the board to consider after the applicant has finished its case. Different from public comment, objectors and their witnesses are expected to present evidence for the board to consider, as opposed to only their personal opinions, and will be subject to cross-examination by the public and by the applicant. After the completion of the applicant's case, the objector's case, and any public comment, the public hearing is closed, and the board members discuss the case and vote. You will be able to listen to our discussion, but you will not be able to participate. Do a roll call.

Yeah. Mayor Baskerville. Present. Mr. Borschoff is excused. Mr. Campbell is excused. Councillor D'Amato is excused. Ms. Gaines? Present. Vice Chair Graham is excused. Mr. Ian Wally? Here. Ms. Willis? Here. Mr. Orbea? Present. Ms. Wallace? Here. And Chief Chair Brodock is excused. Okay.

We need to swear in the professionals first. That's first up on the agenda.

Tony, I would be happy to.

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you may give this evening will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do.

I do.

Thank you both.

It's the resolution for High Hills.

Thank you so much.

Oh, the minutes.

Yep, approval of minutes from July 20th.

I did not receive any comments on the minutes. That's what Rodak's on vacation. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Was I at that meeting? I wasn't at it.

I'll make a motion to approve those minutes.

Is there a second? I guess I can second it. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstentions? Yep. Got it.

And number five on the agenda is application 2973-586 Bloomfield Avenue, High Hills, New Jersey, LLC. It's the resolution that we have to review and approve. Janice, you have, I guess, no comments on that as well?

I didn't receive any comments on this resolution. Is there a motion to approve? Motion to approve.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Abstentions?

OK. Next on the agenda is application 2945, 580 Valley Road, BG Valley LLC.

good evening everyone Alan Tremulak appearing on behalf of the applicant BG Valley LLC as you know this is a continuation of the hearing on the application for site plan approval involving the property at 580 Valley Road what we have planned for this evening as I think previously discussed at the at the last meeting is we have testimony to present from our civil engineer Gerard Desario previously testified earlier in the hearing and he'll discuss the recent site plan revisions and some other comments related to civil engineering matters and then following his testimony we have supplemental testimony from our traffic engineer Matthew Sackler regarding you know his analysis of available parking resources in the vicinity of the property and also his supplemental letter report dated July 23rd 2026 which I believe the board has After that, we would adjourn for this evening, which will leave us with one final witness, which would be our professional planner, Peter Steck. And I believe, and Janice, correct me if I'm wrong, but has it already been decided that Mr. Steck would testify on September 14th? if that's I have if that's the date that works for you and him then most importantly it works for mr. stack yes I'll put you on for the September 14th meeting that would conclude our witnesses and hopefully conclude the application that evening So before I call Ms. Drisario, I assume, Janice, you probably want to mark some recent exhibits.

Yes, I've marked some additional exhibits. If I can read my handwriting here. A30 is a letter from Jarmel Keisel dated July 22, 2026, summarizing their response to our professional comments, our professionals' comments. 831 is a revised site plan prepared by Jarmel Keisel dated July 22nd 2026 okay 832 is a report from Stonefield engineering an updated parking report dated July 23rd 2026 and 833 is a revised report from Naglia engineering dated July 27th 2026

OK. So I would recall Gerard Gisario.

Mr. Gisario, you recognize that you remain under oath from your prior testimony, correct?

I do.

Thank you very much.

Gisario. You recently have submitted revised site plan drawings for this project, I believe with a revision date of July 22nd, 2026. Is that correct?

That is correct.

Okay. What I'd like you to do is to review the changes depicted on the revised plans, and I don't think there are that many. Correct. And if you could go through the changes shown on those plans.

Sure. The July 22nd plans were revised to address comments in Neglia's May 29th, 2026 review letter. And again, there were not many drawing changes required. A couple of the comments dealt with the proposed compact stall parking space. We requested to add some additional signage, some pavement markings, and we also provided a turning analysis to show a compact car coming in and making the turn into that compact space. Another item was relative to the stormwater. We'd been requested to collect additional runoff that was running towards the retaining wall in the rear, the existing retaining wall. So we added a slot drain or trench drain along the back that will collect it and redirect the stormwater into our proposed infiltration basin. The last change is related to the lighting plan. We had a couple of waivers with the prior plans, so we redid the lighting. Several things changed. One, we added the decorative sconces to the front to include that in the analysis. Two, we relocated the pole that was sitting along that wall in the back. There was a waiver because we didn't have two feet clearance from the back of the curb, so there's no longer a light pole along the rear of those parking spaces. With the new model, we were able to get the light levels between the 0.5 minimum and 2.0 maximum. within the site eliminating the prior waiver for having some levels below 0.5 and exceeding 2.0 so the revised lighting plan then is compliant with the town's requirements in the lighting ordinance or the site plan ordinance dealing with lighting yes it is do you is the applicant still seeking any kind of waiver I don't think we need any

just asking yeah so these changes eliminate all need for waiver for the lighting yes lighting is there are there any other waivers I believe there were there may be one more and I'm missing it so waiver I know we exceed lot coverage that might be a variance

might be a waiver for the parking space dimensions yeah well the compact stall is still well right yeah yes so there are still waivers the lighting waivers were eliminated thank you I want to come back to the stormwater sure minute but Just a question. Do your revised site plans show any changes with respect to the pedestrian crossing that runs across the drive aisle towards the rear of the property?

No, that has not changed from our prior submission.

And did you review the comments in Mr. Gios' report, the parking consultant for the town, relating to his concerns regarding that crosswalk?

Yes, we did. And I think in our response, we recognize that it's not an ideal situation, but it occurs frequently in shopping centers, retail centers, everywhere where people have to walk behind cars that are parked. Knowing that, you have to proceed with caution. So we recognize it's not ideal, but we also stated that it's common in retail centers.

Did you bring with you any exhibits relating to that? I do.

I have a couple of handouts to show that our original location of the public access and kind of a hybrid that we can look at if we want to mark these as exhibits.

All right, so are there two exhibits?

to one is the our original submission which basically showed the sidewalk where it is today and then we cross over connect to it that was requested to be changed at the development review committee meeting to push it out to our side and that's how we ended up with the crosswalk that's on the current plans so is this show what was originally the original plan correct this exhibit is the original plan

and then the second one, which is an 8 1⁄2 by 11 paper.

It's kind of an option for consideration. It's kind of a hybrid of the original and what we have today.

Mr. Tremblack, should they be marked separately?

I think so. Okay. This would be the first one. I would do the first one. as 834 and then what that one is the original the optional alignment is 835

What does he need a copy for?

Ms. Wallace, do you have extras down there?

All right, you know what? You and I will share this. They're sharing.

Do you have an extra? Can you pass this to Nicole?

I have a question about 835.

It appears that part of the proposed sidewalk is on the fire station property?

Yes. It would direct people across and then over to get them out of the driveway.

Because keeping it on your property would make the driveway too narrow?

Correct.

OK. why don't you can they talk through these drawings yeah okay it was just I want to make sure I understood what I was seeing so

Why don't you just discuss each of the two exhibits separately and explain what they show, starting with A34, which I think you said was the original.

Yeah, A34, it's the one with the yellow highlight. That was the original plan. That shows the walk on the, just for clarification, it's on the fire station side. but it is still on the applicant's property. And that was the one at the DRC meeting. It was requested that we move the sidewalk to the building, adjacent to the building, and continue the connection to the stairs. is kind of a hybrid of what we currently have proposed, which is the diagonal crosswalk, which was raised as a concern in the parking review memo. So that comes across and then heads towards the stairs, but I believe that is still on, now that would be on the the other property Dave because it's planned north of the stairs this piece so yeah it would be on fire property our proposal would be just to stripe it as a crosswalk yeah you were showing that as a potential alternative correct we think what we have is okay it's signed it's clearly marked whether you're parked in that last space or the first base you should know that there could be people walking behind you and you have to proceed with caution just like any parking space.

I'm not following what's on the firehouse property because, well, actually, what is the red line?

That's the proposed crosswalk in lieu of the diagonal one.

Oh, I see, to go around the diagonal.

So that top piece would be on their property.

Well, people will, this is a comment, they'll take the shortest distance. They'll probably walk the diagonal anyway.

Agreed. Agreed. That's why we think what we show is best, because at least it'll be delineated that way and signed.

I'm not an expert, but that's what I would do. We agree.

I don't know if anyone.

I have a question. What I'm finding a little awkward here is where the stop bar is. The stop sign I'm looking at 835 where the stop sign is located. The stop sign is, I don't know, 15 feet in front of the stop bar? Is there any way? I have a feeling people just roll through that stop bar.

We could add another sign to the left.

Yeah, I guess the only.

And the walkway.

I'm just trying to be practical.

Yeah, we could add a second sign.

Maybe that would help if you put a sign somewhere in the sidewalk on the left side so people actually stop at the stop bar or slow down as they approach that crosswalk.

The idea was one, they would stop there, and two, in case they did roll through that, hopefully they see the stop sign and stop before the crosswalk.

Sarah, what was the, if you know, what was the rationale? It was the DRC who recommended moving the entire sidewalk from the fire station side to the building to adjacent to. What was the rationale?

I believe, and Janice can correct me if I'm wrong, that sidewalk, that's where the sidewalk is today and it continues to be.

in disrepair trucks driving over it cars are cut cars associated with the fire station constantly drive over that sidewalk so that's been gone into disrepair that was the primary reason because and in maneuvering in and out of the fire station they were going across the sidewalk which was on their property so moving it next to the building would make it easier to access the parking area and the driveway for the fire station and I think would be a more natural access point to the front of this building the thought was also to reduce the number of crossings for visitors accessing the site from Valley Road

the previous layout would force everyone to cross the driveway coming down from Valley Road versus the current layout where the sidewalk is along the building. If you're coming from Valley Road walking down the driveway, you don't have to cross the driveway to get into the building. So that was one point. The other point was where the crossing started in the parking lot side, it was directly behind the building. So it created like a blind spot. If you're a pedestrian about to cross the driveway going towards the firehouse, you wouldn't see a car coming down the driveway, neither would the driver see a pedestrian coming. So that was the other major consideration to kind of rearrange that layout.

I hear that and I don't necessarily have a strong feeling about the sidewalk on one side or the other but just acknowledging that this original drawing the one with the yellow and the sidewalk along the fire station is when they didn't have a front door on Valley so now presumably if you're coming down Valley you'll just walk and enter at the front door and not necessarily go around to the back of the building Right? I mean, they said we require your front entrance. So I don't know why, if you're a pedestrian coming down, walking on the sidewalk on Valley, why you go to the back of the building at all. Which doesn't change it coming from the parking lot and behind. But I don't think, yeah, I would just go to the front door. with about would you consider like the pedestrian flashing light so someone could hit them would that be helpful for a car backing up like in that in this first spot if they're backing up and they might see a flashing light or

I mean, you can do a lot. I don't think it's necessary. Again, I don't see any different backing up from that spot than any other spot. There's a potential for pedestrians to be behind you. You have to look. You can't put a flashing light behind every spot. I don't think it's warranted.

Just so the record is clear, this A35 is really just an optional for the board to consider.

Correct.

But your plan is your plan at this point.

Our plan, we think, works just fine.

Okay, just to clarify, I didn't write down the numbers. Which is the plan? That's 35. In your right hand, that's 35. That's the optional. That's the optional one. If not, they're going with the sidewalk one on the firehouse side. No. No, no, no, no. Oh, then we'll... A34, that was the original plan.

The original one. Oh, okay. But then they amended it for comments from the DRC.

Oh, I see. So A35, if the option is to add the angled... Well, but got it. I understand. Okay.

I should also point out that the client just mentioned that if the board, you know, given the redesign of the building with the front entrance now, if the board thought that keeping the sidewalk where it currently, where it was shown on our original plan, meaning closer to the fire property, if the board preferred that, we'd be happy to do that.

Yeah, well, I think we discussed that when I remember asking a question about will there be a smooth transition for cars that are going to be using the parking temporarily? And to drive, I mean, I imagine if you have a sidewalk, there's probably a curb. Most sidewalks have curbs, right, unless it were level. So all it would be would be just a change in pavement. So a change in pavement doesn't protect a pedestrian as much as a curb. If there's a curb there, it's pretty defined. Is the sidewalk next to the building, does that have a curb or is it just flat? It has a curb. That has a curb. Okay. So that's a bit more protected. And then if you... Then if you put the sidewalk down on the original plan, then you've got essentially a flat surface and just part of it's concrete. That's the only difference. It's an open area and part of it's concrete.

Correct.

Over which fire department vehicles during certain times of the day will be crossing over.

So that is a part of this plan, that is the fire department access across the property line is a part of the plan as you've constructed, is that correct?

Yes.

And the Is there a grade change between the driveway on your site and the driveway on the fire department side?

No, we tie in with their grades.

So it's going to be a flat and you could just drive over it?

That's correct. I think we talked about adding a stripe, something to delineate it.

Because I don't see anything on the plan about that. That's why I'm asking.

believe there was discussion about potentially adding a stripe just to physically show separation between the property no other feature mr. chair if I might do just looking further at the

the most recent plan that was submitted there's also one other limiting factor regarding the potential of flipping the sidewalk back along the fire department side the applicant has provided vehicle turning movement templates showing the access of that first compact parking space that we discussed earlier however to facilitate that movement the vehicle needs to take a rather wide turn around that around that corner where the crossing is which would require crossing into where the sidewalk would would be so I think there's an inherent conflict there where you would be mixing vehicles and pedestrians and that in that instance so which I against moving it over to that side at that point unless there's an alternative way to access that parking space but I don't think there is

So the board needs to make a determination now at this point, and then we move on, right? Just put this behind us if we? OK. So I'll make a proposition that we use the diagonal walkway that has no sidewalk. The sidewalk's on the building side, and that there is a stripe put down the middle. Because I think a stripe, I think delineating the space is probably good, because that would tell people you know this is your lane to drive in and if you cross that line you're coming in on the fire department property if that line wasn't there they might feel it was okay to park on the fire department property so i think it helps that stripe i think would help so you're indicating that

no no it's this one without the the diagonal crosswalk the diagonal yeah the sidewalk right no no no no keep the sidewalk along the building right but not right that's keeping it no not putting the red that's the way that it's the existing site plan the existing existing yeah that would be maintaining the existing lights site plant but adding right a stripe along the property adding a stripe yes which i believe was discussed but never really

agreed upon which so now we're including

okay um is this um everything actually um that's noberto with all the questions that you had about um capacity of the drainage system to handle runoff and so forth are you satisfied with the design that he's put forth yeah okay is there anything else that we didn't cover that would give you pause really you know relate you have a your last comment letter actually um answers came in

and you put comments down on the July 27th revision for you think we covered everything yes I did okay I guess we're good with so I have a few more items up are you confident about this compact turn radius if let's say a cars parking here SUV for example are you confident our car can make that turn as well an SUV no but No, let's say an FCV is parked here. Oh. So it's big. You can't go over this line. Can a compact car make that turn into that spot in one...

movement we provided a I haven't seen that's why I'm asking and I'm not a engineer so there there is an illustration showed on sheet C dash 950 okay which is also the last sheet of the civil engineering plan set actually shows two illustrations one is compact car accessing that compact parking space and a more standard vehicle actually it's a sprinter van just doing a general movement in and through the site these are generally as their model they're conservative okay so a typical experience driver probably make the turns a little tighter as needed and adjust so I'm comfortable

secondly and even testify this but you did tough we did talk about it in May there's still not changes made to the landscaping plan that were agreed to there's still so the invasive non-native and you still have a tree proposed for right in front of the front door on Valley are you sticking with those

the tree in the front we're willing to relocate and work with you city can you I would like to see a rendering of where that tree would be and how it would look we have to assess the utilities can you do that prior to September meeting well I mean we would agree to relocate the tree

just question if the whole point is you put it there because of all the underground utilities so either there's a room to locate it or not but having it in front of the front door this we talked about this in May it's August so I know I just was I would like to see I think it's reasonable to see where you're locating it given that there's constraints about where you could locate it would you be able to

determine where the utilities are in order to determine where appropriate alternate location would be for a tree in front of the property.

Yes. And then the laurel is also, we talked about that in May. It's still on the plan.

I thought we addressed the cherry laurel.

It wasn't addressed to me. I know we talked about it in May, and you had agreed you would look at a native option for that.

It's the latest.

Again, you can come back and provide an alternate.

You want an option, a native option for the cherry laurel?

Yeah, it actually has toxic berries in it. I just don't think it's the best plant one could pick for a swim school. And it's a non-native.

we have no problem okay as i brought up in may i'm just reiterating it as it hasn't changed thank you um i just want to i know we touched upon stormwater a minute ago, and you talked about adding the trench drain in the rear of the property in front of the retaining wall to capture more water on site. But can you, I think in light of recent storm events that we've had locally, today not so bad, last week, I think it was last week, some serious flooding in Upper Montclair. You know, in light of that, can you just briefly reiterate what's proposed for this property in the way of drainage and stormwater management improvements?

Sure. First note is that there is no stormwater on site currently. This entire site drains, sheet flows directly to the municipal parking lot in the rear.

So no stormwater is captured on site currently?

None at all. Okay. What's proposed is an underground infiltration system. Basically, it's going to collect, now with the trench drain we've added, probably over 90% of the site, all the roof drain. and now the pavement going towards that wall. So now we're collecting over 90% of the site and bringing it into our proposed infiltration basin. The requirement, so I get my numbers right from my original testimony, the requirement for the ordinance is that we only need to maintain or manage 736 cubic feet of runoff on site. What we're proposing is a system that has 3,794 cubic feet of storage volume. So that's greater than five times what is required by code. Put in terms of numbers, that system can handle about four inches of runoff over this entire site. That's not including infiltration. Even if we get minimal infiltration rates of two inches per hour it's going to handle even more but that volume is about four inches of runoff or four inches of rainfall over the 0.36 acre site as far as the storms that are occurring you can't put a number on them these are They call the flash flood events. Storm events are identified by the DEP in terms of 24 hour rainfall events. So a four inch rainfall over 24 hours might be a five or ten year storm. A four inch rainfall in two hours, it's a flash flood event. It's not really classified. areas flood and it dissipates quicker as opposed to the longer storms. So there's no number to put with these recent storms. This system with minimal infiltration will completely handle, we estimate, between a 10 and 15 year design storm, which will significantly improve. It's not going to cure any flooding that happens in municipal parking lot, but it's certainly gonna be a huge benefit to it. It's quite a bit of water that we're taking away from that parking lot. Okay.

All right, last question. Did you have a chance to review the most recent report from Neglia Engineering, dated July 27, 2026? I did. And have you, at this point, based upon your prior testimony and the plans as they've been revised several times at least, have you addressed all of the engineering comments in the NAGLI report that are able to be addressed prior to construction of this project or development of the property?

Yes.

they're addressed and there are a number of conditions that you haven't been addressed because they deal with matters that most of which could not be addressed until projects being constructed like requirements related to sewer I mean soil movement there's some outside agency approvals that we need to get and we know we need to do the actual soil testing in the area of our storm detention system And is the applicant agreeable to complying with all of the remaining requirements in the NAGLI report that haven't already been addressed? Yes. I prepared a list that you've reviewed and that I'd like to submit to the board, which just has, I think there's a listing of, I guess, 12 sections of the most recent NAGLI report. you know, which the applicant would agree to comply with, you know, as conditions of approval. I don't expect Roberto or anyone to review this and approve it tonight, but we're not going to be completing this until September, but at least you would have a document that could be incorporated to a resolution of the application where you could approve listing conditions to be applied with post-approval.

All right, so this will be A36.

Thank you. All right, that completes my examination of Mr. Cesario.

Any additional questions from the board? If not, if any audience members have questions for this witness, please step up.

hello I'm Holly Felber I own Barbara eclectic located at 594 Valley Road I specifically have a question concerning the driveway because I didn't see the picture that you handed out tonight and you're going to put the sidewalk along the building and that will be cement your driveway will be blacktop correct okay currently we have a driveway a sidewalk a driveway now I believe we will have approximately 30 feet of blacktop from the edge of that driveway to the edge of the fire station is that correct

that sounds approximately correct we have any nineteen fourteen foot drive

it's about 26 feet okay so that'll be a very different look for our streetscape to have straight blacktop now you're proposing that you will paint a line that will show the boundary for the fire department versus the public who are attending the swim school that's correct in your How well do these lines work in keeping people where they're supposed to be in your own experience?

I can't answer that question I mean the fire company is definitely going to go over it the way they've been today but a typical driver accessing the swim school I would suspect they should be able to honor that easily do you think that a parent might become impatient if they're late and go around a car that is in the swim school driveway and go into the firehouse driveway I'm not sure why a car would be stopped in that driveway for them to go around.

There's no door there, there's no... No, but there may be a backup of cars waiting for someone to pull out of the compact space. You have to wait, so there's a line of cars waiting to get into that. It's something that I observe daily, the movement of the cars. I just wanted to ask the question, if you think there ever might be a situation where there is a line of cars going into the swim school and a parent is impatient, they don't want their child to be late for their class, so instead of waiting to actually turn right into that driveway, they will go right into the firehouse driveway and stop their car there. Do you think that might be a possibility? anything is a possibility with drivers today I can't say someone will never do that okay thank you and then exhibit 836 will that be available to the public that's the list that mr. tremulak just gave you it's a summary of of different engineering issues oh great And is there a way we can hold it up to the camera so that if anyone's watching at home they can see it?

I can give you a copy of that.

Thank you.

Is this on? Yes? Carol Ferencz, Princeton Place. Is that the right way to pronounce it?

Yes, that's correct.

In your July 22nd update letter responding to some inquiries, you make a number of references to previous testimony of the traffic expert for the applicant, correct?

I believe so, yes.

And who is that traffic expert? I'd like him to answer this. I'm just looking away.

I'm sorry.

I'd like all my answers from him.

Please. What's the question again? I'm sorry.

Who is the traffic expert you're referring to?

He's our next witness that I believe gave testimony at the last or a prior hearing.

And what was that addressing?

Parking.

Is that what you consider traffic?

It's part of traffic.

And what's the rest of the part of traffic?

I'm not sure I'm following your question.

Well, traffic to me is not parking, but it's to you, and I'll accept that. You say it's part. If parking is part of traffic, then what's the remaining 100%?

In this particular case, he gave parking testimony.

So you're not concerned at all about the traffic impact, ingress and egress going in? traffic report was not required and am I concerned with it no well the traffic report was not required based upon an interpretation of Dunkin Donuts which says and I agree that you cannot make a decision totally based upon the traffic on the roadway which would be Valley but it goes on to say that The planning board is required to consider the ingress and egress as it may apply to the traffic, i.e., backing up to the firehouse, creating a hazard, which then delays somebody responding to a fire. Is that something that should have been addressed, in your opinion?

Do you mean cars backing up onto Valley Road?

well if they're backing up trying to get in because somebody's maneuvering they're getting old like me in my 80s I want to drive backwards it's not quite the same takes time it backs up on Valley is that something that should be considered by this board as to the ingress and egress impacting upon the safety of the mute of the municipality with regard to property and life-saving which I have been told I overreact to that but I don't overreact to one death okay

i can respond to that i don't want a response from you counsel i want a response from the witness he's not our traffic expert let me just say what i have to say and then you can move on i agree thank you what you just mentioned ingress egress circulation is relevant on any site plan application i believe matthew seckler seckler our traffic engineer previously testified about that as part of his prior testimony, and if he didn't, or if you have any further questions, he's going to be the next witness. But it's not within this witness's purview.

Well, let's back up. What are your credentials, sir? You're a licensed professional engineer.

I am.

Are you skilled in examining for parking and for traffic, if required? You're familiar with those requirements?

I don't do traffic studies, but I can give you my opinion. The ingress is safe.

You do traffic studies, yeah.

No, I do not do traffic studies. You may not do them.

Could you do it?

No, that's a specialty in the area.

Okay. So that at no time was there any involvement of your company with regard to the concerns of the impact of the ingress and egress backing up traffic, crowded circumstance in the firehouse next door. You never considered it?

No, we believe the ingress... proposed is safe and the amount of space between the street and the parking lot allows the queuing of a significant amount of cars enough cars have you I'm sorry I didn't mean to interrupt you go ahead but that's my professional thing okay have you made any determinations or with regard to the egress going out the back and through the lot other than showing that a largest truck or vehicle that we expect to visit this site can work its way through and out to that extent.

And since there's larger trucks that go through there, would that impact upon the ingress and egress, or at least the egress at that point in time?

No, the vehicle I'm referring to is like a sprinter van. That's the largest vehicle that's going to enter this site to make any deliveries. It can come through and egress out the driveway that we show.

Have you actually made any visual inspections of that area to give yourself some feeling of how this would actually work?

Yes, I've been to the site and we're actually widening that driveway to what we're allowed to widen it to and removing the tree that's there to improve visibility.

Okay. And then to be clear, when you go to the egress, have you looked at that to see once a vehicle goes down, it's going to have to be a hill and goes to the right, how difficult that's going to be to maneuver with number of spaces there, people backing out of all of those areas, waiting for them, and that's gonna just by a snow effect, back up the hill, back through the driveway, back onto Valley, and right in front of the firehouse. Have you given any consideration to that?

Yes, we don't believe you'll get that much of a backup for a car waiting to get out, that it would back up all the way out the valley.

Well, I'll pay for your parking at the meters if you want to come six times a day and go through that lot and see if you can find a spot without waiting there 15 minutes. You want to meet me one day and I'll show you?

I've been to that lot. I don't know. I found a parking spot one of the day I went.

A parking spot? Well, I only needed one. And what time of day was that?

mid-morning I have nothing else hi Justin Jesser 120 Chestnut Street sorry one really quick question with regards to you mentioned the the pathway going to the parking lot in the back that's 14 feet wide

No, our entry drive is 14 feet wide. The sidewalk adjacent to the building is 5 feet wide.

So the entranceway is 14 feet wide and that goes the entire length of the building?

Yes.

Okay. The only thing that I would say just from observation, being a parent, having two little kids, getting very impatient, is that's just enough space for a person to pull over to the side and park their car on that 14 foot space. It's a concern because if one person does it and they see it and they don't get a ticket, they don't worry about it, other people are gonna start doing it. And then you have added kind of pressure on that space, and you're going to have backing up and queuing, and then you're also going to have everything going for egress and everything else like that. It's a concern. I think it changes the flow of a lot of things. I think it's potentially too wide unless you kind of put something in there that prevents people from parking. Thank you.

Any other questions from the public? Okay. Thank you. The first question, just my comment on the first question about will cars cross over that line from the fire department, we didn't really discuss that as a board. um and this is a question if the fire department vehicles use parking do they need to have access across the property line for the entire length of the property line or could they have access for a limited part of it and i guess what i'm getting at is maybe the whole the whole line doesn't need to be completely crossable

Just with respect to that question, Mr. Genova can answer that. And I want to bring him up after we finish with Mr. . Oh, good. Thanks. Any other questions for him?

Does the board have any more questions for this expert? We're good. Thanks very much.

I would just briefly recall David Genova, who can respond to your questions during a while.

Mr. Genova, you recognize you remain under oath? I do. Thank you.

to your question the request from the fire department was was relegated to the rear because that's where their parking area that was the request of where they would propose to cross into our site from our perspective it does not need to be the entire length of the driveway but just to note the existing condition now which I think there might have been confusion on it is currently asphalt and then a deteriorating sidewalk and then asphalt all at the same level there's no curb protecting that sidewalk now going going through so the condition is is not dissimilar other than pavement type from what we're proposing moving forward we certainly don't have a concern we would curb this the part of the site that is not adjacent to their parking area the only other than pedestrian I'm sorry other than personal vehicle manipulation they did express some interest in on off hours maybe washing a fire truck out there that might limit that that was not something that they they did not seem to be a strong suggestion or feeling but if that were the case we would rather not have that go over the curb But that's the only reason that the curb can't go from Valley Road to at least the back of the firehouse itself.

So that would act as, well, the existing sidewalk right near that, even if it's deteriorated, does act as a visual barrier. And people, even though it's not a perfectly performing sidewalk, it does act as sort of a boundary, don't cross over here. So I think that's what the neighbor was indicating.

And I wouldn't want to confuse people where they should and shouldn't walk but we would have no objections to like a Belgian block transition or some sort of alternate paving material between the two if it if this board didn't feel as though that would confuse people as to their intended walking what in that scenario what would the width of a the curb cut or the cut be for the crossover from the fire department to your property

If there is a curb, you create a Belgian block curb from Valley Road to the rear at some point, what would the width of that entrance and exit be at that point? No, on his side.

I would need Mr. Desario to answer that question. I don't want to.

take a sister terrific just to clarify you you indicated that there was no physical barrier between there isn't now well there's a curve to there's a curve on both sides on but the curve is like no it's about a good three four inch reveal in the curve on your side on the fire department side it's less so but there's still a curve I'm looking at I believe in the back

So I guess I think what's before us is the idea that was expressed by the neighbor was there's concern about people entering this wide driveway that's created and then kind of cutting across the boundary with no, you know, sort of at will. So I guess the question would be, is there anything that the applicant can do to prevent that from happening that wouldn't, in part, that wouldn't prevent the firehouse from being able to cross over? So have some sort of visual um prevention you know point or something that speaks to the incoming driver to say stay on your side don't go over to the firehouse cross over just enter here so you want to something to channelize the traffic channelize it yeah and still allow the fire department to cross as as as as needed that's what i was getting at with the notion of a curb cut right between the two properties and at the end that would be at the back where they would cross certainly

Or some sort of marking on the, you know, the fire department could mark their property if they want, a yellow striped whatever, just to say this is not a public space.

But we all know people ignore it all the time. People do, even for fire departments.

So a change of elevation is really the only way to.

But I think it's a good point. Hey, if you have curving, people go over the curve. We've seen that too. Right, but less so. Maybe there's a way to channelize it. so that cars aren't veering off of this driveway into the fire department property even if you mark it as a fire lane people still park there right and I would say you could do that by adding some landscaping but I don't think it's a good idea it would just get probably run over I'm not sure what the answer is

But I do hear the public comments. Like if you see this extra wide driveway all at one elevation, it's confusing. And you think, oh, two cars can pull in at the same time or something.

Can we divert it at the street? Put something so that it's not going to be one great big curb cut. And I'll ask the engineers, can you divert the traffic? Since the fire department doesn't need to use this to pull – back to behind their building. We can put some kind of diverter at the street, at the sidewalk level.

One thing we've been doing on the township level is installing the plastic delineators that go along areas where you don't want cards. Not so, Ballers is an option too, that's more permanent.

A street tree?

Yeah.

Right, currently it's a giant curb cut from the fire station continuous. Right. I'm just looking through Google Maps and, well, actually up until you hit the hydrant, until you hit the building. Right, so it just looks like one giant driveway. Not two separate properties.

May we leave this with the applicant? I mean, if the applicant kind of understands what we're getting at, may we leave this with you to maybe? I do.

Well, I actually have a suggestion. Because we have one more meeting. Can we have you meet with the fire department? You have your engineer meet with Norberto and our fire officials to come up with a design to address this issue. I mean, I think it's a legitimate issue. And we could resolve it, bring it back to the board on September 14th.

Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Okay. Our next witness this evening is Matthew Seckler.

Thank you.

Do you need to hook up your...

I don't, but I think it might be useful. I think it might be helpful for the public.

Do you have your laptop? HDMI cable do you have it yeah well it just needs a cable to connect to that just a regular one or just do you have it Or an HTML.

Just regular HTML?

Yeah.

Hmm.

this is the second page oh okay I do have this it was the second one

Mr. Secler, you were sworn previously, right? Yes, I was. You recognize that you and your laptop remain under oath?

Yes, I do.

Good.

Mr. Secler, you submitted a letter report, supplemental letter to the board dated July 23rd, 2026, along with some exhibits. And that's been previously marked as Exhibit A32. You're familiar with that? Yes, I am. All right. Can you, well, what was the purpose of preparing that letter first off? And then after you answer that, you can proceed to discuss the letter and the exhibits.

Certainly, so this letter report does not really include substantial amount of new data. I know at the previous hearing that I testified to, bless you, I shared some maps and exhibits and bar charts that the board has looked at there. Your own professional parking expert gave testimony, listened to that testimony. There was a couple items I just wanted to clarify in listening to that, so that's what this resubmission package was meant to do. It is a very short one page letter and then some exhibits of which the second page is currently showing on the screen now. So what's on the screen now is the area that we consider the inner catchment area and that includes the pink area which is the on street spaces. This includes and again this was previously testified to but I want to show the graphic to clear this up. it is along valley road all the way from the brooklyn restaurant all the way to bellevue avenue it is cooper avenue from valley road to northview avenue that includes both metered and some two-hour spaces there's metered spaces about to where the cvs ends and then there's two-hour spaces near the women's club and across the street from the women's club We also included, which is in green, the three lots, which is the Upper Montclair Plaza lot, Bellevue lot, and Bellevue Erie lot. There was some discussion at the previous hearing that I was not at regarding Whether they're the limit of the on street spaces that were included so I want to make sure this exhibit was prepared and submitted to the board so it was understood that when I included at my previous at the previous hearing the testimony of the of the 263 spaces what they included so again, it's the areas outlined in magenta and green and green on the second page of exhibit a The subsequent exhibits are the bar charts that I showed last time with the exception that I've overlaid the expected parking demand from the swim quest school in green and I've hatched them. It's difficult to see on the screen as they're being hatched, but those are the top most areas on the bar chart. What we did including what the expected parking demand was for the swim sim quest, this was again what I testified to previously, was that we assumed during the peak time periods that there would be 18 children in the pool and then another 18 children either getting ready to go in the pool or just coming out of the pool depending on what part of the 15 minute period that we were looking at. So all the peak hours would assume that there'd be 36 children in the pool, meaning 36 parked cars needed for the visitors of the swim quest. We assume we had 10 parking spaces on site, which is why for this exhibit, this is again, this page, the third page, you'll see that 26 parking spaces is what we're looking at in the public lots, which again would be the 36 children either 18 in the pool or 18 getting ready or just out of the pool minus the 10 spaces that we have on site. So that carries through all the way till the end of the day where you would only have 18 children in the pool because it would be the last session there would be no one else coming in the pool and again with 10 spaces on site we would need 8 spaces in the various public parking areas around the site. So again, we mapped that out on these bar charts for both the October weekday, October weekend, May weekday, May Saturday, and May Sunday counts that we previously testified to. So again, the actual counts have not changed. These are basically the exact same bar charts you saw previously. We just overlaid the demand that we'd expect based on the swim quest. And again, I would emphasize that that assumes 18 cars for 18 children so if there's carpooling or siblings in the pool we're over counting that parking demand that is necessary as part of this as opposed to as as part of these bar charts i would note i really didn't have any objection because i did listen to the testimony by your parking expert As I testified to previously, when parking lots reach 85% or greater in terms of reaching their capacity, they do feel full. They do require, and I have no objection to the way that the parking expert testified to, that it does require people potentially to circle lots or, you know, obviously... reach out to further and further lots in order to find parking but again what we're testifying to here is that based on you know these bar charts you would have at all times at least a few empty parking spaces within the inner catchment area so again these were just in an effort to overlay that expecting swim quest parking demand on top of the existing demand that we saw out there in October and May So really not a whole lot of new testimony, not a whole lot of new data, but just want to make sure that we clarified our position and the data that we've prepared.

Sorry, go ahead.

And you've already determined that within this limited catchment area there's 263 available spaces?

Correct.

And according to your charts, correct me if I'm wrong, that at no point in time does the parking requirement including the 26 base demand for swim class exceed the 263 parking spaces available correct correct there's available parking according to your analysis there's available parking i'd love for there to be more i'd love for there to be more parking spaces available nearby

We're stuck with the data that is collected where, again, there are time periods when these lots are starting to get constrained. Parking does need to push out a little bit further. But again, we did notice during all time periods that we did counts that there would be sufficient parking within the 263 closest parking spaces to the site. I would also note that your parking expert did, I think, a similar exercise to this. In his charts, he included... relocating vehicles that he saw parked on our lot, meaning the lot that we're gonna develop. I think that was previously testified to that I believe those were fire vehicles that would no longer be parking on our site. So that may be a reason why our parking charts differ from his. The other aspect is that we did not add additional parking related to the Bellevue Theater. The Bellevue Theater was not open in our October counts. They were open in the May counts. I think it had just opened for the May counts. Our May counts were actually less even with the Bellevue Theater open. I'd also note that the Bellevue Theater would have, I'd say, some overlap to our catchment area, but not completely. In other words, we looked out, let's say, 800 feet or so around our building and looked at those 263 spaces. The Bellevue Theater, all of their demand would not be within those 263 spaces. Some of them may be in other spaces that are, let's say, a little bit further from our building, but still within 800 feet or 1,000 feet of the Bellevue Theater. For example, if i go back to the second page you know the bellevue theater located here if you did a similar catchment area for that site it would likely include the bellevue lorraine lot parking on valley road potentially even parking on you know if you're seeing a quick show and it's under two hours you might be able to park on north mountain avenue but again our catchment area is not exactly the same. So while there is some parking demand related to the theater, it would, again, some of that would be in lots that we were not accounting for in our development. So we wouldn't expect that all, I think he had 32 or 34 parking spaces would be part of our 260 some odd spaces. They may be in other lots outside of what we count.

Thanks. I did want, I meant to do this At the last time, and it just came to me, the 260, you said 263 or 260 capacity, can you itemize those by the lots? I know you've got three lots in here. You're not using Bellevue Lorraine. Correct. I'm just trying to square up how many each of those lots are contributing to the 263. And then in your pink, the street parking, how many are you attributing to that? So I'd like to get, if possible, see how those totals equal 263. Sure.

One second.

Because I think the charts are demand, right? The charts are demand. We want to know how the supply adds up. Yeah, where do you get the 263 from? OK, let me get you those in a second.

Just making sure I capture all of my math. So I believe it's 224 is what we counted for in the lots. You want me to give you each lot individually? It would be 96 in the Bellevue lot, 68 in Bellevue Erie. 68? Yep, and 60 in Upper Montclair. Again, those lots have more spaces than that. We are not counting certain reserve spaces or private spaces in those lots.

Okay, so you did 60 in that total. Can you repeat that again?

You did 96 in Bellevue, 68 in Bellevue Erie, and... 60 in Upper Montclair Plaza.

60 or 68 60 sorry and then the remainder would be assorted on street spaces okay and then 224 plus i guess 263 was the total so the balance is in the pink area correct okay 39 i guess that would be So it's pretty close to the Montclair parking utility has 59 meters and then four accessible spaces for Upper Montclair. Bellevue lot has 94 meters plus six accessible spaces. Permit spaces are separate from that. They've broken out what's permit. And then Bellevue Lorraine is not in your catchment area. But I think the one lot that I'd like and maybe other members of the board would like to ask about, because questions did come about the Bellevue Erie lot. The parking utility has zero metered spaces on their website for that. Because if you drive through there, it says permit parking throughout the whole thing. So I guess the basic question is what are those spaces and how how can we include them as the 68 or 60 I forget because if it might be misinformation on the website it may we may not understand how those spaces are really used well I will say that there needs to be in general there definitely should be some clarity as it relates to the signage that's out there when you're entering the lot

there's a big sign that gives various hours in which permits are allowed, you know, at the end and the U, and sometimes they're together, sometimes they're not. But when you're in the lot, I agree there are spots, and a lot of spots say permit only, you know, NJ Transit style. Some are not NJ Transit style signs. But then they're also a ParkMobile sign, and if you go on the app, you could pay for parking in that lot. That lot is a listed lot to be able to pay for parking. So again, we took it as that if ParkMobile allows you to buy hourly parking in that lot, then that is a lot that's available again people may not know they may be nervous about using it because of all the other signage there and again from our correspondence with the parking authority parking utility i don't know what the definition is in township i know there's legal legal ramifications of that it is our understanding that the ParkMobile is allowed to be purchased there. So again, whether the signage is consistent, it appears that the ParkMobile is permitted.

Isn't that an all-day parking? ParkMobile only allows you to purchase the entire day in that lot.

you can't you can't park for one hour you can't park for half an hour in that lot you can only if you're if you're using park mobile you can only you have to pay the five dollars for the entire day you could pay for the whole day or five whatever it is yeah you you're not required to park all day you're required to pay for all day so it'll be a five dollar and change space versus a you know the one hour or whatever amount you're going to use for the other spaces But you can purchase, again, you'll over-purchase, but you could use that for parking.

Well, I guess because this, and others can join in, because the parking demand is so close to capacity, I think that defining what the capacity is is probably pretty important. And if there is messaging that is not entirely accurate, it's not within this board's ability to tell a parking utility what to do, but it certainly When you drive in, it seems like you can't park anywhere because there's either restaurant parking or there's permit parking. So you get discouraged about parking there despite having the app there. So I don't know.

I will say that the time period in which we are, let's say, the most squeezed, the most limited in parking, that lot, which is the, of course I have two blues, which is the upper blue here, is generally full. There's not a whole lot of excess supply in that lot during the time periods that we're squeezed the most. In the weekdays, probably. Right, during weekdays after work. The time periods in which that lot is the lowest... is actually on the weekend where you can't even, the parking demand, I'm getting too close to the screen, is in this one, two, eight, that's the time period where we would use the lot the most would be on the Saturday, middle of the day, on the weekend.

Yet it still just says permit parking period. It doesn't say permit parking only Monday through Friday.

Agreed, but on the Saturday is when we have a lot more capacity overall so if for some reason and again um you know if we don't have all 68 spaces and you say 68 spaces can't be used that obviously have to recalculate my numbers and see where you land but again we're when we're squeezed the most that lot is not really a lot where our potential customers would be going to because it's generally full

I agree. It does trouble me, possibly, if you can park there for $5 all day. I question whether a parent looking to park for a half-hour class is going to use ParkMobile versus just drive around and park elsewhere. I've always thought you can't park there, so I've never chose to park in that lot. So it is concerning. You're probably right about the park mobile thing, but I think as a driver driving around looking for parking, it doesn't appear to be a spot. I mean, it's nitpicky, and I just am curious. So again, looking at the parking utility map, like they say 94 meter spots in Bellevue you say 96 why is there like even just it they're minor discrepancies but why is there a discrepancy at all are you accounting like handicapped spots our 96 was not including handicapped spots 94 is that just it's a minor discrepancy I was just curious why there was one at all I will tell you I'm just trying to see if there was a time period where you know there may be a you know legally parked car or a car that is I'm just saying supply but yeah yeah supply based on what they say and supply it's it's minor like 59 in Upper Montclair you have 60 so I just you know there's probably a actual number That's the actual number that's available. This is not including permit. So it would just be good to have your numbers squared away with what's there and what is, you know, I'm giving benefit of the doubt to the parking utility. Maybe I should be giving benefit of the doubt to you.

Again, unclear. It could be worth a recount to capture the one that may be on either end.

Yeah, again, it's not a huge deal, but when we're talking about the perceived tightness, a few spots might matter.

Is your question to the witness, where did you get your information from?

That might be a good way of saying it.

Our staff counted all the parking spaces and all the meters, but again, I can't speak to, there could have been a meter that, you know, has been broken or, you know, is no longer active or was, you know, leased out to someone or something like that, that, you know, maybe why we capture it. But again, I... it you know being off by one meter I understand we're we're trying for accuracy and again we are at a very close yeah knit thing that uh you know we don't want to make sure we're missing any but you know a plus or minus one wouldn't change the conclusion completely but yes I would want to have a chance to you know walk with them and check every meter well I actually appreciate it the answer is that you walked and counted and that that answers the question for me I mean it seems reasonable that that could happen

I have a question. Mr. Sackler, I know when you have you determined where employees will park?

At this point, from the operator's perspective, they have only told me they will not be parking on site. Where they're going to park, that's all they've given me the information.

And I know that Mr. Giosa said they're going to have to park somewhere.

That's right, he can.

So I know when he added those 10 spaces into his analysis, because you're going to have to find some place for them to park if they're not parking on site. So shouldn't that be included in the analysis?

If they are parking in... public spaces they would they would need to be included in the analysis again some of these metered spaces are or they could be restrictions two hours things like that where again there may not be appropriate for an employee who's going to be there for six hours eight hours which begs the question where employee is going to park it's kind of an important consideration okay

I'm not sure if this question is for you or for Mr. Cesario, but in his A30, the July 22, 2026 memo, he mentions that For example, the parking space in the upper Montclair Plaza lot has no record of that space that when you come down the egress, there's a parking space apparently there, but the utility has no record of that. How is this going to be reconciled? Has anyone reached out to the utility in order to determine what is going to be? Are you going to get a permanent easement for that, or are they going to give up that parking spot is it mine

we're not sure whether an easement is legally required but I respect Roberto's opinion and concern that that parking lot might not always be owned by the township so to have some permanency to it I think I don't think an easement would be required to access onto into a public parking lot but I understand that you know there might not be any permanency to that the town could sell it to a private person and be beneficial avenues but so you know we believe that we would be able to obtain that that would be a condition of approval it's one of the on the list that i gave to the board earlier i believe i believe the parking utility superintendent said that applicants are if there's a loss of a township parking spot then the applicant would have to pay for the loss of that spot Well, I would remind the board, though, that we're adding two spaces on Valley Road that don't currently exist. So there would be a spot lost in a lot that would be replaced by two public spots available right on Valley Road.

And you're confident that there will be two spaces on Valley?

Yes.

Any other comments or questions from the board?

Did you have anything further you wanted to add to regarding the supplemental letter report? You were here earlier when a member of the public asked a question regarding ingress and egress for the site circulation. Is that something you reviewed as part of your evaluation as a traffic engineer for this project? And what can you say about it?

So I think there are some benefits to this application from a safety point of view. One being the closure of the egress driveway that goes onto Valley Road today. Again, having less potential conflict points on a busy road like that is beneficial. Again, coming out of that driveway, It was open. You know you can have, you could have had left turns going in or out and again I think that possibly could cause congestion near the fire station. In this case we were only having right turn in and left turn in no out movements on Valley Road. Obviously, that's our proposal. The county could come back and say you can't have left turns in and we would be only right turn in. It's obviously their roadway, their jurisdiction. I know they do take opinions of township boards or governing bodies. If there is a turn restriction, they would consider it. In terms of egress, again, we're going out into the public parking lot instead of into a public street. Again, that is typically seen as a move in the right direction from a private development standpoint. You do not want to have to access and have your egress traffic on a busier street. would say the movement would be very similar to the I think a Talbot's which is right next to us you know has a access point that comes down into the parking lot just like ours would again has a similar grade where you know the drive the parking lot starts up high and then goes low into the upper Montclair parking lot and then you kind of circulate around the parking lot in that manner of the public parking lot in a yes that's counterclockwise direction so again we'd be Similar to that in this case as well. So again, I think there is benefit to the fact that we are not accessing directly on Valley. It puts less strain onto the area where there is obviously a firehouse and a congested area that gets backed up because of train crossings, pedestrian crossings, fire emergencies. There's a lot going on. And I think taking an access point off of that road is a benefit versus a detriment.

A member of the public asked a question about, for lack of a better term, the site triangle. Coming down your egress into the Upper Montclair Fossil Lot, do you foresee any issues with looking around cars and what have you as you egress into the Upper Montclair Lot?

Yeah, so going into the Upper Montclair lot, it's a one-way circulation pattern in that area. So really, you're looking mainly to your left. Obviously, you need to look straight ahead to make sure there's not a car backing out one of the spaces you're kind of going towards. But you're looking to your left, and in that area is, again, where the Talbot's, if I'm pronouncing it right, kind of driveway kind of dives down to the area. So again, we could see their driveway from our lot, and there's no parked cars physically next to us in terms of like there's no, you know uh parking in the upper montclair lot that's immediately adjacent to us that we block in your view as we come down into the lot so i don't see an issue from a sight distance perspective um coming down to the upper montclair parking lot any other comments or questions from the board or um just a question i i heard what you said about the um

weighing the pros and cons of eliminating that second driveway access on Valley Road, which I do agree it's beneficial to alleviate that portion. However, that volume of traffic is not disappearing. It's being sent to the upper Montclair parking lot, which is fairly congested on a good day. And I guess the concern is, or the question, what is your opinion and thoughts on the impact that we'll have on the circulation of that lot in particular, particularly when at the worst point the accurate crossing is closed? because of the train station, as well as the light on Bellevue and Valley is red. It's gridlock at that point, from my own experience. So I guess, what is your thought? Because the main issue here is vehicles exiting the driveway will have to loop around the lot to then exit onto Valley. and there's often instances where that driveway exiting onto Bellevue is backed up. So what's your thoughts on how that may potentially impact circulation of the lot as well as egress of the site?

And before you answer, are you contemplating that someone would have to go around inside the interior of the Montclair Upper Plaza lot in order to exit onto Valley Road?

It's a one-way loop around that parking lot.

Yeah, and again, you are correct. Anyone leaving our site would need to either circulate towards the Bellevue Avenue intersection, which, as you mentioned, gets congested, train crossings, things like that. Again, I don't know the legality of it, but there's also the access point between Talbot's and Starbucks. If you circulate all the way around, again, I don't know. don't see anything says private roadway only so i assume you could legally use that and to get back onto valley uh obviously you have to circulate the lot in order to do so um but again i i don't think that we are i think that is still a a improvement versus dumping people directly back out onto valley road closer to the fire station which is where our current access point is versus either the drive up next to Starbucks or the access point at Bellevue near the train.

I'll ask a question. There was testimony, and I apologize I forget. What was the testimony about how many people will just go park the car and walk their kids in? I remember someone speaking about that versus trying to just go through the lot and drop off. There was some testimony, and I apologize about not having it handy, but it's relevant to this question because it yeah so for example if some if some parents are just going to go find a parking space and then walk over versus like i guess the question is what proportion of parkers are actually going to feed through this lot and dump out onto um the municipal lot

I think I might have given testimony anecdotally that some people may choose to just park in a spot where they know they'll find parking and then walk over versus hunt for the closest space. I don't have a proportional number. I just know from my experience, I'm the type of person that I like to park where I know there's a spot and I'll walk however far I need to as opposed to following the person in the shopping center when they're pushing their cart. uh but again i i assume this being a repetitive class that kind of parents there's a little bit of a learned activity of okay instead of you know driving through the lock and caught with the train down i'm just going to park in this spot and then walk over yeah thank you um any other carol yeah

Given the age that you're serving for the clientele of the swimming pool, I believe it's from infant to, is it eight years, is that the top?

I think eight was the general range for their peak, but I think they'd go up to 10 or 12 or something like that. But I think eight is their prime. Six months to eight is their prime.

I thought the older children was for the birthday parties.

That might have been.

Well, that's for the birthday party. I was listening to the swim lessons. I think the lessons are only up to, I guess you said the peak is eight-year-old, but that it can go up to 10. Is that what you're saying?

I think so. I'd have to double check. But yeah, I guess I understand, or I think there may be a question beyond that, but I think that is generally the range, yes.

Well, this implies that you're looking at mothers with babies in car seats and having to get them out of the car seat and do those kinds of things. So I presume that those people are not drop-offs.

Correct. No one is drop off at this site. It's basically park. Like you said, it may be birthdays. If you have a 10 year old little run in and you could do a drop off pretty quickly. But obviously any of the infants, toddlers, you know, they all need to be parked and walked in.

When it comes to the exit of the parking lot, I know that the, is there, right now there's no need, I know that Talbot's and a couple of others use an exit only onto the township parking lot. And I don't believe there's an easement or anything necessary, you just, it's okay to do that without a particular permit from the township to use that as the only exit.

You're talking about our property, or did you mention Talbot?

You're saying that in order for the traffic to exit your parking lot, that they must go through the township lot. Is that not correct?

Correct.

Okay. Is there an easement required to do that?

I don't believe so, since it's public property. And the site was originally developed with that driveway there, which is now blocked off by bollards. But at one time, that was utilized presumably for egress from the property. And again, so long as it's a public parking facility, I don't believe there's any requirement for public to utilize that. But we're going to get that clarified from a legal perspective. And if any agreements are required, we've agreed to obtain those as a condition of approval. But that would be something to work out with the township or the parking utility.

Thank you.

Any other comments or questions from the board? How about we break quickly for five minutes, and then we'll take questions from the public? Do we have any more experts?

Not tonight.

OK. How about five minutes? All right.

Thank you. Hi. I have several questions generally about how one conducts these parking analyses. And then I have some particular questions. After you do a parking, you've done three studies now. And the last one was in October of 2025. No, I'm sorry, May of 2026. That's right, isn't it? Correct. OK. there have been i don't know if you're aware of it but there have been new businesses that have moved in since may of 2026 and opened clementina being one of them the restaurant jackie's grill yet grillette expanding to a much bigger space and then we have a iv physical therapy is going to be opening up soon So that suggests, I think, that there will be additional pressure on parking. Is there a best practice in your field for how you update changed circumstances?

With parking, one of the challenges is where the uses are located. Again, I know where Jackie's Grillette is. I don't know specifically where every other business you mentioned.

They're at the corner of Bellevue and Valley. So they're in the area.

Right. But like Jackie's Grillette, that would be outside of what we have as our inner catchment area. Customers of there may be utilizing Valley Road,

on on street spaces north of Bellevue the Bellevue Lorraine lot and then some may overlap with us you know in the in the Bellevue lot so your your third catchment area because you've had three as far as I can tell well there's the greater catchment area there's the yellow dotted line catchment area and now there's this narrower one and the narrower one doesn't include Valley Road north of Bellevue is that what you're saying correct correct so there may not again

parking again is like a living breathing thing you know businesses come out new businesses come in you know there was parking demand for I assume whatever was in Jackie's grillette beforehand that you know generated some level of parking it's been empty for quite a while as Clementina was empty for several years so when you did your analysis in May in October and May those spaces were empty I believe potentially yes I'm going to trust you on that one if they've been out for a while then obviously they were not open in May But again, they would potentially be adding demand some to our area, some to areas that were outside of what we're considering our inner area. So there may be an uptick in a little demand on our end, could be an uptick in the other areas outside of our zone of influence.

Okay. And we're talking about a five-minute walk. That seems to be the ideal here. How has that determined the five-minute walk? How did your folks who collected this determine what was a five-minute walk and what was beyond that?

so first off the folks that did the data collection they just collected the data we then went back to the office to determine hey what's the reasonable distance that someone would walk in this area um what we did is you know it's difficult for let's say a potential customer when they pull into a lot if that lot was within what i'm going to consider a five minute walk the beginning of it i generally consider the whole lot to be within the five minute walk because when you enter the lot and you're swinging around, you're not going to all of a sudden decide at an imaginary line, I'm not going to park in that spot when you're already within the lot. Like you may not decide to drive in another street when you're going down public streets and be like, hey, that's too far, I'm going to turn around. But once you're in the lot, you're generally accepting anything within that lot. Now what we looked at was generally, and I think this was discussion previously, in the traffic industry we typically utilize like a three and a half foot per second speed as what pedestrians walk at. That's what the traffic lights are timed for when you see the countdown timers when it's telling you how long to cross the street. That's based on three and a half feet per second. In this case, we generally looked at that as being the limit. I did go back because there were some members of the public that questioned, well, if you have younger children and they're walking, you're pushing a stroller, are you getting to three and a half foot per second? I would say all of the areas we've looked at or at least had portions of the lots within three feet per second. So again, slower than what the traffic lights are timed for. But still, again, you know, you know, within a five minute walk for anyone, you know, in the Bellevue lots or the public spaces that are on Valley Road or Cooper Avenue as part of our our catchment area.

OK, so now I just want to ask you some more questions about your collection of the data.

If I can walk over.

so you said you said there were 633 your report says there's a total of 633 or so parking spaces and that includes Lorain Avenue down to Park. It includes Bellevue Avenue down to Park. It includes Cooper down to Park. It includes further on Northview. Would you agree with that? It's greater than the yellow area.

Correct. The 600 some odd spaces that we sent our staff out to catch to get a bird's eye view was almost everything that you see in this picture.

Did you realize that your report says that there are 633 spaces within a five minute walk? And you testified to that also in your June. Maybe you didn't mean to do it because you said that within the yellow area, it's 633 spaces. Your table three, I think, in your report says that.

I'd have to look at that. But again, like I said, I know that we started narrowing it down to the most logical spaces. And then that's why we weren't counting all the way down Bellevue and things like that. And that's when we looked at this inner catchment area.

Okay, so let's just look at your initial report.

And which date is this, the May 22nd?

Yes, your May 22nd report on page, sorry, page four, table three. Right above that it says the count data was collected in 20 minute intervals. A summary of the peak parking utilization within a five minute walk. is provided below. But that's not really within a five-minute walk, is it? Correct. Because it includes all 63 spaces. Correct. All 633 spaces. And your testimony on June 1 WHICH I LISTENED TO AGAIN INDICATED THAT AS WELL. SO THERE ARE NOT, I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CONFIRMED THAT THERE ARE NOT 633 AVAILABLE PARKING SPACES WITHIN THAT YELLOW AREA THAT YOU HAVE IN THAT MAP. THEY'RE NOT WITHIN A FIVE-MINUTE WALK, I THINK IS THE... WELL, YOU'VE TESTIFIED THAT THAT YELLOW AREA IS A DELINEATION OF A FIVE-MINUTE WALK.

I think there may be some spaces beyond a five-minute walk here for a child in the yellow area. Again, I can confirm that everything within the 263 inner spaces are within a five-minute walk of this site.

Okay. All right. All right. So I asked you before about updated information that you might come upon. Is it correct that what you're saying is that with respect to some of those sites, they're not really going to have an impact on the site in question?

Again, depending on the use, they may or may not. Depending on their busiest hours and where they're specifically located, they may have some spaces that some customers would park within the areas that we studied, and some may be in areas we did not study. OK.

Turning now to the circulation within the Upper Montclair Plaza area, are you aware of the number of trains that stop at Upper Montclair throughout the day?

I don't think I have the exact number, but again, I am familiar with how often generally trains come by, especially during peak periods.

I have the schedule from New Jersey Transit. And between the hours of 9 and 6. a weekday there are 23 trains that stop at Upper Montclair and that is a concern in terms of circulation through the Upper Montclair Plaza parking lot because of the backup that occurs at that time and is it is it true it seems to me that with the ten parking spaces that are available on site every half hour there will be at least 10 cars leaving the site to go to the Upper Montclair Plaza parking area, needing to circulate in that area. Is that correct?

Yes, I would agree with that.

Okay. That's an additional 10 cars every half hour. Correct. Are you aware of the... bus schedule, the New Jersey Transit bus schedule. Not the commuter schedule, the number 28 bus.

I know the number 28 bus stops like 300 feet from here. I don't know the frequency of its service.

It stops at the Upper Montclair parking plaza. makes a left-hand turn on to Bellevue and then a right-hand turn on to Valley and it does the opposite when it's heading north anyway there is a bus heading north and up 28 bus heading north in that area approximately once every 30 minutes and there's another one heading south in that area approximately every 30 minutes does that check that and the number of train stops that there are during the day does that change your perspective on the circulation within the parking lot no it does not but again it is good to know that the area is well served by mass transportation do you expect that the parents who are bringing their children here will be using this I don't think they will be but maybe an employee does utilize mass transit to get here Let me just look at this. You talked about the benefits of in terms of there not being an egress onto Valley Road, which I would certainly agree with, except you also stated that you thought that some of the vehicles leaving the site would travel counterclockwise and end up eventually entering on Valley Road. But what about the backup? What's the benefit or the detriment to the backup of 10 cars every half hour given the number of, given the traffic on Bellevue Avenue and the backup from the trains, et cetera.

Well, again, I mean, typically I would consider 10 vehicles in a half hour in an area that there's, you know, hundreds of cars that go through an hour as a de minimis number. Now I understand that there are some other factors of congestion related to, you know, pedestrian crossings, train crossings, fire type of emergencies, things like that. So I, i am sensitive that a simple 10 number where which would normally be you know a minimal number may seem like it generates additional congestion again i would say that you know i think that you know the if the township was able to find 10 more parking spaces in the upper montclair lot for the public that would be seen as a great benefit and it would generate 10 more cars we are generating the same 10 cars but just in our site I'm emphasizing the fact that I think that it is not, I don't think it is a substantial detriment, but I do understand there is additional congestion due to the area that we're located within.

And you mentioned that the county may not allow a left turn lane heading north in the ingress to the site.

um do you have to get the permission of the the county to uh to do that we need to receive approval from the county planning board uh essex county require does that decision after uh municipalities local land use board has made their decision um so at that point we would go before uh make you know have our application be reviewed and they could decide whatever turning movement restrictions they want to see

Do you have any concerns from a safety perspective or from in the back up on Valley Road with the left-hand turn heading into the site?

Again, I think there are time periods where the left-hand turn is easy to be, I'd say relatively easy to be made. If traffic is being held up at the light at Valley and Bellevue and there's no cars coming southbound, it's easy to make a left turn in. And other time periods, it's backed up during rush hour and you're hoping for a generous person to kind of wave you through. So there's obviously a Saturday at 10 o'clock in the morning might not be that difficult. 430 on a Tuesday may be very difficult.

Okay, thank you.

Hi, Jan Hoffman, 193 Cooper Avenue. And I would like to say I am a far better expert on parking and traffic at Cooper and Northview than you. I've lived there for over 30 years. And where I live, it's about a three-minute walk to your proposed swim school. First question, Mr. Sackler. If you have a choice between a free space and a paid space, where would you park?

I think all things being equal, most people would pick the free space.

Okay, and when you testified a couple of months ago, you talked about Cooper and Northview, and I believe you used the term negative spaces.

I believe when we showed the 20-minute interval counts, there were time periods in which there were more spaces than could either legally park or meters on the street if it was in a meter area. Cars either jammed themselves in. or cars were illegally parking potentially too close to a stop sign or a crosswalk.

Or, you know, cutting into my driveway or cutting into my neighbor's driveway. That's true. And so I would actually tell you that if you had been observing those parking spaces at more complete hours than you did, you would find almost negative parking spaces all the time. Do you know who parks there in the negative spaces?

Personally, no. I can't tell when I look at the cars.

It's often employees in Upper Montclair or people who use the train station. So if you are with a three-year-old, it's pouring rain out or snowing and you have to get within your five-minute walk to the swim school and you can't quickly find a metered parking space, where do you park? guess in a space either further or you have a three-year-old it's raining or snowing out where do you park in the closest available space that you could find and where would that be it could be in one of the lots we were talking about it could be on the street it could be on the street it could be in CBS and it could be in the upper women's the upper montclair women's club because people are thinking oh I have a half an hour what the heck I'll risk the ticket So you have not considered that or talked about actual behavior? How many how many staff people need need parking spaces?

I believe that was testified to before I Believe it was testified to there be ten staff at a max period of time, right?

So that's really in addition to the parking that you have requested. It's ten additional spaces Okay Finally I want you to know that that you are now requesting additional parking that will spill over where we are. I am a three-minute walk from you in an area where there is consistently negative space, and you want to be there seven days a week, sometimes till 8 o'clock at night. That's what you're asking of our neighborhood. Yes, is that what you're asking of our neighborhood? Is that the burden you're asking?

I'm just the traffic engineer. That's obviously what the applicant is asking for.

Well, actually, you know what? You have really talked, sir, about parking. You have not talked about traffic, which is considerable. And what you didn't talk about in your traffic report is the car accidents that have happened even a block off of Valley Road that I can testify to. Because I call the cops every time there is a car accident at the intersection of Valley and Northview. Do you know when the most recent car accident there was? No. It happened about three months ago, and it was when a firefighter was coming home from work from the fire station right there. He was coming down Cooper, and someone was racing through Northview to beat the traffic on Valley and hit the firefighter's car because he landed up on my lawn. I hope you'll keep safety in mind in addition to parking.

Hi, my name is Suzanne Neckerman. I own Get Dressed Montclair at 601 Valley Road, just north of Bellevue Avenue. You've been alerted now, I think, that there's staff that you need to park somewhere. I was wondering if you know that most of these parking spots are only two hour parking. So do you assume your staff will every two hours during the changeover from the classes go and repark their cars and come back in time to teach a new class? Or is that going to be a problem?

Again, as we testified to the customers or parents parking, again, because their time periods are less than two hours, a half an hour at a time, all we've heard from the operator is that they would be parking off-site. Obviously, that still needs to be clarified or discussed as part of the applicant's application.

okay did you just thank you did you just testify that you check the traffic on a Sunday or did I misunderstand that we did parking counts on a weekday and Saturday in October a weekday a Saturday and Sunday in May Okay, are you aware that most of the other businesses are closed on Sundays except restaurants? So there's definitely less occupancy for parking spots on Sunday in Upper Montclair?

Absolutely, and that's what we found. The table showed the most demand on the weekday in the evening. Saturday was obviously the next, and then Sunday was the least. The reason why we did Sunday is we are located near some churches, so we wanted to make sure that we took into account interaction between the church and then again the businesses that are open on Sunday.

And isn't your swim school closed on Sundays? I think that was the original. No? Okay, my mistake. And then I have actually a question to the board. I'm not sure I'm allowed to ask this, but I'm just, we have, what, four new businesses in the block and a half already who all needed extra, extra parking spaces. For example, the physical therapy doesn't have a single parking spot for the building. so when they're in business they will use up a lot of parking spots i have no idea how many is there a maximum limit of parking things he might not even be aware of that it might not actually be his problem but it's the problem for us as business owners in upper montclair that let's say you have 200 263 spaces and between all the businesses we might need 400 already and that's he's just at the tail end he's like the last one to come in I don't think the board can answer that question the town planner may be able to if you know of any sort of comprehensive parking studies that have been done the last comprehensive parking study we did was in 2016 so it predates a lot of these current issues so Okay, so we might before he even comes in be already full even though some of the new businesses Jackie's has just started like what a month ago with their much bigger space and the physical fitness hasn't even started so but there's spaces that they will need we know about already right because they've already come before the board and made the plan so that is my question is there a maximum that you would consider then because my business on saturday my customers leave and say hey i was going to come shopping but i couldn't find a spot and i'm like the parking lot police in the back because everyone who goes to jackie's and to mercados and just picks up food just drops their car and blocks that little area behind frederick's and us can't even put my car in my own spot unless I ask someone else to move and so it's even more than it's officially because people just like oh yeah I'm just running in to get food it's only gonna be ten minutes what do I really worry about so there's more and I'm not sure this is part of what I should be talking about but it affects all of us who have a business

What the board has been provided with evidence about five days. That's what we're working with now. So we're trying to do our best with the evidence that's before us. But we don't have data beyond what the public has. I don't think there's been any other independent reports about the parking that you're talking about. So that's the situation that we're in.

okay well I appreciate you listening to me and I know it's not all on him because we've already approved other businesses with other variances in the last few years and as you said your last study was in 2016 and upper Montclair has definitely changed a lot since then so I appreciate it thank you for listening

Hi, Liz Zazie, and I live on Amherst Place in Upper Montclair. So Mr. Seckler, I have a couple of questions. You said that you had no or you didn't have any problem with the testimony of Mr. Giosa, the parking expert.

the township's expert I listened to his testimony I don't have any issue with his overall findings the way that he explained his review letter again the one thing I wanted to bring up was the fact that you know I would say the catchment area related to the theater would be slightly different than ours so some of his expected parking demand for the theater wouldn't

only be absorbed by you know the lots that we studied that may be in other lots as well that was the only real you know clarification point that i wanted to raise on the record okay so you said lots do you do you know what lots you mean because i'm trying to picture as a um a consumer that uses the area what lots there are that people would park in for the movie theater

So what I was referring to is, again, on the figure A1, which is behind you, everything that is colored is the lots that we counted.

The Bellevue-Lorraine lot, Valley Road, north of Bellevue, Bellevue Avenue, east of... No, I'm saying the lots that you said would be more utilized by people who are going to the movie theater. You said there were...

The Bellevue Lorraine lot and then possibly if someone would be within walking distance to I believe it's like the extension lot on the north side of Lorraine. I don't know if it's the Bellevue extension or the Bellevue area extension. There's a little bit of a lot. Further to the north on Lorain, but again, also the on-street spaces along Bellevue Avenue or Valley Road, you know, towards Lorain and down towards Norwood Avenue. All that would also be potentially part of the theater, you know, area. Same thing with North Mountain Avenue. If they're under two hours, you know, those are other spaces that are closer to the theater as opposed to where our building is.

Right, but are you aware of how many permit spaces are actually in that lot that the, I think you're calling it the Bellevue Lorraine lot?

Bellevue Lorraine has 16 permit spaces, I think 54 private spaces, and 33 metered spaces.

And you're not counting that in your captured area? We're not counting that in our captured area. Okay. And so did I miss here? Because I remember Mr. Gios' testimony. He said that he felt there would be deficit parking. In other words, there would not be enough parking spaces in the captured areas or catchment, whatever the word is. He testified, to my recollection, that there would not be enough, and I remember he used the word deficit. Did I misremember that? Because you seem to be agreeing with what he testified.

So I don't have his, let's say, chart handy, but the differences between his chart and my chart is that his chart, which led him to the – and he's here, so he could probably speak for himself. But I just want to highlight a couple differences. He accounted for cars that were currently parking on our lot that I believe were firefighter spaces that he added to his chart. So that increased the demand either above or close to the demand line. And then again, he added the theater parking, which again, he included the entire demand of the theater parking within our 263 spaces. that popped it over the number so I agree if you were to count those two things it would pop it above the number then basically what it does is it pushes cars out of our catchment area so that could mean that you know someone who is going to one of the other businesses along Valley Road that person may be parking on Bellevue Avenue or something like that instead of you know on Valley Road in our catchment area

Okay, thank you. And I'm glad you said the firefighters parking on your property now, because as a person who is a customer of Chase Bank, that drive-through ATM not only functioned as a drive-through ATM, but there were parking spots there. That said for chase customers only and those parking spots were intended and I know this because I bank at that chase They were intended not only for people using the ATM even though they were abused by people shopping everywhere they were intended for the people using the bank that is on the corner of Valley and and Bellevue. Those parking spaces, which are now blocked with stanchion signs that say no parking, yet there are firefighters apparently parking there. Somebody's parking there, right? It used to be people like me using the bank and the employees of Chase Bank.

We have to turn, if you could... We understand. The board understands. Right.

So I'm just saying, okay, so again, let's go back to the where do the employees park, because not only are your employees looking for all-day parking, but all of the people that used to park at the Chase ATM who were customers and employees of the Chase, they're looking for the parking as well. So I guess that's my closing question.

I assume those employees were parking in somewhere in the spaces that we either counted or outside our catchment area today. The bank is still open, correct? Not the ATM.

It's the largest chase in all of Montclair.

So those employees, if they parked within... Back when the lot was open, they parked on our property. I understand that. Yes. But in October or May, when we did our counts, I'm assuming they were parked somewhere in that map, but not on our property. I believe that people parked on our property were solely they're firefighters well i'm not allowed to answer but i but they're they're all looking for parking correct so they if they were parked in any of the areas that we've colored then they're in our accounts in our demand if they parked in areas north or east of our park our area then they're not in our catchment area but they are again i agree they're parking somewhere but they are within our accounts if they are not parked on our site

Right, but it comes back to the deficit, which we're at a deficit if those 10 spots, whether they're firefighters or they were the Chase customers and employees, that's a deficit. Thanks. Sorry. That was a statement, not a question. I admit it.

I just want to clarify then. I believe there was some testimony, and I didn't hear all of it, about the firefighters parking on our lot and when they would be able to park on our lot and when they would be still parking on the fire site. site so i don't believe that they would be spilling you know or they wouldn't be added to the demand in the areas that we've done our parking i believe they're being handled either parking our site after we close you know for the overnight shift or they're parking back on their property i believe that was what the testimony was okay thanks holly felber barbara eclectic

I would like to reiterate that the fire staff will have to find parking, too. But a question for you. The past two or a couple witnesses stated several new businesses have opened. Are you aware that there are three new businesses opening within the Upper Montclair Plaza parking lot?

Just from driving around, I see that there's, you know, let's say new tenant space, but I don't have any idea of what the tenant is or their expected either parking demand or hours.

one is a dog groomer another is a restaurant and the third i don't know and when your team did their parking study did they notice um how how kuman gets their customer gets their students into their spaces in their spaces in the building immediately next door to the firehouse in the back parking lot again

Our staff counted the vehicles that were parked in parking spaces or illegally parked. So if they were waiting in the aisle, they would not have been accounted for. If they were parked in, you know, a handicap stall or in a, you know, as I mentioned, where there's a fire hydrant or something like that, they would have been counted as a car.

Did your team encounter any junk traffic? We learned that at the last meeting, that junk traffic is created when cars just circle and circle and circle looking for parking spots.

So I will say I did not instruct them to look for it, but I know from experience in driving through here, I did observe junk traffic driving through the lots.

And at the meeting here in June, I thought it was clearly established that the Erie lot was a New Jersey transit lot, and you cannot park hourly there. So I am curious as to why you did not update your report and subtract those 68 spots.

As I mentioned earlier, you can purchase parking through ParkMobile. Again, it can be daily. You could utilize it for five minutes. You could utilize it forever long. You have left in your daily parking pass. So that is why we utilized that parking. And I would reiterate that the capacity or supply that this use is utilizing from that lot is on a Saturday primarily or a Sunday primarily. and not during the week. That lot is generally jammed up during the week when we would be, let's say, needing to find parking, so that is not a lot where we're pulling some of our supply from.

Okay. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Warren Ross. I own the building in Upper Montclair Plaza where I have six tenants. I have two questions. Are you aware that right now there are already two businesses that have drop offs already in Upper Montclair Plaza so that the cars are dropping off and circling and it's causing a big backup of traffic flow in the plaza? They have the coder school and the daycare center.

Again, when I've done observations of the area, not as part of the counts, I have noticed there are time periods in which there are parents dropping off or picking up in the lot. So I have observed that.

And I'm there almost daily. And my second question is, what's going to happen when the customers from the swim club can't get into Upper Montclair Plaza? Because this happens frequently where cars... have to back out, turn around. I was there Friday where a truck was blocked behind all these business and people didn't know what was going on. The horns are honking. People are backing up. Then we went out past Starbucks and the traffic was backed all the way past CVS and you couldn't go left so I couldn't get out I couldn't get out to Bellevue I couldn't turn left on Valley I had to go all the way down to Wachong to go all the way around to get to Bellevue Avenue to go over the so the traffic right now is horrendous there and what's going to happen when people leave and they can't get into the plaza

So, again, I can't speak to the day that you were referring to if there was an accident or some vehicle parked illegally that was preventing the circulation pattern. Again, our customers would be not unlike the customers of your Upper Montclair Plaza lot where, again, we rely on the vehicles following the normal path of traffic in order to get in and out with the understanding that there is a train, there is a bus, there is... traffic lights and pedestrians in this area in the downtown but again our 10 cars coming out of our lot would be a half hour would be no different than the other businesses that utilize that parking lot

So the new businesses that Holly mentioned before, and there's three new ones just coming in, none of them have their own parking space. So these are all adding into, so it's a blizzard. I mean, you have new cars coming in there, people dropping off from existing. Your group would come in. doing it. And the plaza was supposed to be for cars parking for the local businesses. It's going to be a problem. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Don Felber, born and raised in Upper Montclair, business owner of 594 Valley Road. In addition to some of the businesses that have recently opened, Kumon Tutoring Center, Bloom Child Care, there's a draw grooming place which came online, I guess, today, this week. You had mentioned Starbucks in your testimony. The Coder School, somebody else mentioned. There's Montclair Mud, which is a ceramic, I guess, classes. And there's also a Jungle Juice, which is very similar to the Starbucks. I don't know if all of those or some of them were open or not yet when you made your study.

don't have the date of every single opening uh i i believe most of them were open again obviously not the dog groomer that just opened at that time but i do think a majority of those but yes i understand that the upper montclair downtown area is booming with retail and service opportunities and they seem to keep coming and that is obviously adding traffic and parking to this downtown

In fact, it seems that we've, in the Upper Montclair Plaza parking area, the new businesses that are opening up are largely pickup drop-off types, which would be kind of similar to yours.

Ours is not drop-off. Again, in the sense that you're there for 30 minutes, 45 minutes, and then you leave, I guess that could be a type of traffic, but we are not, you know, you drop your three-year-old off and then you come pick them up in... 30 minutes type of thing.

So the parents would be required to go inside with their child?

They would be walking their child in.

Okay. And when you did your study, was St. James' school across the street, directly across the street open? Because they are a preschool too, which were also competing for the valued parking spaces.

so we did not do weekday counts early in the morning so if they were open we would have caught them at the end of the day uh like when we did our weekday counts in may we did our accounts from 3 p.m to 7 p.m so it would have had some overlap with potentially uh you know the daycare went later in the day yeah i'm pretty sure they're probably like eight o'clock in the morning and three o'clock in the afternoon but anyway um Well, and I just want to put on the record, the reason why we did our counts from starting at 3 p.m. is that's when we start to peak up, as was testified to. We do have classes with younger kids that may have, you know, five or eight kids in the pool at, you know, 11 o'clock in the morning, things like that. But we ramp up when, you know, the I'd say the larger schools let out. So between 3 p.m. is basically the beginning of our peak period. So that is why we started our counts at 3 p.m. to capture as we would ramp up.

Okay. It was mentioned here tonight by Mr. Trembulak, and it was mentioned in previous meetings that I think you intend to capture two parking spots on Valley Road. Is that correct?

I think we had mentioned that there by closing the curb cut along Valley Road there appears to be the ability to have enough length for two parking spaces obviously the actual design location you know needs to be blessed by likely I'm assuming the county and the township in order to effectuate that space a private business can't just start striping spaces on the street um are you aware that there's a fire hydrant on the property at some in some place I do know there's a fire hydrant just past, just south of our entrance driveway.

Correct. And what is the overall, I don't know if it's the length of the property or the width of the property along Valley Road. Do you have any idea? From Talbot's to the firehouse driveway.

Well, it looks like about 95 feet, I believe. 95 feet? To

yeah it looks like 95 feet that might be a little bit longer than I thought yeah it's yeah yeah it's yeah it looks like 95 feet based on the survey from Talbot's to the firehouse the property line yes okay I measured and I was pretty generous I have a 30-foot Stanley tape measure and I came up with about 67 feet

Yeah, again, our property line goes all the way to the far end of the existing, we were just talking about the sidewalk that is between.

Correct. I went Belgian block curbing from the firehouse to Belgian block curbing at Talbot's. But anyway, that's.

We have the survey. Yeah, I don't doubt it. The width of our property at Valley Road.

also took a measurement from the firehouse Belgian block inside the fire department's side of the Belgian block to the fire hydrant and I came up do you know how far that distance is I'm approximating it off of this plan it looks like it's probably that's probably another maybe 22 to 25 feet maybe I had 32 feet it's it's

I'm not using a scale. This is a half plant, so it's possible.

And on county property, county road, when you make a stripe for a parking spot, how long must that be?

So typically if you're a first space in a parallel parking, you could be about 20 feet, or the last space you could be 20 feet. In other words, if you could drive in or out of it, it's an easier space. I'm talking about on-street parking, sorry. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So an on-street parking space, the first or last space could usually be a little smaller because it doesn't require as much maneuvering. You basically could... you know, enter pulling in or exit pulling out as opposed to doing the back and forth. So again, if I was doing design, typically I'd have 20 foot spaces on the ends and 22 foot long spaces for anything that is, let's say, landlocked between two other spaces.

Gotcha. So I went on the county website and it said 23 feet. And Montclair Township is 20 feet, but obviously this is a county road. And from a driveway, how far must that first stripe be?

I don't know what the county standard is. Again, there is benefits to having daylighting for sight distance. In this case, we're an entrance only driveway. So normally I'd want to have could be 15 feet so you could see out. But that because we're not an exit driveway, perhaps we'd be less than that. But we do have the fire hydrant, as you mentioned, which would be a limiting factor. In terms of how close?

On the north side of the property. Correct. On the south side of the property, different story. And then from a fire hydrant to the stripe, you need how many feet approximately?

I think it's 20 feet centered on the hydrant, I believe is what it is.

Montclair said 10.

Well, I think I mean that it's a 20-foot section. I think you need 10 feet on either end from the hydrant.

And then so the only way I can see you getting a spot on there is if you did it on the Talbot side, and you'd be right at numbers. Because on the Talbot side, I have 35 feet from fire hydrant to the Talbot's property line. And then you need 10 feet for the fire hydrant, plus two feet for the driveway. And the spot needs to be 23 feet. So you're up to 35 feet, which is what that site is. So you're pretty much maxing out there.

These are good questions about, would the applicant be agreeable to just do a layout of, I mean, if the testimony or if the intent is provide two parking spaces, could they show the board how they're drawn? So we'll know if it's one or two or zero.

I'm assuming we could do that.

We could do it.

Obviously, we don't have the jurisdiction to enact it.

At least whether or not the township approves it to show that with the dimensions that you're speaking about, that they work. I think it's a reasonable request of the applicant.

Because I would presume that the most common variance you see here is a parking variance.

But we wouldn't have any ability. If there's parking proposed on the street, this board doesn't control that. But it would have to be, if it's being proposed as a part of the application is being available, we would like to know how it's drawn out so that it would be. I mean, I think Norberto might be probably the most capable of determining whether or not the spaces work on the street.

we submitted an exhibit somebody just reminded me i'm looking at my exhibit oh okay street parking exhibit a23 okay um that might have been one of the colored things i gave you earlier janice no okay

i don't see the hydrant on a23 It's also very small.

I didn't see the hydrant on the July 22nd plans either.

So if you can redo A23 in a larger font so we can repeat it.

It wasn't delineated.

I do see that A23 was not prepared by my office. I do see a 10-foot call-out that I assume is from the hydrant.

but we're showing thank you two cars there and allow for the time okay so that shown on what except what 823 okay

yeah so i'll ask i don't know if i have this in um digital format was this handed out this might have been handed out at a meeting and not submitted digitally i think that's included those exhibits i gave you prior to you know before tonight's meeting that you handed out from the prior meeting that were marked during the may 4th i thought this is just Oh, okay, there's more than one page.

I think it's the third page of that exhibit. Am I right?

Okay, yes.

Is that publicly available on the website?

No, here's A23. This was previously marked?

yes it was a previously marked to 823 but they were not I think you had it digitally and I didn't have copies made in time for that meeting but I had them to Janice hard copies so what he's talking about is the third page here

So I don't see the hydrant. Is the hydrant on this?

It's really tiny.

I see a 10-foot call out, and I think the 10-foot call out is from the center of the hydrant.

Oh, I see. There's a dimension there. So the end of that dimension is where the hydrant is.

Just under the trees, are we saying?

No, it's before that. There's a 10-foot, what he's saying is that that's the 10 feet that they require from the hydrant. The hydrant would be here. The invisible hydrant is 10 feet in front of the car. Could this just be redrawn so it's clear for the board and the public so that, you know, there's a big dot in terms of where the sort of... Well, I mean, it can be, but the point is we think there's enough space.

Ultimately, the county is going to have to approve it.

Oh, we understand.

But, I mean, if you want it enlarged, you can certainly do that.

It appears that... Are these 19-foot spaces? Yes.

the dimensions of the spaces are missing as well yes the vehicle is 19 feet it fits between but I I was not the one who drew this so I don't know what the actual dark lines are spaced out right but it's definitely more than 19 my guess is somewhere between 20 and 22 is my guess thank you Kenny said 23 but what's a foot

how about for the purposes of this board we assume there's only one space they can put there and then unless two is proven there's this one space so it replaces that one space replaces the space that's taken away from the municipal lot to even if all we're talking about is parking capacity it's it's even Or it's a plus one if there's two.

And lastly, the width of the egress into the upper Montclair Plaza apron is approximately how long? Or why?

The aisle is 12 feet. going down towards the upper Montclair lot.

So if you remove the bollards and that spill out, the apron would be 12 feet? mean we're rebuilding that area so I it's I don't know if it's a one-for-one the exact opening is the same as it's approximately 12 feet it's a proxy yes but it's it's a line slightly different but yes and it was tests in previous testimony it was said that the existing stone wall would not be touched in any way in order to accommodate that egress that's probably a site engineer question not parking are you aware of a telephone pole back there

I believe there was some testimony previously about the telephone pole, but again, by the site engineer.

Okay. That's all I have. Thank you very much.

Hi, good evening. I'll try to be quick. I know it's getting late. I'm Rick Anlinger. I live at 190 Cooper Avenue. Been there 40 years, so I've seen this area regularly. I have a couple of questions. In the general parking discipline, are there standards for how did you decide, five-minute walk, what's the area that's relevant for consideration and what could be available?

Typically, you would look at a quarter mile as being a five minute walk. In this case, what we sought to do was not necessarily go a quarter mile into, let's say, residential neighborhoods because we didn't want to take credit for potentially open spaces that would be encouraging people to necessarily park in the residential neighborhoods. So we limited our scope, I would say, on Cooper Avenue to the Northview Avenue intersection and not beyond that. There clearly is parking spaces Within a quarter mile along Cooper Avenue, if it continued going on, we cut our study of capacity at Northview Avenue.

Okay, so there's a judgment call on what you figured was the relevant area.

Correct.

Okay. How many days of sampling would create a statistically significant sample? In other words, are four days, I think you chose portions of four days, is that right?

It was portions of five days that we did counts on. And again, we provided the analysis and the board's own parking expert, I don't believe, had any issues with the days that we counted or the frequency of the counts. Obviously, if he indicated that he thought otherwise and didn't accept our study or needed more counts, we would have to perform additional counts.

Okay. And did your surveyors who were out there and studying this, and now I'm looking at the parking lot directly behind the property here. Did they notice that cars quite frequently leave the Talbots side there and make a left turn and don't follow the circulation because it's only a little quick scoot around the building and you can get out by Starbucks?

I noticed it. I didn't speak to every single person who did the study, but I know from my experience in driving through there, I did notice that some people do the circle around the guy.

And so I would just ask, Would it be a concern then that people coming out of your parking lot would also, you know, it's only five feet more, just make a left turn. So I wonder if that's a factor.

I think we could do a little more in that opening in driveways a lot wider and more pavement I think kind of encourages that movement a little bit more than I think the way that we've angled and narrowed our driveway kind of keeps them heading in the proper direction going counterclockwise around the lot.

Okay, and did your survey people notice that quite frequently on St. James pickup and drop off, and here let's call it pickup because that's the end of the day more, there's illegal parking all up and right exactly across on Valley Road into the no-go zone for the fire department, kind of all the way along there. So just did they notice that and note there's additional congestion there?

I mean, they did note that there were definitely time periods in which the number of parked cars exceed the illegal spaces. That included along Valley Road and along Cooper Road. So, again, they didn't identify the exact reason for it, but there definitely was periods of, you know, more cars parked than spaces available.

And how do you take into consideration the incentive for illegal parking?

illegal parking as in in front of the post office in front of starbucks an extra spot in front of talbot's there which seem to be full all the time so again as part of our analysis we're counting the overall demand so if there were six cars parked in five spaces we're utilizing the sixth number and trying to you know somewhat finding a available space for them as part of our analysis of demand and supply but in terms of where the space is located Again, we're not suggesting or promoting that that car continue to legally park it in front of the post office. We may be, if there was an available space further down Valley Road, a legal spot, that would almost be accounted for down there. Like if we have an over demand compared to the supply, we're carrying that demand in our charts. So there'd be a time period where the bar chart shows 70 cars parked and only 68. But again, we're taking an overall demand for the whole region. So the 263 spaces that we studied, we're counting for that some of the areas have greater demand than supply and some of them may have less.

Would regular illegal parking imply that there was a shortage of parking?

Or a shortage of the most convenient parking spaces. Right.

Okay. Which happened to be right by this establishment. Yes. Okay. No further questions. Thank you.

Hi, Justin Jesser, 120 Chestnut Street. I asked you before, and I want to kind of clarify something. So on the five days that you submitted, there was a question about religious holiday on one. There definitely was an early dismissal on the weekday. Out of curiosity, when you've worked with other townships, organizations, how do you determine that you have enough data that is of quality and that you can actually make a decision around?

Again, we picked days in May and October, which are, I would say, typically the seasons that you'd want to do the counts. You don't want to do it in, obviously, let's say, December holiday time periods or in the summer when there could be greater fluctuation, depending on people weighing vacations, things like that. again we provided five days of counts we counted two different seasons your own expert or the board's experts are not your expert indicated those days seem to be acceptable to him again I believe that the days that we counted show I would say relatively useful data. I think the fact that one of the schools, I think the schools were out early on one of the days, sometimes you end up finding a lot more vehicles in a downtown when kids are out. People are doing activities in the town, so I don't think it's actually a bad thing to have that kind of variation. In addition, the days we counted would be days that our business would be open. So, you know, we would be open on, you know, I think about in the third day or second day of Sukkot, you know, we would be open on that day. It wouldn't be a day that we would be closed. So that would be a normal business day for this business. So that was why we felt that was an appropriate date to count.

Got it. So the other question that I'd ask you is when looking at, you know, a business district like this that has gone through a significant change, at what point would you say, you know what, there's been too much change for this data to be reliable? or to be able to rely on that to make decisions such as big as this.

And again, I'm not the one making the decision, we're the ones preparing the data.

Which I assume you've had people come to you and say, you know what, we need to refresh this because the data is out of date, it's no longer relevant, the traffic flow has changed. At what point have they come to you in the past and said, you know what, we need to reconsider this?

Again, usually it becomes more of a time period. Hey, this is three years old. I think it was mentioned that you have 2016 data, you know, that's pre-COVID, pre all these businesses. Again, so I don't think there's a hard and fast rule that says, but typically it becomes age. You know, it becomes this is four years old. This is three years old.

But not driven by businesses and increasing inflow.

Again, I think that I would say that what we're seeing here in terms of parking rates at 85-ish percent, you're probably going to see that even going forward. What you may see is that parking gets pushed to other lots or further out areas. And I think that's what your own parking expert kind of indicated as well is that you know you you rarely ever see a hundred percent occupied parking lot you end up seeing 90 and then people are just like i don't i'm just going to go find this other lot and park out here and again i think that is what you would see if you redid these counts you know in september and october you'd probably see around the same within our catchment area and there may be more park cars you know that spill into bellevue lorraine lot or something like that or if people actually know you could park in bellevue erie

maybe on the weekends that starts filling up okay i appreciate it i understand this is not an exact science i think that the one last question i have is with regards to safety of children crossing the street and safety of kids traveling with parents in very crowded parking lots i don't know if you're the expert on that that can kind of speak to it But I have little ones that I have to hold by the hand and I'm more worried about them running, especially if they're excited to go swimming, than I am anything else. And so I don't know if you kind of looked at that as a safety or having a clear way of having the path. And is that still within that five minute walk?

So I think that the applicant has agreed or they've designed an entrance also in Valley Road so it doesn't mean everyone needs to basically come through the upper Montclair Plaza lot. I would say the upper Montclair Plaza lot does have a mix of seems like kid friendly uses along with many other uses in there so I don't think having children in that lot is atypical but again I'm not someone who could evaluate I would say personal safety or personal injury, but, you know, on a safety scale. But again, I do think the applicant in having an extra access point on Valley Road is, you know, trying to encourage people to be able to use that route as well as if someone is parking in Upper Montclair Plaza lot, you know, just like they do for the, you know, the other kids facilities in there that you get access from that point as well.

Thank you.

Jerry is here. Jerry, are you prepared to present to the board based on past information or what you heard this evening?

Thank you.

Thanks.

Mr. Gioza, you recognize you remain under oath? I do. Thank you.

Good evening. I just wanted to say that based on my review of the subsequent report from Stonefield dated July 23rd, I just wanted to point out that the only real difference in the data presented in my previous report and the new report prepared by Stonefield was actually quite astutely picked up by members of the audience. And that is, I don't disagree with what was presented in the Stonefield report. In fact, the graphs that Mr. Seckler presented from my review appear to be, they're not incorrect, but I would say they're incomplete because they do not include These other categories of demand, we really got no plausible explanation about the location of where the employees are going to park. where the whoever you know they mentioned that it's the fire uh folks us currently parking on the lot but we don't know for sure who they are but i do know that they are going to need some place to park and i do believe that there was some testimony by one of the gentlemen from the fire department that said they can't park in that lot they're gonna end up on the street so that's another 11 cars and then of course the Bellevue theater demand which was not included in their peak weekday observation which is another 35 cars so if you add those up that comes to 56 cars that were not included in their demand numbers So when they're hanging their hat on excess capacity of 17 cars in the 263 space catchment area, that 17 excess capacity is rather thin in my estimation. So when you're talking about the possibility of adding another 56 on top of that, I think Again, and to reiterate my previous testimony and what one of the members of the public picked up today, I do see a parking deficit in the 263 space catchment area. So that's pretty much the only thing I wanted to clarify and mention to the board, and I'd be happy to answer any other questions you might have.

Give us your thoughts on the Bellevue Erie lot. I know it's not, I mean, that's a big part of the capacity that's being put. I mean, you've heard us discuss what is capacity? Is it permitted or not? That's a question, too. Do you have any advice in terms of what could be done to solidify what the true capacity of that lot is?

Okay, I think that the big thing The big picture on the Bellevue Erie lot, in my mind, is not necessarily the capacity because the applicant is not really relying on any capacity in that lot during their weekday peak. They've already recognized that that lot is essentially going to be full. So the charts don't include... Oh, no, they do, but they're not really relying on any excess capacity in that lot to accept... their employees or students or customers on a peak weekday. Because a lot is essentially falling.

I'm not falling. I'm sorry. I apologize. They're not relying on, well, it's in the number, 60 available cars are in the, that compose a part of that gold line, which is a determining factor of whether or not we're parked to capacity or not. So if available parking, if that line comes down, because if it's true that there aren't 60 cars available, you know, 60 spaces, I'm sorry, in that lot, that line comes down, doesn't it?

That gold line, it gets closer to the top of the... Well, the applicant has chosen to use... almost the same color blue, it's hard to see how much capacity they're relying on during the week. I believe the applicant was talking about just a handful of spaces possibly available in that lot during the week.

Well, I thought that was the demand. I thought that all the colors mean the demand. How many cars are actually parked there? And when you're counting cars in that lot, you're counting permits. You're counting people that are going on the train.

But what we're concerned about is the number of spaces available in that lot. where we could put demand. They're saying that there's virtually no spaces available in that lot during the week.

Because I can't see the numbers. The blue says 60. Even on what we have, we can't see the numbers too easily.

Do you want me to just clarify something right up against the screen?

OK, is the Bellevue lot light blue or dark blue?

The Bellevue Erie lot is the lighter blue lines. Okay. So for instance, I think we said there's 68 spaces. Yeah. At 440, 67 of them were occupied. Before that, 420 is actually 69. There was an illegal park car, 68. So what, Chairman, you're saying, what would happen is the gold line would come down, but also you would remove this whole part of the demand from the bar chart. So basically you would bring the top down 68 spaces and then bring it down this bar chart 67 spaces or this one 69. So the... the excess capacity again if there is any is basically unchanged because we're going to move down together during the weekday weekend is when this line gets very very tiny and that actually is one of the main reasons why there's a gap in the data Jerry is that help explain that everyone

So I think that, you know, from my perspective, that sums up kind of what is being modeled for a weekday. Now, the weekend is a different story, the Saturday condition. Their model is relying heavily on the Bellevue Erie lot. to accept demand from the proposed project. And I wanted to point out something in my report of June 22, and that was about Saturday parking. During their Saturday count on October 4, there was one open parking, at the peak period, which was 1140 a.m., there was one open parking space in the upper Montclair Plaza lot, one open space in the Bellevue lot, and a net of zero open spaces on the local streets within 800 feet of the site. As a result, they're really relying on most of that excess capacity in the Bellevue Erie lot to accept the demand that's going to be generated. And I also pointed out that the cost of those spaces is going to be $5.35 for eight hours of parking, which is permitted by ParkMobile. So again, the choice between $5.35 for eight hours of parking 800 to a thousand feet away from swim quest weighed against the possibility of parking for free in the neighborhood led to my conclusion that the local residential streets are going to be put under pressure as a result of this applicant of this project if if accepted as a as proposed so it's not only the weekday peak condition it's also the saturday which which i see as being problematic in terms of the pressure that it will apply to the neighborhood um would you be able to jot these down on a piece of paper it's it's all in my report oh you yep oh you're just re

OK, so the points you're making were in your June report. Correct. OK, you're just reiterating it. OK, I see.

OK.

So there's nothing that you heard today that would cause you to change what you stated before about that? OK, that's correct.

Yeah, I just wanted to point out the difference between the applicant's graph and the graph that I had in my report.

Thank you. um does um if jerry is through members of the audience can question jerry is as well okay i think um how about that do any members of the public have oh yeah i'm sorry any members of the board have questions for jerry i just have one question you mentioned that the applicant's counts did not take into account the ability of theater being open but there's an improvement

I think the May counts did reflect the we're done after the theater was open.

I believe so. But however, in when you're doing a parking study and doing modeling, you typically go by the peak observation, the peak condition that was noticed. And then when you solve for the peak, you've solved for pretty much all conditions. And the peak was observed in that October count of 2025 which is less than a year ago so the data is is still relevant and so you know from from my position we consider that yeah the P count thank you any members the public have questions for the townships traffic engineer parking consultant

Jane Hanson, Marion Road. Just a quick question. Do you have any thoughts on the issue of circulation within the Upper Montclair Plaza parking lot with 10 cars exiting the site every half hour?

No, I'm sorry. That's out of my area of expertise.

Okay. Thank you.

Thanks. I think we're good. Oh, sorry.

sorry mr. Gioza thank you I may be barking up the same tree but it when you were doing these studies did you encounter anyone or when when your people were doing these studies did you encounter anyone doing what a previous resident had mentioned which was cutting through different streets to avoid traffic on Valley in pursuit of parking in fact something that I've experienced people in the the lot behind the with the proposed school going the wrong way to avoid or to grab a spot that they may seem being open we did not perform any any independent parking counts we were basically reviewing the data that was submitted by the applicant So you were looking at spots versus people in pursuit of spots and what they might do that might be dangerous in the pursuit of those spots.

I did personally make a site visit just to understand the site conditions and the various lots and streets. But I did not personally witness the condition you just described. OK, thanks. But it was just for a short period of time.

Thanks. Thank you.

Holly Felber, Barbara Eclectic. I love your term, junk traffic. How much junk traffic did you observe when you visited the site?

We didn't count the amount of junk traffic, but we did notice there was some of the effect occurring at the time. but we did not make any counts.

Okay. Okay. And where did you park that day?

I parked in the Bellevue lot.

Okay. Did you use ParkMobile?

I did.

Okay. I think that's my only question. We consistently have people say, the only reason I stopped in your store is because there was a spot open in front. So I really hope we have enough spots to support our existing businesses and to welcome new businesses because we have a wonderful town. We have wonderful customers. We just have to be sensitive to that. Thank you.

Thank you. With respect to this application, I know we have other items on the agenda. Should we go through... I mean, we'll hopefully be making a decision on September 14. Obviously, the planner is coming in then. Should we give the applicant kind of go through what we did ask the applicant to present a couple of things? Should we just clarify what that list of things is that we would?