WEST AMWELL TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

April 19, 2005

The West Amwell Township Planning Board meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM by

Chairman Jeff Ent followed by the Flag salute. Chairman Ent stated the meeting has been properly advertised and is being held in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. The meeting was recorded via digital recording system and copy of CD is on file in the Planning Board Office. A joint discussion was held with members of the Township Committee as outlined in the minutes.

ATTENDANCE:

Roll call on attendance: Dale-present, Greenwood (Alt.#1)-present, Meader-present, Molnar-present, Palladino-present, Perri-present, Pfeiffer (Alt. #2)-present, Shute-present, Smith-present, VanDerVeen-present, Ent-present.

Chairman Ent excused from meeting at 9:15 PM (prior to Stream Corridor Ordinance Draft Discussion)

Professionals Present: William Shurts, Attorney; Robert Clerico, Engineer;

Anthony Mercantante, Planner

Minutes – March 15, 2005 – Ms. VanDerVeen requested further amendment to the referenced February 15, 2005, minutes, specifically language contained on page 3 of those minutes, “Hunterdon County Cross Accceptance” to read as follows: “…figures projected by the NJTPA will have an impact on COAH plans.” Motion to approve the minutes as amended was made by Meader with a second by Dale. Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes.

Bill List – April 19, 2005 – Motion to approve bill list as presented and attached hereto as Appendix 1 was made by Meader with a second by Perri. Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes.

FULPER ESCROW FEES/GDP - Secretary Griffiths provided the Board with a memorandum outlining the total amount of escrow fees that were inadvertently billed to Mr. Fulper for the period 3/04 through 10/04. It was determined that these fees were the responsibility of the Township and a total of $2,018.00

should be credited to Mr. Fulper’s escrow account. Mr. Fulper was present, agreed with the findings, and requested a refund of the overbilled amount in addition to any outstanding escrow fees in the account.

Motion to approve the refund was made by Meader with a second by VanDerVeen. Roll call: Dale-aye, Meader-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye.

Motion carried.

Memorandum dated April 11, 2005, from Secretary Griffiths to Planning Board Members, Re: Planning Board Tapes of 10/19/04, was provided to the Board prior to the meeting. Also provided to the Board was letter dated April 11, 2005, addressed to Ms. Catherine Urbanski, Re: Joint Planning Board/Township Committee Meeting of 10/19/04. Chairman Ent summarized the memorandum which was as a result of a subcommittee meeting held on 4/7/05 formed to research the tape problems and minutes generated from the 10/19/04 joint meeting. Members of the subcommittee present at the subcommittee meeting were: Jeff Ent, Tom Molnar, Sean Pfeiffer, Donna Griffiths, Betty Jane Hunt (former Township Clerk), and Catherine Park (former Planning Board Secretary).

The memorandum provided a findings of fact determination as follows:

It was determined that the 10/19/04 planning board minutes have not been approved to date; Ms. Park advised that she made corrections to the minutes as requested and provided a revised copy. The minutes would be placed on the 4/19/05 agenda for consideration of approval. The Township Committee minutes contained within the 10/19/04 planning board minutes were approved on 11/3/04 by the Township Committee with some amendments. However, it was determined that there was an error in a roll call vote wherein an individual (Dudbridge) was recorded as taking action but was not on the Board or Committee at that time and this was not one of the amendments previously recommended to be made by the Committee.

Ms. Hunt further revised the 10/19/04 by deleting that vote, and provided an amended copy which was provided to the Board.

It was further concluded that the planning board minutes of 10/19/04 contain all the general agenda items that were acted on by the Board at that meeting and as prepared by Catherine Park.

Therefore, the issues raised by Ms. Urbanski as to the missing discussion and action taken at that meeting by the Township Committee regarding the sewer service area and transfer of development rights would have been addressed in the Clerk’s minutes. The formal action to eliminate the old sewer service area is contained in the Clerk’s minutes, however, there is no decision regarding TDR’s referenced.

Secretary Griffiths listened to the three tapes for the 10/19/04 meeting and confirmed that there is a portion of recordings of the 10/19/04 meeting that are missing, to include the formal action (vote) taken by the Committee to re-file the Township’s request to eliminate the old sewer service area (outlined in the Clerk’s minutes) which is not included on the tapes nor is any discussion regarding the transfer of development rights. It was also confirmed that one of the three tapes is blank. In regard to the problem noted by Ms. Urbanski as to there being a blank leader on one of the tapes, it was determined that there is not a blank leader on the original tapes.

It was the consensus of the subcommittee that based on the findings, Ms. Urbanski should be offered the opportunity to listen to the original tapes since the duplicated tapes appear to be flawed, have another set copied (professionally) and provided to her at her request, and invite Ms. Urbanski to attended the 4/19/05 meeting of the Board and Township Committee at which time transfer of development rights discussion will be revisited. The subcommittee also agreed that any further questions or comments regarding the circumstances of this situation be referred to and addressed by the Township Committee.

The letter dated April 11, 2005 addressed to Ms. Urbanski outlined the findings of the subcommittee and offered the aforementioned options. Ms. Urbanski was present at this meeting. In response to the options offered to Ms. Urbanski, she advised that she would like the opportunity to listen to the original tapes. Arrangements are to be made with Ms. Urbanski for her to listen to the original tapes.

A subsequent letter dated April 19, 2005, to Planning Board Members from Tom Molnar and Sean Pfeiffer,

(subcommittee members) Re: Dissenting Report – 07 April 2005 Subcommittee Meeting was provided and distributed to the Board members at the meeting. The letter was read into record by Mr. Pfeiffer. The letter contained concerns by Messrs. Molnar and Pfeiffer to include: the subcommittee report is factually accurate, however, they do not feel it is complete; enough questions remain unanswered and they recommend that the minutes of October 19, 2004, not be adopted as currently written until a more thorough attempt has been made to reproduce the record of that meeting; the subcommittee investigation was not conducted in a thorough manner; they are of the opinion that there was a conflict with the composition of members of the subcommittee and the manner in which the subcommittee meeting was carried out; there is no credible explanation as to why the tape is blank. Messrs. Molnar and Pfeiffer recommend that efforts be made to reproduce the events of the 10/19/04 meeting before any action is taken on the 10/19/04 minutes, to include polling current and former members of the Planning Board and Township Committee. They are also requesting that no destruction of records be permitted by the Township Committee while an active Government Records Council investigation is ongoing. Mr. Pfeiffer referenced a letter prepared by him dated October 28, 2004, same of which was provided to the County, State, Township Committee, and Mr. Shute wherein he raised concerns of actions taken at the October 19, 2004 joint meeting.

After considerable discussion, it was agreed that Board Attorney Shurts will confer with Township Attorney Faherty as to how to proceed with this matter. In the event that another subcommittee meeting is held for this purpose, Attorney Shurts will be requested to be in attendance.

Also discussed was the procedure that should be followed with regard to the taking of the minutes of joint meetings and the posting of minutes on the website. It was suggested that only one individual (the Board Secretary or Township Clerk) be designated to record the minutes of a joint meeting and it was noted that only approved minutes are submitted to the webmaster for inclusion on the Township’s website.

Attorney Shurts reviewed the notices of service and proof of publication pertaining to this public hearing. Finding same to be in order, said documents were entered into the record as Exhibit PB-1. A copy of the Stormwater Management Plan dated April 2005 as provided to the Board was entered into record and

marked as Exhibit PB-2. Ron Shapella, representative of the stormwater management subcommittee, appeared before the Board and provided an overview of the plan. It was noted that a sample ordinance

and relevant maps as distributed to the Board at the meeting have been included in the plan. In response to questioning by the Board, Mr. Shapella indicated that $5,000.00 has been allocated for the cost of the plan and this is the final plan.

The floor was opened for public comments:

Mike Rassweiler, 386 Rock Rd. E. – Mr. Rassweiler inquired as to whether restrictions have been included in the plan and about the BMP’s included in the plan. Mr. Rassweiler expressed his concern that the more restrictions there are on developers, the more restrictions on the public/individual’s abilities. He requested that standards imposed be user friendly to residents to help alleviate the need for professionals.

Mr. Rassweiler was advised that the standards are mandated by DEP for each town and the requirements incorporated into the ordinances for developers shouldn’t fall to the citizens. It was noted that for the most part this plan is a minimal response. However, stormwater regulations are determined by land disturbance, therefore, some goals go beyond the minimum.

Jamie Kamph – 74 Wilson Rd. – Ms. Kamph questioned the notice of this hearing to the public and was provided with the procedure that was followed for same.

Robert Fulper, 221 Rocktown Lambertville Rd. – In response to Mr. Fulper’s question as to whether farming is affected, Mr. Shapella advised that farming is specifically excluded.

Gordon Whiting, 33 Queen Rd. - Mr. Whiting expressed concern with individuals that may skirt the parameters of major developments, West Amwell Dam and Alexauken Creek ramifications, the remediation of problems, and how watershed impacts will be addressed. Mr. Shapella advised that

Mr. Whiting’s concerns would be addressed in the ordinance.

Motion to close the floor to public comments/questions was made by Meader with a second by VanDerVeen. Dale-aye, Meader-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye. Motion carried.

Motion to adopt the plan as presented and memorialization of the Resolution Adopting Municipal Stormwater Management Plan – Master Plan Element was made by Molnar with a second by VanDerVeen. Roll call: Dale-aye, Meader-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye. Motion carried.

NEW BUSINESS:

Letter dated April 7, 2005, from Doris Rutherford, Project Coordinator, was distributed to the Board. Ms. Rutherford is requesting an additional six month extension for filing of deeds. Motion to grant the six month extension was made by Perri with a second by Meader contingent upon applicant being advised that this will be the last extension granted. Roll call: Dale-aye, Meader-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye. Motion carried.

Review letter of April 7, 2005, from Engineer Clerico deeming the application incomplete was provided to Board members. Applicant’s attorney has been provided with same and has advised Secretary Griffiths that may wish to be placed on next month’s agenda for checklist waiver requests. No action at this time.

Ron Shapella, member of the Environmental Commission, presented a draft Stream Corridor Ordinance for review by the Board. Mr. Shapella provided an overview of the draft ordinance noting that this ordinance is a requirement for the amendment of the wastewater management plan. The current ordinance allows for

a 50’ buffer on either side of a stream. It is the recommendation of the Environmental Commission to increase the buffer to 150’ for additional protection to high quality areas in the Township that should be protected from development and also based on a study conducted by DEP, Office of Smart Growth, wherein models for sediments was researched. The six purposes of stream corridor protection as outlined in the draft ordinance were reviewed. It was noted that there would be no impact on local agriculture; daily

farming activities would not be affected. Permitted uses and permitted activities for hardship cases were summarized. Mr. Shapella indicated the tax map was used to define the location of the streams whereas he has found this map to be the most accurate.

Considerable discussion ensued to include the following questions/comments/suggestions by the Board and professionals: The plan should address ambiguity to ponds; why 150’ is being proposed when the State standard is 75’; specifics relating to allowable structures, permanent vs. mobile, encroachment specifics for same; egress/ingress to streams; any changes that may be imposed by the State in light of the recent flooding problems; administrative mechanism for single family construction permit application to the construction official; potential problems with using the tax map whereas not all mapped channels and streams are included on this map; suggestion that Category I Standards map and/or County Soils Maps be referred to; clarification of wet soils definition and regulatory format for same; more specifics should be in place for hardship and restoration criteria; economic hardship standard too broad, suggested language change to viable economic use of the property; administrative mechanism/defined group for on-site inspections; suggestion of requirement for Letter of Interpretation from DEP for all applicants; establishment of a map that specifically relates to this ordinance; expand definition of stream corridor.

It was suggested to Mr. Shapella that in addition to the previous comments/suggestions, the following be considered and submitted: mapping process be reevaluated based on the suggestions by Planner Mercantante and Engineer Clerico; Office of Smart Growth study previously referred to should be provided to the Board; estimate of acreage that will be affected by the increase to 150’; clarification of structures definition and if it applies to all residences (single family, one lot, etc.); standards for building inspector; modification of economic hardship language; clarification of blocked streams (relating to downed tree). It was suggested that under Permitted Uses, the following language should be deleted, “..for reasons of imminent public safety)”; under the definition of Woodlands and wooded wetlands to read, “These vegetated areas within the stream corridor…..”; under #2 should read, “Impact on local agriculture.” No action on the proposed ordinance was taken at this time.

Mr. Jim Waltman, Executive Director, of Stony Brook Millstone Watershed Association thanked everyone for their efforts on this project and offered the use of their GIS mapping program which may be helpful to the Township.

Dissenting Report prepared for Township of West Amwell and the West Amwell Township Planning Board dated April 6, 2005, prepared by Anthony Mercantante, P.P., for submission to the New Jersey State Planning Commission was received and distributed to Board members prior to the meeting. Board member Nancy Palladino recused herself from discussion on this matter. Planner Mercantante advised the Board that he spoke to representatives from the County on several occasions about them considering our findings before doing a dissenting report and was advised by the County that a dissenting report is necessary. The dissenting report provided incorporates the Board’s prior recommendations that the area depicted as the Sourlands Regional Planning District be designated as Planning Area 5 and the remainder of the Township be designated as Planning Area 4B. Also included in the report is the Board’s recommendation that State Planning Area designations should not be used to prioritize Farmland Preservation Funding.

Planner Mercantante was requested to add to the report: there should be no distinction between designations 4 and 4B for funding purposes, that “…the majority of the area depicted as the Sourlands Regional Planning District be designated as Planning Area 5…”, and that “these recommendations are in conformance with the Preliminary State Plan Policy Map, prepared by the Hunterdon County Planning

Board in January 2005”. Typographical errors will also be corrected. It was the consensus of the Board to accept the report with the aforementioned minor changes. Planner Mercantante will revise the report,

e-mail same to Secretary Griffiths, who will in turn provide to Board members for any additional comments. It was requested that any changes be provided within seven days of receipt of the corrected copy in order that Planner Mercantante may file the report by the required due date of May 15, 2005. Copies of report to also be provided to adjoining municipalities, Hunterdon County, and Office of Smart Growth.

Mayor Nancy Palladino opened the joint meeting at 10:53 PM. Committee member Tom Molnar was in attendance; Committee member Gary Bleacher was not present. Notice of the joint meeting as provided by Township Clerk Lora Olsen on behalf of the Township Committee was read into the record by Vice Chairman Hal Shute. It was agreed that Board Secretary Donna Griffiths would record the minutes of the joint meeting; Clerk Olsen was excused from the meeting. Due to the late hour, it was agreed that this matter should be continued.

Alison Somers Sayre, resident, 51 Mill Rd., requested this matter be placed first on the next planning board agenda.

No other public comments/questions were made.

Vice Chairman Shute indicated he would forward this recommendation to Chairman Ent. Discussion ensued as to whether this matter should be placed first on the next agenda, or whether a special meeting date should be held for discussion of this matter. Motion was made by Palladino with a second by Molnar to ask the Chair to put this as the first order of business on the agenda for the next planning board meeting (5/17/05) with unlimited time constraints. Roll call: Dale-nay, Meader-nay, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-nay, Smith-nay, VanDerVeen-aye. Roll call resulted in a tie vote; Alternate #1 Greenwood voted in the affirmative. Motion carried.

Secretary Griffiths advised that a final site plan application has been received by Globe Associates, Route 179, which is currently under review for completeness by Engineer Clerico.

Notice of seminar being held for “Current Issues in Planning and Zoning” was received.

Hunterdon County Planning Board, Development Review Committee, agendas were received.

Notice of Hunterdon County Planning Board Annual Planning and Design Awards and Dinner was e-mailed to Board members.

Letter dated March 11, 2005, from the Delaware River Greenway Partnership regarding grant application for the 2005 Incentive Grant Program was received and distributed in the meeting packets.

Letter dated March 24, 2005, from the Stony Brook Millstone Watershed Association along with maps and narratives tailored to our community conveying groundwater recharge and critical habitat information was received and distributed in the meeting packets. The Association is also offering their support and resources to municipalities in complying with State stormwater rules.

Key recommendations outlined in the Final Hunterdon County Cross Acceptance Report were provided to Board members in the meeting packets.

COAH Petition - Copy of Notice of Motion dated March 28, 2005, filed by Philip Faherty, Esq., on behalf of West Amwell Township, requesting extension of second round substantive certification was received.

Motion to adjourn at 11:05 PM was made by Meader with a second by Perri. All members voted in favor of adjournment with exception of Pfeiffer-nay.

Respectfully submitted,

Donna M. Griffiths

Secretary