WEST AMWELL TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD                 

 

October 18, 2005

 

The West Amwell Township Planning Board meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by

Chairman Jeff Ent. 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.

 

 ATTENDANCE:

 

Roll call on attendance:  John Dale-present, Bernard Meader-present, Thomas Molnar-present, Carmen Perri-present, Sean Pfeiffer (Alt. #2)-present, Hal Shute-present, Joan Smith-present, Joan VanDerVeen-present, Jeff Ent-present

 

Absent:  Alexander Greenwood (Alt. #1)

Late Attendance:  Nancy Palladino- 7:34 PM (after approval of minutes)

 

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

Anthony Mercantante, Planner

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES/BILL LST:

 

Regular Minutes – September 20, 2005 Motion to approve the minutes with correction of typographical error “on” on page 3 was made by Perri with a second by VanDerVeen.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes; Meader-abstain.

 

(Nancy Palladino arrived at this time – 7:34PM.)

 

Bill List – October 18, 2005 – Motion to approve the bill list (attached hereto as Appendix 1) to include voucher presented by Planner Mercantante for a special meeting held with representatives of the Township Committee on 9/1/05 in the amount of $550.00 was made by Perri with a second by VanDerVeen.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes.  The aforementioned bill/voucher was referred to the Township Committee for payment, however, correspondence was received from the Township Clerk advising the Township Committee has no line item for Planner O.E.  Therefore, the Township Committee has directed that same be billed to the Planning Board budget.    

 

PUBLIC HEARING – MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT – HOUSING PLAN ELEMENT/FAIR SHARE PLAN

 

The public hearing commenced at 7:35 PM.  Shirley M. Bishop, P.P., retained by the Township as a Special Planning Consultant, was sworn in by Attorney Shurts.  Proofs of publication and notices of service for the hearing were reviewed by Attorney Shurts and marked as Exhibit PB-1.  Attorney Shurts advised that all statutory jurisdictional requirements have been met by the Board.  Copies of the Housing Element and Fair Share Plan were previously distributed to the Board.  Revised pages 2 and 3 of the Fair Share Plan, Table of Contents, were received and distributed. Ms. Bishop provided an overview of the Housing Plan as prepared by her along with members of the Housing Committee.  The Township’s Growth Share Obligation has been determined to be 30 units.  The Fair Share Plan has been raised to a 17 unit obligation and Ms. Bishop advised as to how this obligation would be met.  Ms. Bishop advised that the 3rd round unit growth share obligation requires that all growth share unit consisting of accessory apartment units

must be low income and have 30 year deed restrictions in place.  The Draft Fair Share Ordinance is included in the Fair Share Plan and the Growth Share Ordinance is included in the draft affirmative marketing plan also included in the Fair Share Plan. Resolution of intent to bond may be required by COAH at a future date to which we will comply.  The Spending Plan was summarized and with data acquired by the tax assessor it was determined that there would be an approximate total of $609,690.25

in development fees carried out to 2014.  Ms. Bishop stressed that these figures are projections only and we may amend the spending plan if need be in the future.  It was noted that $270,000 is being put aside or $30,000/per accessory apartment for affordability assistance and excess monies will be placed in affordability assistance which can be transferred out for other means if need be, i.e. RCA’s.    

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes – October 18, 2005

Page 2

 

 

Board Comments/Questions:

 

There was discussion as to the need for $30,000/accessory apartment unit.  It was the consensus of the Board that the $30,000 figure should be used and if need be adjusted accordingly in the future. 

 

Typographical and other errors were noted as follows which will be addressed by Ms. Bishop:

Page 16 – Fair Share Plan – under residential development fifth line down – should be .5; not .5 percent;  Page 6 - Housing Element - Table 6 – top sentence references median contract rent of $1031/mo  - this figure to be double checked by Ms. Bishop;

Page 1 – Housing Element – last line, second paragraph – word to be changed to “development”

Page 6 – Housing Element states a total of 124 rental units and the next page states 152 renter occupied units – these figures will be double checked by Ms. Bishop;

Percentages standard format will be doubled checked;

Page 6 – Housing Element – correction to the name “Holcombe”;

Page 1 – Development Fee Spending Plan – correction to “.25”.

Clarification as to the non-residential and residential proposed development fees.

 

It was noted that nothing of substantive change needs to be done to these documents.

 

In response to the length of time for attaining substantive certification, Ms. Bishop recommends filing with COAH by December 15 which will begin the 10 year certification process.  She further explained the process as carried out by COAH stating that earliest receipt of a review letter may be next summer. In response to questioning, Ms. Bishop advised that the nonresidential drop in number was due to the fact that cubic feet rather than square feet were used.  Planner Mercantante noted that the maximum amount of monies allowable will be placed in the administration element in the event of any possible lawsuit. 

 

The hearing was opened to the public for comments/questions; hearing none the floor was closed to the public. 

 

Motion was made by Smith with a second by Dale to adopt the Housing Element and Fair Share Plan along with the memorialization of Resolution #PB2005-13 affirming same contingent upon the aforementioned corrections.  Roll call:  Dale-aye, Meader-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye.

 

The efforts of all those involved in this process were acknowledged by Ms. Palladino. 

 

(Hearing concluded at 8:00 PM) 

 

HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT (HOLCOMBE PROPERTY) – FINAL MAJOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION

 

This item of discussion was added to the agenda per Chairman Ent.  Application for final major subdivision has been submitted by this applicant.  It was determined that the applicant has not satisfied the conditions of the preliminary subdivision approval and they have also made a revision to the plan which affects the  prior approval in that less lots are being referenced.  Attorney Shurts and Special Engineering Consultant

Robert Lorentz (representing the Board on the preliminary application) were directed to send correspondence respectively to the applicant via their attorney based on the merits of the application and indicating that no review of the final application will be done.  Engineer Lorentz will do a technical review of the submission to include:  no final plat with all details has been provided; there are major procedural issues; no checklist has been received by him; issue with number of lots in the stream corridor area as opposed to what was authorized by the Board; reduction in lots may require further review; no approvals received from other jurisdictional agencies as specified in the original approval.  It was agreed that a letter of incompleteness will be sent by Engineer Lorentz and a requirement will be imposed that due to changes in the original approval, the applicant is required to do an amendment of the preliminary approval.  Fees submitted with this application will be retained for the relative administrative process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes – October 18, 2005

Page 3

 

 

PUBLIC HEARING:

TAMKE TREE EXPERTS (DOUGLAS HUNT) – PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPLICATION/VARIANCE REQUEST – BLOCK 8 LOT 23.04

 

Hearing commenced at 8:15 PM.  Vincent Bisogno, Esq., appeared on behalf of the applicant, and provided an overview of the application.  It is to be noted that Board members Greenwood (Alt. #1) and Meader are ineligible to act on this application.

 

Robert Lorentz, P.E., was recalled for continued testimony.  Letter of October 18, 2005, from Engineer Clerico was received and distributed.  Overview was provided of the action taken on the waiver requests from the September hearing and informal plan amendments based on those waivers.  Mr. Lorentz stated that the applicant takes no issues with Engineer Clerico’s letter of 10/18/05. 

 

Mr. Lorentz referenced informal plan and distributed a condensed version of the parking plan displaying changes made to the parking area adjacent to the building per the waivers granted at the last meeting to include reduction in setback for parking, landscaped areas to provide for buffering from the building, walkway aisle leading to access doors to allow unimpeded access to the door, parking space length requirement of 18 ft, minimum average lighting standards.   It was reaffirmed that a light will be installed between the two buildings and tenant controlled lights will be on timers and referenced on the revised plan per questioning by the Board.

 

Exhibits:

 

Exhibit A -1, 10/18/05 – colored sheet 2 of 3 of the site plan with modifications reflecting the relocated fire tank and redesigned parking layout and landscaping with no revision date was entered into the record.

 

Exhibit A-2, 10/18/05 - sketch of parking layout adjacent to building was entered into the record.

 

In response to questioning by Engineer Clerico, clarification was made by Mr. Lorentz as to the four parking spaces between the two passage access doors into adjoining units that the doors have been moved slightly to accommodate the revision and revision will be noted on the revised plan reflecting that there will be at least 36 ft. between the edges of the door so that passage to the door will not be impeded.     

 

Other items to be addressed at outlined in the Engineer’s letter of 10/18/05 were discussed and acted on as follows:

 

Variance relief for setback – Mr. Lorentz summarized the relief  for setback of 86 ft. from the required 100 ft. rear yard setback  requirement and the effect on surrounding properties.  In response to questioning by the Board, applicant attested that representatives from the Globe property have taken no exception to their application for relief.  Concern was expressed as to the continued buffering of the Tamke property. Applicant agreed to stipulation that 15 ft. buffer be maintained. Motion to approve the variance request for 86 ft. setback  with condition that buffer be maintained in current condition and placed in landscape easement was made by Perri with a second by Smith.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes.

 

Waiver from paving standards – Applicant is requesting to use 4” stabilized base course in lieu of required 5” within paved areas of the site. The actual main access drive leading to the adjoining site will be upgraded to the streets standard to provide for heavier traffic. As previously proposed, applicant requests to use gravel in lieu of paving for the truck parking area and storage area to eliminate potential chipping/scarring of asphalt.  Mr. Hunt responded to questioning regarding the weight of trucks and sub-base being used in the truck parking area as set forth by Engineer Clerico and Board members.  Motion was made by Dale with a second by VanDerVeen to grant the waiver to allow for 4” base (with exception of main access roadway from Kari Drive which will have 5” base) and relief from paving from the truck parking and storage areas.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes – October 18, 2005

Page 4

 

 

Waiver from Guidrail requirements – Applicant requesting to use wood (timber) guardrail in lieu of NJDOT steel beam guardrail.  Mr. Lorentz provided an overview of the location of the guiderail and adequacy of proposed materials.  The Board and Engineer Clerico expressed concerns and questions with the use of the timber guardrail for aesthetic reasons, impact affect on same from moving vehicles (stability), attachment of the posts and/or enhancement of additional posts in at least the area adjacent to the road.   Mr. Lorentz attested that this material is used statewide in lieu of DOT standard materials, applicant proposing to cap wood rail with weathering steel plate, and provided testimony as to the stability of same in response to concerns. Engineer Clerico noted the acceptance of the use of the timber guardrail contingent

upon his approval of post sizing and spacing.  Motion to grant the waiver request was made by Perri with a second by Smith contingent upon the approval of post sizing and spacing requirements by Engineer Clerico.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes.

 

Waiver of landscape materials – Applicant is in the process of completing landscaping plan; applicant requesting to provide non-flammable, stone mulch for plant areas in the vicinity of the building; hardwood mulch in the evergreen buffer area on outer rim of the drive.  Motion to grant waiver for use of aggregate mulch in the vicinity of the building was made by Smith with a second by Dale.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes. 

 

Motion to grant request for the use of purely evergreen trees (Norway Spruce) in lieu of required alternating evergreen and deciduous mix within the buffer area was made by Smith with a second by Perri.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes.    

 

In-ground Water Tanks – Applicant advised that the fire prevention issue has been addressed in that the  proposed location for a 30,000 gallon underground storage tank has been relocated adjacent to the main access and provisions will be made for a  15 ft wide paved pullout so that fire apparatus can have ample space to be out of traffic stream.  Applicant installing own in-ground tank; not in conjunction with other applications.  These details have been approved by the Fire Chief Jeff Ent; no waiver required. 

 

Parking spaces in front of overhead access doors - In regard to the parking area provisions in the ordinance, Engineer Clerico recommended that some type of accountability for the leased spaces will need to be arrived at by the zoning officer; the uses for Tamke parking are clearly defined at 12 spaces. However, the remainder of the assignment of spaces for tenants needs to be addressed, whereas the 14 spaces provided in front of overhead doors of tenant spaces is a deviation from standard; it’s a dual use of paved area and should be acknowledged formally.   Motion was made by Perri with second by Dale to accept the parking design as outlined, specifically, allowing the 14 parking spaces in the areas of the overhead doors.  Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes. 

 

Off -Tract improvements  - Kari Drive – Considerable discussion ensued regarding the current, deteriorated condition of Kari Drive, the effect of the proposed development on the road, and the financial responsibility due to increased deterioration.  Engineer Clerico advised that the road has some identifiable areas of settlement and cracking in the pavement that may be attributed to a wet sub grade condition that may be resolved with some sort of milling or overlaying.  It was suggested by Engineer Clerico that pre and post inspections be made and documented to track any increased wear that may arise from traffic/construction equipment used for the purpose of this development noting that typically damage done based on construction is born by the applicant.  Several members expressed their opinion as to the following:  the condition of this Township road is pre-existing, repair of same should not be borne by the applicant, suggestions were made that additional wear should be shared with other users of the road, the Township, other applicants, businesses; there was discussion at to whether an assessment should be considered; the process of capital improvements to roads was discussed, and whether some form of protection should be afforded to the applicant.   The Board’s professionals agreed that a mechanism is in place to deal with potential problems resulting from construction projects by the Township and recommended this policy be adhered to.  It was recommended that  pre and post inspections should be done and any issues should be addressed by the Township.  In response to questioning, Engineer Clerico estimated the total repair to the road to be approximately $50,000.  

 

Mr. Hunt expressed his concern of inheriting an existing problem and doesn’t feel that it is fair that he be responsible to repair the road. However, he offered to contribute the amount of $5,000.00 towards the repair of the road for any damages caused by his project. 

 

 

Minutes – October 18, 2005

Page 5

 

 

Motion was made by VanDerVeen with a second by Smith to accept the $5,000 offered by Mr. Hunt to address any  problems caused to the road relative to this project; same repairs to be done at a time as decided upon by the Township Committee.  Roll call:  Dale-nay, Molnar-nay, Palladino-nay, Perri-nay, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye, Pfeiffer (Alt. #2) – nay.  Motion failed to carry.

 

Well – Applicant is relying on well data provided by Stotholff Well Drilling (former owner of property) basing their findings on wells drilled in the area by Mr. Stotholff (stating adequate yield for Breen and Globe)  Copy of the letter from Mr. Stotholff is to be submitted for the file. Mr. Lorentz noted that projected water demands are minimal for this project; little greater than single house use (approx. 1,000 gallons per day).  In response to concerns expressed by the Board, Mr. Hunt will include language in rental agreements restricting overuse of water.  Applicant will provide documentation to Engineer Clerico as to the quality of the water and agrees to the requirement that the well be drilled and tested for adequate quantity/quality prior to issuance of building permit.

 

Status report of outside agency approvals was provided by Mr. Lorentz.  Applicant has received reconfirmed approval by the Hunterdon County Health Department, reconfirmed approval from the Hunterdon County Soil Conservation District, Approval  not to construct from the Hunterdon County Planning Board pending final approval from the Township and executed bridge maintenance easement be provided; evidence of  NJDEP permits, and DEP approvals.  D&R Canal Commission approvals have not been received to date.  

 

Security lighting – It was agreed that all three free standing lights would remain on as well as the security light between the two buildings noting that the lighting should not cause an adverse affect on neighboring residents.  Mr. Lorentz noted the relocation of one free standing light closer to the fire tank and on-site directory sign.

 

Site Plan Approval Consideration:

 

Motion to approve the site plan application was made by Smith with second by Perri with the following conditions:  subject to submission of  revised site plan, architectural plans , restrictions on uses as discussed, notice to zoning official that plan is approved with parking restrictions, all outside agency approvals, security lighting issues to be detailed in the resolution, requirement of well testing as to quality and quantity prior to issuance of building permit, and all other outstanding issues subject to approval by Engineer Clerico.  Roll call:  Dale-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Pfeiffer (Alt. #2)-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye.  Motion carried.  Hearing concluded at 10:30 PM.

 

PUBLIC HEARING

INITIAL PLAN ENDORSEMENT/RESOLUTION

 

The public hearing commenced at 10:30 PM.  Attorney Shurts reviewed proof of publication and notices of service (marked Exhibit PB-1) and stated the Board has met all jurisdictional requirements.  Planner Anthony Mercantante was sworn in by Attorney Shurts. 

 

Planner Mercantante summarized the process of Initial Plan Endorsement.  Planner Mercantante noted that as previously promised, CD’s were not provided to Board members given the fact that most appendices that would have been included on the CD’s have been composed by and/or previously provided to the Board members. Important parts of the process as outlined in the Initial Plan Endorsement document that was distributed were discussed.  Planner Mercantante noted that one of the reasons for entering into this process is based on the Township’s request to remove the sewer service area from the State maps.  The State has requested the Township file for Initial Plan Endorsement to aid in the process of the elimination of the sewer service area.  The other reason for filing the plan is to meet substantive certification requirements. 

 

Planner Mercantante noted that copies of all planning documents have been requested and will be provided.  He noted that the most significant language is noted on page 6 of the application wherein we discuss issues that we feel need to be addressed: 1) dissenting report that the Township filed relative to the State Plan; and 2) our position on the sewer service area that it is not consistent with the Township’s Master Plan and the goals and policies of the Township; thus it should be eliminated.  Our findings are supported by the Master Plan, hydrogeological studies, and the Connaught Hill study done and being submitted.

 

 

 

Minutes – October 18, 2005

Page 6

 

 

Planner Mercantante noted the following items that still need to be provided with the application package:

Minutes of all meetings at which the Initial Plan Endorsement process was discussed (unofficial minutes of this evening’s hearing are acceptable); an environmental justice form that he will be completing and submitting (providing Twp. Committee and Planning Board input is not necessary); long range facilities plans for future schools for South Hunterdon High School and West Amwell Elementary Schools.   

 

Planner Mercantante will provide this additional information and plans to submit the application package to the Office of Smart Growth by the end of this month (October). He indicated that OSG is expecting the application.

 

Board questions/comments:

 

It was requested that completed copies of the environmental justice form be provided to the Township Committee and Planning Board.  Planner Mercantante addressed questions regarding the draft planning and implementation agreement noting that we have complied with all requests with the exception of the development of a GIS database. However, we are able to use the County’s system. Planner Mercantante was advised that an in-house system is available that he was not aware of. Clarification will be made that the stormwater management plan was completed in 2005 and the ordinance is anticipated to be adopted in 2006.  Typographical errors were noted and will be addressed by Planner Mercantante.  Clarification was made as to the availability of digital block and lot data.

 

Public Comments:  There were no members of the public present. 

 

Motion to approve Resolution #PB2005-14 for initial plan endorsement was made by Perri with second by Molnar.  Roll call:  Dale-aye, Meader-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye.  Motion carried.  (Hearing concluded at 10:45 PM).

 

RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL - PB #2005-12 - ADAM – BLOCK 32 LOT 21 – BARRY RD. – MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL – Resolution was presented as amended by Attorney Shurts in regard to issues raised by applicant’s attorney, Steve Morland, pertaining to flag lot language in Item #9, page 2.  Correction to be made to page 3, #14, “…the then current stormwater…” Motion to approve the resolution with the aforementioned change was made by Smith with a second by Dale.  Roll call:  Dale-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Pfeiffer (Alt. #2)-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye. 

Motion carried.  (Meader-ineligible)

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

 

GROWTH SHARE ORDINANCE #29, 2005- INTRODUCTION BY TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE

 

Per Planner Mercantante, this ordinance (distributed to Board members) will establish a required Mt. Laurel set aside for all developments and is a component of the housing plan.  He noted that this is an ordinance adopted by  municipalities to prevent problems with the providing of adequate affordable housing.  This ordinance is also an important component in the substantive certification process.  Motion was made by Perri with a second by Molnar to recommend approval of the ordinance by the Township Committee whereas it is consistent with the Master Plan.  Roll call:  Dale-aye, Meader-aye, Molnar-aye, Palladino-aye, Perri-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye, Ent-aye.  Motion carried. 

 

Escrow Problems/Issuance of Building Permits– Correspondence from Township Committee dated October 5, 2005, was received and distributed, regarding a problem the Township is experiencing with deficit escrow fees and action being taken by the construction office on projects that have not met the Township Engineer’s approval.  The correspondence requests that the Board’s professionals provide timely billings and adhere to requirements of the MLUL in that copies of monthly charges are sent to applicants.  Request was made by Chairman Ent that all professionals adhere to the request.  In regard to the request to have a provision inserted into the checklists for a sign off that all bills have been paid, Secretary Griffiths advised that inserting this provision on the planning board checklist is after the fact and therefore, will not address the problem.  In regard to request being made in the resolution process, the Board was advised that this aspect of the application process is not the final process.  Deeds and plans are reviewed, signed, and billed for as the last action for an application project

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes – October 18, 2005

Page 7

 

 

 

Secretary Griffiths explained the process she currently follows to ensure the collection of all monies prior to the surrendering of these final documents.  She will ensure that copies of resolutions and deeds of approval will be provided to the construction official and tax assessor as confirmed by way of an internal tracking system.  Ms. Palladino advised that measures will be taken to ensure that the construction office will carry out their responsibilities as they relate to these problems. 

 

Stream Corridor Ordinance – Notice of final adoption of the ordinance by the Township Committee and copy of the adopted ordinance were received and distributed. 

 

NEW BUSINESS:

 

OTHER:  None at this time.

 

CORRESPONDENCE

 

Long Range Facilities Plan for South Hunterdon High School was received from the Thomas Group and referred to Planner Mercantante for inclusion in the Initial Plan Endorsement package.

 

Information on the Green Acres proposed rule change dated September 30, 2005, from HCPB was provided to Board members via regular mail.

 

Hunterdon County Planning Board DRC agendas were received.

 

Budget request worksheet forms for 2006 and the 2005 budget summary were received and distributed. 

 

Correspondence received October 7, 2005, from JCP&L regarding newly adopted Smart Growth Main Extension regulations by the BPU was distributed to the Board prior to the meeting.

 

ADJOURNMENT 

 

Motion to adjourn at 11:00 PM was made by Perri with a second by VanDerVeen. All members present voted in favor of adjournment.

 

                                                                                                         Respectfully submitted,

 

 

                                                                                                         Donna M. Griffiths           

                                                                                                         Secretary