The West Amwell Township
Planning Board meeting was called to order at
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, Thomas Molnar-present, Nancy
Palladino-present,
Carmen Perri-present, Sean Pfeiffer
(Alt. #2)-present, Hal Shute-present, Joan Smith-present, Joan
VanDerVeen-present, Jeff Ent-present
Absent: Bernard Meader
Late Attendance: Alexander Greenwood (Alt.
Professionals Present: William Shurts, Attorney; Robert Clerico,
Engineer;
Anthony Mercantante, Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES/BILL LST:
Regular Minutes –
Bill List – September 20,
2005 – Motion to approve the bill
list (attached hereto as Appendix 1) with the exception of 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 Molnar. Motion carried on roll call vote – all
ayes. The aforementioned bill/voucher
will be forwarded to the Township Committee for disposition.
Steve Morland, Esq., appeared
on behalf of the applicant. Application
continued from July 2005 meeting. Mr.
Morland addressed outstanding issues in Engineer Clerico’s letter of July 2005
specifically advising that Board of Health approval has been received and
copies of same approval letter from Dept. of Health were provided to the Board. Soil log data has also been submitted to
Engineer Clerico. Mr. Morland questioned
whether there would be a need for a drainage plan for the lands remaining at
this time. He is requesting this condition
be carried until such time this parcel is developed and prior to the issuance
of a building permit. Mr. Morland also
requested that approval of the lot with the 150’ flag stem not preclude the
applicant in the event another flag lot is proposed. Mr. Morland attested that
no development of remaining lands would be done at a future date without
submission of drainage plans and adherence to stormwater regulations.
The application was
classified as a minor subdivision by Subdivision committee member Shute with a
second by Smith.
Discussion and questioning by
the Board surrounded the length of the proposed flag stem, potential for
remaining lands being considered for Green Acres, and the need for adequate
recording of the restriction regarding the drainage plan/stormwater
requirements. It was suggested that a
copy of the resolution be attached to the deed of record and/or referenced in
the deed.
There were no public comments
offered.
Motion to approve the minor
subdivision was made by Shute with a second by Dale with the following
conditions: grading plan to be submitted
to Township Engineer confirming the disturbance; LOI to be obtained from the DEP
prior to lot disturbance and any permit issuance (which would be in the form of
a deed restriction), and if it is determined that a stormwater plan is
required, the applicant/owner will
Minutes –
Page 2
reappear before the Board. Roll
call: Dale-aye, Palladino-aye,
Perri-aye, Pfeiffer (Alt. #2)-aye, Shute-aye, Smith-aye, VanDerVeen-aye,
Ent-aye. (Molnar-ineligible). Motion
carried. In regard to the 100 ft. flag
lot created, it is to be noted that the Board offers no decision at this time
as to approval or denial of any future
subdivision.
PUBLIC HEARING
TAMKE TREE EXPERTS (DOUGLAS HUNT) – PRELIMINARY SITE
PLAN APPLICATION/VARIANCE REQUEST – BLOCK 8
The continued public hearing
commenced at
Fred Zelley, Esq., appeared
on behalf of the applicant. Letter dated
In regard to stream corridor
protection, Engineer Lorentz advised that approvals have been received
regarding this issue from DEP as to stream encroachment, freshwater wetlands,
and transition area averaging. Applicant
is awaiting approval from D&R Canal Commission for a minor adjustment to
the required buffers under those regulations.
There is a small portion of stream around the embankment of the detention
basin that falls within the disturbance area (detention basin berm encroaches
upon this stream). The State does not take jurisdiction over this stream,
however, it was concluded that relief would be needed under the local ordinance
requirements. As noted on the plan, all
other areas but the northeast corner of the site are covered by a conservation easement
which will be evidenced by declaration of restriction as required by DEP once
approvals are gained.
There were no public
comments/questions offered at this time.
Applicant provided
justification for waiver requests as follows:
In regard to the sidewalk waiver request, applicant is requesting to
deviate from the sidewalk requirement in way of paving up to the face of the
building with wheel stops provided in lieu of the sidewalks. Applicant
proposing same as alternative in trying to reduce imperviousness due to
constraints of the site. In regard to
concerns expressed by the Board as to interference of the walkway due to window
placement, Mr. Hunt (previously sworn) agreed that double hung windows would be
considered so as not to cause interference of walkway.
In regard to waiver request
to curbing in parking areas, applicant requesting waiver that outer boundaries
of the parking and drives not be curbed due to the runoff and drainage concept
of maintaining sheet flow wherever possible to reduce the amount of connected
impervious coverage and applicant also requests the areas within the parking
lot (landscaped areas) be curbed with timber in lieu of Belgium block which
tends to present more natural look. It
was agreed that applicant will use non-flammable landscape materials, i.e.
stone mulch, for the landscape islands.
There was considerable
discussion surrounding the length of parking spaces, parking setback from the
building, the need for the sidewalk area along the buildings, and the
suggestion of converting the walk area into landscaped area to address
potential problem with proper clearing for the unit doors.
The following action was
taken on the waiver requests with a notation that relief be granted subject to
revised plans being submitted addressing these issues:
Minutes –
Page 3
Sidewalk Waiver - Motion to
grant the waiver giving relief from the sidewalk requirements was made by VanDerVeen
with a second by Dale. Motion carried on
roll call vote – all ayes.
Length of parking space – Motion denying relief from the required parking
space length was made by Perri with a second by Smith. Motion carried on roll call vote – all ayes.
Parking setback from the
building - Motion by Dale with second
by Perri was made to grant waiver for four feet setback as opposed to 10 ft.
contingent upon a plan being submitted confirming that access to door is not
impeded. Motion carried on roll call
vote – all ayes. Applicant agrees to
install barrier, i.e. bollards, steel posts (complaint with
Parking setback from
property line (west side) – Motion by Perri with second by
Smith was made to grant waiver for setback for three truck parking spaces
conditioned on only overnight parking being available; no long term
storage. Motion carried on roll call
vote – all ayes.
Design waivers for curbing –
Motion by Dale with a second
by Perri was made to grant waiver from use of
Motion by Perri with a second
by Smith was made to waive the requirement for
Lighting – Motion was made by VanDerVeen with a second by
Molnar to grant the waiver request for minimum average lighting for parking
areas based on the following conditions:
lighting to consist of three lights as shown on the plan, light to be
installed in corridor between buildings A & B, and timers are to be
installed on individual tenant controlled lights. Motion carried on roll call vote - all
ayes.
Stream encroachment waiver –Motion was made by Shute with a second by VanDerVeen
to grant the waiver from the local stream corridor ordinance requirement for
the intrusion of the detention basin grading as shown on the plan. Motion carried
on roll call vote – all ayes; Smith – absent at roll call.
There were no public
comments/questions offered at this time.
The Board was polled as to
the concept of the variance request of 85 ft. (from 100 ft. requirement) for
rear yard setback; no adverse comments were offered.
It was noted that a revised
landscape plan based on the above waivers being granted will need to be
submitted. Engineers Clerico and
Lorentz will address these revisions along with all other outstanding
issues. Engineer Clerico will provide a
summary report for review at the continued hearing in October. Other issues to be discussed are the fire
tanks and impact of the project on
(Hearing concluded at
Board member Alex Greenwood (Alt. #1) joined the board
at
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
DRAFT GROWTH SHARE ORDINANCE/HOUSING
Planner Mercantante provided
an overview of the memorandum submitted by Shirley Bishop, P.P. dated
Minutes –
Page 4
meeting for adoption of the
housing plan element and fair share plan.
Planner Bishop will be present for that hearing.
Initial plan endorsement
letter dated
Planners Bishop and
Mercantante will provide all pertinent documentation and notices to the Clerk
and Planning Board Secretary relative to the public hearings.
Motion was made by Perri with
a second by Molnar in support of the Township Committee moving forward with
this process. Motion carried on roll
call vote – all ayes.
STREAM CORRIDOR ORDINANCE - RE-INTRODUCTION BY
Chairman Ent stated that this
ordinance has been amended (Ordinance #24, 2005) by the Township Committee and
Environmental Commission and has been resubmitted to the Planning Board. Copies of letters addressed to the Township
Committee and/or Planning Board regarding this ordinance were distributed to
Board members prior to the meeting. Copy
of Township Committee minutes from
Ron Shapella, Chairman of the
Environmental Commission, was present to address questions relative to the
changes made to the ordinance. Changes
made were based on public comments offered.
Memorandum dated
Board questions:
Mr. Shapella addressed
concerns/questions from Mr. Shute regarding the modification of language
pertaining to the definition of “net increase in lot coverage”. Mr. Shute expressed concern that the
ordinance be consistent with the requirements of the stormwater management rule
and wants to ensure that State requirements for a stream corridor ordinance are
satisfied. Mr. Shapella advised that the
State offers recommendations to include minimum requirements, and that there
are no requirements as to municipality’s stream corridor ordinance. Mr. Shute noted the exemption of ponds and
lakes in the stream definitions section in the new ordinance and expressed
satisfaction with this change.
In response to questioning by
Mr. Shute, Mr. Shapella advised that a model management plan will be prepared. Mr. Shute questioned whether the conservation
easement for the stream corridor will be classified as a critical area and the
affect for someone who wants to subdivide and establish buy rights potential. It was noted that the stream corridor would
not get subtracted from the gross acreage prior to calculating buy rights. Planner Mercantante advised that the entire
stream corridor is not a critical area.
Mr. Shute stated his opinion
that the 150 ft. stipulation is overreaching and we are a township of landowners
and should protect the little rights that we have.
Maps were presented by Mr.
Shapella showing the proposed stream corridors with overlays for the 50 ft., 75
ft., 100 ft. and 150 ft. buffer areas.
Minutes –
Page 5
The floor was opened to the
public for questions on the revisions to the ordinance:
Roy Pedersen,
Clifford Zink, property owner on
Patricia Comly, resident of
The floor was opened to
members of the public that had not submitted letters:
Andrew Nowick, resident of
Bill Comly, resident of
Robert Fulper,
Gary Bleacher,
Mr. Bleacher stated that we
have an opportunity to satisfy everyone’s needs. He has a problem with the varying degrees of
the requirements, finding them to be arbitrary and with the deed restriction which
adds another encumbrance on residents’ properties. It would be his recommendation that the buffer
be 75 ft. across the board and treat same as a setback. He suggested that the Township map out those
stream
corridors thereby delineating
the setbacks. Mr. Bleacher noted that many letters have been received pretty
even in support of the ordinance and in support of the ordinance to be further
amended. He stated those letters that
came in support of the ordinance as written came from the area of the Township
most affected in the area of the sewer service area. Mr. Bleacher commented that the whole of the
Township must bear the burden and consideration should be given to people that
don’t live in this area.
Mr. Pfeiffer challenged Mr.
Bleacher’s statement as to the letters received in support of this ordinance
coming primarily from the areas affected by the sewer service area.
Catherine Urbanski,
Floor closed to the public.
Minutes –
Page 6
The following typographical
errors were noted:
Page 4, Section 3B, sentence
3, should read in part, “the provisions of Section
3A
Page 5, Section 3D, sentence
3, should read in part, “…as stipulated in
Section 3A”.
Motion was made by Dale with
a second by Smith to recommend adoption of the ordinance by the Township
Committee contingent upon correction of aforementioned typographical errors wherein
the Planning Board finds same to be consistent with the Master Plan. Roll
call: Dale-aye,
PROPOSED HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
There has been no response to
letter sent to Zoning Official Venettone requesting his opinion as to whether
modifications/stricter regulations to the home occupation ordinance should be
considered. It was agreed that no changes/amendments will be considered at this
time.
NEW BUSINESS:
OTHER:
Issuance of Building Permits– Correspondence dated
CORRESPONDENCE
Workshop notice for
“Protecting Stream Corridors” to be held
Mandatory training for planning board members – In response to Mr. Pfeiffer’s inquiry as to whether
training programs are available, Planner Mercantante advised that the
curriculum is being developed and
Programs should be available
within next six months. It was suggested
that in-house training be considered.
Information on the Green Acres proposed rule change
was provided to Board members via e-mail and fax.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn at
Respectfully
submitted,
Donna
M. Griffiths
Secretary