View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version

A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held on the above date at 7:30 p.m. with Chairman Scott Meyer presiding.  After a salute to the Flag, the Chairman read the “Open Public Meetings Act”.

 

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:  Scott Meyer, Larry Sweeney, Richard Zoschak, Michael Shadiack, Charles Bautz, Jim Rilee, Gary Behrens, Robert Schultz.

 

ABSENT:  Joseph Schwab, Robert DeFillippo, Steven Alford.

 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF PRESENT:  Tom Germinario, Russell Stern, Paul Ferriero.

 

Also present:  Lorraine Mullen for Dolores DeMasi, Board Secretary.

 

Minutes of 5/2/07

 

Mr. Rilee made a motion to approve the minutes.  Mr. Zoschak seconded.

 

Roll as follows:  Mr. Rilee, yes; Mr. Zoschak, yes; Mr. Shadiack, yes; Mr. Bautz, yes; Mr. Sweeney, yes.

 

RESOLUTIONS

 

PBA-07-16 – ALICE DUFFORD – SUBDIVISION FOR TWO LOTS LOCATED ON RIGHTER RD. BLOCK 1802, LOT 1 IN R-3 ZONE

 

                                               ROXBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

                                                                                           RESOLUTION

 

 Decided:  May 16, 2007

 Memorialized:  June 6, 2007

 

IN THE MATTER OF ALICE DUFFORD

MINOR SUBDIVISION PLAN APPROVAL

BLOCK 1802, LOT 1

APPLICATION NO. PBA-07-16

 

WHEREAS, Alice Dufford (hereinafter the "Applicant") applied to the Roxbury Township Planning Board (hereinafter the "Board") for minor subdivision plan approval on March 23, 2006; and

 

WHEREAS, the application was deemed complete by the Board, and public hearing was held on 5/16/07; and

 

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Applicant has complied with all procedural requirements, rules and  regulations of the Board, and that all required provisions of procedural compliance have been filed with the Board; and

 

WHEREAS, the Board makes the following findings and conclusions based upon the documents, testimony and other evidence comprising the hearing record:

 

1.  The property which is the subject of the application consists of 58,685 square feet (1.3472 acres) located in the R-3 Residence District.  The site is developed with a two-story single-family dwelling, attached garage, two sheds and an in-ground pool.  Public water and sewer service the home.  The property adjoins Township land (Horseshoe Lake), zoned OS Open Space District to the north and east.  To the west and south are residentially developed single-family properties zoned R-3 Residence District.

 

2.  The development of the subject property proposed by the Applicant comprises minor subdivision approval to create one new lot (Lot 1.02), encompassing 26,865 square feet for the development of a single-family dwelling.  The remaining lot (Lot 1.01) will encompass 26,939 square feet and contain the existing dwelling, sheds and pool.  Both lots conform to the R-3 minimum lot size requirement of 15,000 square feet.  No variances are required.  A twenty-five feet wide road right-of-way dedication is proposed along the Righter Road frontage.  Public water and sewer will service the new home.

 

3.  The proposed development of the subject property to which the Board’s decision herein pertains is depicted and described in the following drawings and/or plans:

 

Prepared by Edward F. Secco

 

-                    Sheet 1 of 1, Minor Subdivision,

                revised April 26, 2007

 

4.  In support of the application, the Applicant submitted the following documents, which are part of the hearing record:

 

-                    Minor Subdivision Application, dated 3/23/06

-                    Rendering of Typical Dwelling (undated)

-                    Letter of American Environmental Services,

                Dated 3/16/06

 

5.  The Board’s planning and engineering professionals and/or consultants submitted the following reports concerning their respective reviews of the application, which are part of the hearing record:

 

-                    Russell Stern, P.P., dated 5/2/07

-                    Paul Ferriero, P.E., dated 5/8/07

 

6.  Township officials and/or agencies submitted the following reports concerning their reviews of the application, which are part of the hearing record:

 

-                    Michael Kobylarz, P.E., Township Engineer,

                Dated 2/16/06

 

7.  In the course of the public hearings, no exhibits were marked.

 

8.  In the course of the public hearings, the Applicant was represented by her daughter Virginia Grodeska (with power of attorney), and the Applicant presented the testimony of the following witnesses, which testimony is part of the hearing record:

 

-               Edward Secco, Surveyor

 

9.  The development of the subject property as proposed by the Applicant requires relief from the following land use provisions of the Township ordinances:

 

-                    Section 13-8.610A, requiring sidewalks

                along Righter Road.

 

10.  Based on the hearing record, the Board has made the following findings relative to the variances and/or design waivers sought by the Applicant:

 

-               A design waiver is granted from Section 13-8.610A as sidewalks are not provided along Righter Road.  Sidewalks do not exist along this area of Righter Road.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board does hereby approve the minor site plan as depicted and described in the drawings and/or plans referenced hereinabove.  In connection with this approval, the Board grants the following relief from land use provisions of the Township ordinances:

 

-               A design waiver is granted with respect to Ordinance §13-8.610A.

 

This approval is subject to the following conditions which shall, unless otherwise stated, be satisfied prior to the filing of the minor subdivision deeds:

 

1.  Street trees shall be provided (40 feet on center, 2 ½ - 3” caliper) (1 on Lot 1.01 and 2 on Lot 1.02).  The new trees shall be in line with the existing Sugar Maples that are located outside of the right-of-way.

 

2.  A grading/drainage plan for proposed Lot 1.02 shall be submitted to the Township Engineer for review and approval prior to obtaining a building permit.

 

3.  Lot numbers and street numbers shall be verified by the Township Tax Assessor.

 

4.  The Applicant shall comply with Section 13-2.402A, Lot Line Revision Fee, prior to filing minor subdivision deeds.

 

5.  Prior to the signing of the deeds, a soil log and permeability test shall be completed at the location of the drywells.

 

6.  Prior to filing of deeds, in the deed for lot 1.02, an easement will be provided for the sewer lateral from the street to lot 1.01.

 

7.  Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following changes shall be made to the minor subdivision plan:

 

a.             For the new sewer connection required for lot 1.02, construction details for the connection, trench and pavement repair shall be provided.

 

b.             Construction details shall be provided for the driveway apron, water connection, depressed curb and pavement repair for the new curb.

 

c.             The location of the drywells and overflow pipe shall be shown on the plan.

 

d.             The drywell calculations shall be expanded to show the basis for the storage required.

 

e.             A note shall be added to the plan that all utilities to the new dwelling are to be provided underground.

 

8.  Minor subdivision deeds shall be reviewed and approved by the Board’s Attorney and Engineer prior to filing.  Deeds shall include the following recital:  “Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-47, the minor subdivision referred to in the within Deed was approved by the Roxbury Township Planning Board on 5/16/07 and memorialized by Resolution on 6/6/07.”

 

9.  The following construction mitigation measures are hereby made applicable to this project:

 

A.            Elimination of anti-vandalism horns on equipment.

 

B.            Work hours shall be limited from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.  No work shall take place on Sundays or holidays except on an emergency basis.  The holidays which shall be observed for purposes of this condition shall be New Year's Day, President's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas.  The Applicant shall maintain personnel on site to whom incidents of noise disturbance shall be reported and said personnel shall be authorized to take measures to minimize said disturbances.  As used in this section, “work” shall include both interior and exterior construction.

 

C.            Anti-litter regulations shall be imposed on site.

 

D.            The Applicant shall establish regulations for the safe and proper transfer and transport of fuel on site.

 

E.             Tracking mats shall be located by the Morris County Soil Conservation District and the Township Engineer in such places as to minimize the tracking of dirt and mud onto Righter Road.

 

F.             Clean-up and wash-down of trucks and equipment shall be required before leaving the construction site.

 

G.            Adequate provisions for safe control of employee parking including employees of the contractors and sub-contractors shall be required on site during construction.

 

H.            During construction, all construction traffic shall enter and exit the site exclusively from Righter Road.

 

I.              Violation of any of these construction mitigation measures may result in a stop work order, which order shall remain in full force and effect until the condition is remedied to the satisfaction of the Township Engineer.

 

10.  Prior to disturbance of the subject property, the Applicant shall comply, to the extent applicable, with the provisions of Ordinance Chapter XVII, “Soil Removal and Soil Relocation.”

 

11.  The Applicant shall obtain from the Township Engineer a determination of required off-tract improvements and Applicant’s pro-rata contribution with respect thereto, pursuant to Ordinances §13-4.6 and 13-4.7.  Said contribution shall be paid in full.

 

12.  This approval is subject to all other approvals required by any governmental agency having jurisdiction over the subject property.

 

13.  This approval is subject to the payment in full by the Applicant of all taxes, fees, escrows, assessments and other amounts due and owing to the Township and/or any agency thereof.

 

14.  If the Soil Conservation District, Morris County Planning Board, or any other governmental body from which approval is necessary causes, through their examination of the plans as recited in this resolution, any revisions to said plans then, in that event, same shall be submitted to the Planning Board Engineer.  If the Planning Board Engineer deems said revisions to be significant, the Applicant shall return to the Planning Board for further review and approval.

 

15.  Revised plans shall be submitted within 60 days and must be deemed complete to the satisfaction of the Board Engineer within 6 months of the date of memorialization.  Failure on the part of the Applicant to satisfy this or any other condition of this resolution will result in referral of this matter back to the Planning Board for purposes of deeming the approval null and void.

 

The undersigned does hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Resolution of the Roxbury Township Planning Board memorializing the action taken by the Board at its meeting of 5/16/04.

 

Mr. Rilee made a motion to approve the resolution.  Mr. Zoschak seconded.

 

Roll as follows:  Mr. Rilee, yes; Mr. Zoschak, yes; Mr. Shadiack, yes; Mr. Behrens, yes; Mr. Schultz, yes; Mr. Sweeney, abstain; Mr. Meyer, yes.

 

PBA-07-06 – ROXBURY 2002 LLC, PHILLIPS – FINAL MAJOR SITE PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON ROUTE 46, BLOCK 9501, LOT 9 IN LI/OR ZONE

 

                                      ROXBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

                                                                 RESOLUTION

 

 Decided:  May 16, 2007

 Memorialized:  June 6, 2007

 

IN THE MATTER OF ROXBURY 2002, LLC

FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL

BLOCK 9501, LOT 9

APPLICATION NO. PBA-07-06

 

WHEREAS, Roxbury 2002, LLC (hereinafter the "Applicant") applied to the Roxbury Township Planning Board (hereinafter the "Board") for final site plan approval on 11/3/06; and

 

WHEREAS, the application was deemed complete by the Board, and public hearings were held on 5/2/07 and 5/16/07; and

 

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Applicant has complied with all procedural requirements, rules and  regulations of the Board, and that all required provisions of procedural compliance have been filed with the Board; and

 

WHEREAS, the Board makes the following findings and conclusions based upon the documents, testimony and other evidence comprising the hearing record:

 

1.  The property which is the subject of the application consists of 72.79 acres located in the LI/OR Light Industrial/Office Research District.  By Resolution memorialized 10/6/04 (amended 12/1/04), Applicant was granted preliminary major site plan approval with variances and design waivers to construct a two-phase addition to an existing industrial/warehouse building.  The Applicant is now before the Board seeking final site plan approval for Phase I improvements.

 

2.  The development of the subject property to which the Board’s decision herein pertains is depicted and described in the following drawings and/or plans:

 

Prepared by Bohler Engineering, P.C.

 

-         Sheet 1, Cover Sheet, revised 12/13/06

-         Sheet 2, Final Overall Site Plan, revised 12/13/06

-         Sheets 3 to 6, Final Site Plan, revised 12/13/06

-         Sheets 7 to 10, Final Grading Plan, revised 12/13/

-         Sheets 11 to 14, Final Drainage and Utilities Plan, revised 12/13/06

-         Sheets 15 to 18, Final Landscape Plan, revised 12/13/06

-         Comparison Report, dated November 2, 2006

 

Prepared by Control Point Associates, Inc.

 

-         Sheets 1 to 4, As-Built Survey, dated 10/30/06

 

3.  The Board’s planning and engineering professionals and/or consultants submitted the following reports concerning their respective reviews of the application, which are part of the hearing record:

 

Russell Stern, PP, dated 2/15/07, updated 4/27/07

Paul Ferriero, PE, dated 2/14/07 and 4/24/07

 

4.  In the course of the public hearings, no exhibits were marked and are part of the hearing record.

 

5.  In the course of the public hearings, the Applicant was represented by Paul Nusbaum, Esq., and the Applicant presented the testimony of the following witnesses, which testimony is part of the hearing record:

 

Grayson Murray, P.E., engineering expert

 

6.  The Board finds that the Applicant has constructed the project substantially in accordance with the approval preliminary site plans, subject to the completion of those items set forth in the conditions herein below.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board does hereby approve the final site plan as depicted and described in the drawings and/or plans referenced hereinabove.

 

This approval is subject to the following conditions which shall, unless otherwise stated, be satisfied prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy:

 

1.  The following items shall be completed by 6/1/07 and completion verified by the Township Planner and the Board Engineer.  Any item for which completion is not verified by 6/1/07 shall be bonded and completed by 7/1/07:

 

                        (1)  Incomplete items noted in the November 2, 2006 Comparison Report from Grayson B. Murray, P.E.

 

                        (2)  Incomplete items noted in the January 16, 2007 Interoffice Memo from Dan Henry to the Township Engineer.

 

                        (3)  New plants shall be provided for missing, marginal and dead plants. Topsoil shall be provided for incomplete planting beds and mulched.

 

                        (4)  Site work related to the basin and surrounding area shall be completed:

 

                                    (a)        Fine grade areas as needed.

                                    (b)        Reseed as needed, including embankment to truck area.

                                    (c)        Cut back and/or bury exposed filter fabric associated with emergency spillway, bottom channel between the two basins, rip-rap swales, etc.

                                    (d)        Cover exposed flared end section/filter fabric at bottom of basin. Seed and add landscaping.

                                    (e)        Re-mulch sparse landscape beds and plants.

                                    (f)         Verify presence of aerators, install per Sheet 18.  Include staff gauges.

                                    (g)        Remove debris at perimeter of basin (including wood pile).

                                    (h)        Provide landscaping to screen aerator control panels.

 

                        (5)  All requirements of Morris County Soil Service permits shall be satisfied.

 

                        (6)  Fine grade, topsoil and reseed along the Route 46 frontage including the area between curb and sidewalk.  Address area between sidewalk and curb associated with the former construction access road.

 

                        (7)  Re-stabilize embankment, as needed, at easterly end of Route 46 frontage. Correct/stabilize exposed soil mounded against the utility pole near North Frontage Road.

 

                        (8)  Remove debris (rock, concrete, vegetative waste, construction material, garbage, etc.) from the Route 46 frontage.

 

                        (9)  The area where the stone wall at the westerly Route 46 frontage was removed shall be landscaped.

 

                        (10)  At the westerly Route 46 frontage is a headwall where water is circumventing the structure and flowing over the adjacent sidewalk and entering an inlet on the highway. This problem shall be corrected.

 

                        (11)  Documentation of DEP approval of the tree removal activities in regulated wetlands/transition areas shall be furnished to the Board Engineer.

 

                        (12)  Install “Trucks Entering Roadway” signs per the condition 1 of the amended site plan resolution.

 

                        (13)  Remove all wallpacks/floodlights along the existing building elevations that are not required for emergency purposes or specified on the approved lighting plan. Replace with shoebox lights where depicted on the approved plans.

 

                        (14)  Fine grade the Phase 2 building pad per the preliminary site plan approval and seed.

 

                        (15)  Install decorative trash receptacles/ash urns per approved plans.

 

                        (16)  Fine grade, topsoil and landscape center islands in the existing easterly parking lot. Existing landscaping within the medians was damaged.

 

                        (17)  Trailers shall be removed from unauthorized parking areas.

 

                        (18)  Install handrails on both sides of the box truck ramp located on the new southerly building elevation. Bollards shall be installed at the end of the ramp.

 

                        (19)  Install bollards at the transformer across from the southerly new building elevation.

 

                        (20)  The gravel remnants of a former construction access road at the westerly top of the detention basin shall be removed, topsoiled and seeded.  The area is currently graveled but covered with hay.  Apron needs to be completed.

 

                        (21)  Install grass pavers at basin (apron at Rt. 46).

 

                        (22)  Check/restabilize areas of erosion in basin.

 

                        (23)  Remove fabric from inlet (just before new parking lot at rear of new building).

 

                        (24)  Topsoil depression along rear easterly parking lot curb line and remove all asphalt pieces along wood line.

 

                        (25)  Complete curbing in east end lower parking lot.

 

                        (26)  Curb drain – remove all fabric, lower east parking lot.

 

                        (27)  Construct 10 x 10 pad at entrance road.

 

                        (28)  All areas along parking lots – topsoil and landscape beds, cover all PVC lighting conduit.

 

                        (29)  Applicant shall submit a maintenance manual for the upkeep of the porous paving on the site.  The manual shall be reviewed and approved by the Board Engineer and shall be referenced in a note on the final plat.

 

                        (30)  Bolts shall be installed on the outlet structure emergency spillway grate in accordance with approved plans.

 

                        (31)  All existing wall-mounted lights to be removed and replaced with wall-mounted shoebox fixtures.

 

(32)  The cover sheet of the engineering drawings should be labeled as “Phase I Final Site Plan.”

 

(33)  An accurate as-built drawing clearly identifying landscaping compliance and non-compliance shall be submitted to the Township Planner.

 

(34)  The Land Use Administrator shall verify payment of the mandatory development fee.

 

(35)  The Land Use Administrator shall verify payment for replacement trees.

 

(36)  The Land Use Administrator shall verify payment of off-site and off-tract pro-rata share contribution.

 

2.  The following items shall be bonded and completed by 7/1/07:

 

 (1)  At the southwest corner of the Phase II building, install pavement reflectors to delineate traffic aisles per the approved plans and condition 4 of the amended site plan resolution.

 

                        (2)  Replace wallpack light on the water tank building with a shoebox light.

 

                        (3)  Replace damaged integral curb/sidewalk along the northerly portion of the existing easterly manufacturing building area.

 

3.  The following items shall be bonded and completed prior to 9/30/07:

 

                        (1)  With respect to maintenance, cleanup and remediation of the loose gravel associated with the porous pavement parking areas, remediation will include removing loose gravel from the pavement surface and adjacent landscape areas where gravel remnants remain from previous snow plowing activities.  All affected landscape beds will receive a new treatment of hardwood mulch.

 

                        (2)  The linear depression in the parking field west of the existing building will be repaired.  Repair activities will include saw cut and excavation of sub-base material, compaction of the sub-grade, and replacement of sub-base and asphalt using I-4 standard mix design.

 

                        (3)  The earth settlement around two existing ‘B’ inlets in the southwest portion of the employee parking field shall be repaired.  Repair will include removal of adjacent curbing to the nearest expansion joint, saw cut existing asphalt area approximately six (6) feet away from existing ‘B’ inlet structures, excavate sub-grade to approximately three (3) feet below ground surface, replacement and compaction of sub-grade in controlled six-inch (6”) lifts, replacement of concrete curb, and replacement of asphalt using standard I-4 surface mix.

 

                        (4)  Repair asphalt surface where the employee parking field meets with the adjacent access road.  Repair will include saw cut and removal of approximately a four-foot-wide strip across the drive aisle connection, and replacement of asphalt material using standard I-4 mix design.

 

                        (5)  Mr. Dan Henry of the Roxbury Township Construction Department shall be notified prior to any paving re-construction activities taking place.

 

                       

 

                        4.  The following items shall be bonded and completed by 10/30/07, provided, however, that no planting of plant materials or trees shall be done between the dates 6/15/07 and 9/15/07:

 

                        (1)  The detention basin area where rip-rap pads have been placed shall be landscaped and screened by evergreen plantings along Route 46 to the satisfaction of the Township Planner.

 

                        (2)  In the area where trees were cut down along Route 46 to promote visibility of the “Philips” sign, the stumps shall be cut down level with grade, and the area shall be supplemented with landscaping to the satisfaction of the Township Planner.

 

                        5.  The following conditions from the Preliminary Site Plan Resolution of 10/6/04 are reiterated:

 

-         Condition 5 - restricting use of the connector road to Old Traveled Way

-         Condition 6 – removal of connector road to Old Traveled Way

-         Condition 52 – prohibits construction vehicles on Old Traveled Way

-         Condition 96 – landscape guarantee

-         Condition 108 – recycling requirements

-         Condition 116 – payment of taxes and fees

 

                        6.  This approval is subject to all other approvals required by any governmental agency having jurisdiction over the subject property.

 

                        7.  This approval is subject to the payment in full by the Applicant of all taxes, fees, escrows, assessments and other amounts due and owing to the Township and/or any agency thereof.

 

                        8.  If the Soil Conservation District, Morris County Planning Board, or any other governmental body from which approval is necessary causes, through their examination of the plans as recited in this resolution, any revisions to said plans then, in that event, same shall be submitted to the Planning Board Engineer.  If the Planning Board Engineer deems said revisions to be significant, the Applicant shall return to the Planning Board for further review and approval.

 

                        9.  Revised plans shall be submitted within 60 days and must be deemed complete to the satisfaction of the Board Engineer within 6 months of the date of memorialization.  Failure on the part of the Applicant to satisfy this or any other condition of this resolution will result in referral of this matter back to the Planning Board for purposes of deeming the approval null and void.

 

                        The undersigned does hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Resolution of the Roxbury Township Planning Board memorializing the action taken by the Board at its meeting of 5/16/07.

 

Mr. Zoschak made a motion to approve the resolution.  Mr. Rilee seconded.

 

Discussion.

 

Roll as follows:  Mr. Zoschak, yes; Mr. Rilee, yes; Mr. Shadiack, yes; Mr. Behrens, yes; Mr. Schultz, yes; Mr. Meyer, yes.

 

AGENDA

 

Letter of extension for Frank & Sheila Biank from Attorney Harrison

 

Mr. Geminario said they are requesting a one-year extension on the normal 190-day period for filing minor subdivision deeds.  They have been held up with their Highlands application approvals. 

 

Mr. Rilee made a motion to grant the extension for one year.  Mr. Zoschak seconded.

 

Roll as follows:  Mr. Rilee, yes; Mr. Zoschak, yes; Mr. Shadiack, yes; Mr. Behrens, yes; Mr. Schultz, yes; Mr. Bautz, yes; Mr. Sweeney, yes; Mr. Meyer, yes.

 

 

 

Main Street Streetscape Committee

 

Christopher Raths, Township Manager, was present and stated the area on Main Street to be restored/renovated was to be the entire length from Hillside Avenue to Eyland Avenue.  We had applied for a grant, and that grant was not approved.  We are focusing now on the section in front of 109 Main Street.  The project has been going on for quite a while and there have been a lot of volunteers within the community working on the project.

 

Mr. Raths showed a slide show and gave an overview of the proposal.  He said not every item was adopted.  There was consensus building.  There were a series of meetings and we were able to put together a good project.  We are proposing street lighting, concrete pavement outlined in brick, and street trees.

 

Mr. Raths said we want to keep the Board informed and to indicate the type of appointments we are looking for so that for future development in the area we can be consistent.

 

Ms. Anderson was present and stated we are looking for ways to raise funds, and would suggest that some people would want to donate items such as bricks for the sidewalks. 

 

Mr. Raths said we have agreed on a 40-foot width for the road.

 

Mr. Zoschak said there is a mention of traffic and the thinning of the road near Hillside Ave.  Is it actually going to be thinner there?

 

Mr. Raths said at the intersection it is between 42 and 44 feet.  It won’t be significant.

 

Mr. Rilee stated several things were looked at for the street, including bikeway, traffic calming devices, etc.  We would like to make it a center and I still think there is potential for those items in the future. 

 

Mr. Meyer said we appreciate all the work that has been done.  As it applies to the Planning Board, there is one large lot that may come before us at some time.  It is incumbent on us to speak to those developers who bring in projects on Main Street.

 

Miriam Morris, a member of the Historic Advisory Committee, stepped forward.  She stated we became aware that this was moving ahead in January and we submitted various critiques.  We went before the street improvement committee in March because we were concerned.  We are trying to protect the historic character of Main Street and referred to the Secretary of the Interior standards for this sort of thing.  We recommended against the brick along the sidewalk as it completely changes the character of the sidewalk.  The early Main Street had concrete sidewalks.  We strongly suggest that be continued.  One issue we had with the lighting comes out of the Secretary of the Interior recommendations.  We should not be adding false history to the area, and the light fitting that was chosen seems to look like an old fashioned gas light.  Main Street didn’t have lighting in 1906. An architect we consulted recommended something modern but sympathetic.  There was also mention of plantings.  We would like to see a continuation of the kind of tree-scape that is there now. 

 

Mr. Meyer said this Board doesn’t sign off on the work of the committee.  They are here as a courtesy.  I believe the Historic Advisory Committee had representation on the committee and  it appears the committee tried to strike a balance between maintaining the history of Main Street, yet tried to make this a community center at the same time that would be attractive to the residents of Roxbury.

 

Ms. Morris said that is true, but we were specific that the brick borders on the sidewalk would not be in character, especially in this part of the country.

 

Bob Morris stepped forward.  He stated he is a member of the Historic Advisory Committee which is a subcommittee of the Planning Board.  We have created 3 documents with regard to this, only one of which has come to the Board’s attention.  We would like to see that the Board gets the other two documents.  We believe the Historic Advisory Committee has more of a roll than just being represented on the Main Street Committee.  We are concerned that this corner lot will set the tone for the whole street and will be a big mistake for the township and is something the town will regret in the future.

 

Mr. Rilee stated the 109 Main Street project will not be before this Board and was before the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

 

Mr. Stern said the improvements approved by the Zoning Board were the improvements established with this streetscape plan.

 

Mr. Rilee disagreed that this is a serious mistake.  This is a balancing act.  This is not strictly an historic district and is an area that has transitioned over time to accommodate  a multitude of uses over the last 200 years.  I think in this day and age it was a very good idea to do the brick pavers.  The lighting is from that time period.  We did not race ahead with this plan.  It was going on for 2 ½ years.  Mr. Cramond was on the committee, and we all agreed on the plan before us today.  I think this is a good plan for a great area of the township.

 

Mr. David Rogers stated inasmuch as the committee has labored over the project, Mr. Cramond was in attendance for most of the meetings.  He was there when the lighting was selected.  At the last meeting he came in with a complete change in lighting.  Since we had spent the time and effort and visited other areas, it seems to me that when Mr. Cramond came in the last time he wanted to go backwards.  As to the lighting, around the turn of the century there was little or no lighting or sidewalks.  Today you have heavy traffic at rush hour and trucks on the road.  It is impossible to go back to the time the Historic Advisory Committee would like to do.  We have made some progress toward a workable design. 

 

Cindy DeToronto of the Historic Advisory Committee stepped forward, and stated we are an official group.  This was an area designated historic by the town.  The value in maintaining the historic value of that would be an asset.  Our attitude is to preserve as much as you can, under the Smart Growth principals, would encourage leaving a legacy of the original history of the area.  As a committee, that is our responsibility.  The HAC is a subcommittee of the Planning Board and applications for construction and alterations to properties within the districts are reviewed by the committee.  As a member of the committee, yes we had representation, however that is not our capacity as a board.  We weren’t trying to hijack or insult anyone.  We were just trying to fulfill our obligations as an historic committee.  I encourage everyone to review the website smartgrowth.org.

 

Mr. Meyer stated anytime there has been a project along Main Street, there was never any action taken without input from the Historic Advisory Committee.  It appears there have been differences of opinion, but it appears the committee came to an agreement.  We don’t have power to sign off on the project, but we are here to hear the presentation

Mr. Zoschak stated no one is planning to take down any mature trees on Main Street.

 

Dan Dyrness stepped forward.  He stated he is the owner of 109 Main Street with his son and son-in-law.  We are excited about restoring the house and to bring our office there.  I feel if the town doesn’t take a positive step in improving it, it will never come back.  This seems to be a good proposal.  We will go along with whatever the town proposes for Main Street. 

 

PBA-07-07 - KBC PROPERTIES – SITE PLAN FOR LUMBERYARD LOCATED ON RT. 10, BLOCK 1905, LOTS 11 & 13 IN B-2 ZONE

 

Attorney Jason Rittie represented the applicant. 

 

Adam Remick was present and addressed the open items in Mr. Stern’s report:

 

Items 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.6, 2.14 – will be addressed by the traffic expert

 

Item 2.16 – Mr. Remick stated that area will be gravel.  We did remove some gravel to allow for landscaping.  Plans will be revised.

 

Items 2.17, 2.18, 2.21 – addressed

Items 4.2, 4.3 – to be addressed

Items 4.5, 4.6, 4.8 – addressed

 

Mr. Rilee asked about the height of the T-sheds.

 

Mr. Remick said they are about 5 feet higher than the existing T-sheds on site.  They are within about 6” of the height of the 3 sided shed.

 

Mr. Remick addressed the 5/8/07 report from Paul Ferriero. 

 

Item II (1) – applicant agreed to provide additional striping to denote the loading area and agreed to the recommendations of the engineer and additional details

 

Nicholas Verderese, traffic engineer for the applicant, was sworn in and gave his educational and professional background and was accepted by the Board.  He stated we prepared a traffic assessment.  There will be 20 trucks per day, mixed type from pickup trucks up to tractor trailers.  There are an average of 10 deliveries per day.  The trucks are WB 40.  Regarding on-site signage, we will add a stop sign at the guardhouse with a supplemental panel stating all vehicles must check in. About 90% of the business is from contractors, and the guard is generally familiar with people coming to the site.  There will also be a 1’ x 1’ sign on the front of each T-shed identifying them by number.  This is just for the Kuiken employees and their trucks and the loads, and about 15 customers a day.  You don’t have a lot of turnover.  In the front is a showroom for customers to choose their merchandise and place an order. We compared the traffic to the previous use on the site which was a lumber yard.  That had a higher turnover rate.  We provided the report and in summary it states the new use would have less traffic, and no new access permit would be required from the DOT.  There is no change proposed to the radii.

 

Mr. Rittie stated item 2.14 in Mr. Stern’s report refers to the width of the access drive.

 

Mr. Verderese stated we have provided some curb at one area of the entrance drive.  We don’t believe there is an issue there.  It operates today.  It is unlikely you would get two vehicles that would have to pass in that area. It meets current DOT standards for the width.  This is a warehouse distribution type facility and the standard is about 1 space per 5,000 sq. ft.  Here, there would be 45 spaces required, and that is adequate here for this use.

 

Item 1.4 – details will be added to the plans.  The numbering signs will be 1’ x 1’.  The stop signs will be standard. 

 

Item 2.3 – Regarding the Rt. 10/ Eyland Avenue jughandle, we did some truck turning templates.  We overlaid the WB50 over the jughandle, and are comfortable that it will work.  I did not see a truck using that jughandle, but assume that other uses in the area such as service stations, and other retail users do use it.  We also looked at the Sussex Turnpike underpass, and the WB50 can also make that maneuver.

 

Mr. Stern said the site was previously approved for a supermarket and a sub-anchor.  Is this less of a traffic impact?

Mr. Verderese said yes.  In the daily operation, that site would generate over 8,500 vehicles.  Our site generates about 150 vehicles per day.  Supermarkets get even larger tractor trailers.

 

Mr. Rittie stated there was a letter dated 5/24/07 from the Township Engineer indicating no off-tract or off-site improvements are required.

 

Christine Cofone, professional planner, was sworn in and gave her educational and professional background.  She stated she has reviewed the application and has visited the site.  The variances requested are for outdoor storage in the front of the principal building; outdoor bulk storage height; maximum building height; number of parking spaces; number of parking spaces; disturbance to steep slopes; lumberyard within 500 feet of an active public well; lighting height; accessory building in front yard; number of façade signs; landscape buffer; outdoor storage within 500 feet of an active public well.

 

Ms. Cofone stated there has been testimony to support the variances.  The hardship criteria relate to something unique or specific about the shape or topography of the property.  I believe of all the variances, the one that would qualify as a hardship is the steep slope one.  The others can be classified as flexible C variances.  There are 15 purposes of the MLUL, and I believe two of them are advanced by this application:  To  promote general welfare - The Board has heard testimony as to the water main being extended across Route 10 for the eventual connection of others.  Another criteria that is advanced is the aesthetics – we have done a number of things to enhance the landscaping,  In totality, all those elements have a positive aesthetic impact and solidly advance the positive criteria.  As to negative criteria, I don’t believe there will be a deleterious impact on any of the surrounding properties.  The majority of the variances relate to the operation of the site, specifically the orientation of the buildings and the need for the site to be laid out as it is.  The applicant has supplemental landscaping and has taken other measures to be sure these buildings will be sensitive to the surrounding properties.

 

As to impact on the zone plan, the application is permitted within the zone and we are in substantial compliance.  We are eliminating the impervious coverage variance and are consistent with the FAR.  Conformance with those two standards is very important and shows this application is consistent with the zone plan.  In my analysis, the applicant is providing additional stormwater management that we would not be required to address under the DEP regulations.

 

Mr. Rilee said his biggest concern is the signage variance.

 

Mr. Rittie said at the last hearing revised architecturals were submitted eliminating one of the signs facing Route 10.  There are two proposed on the front of the building. 

 

Mr. Stern said there is an approved sign that was already granted as a result of a zoning permit at the front building, and none are proposed with this application for Route 10.  There will not be a pylon sign.

 

Mr. Rilee asked if there will be sprinklers in the outdoor sheds.

 

Mr. Remick said he does not believe so.

 

Mr. Stern said he believes East Mapledale Avenue will be dedicated to the Township.

 

Mr. Remick said that is correct.

 

Mr. Zoschak asked where the water line runs.

 

Mr. Remick stated it goes down East Mapledale Avenue and terminates at the southerly portion of the site.  It has already been extended underneath Route 10 and serves the current Kuiken Brothers showroom.  It was then extended west and south.

 

Mr. Rilee asked if there is a place that you could hook up water at the island at Horseshoe Lake.

 

Mr. Remick said that would be subject to an agreement with Roxbury Water Company.

 

Mr. Rittie summarized, stating he believes this is a good use for this property and would be a good addition to the town and requested approval of the application.

 

Mr. Stern stated his comments have all been addressed. 

 

Mr. Ferriero stated he has no further comments.

 

PUBLIC PORTION OPENED

 

No one stepped forward.

 

PUBLIC PORTION CLOSED

 

Mr. Zoschak made a motion to approve the application.  He stated this is a nice application for a very underutilized site.  A supermarket was approved here, and would have generated a lot of traffic.  Mr. Bautz seconded.

 

Mr. Shadiack stated, as Chairman of the Economic Development Committee, we are appreciative of the Kuiken Brothers efforts.   We awarded them our second annual recognition award, and we also nominated them for the 2007 McFlowertown award.  Our nomination was successful, and Kuiken Brothers received that award as well for the best commercial industrial development of the past year.  This will be a fine project.

 

Mr. Meyer thanked Mr. Kuiken for his efforts with this application, and he has agreed to do it for the betterment of the citizens of Roxbury.

 

Roll as follows:  Mr. Zoschak, yes; Mr. Bautz, yes; Mr. Schultz, yes; Mr. Behrens, yes; Mr. Shadiack, yes; Mr. Sweeney, yes; Mr. Rilee, yes; Mr. Meyer, yes.

 

There was a 5 minute recess at 9:00 p.m.

 

PBA-7-17 - GRUBER PARTNERS – KENVIL MEDICAL – FINAL SITE PLAN FOR MEDICAL BUILDING LOCATED ON RT. 46/BERKSHIRE VALLEY RD. BLOCK 4002, LOT 16 IN B-2 ZONE

 

Attorney Larry Kron represented the applicant.  He stated this application is for final site plan.  We have received the reports from Mr. Stern and Mr. Ferriero. We have either agreed to the items or responded.

 

Mr. Stern went over his 5/31/07 report and Mr. Knudsen’s response letter is dated 6/4/07.

 

Items 1, 2, 3 – agreed

Item 4 – deviation – no objection from Mr. Stern

Item 5-9 – agreed

Item 10 – no objection

Item 11 – agreed

Items 12-14 – done

Item 15 – agreed

Items 16, 17, 18 – ok

 

Mr. Ferriero went over his report dated 6/4/07 – response from Mr. Knudsen dated 6/5/07.

 

Item 1 – addressed – no variance required

Item 2 – no objection from Mr. Ferriero

 

Mr. Ferriero stated the remaining incomplete items are minor and should be completed – the applicant has agreed to do all of them.

 

Discussion.

 

Mr. Kron said all items will be completed within 30 days.  If not, we will return to the Board.

 

The Board did not object. 

 

Mr. Germinairo stated there will be a temporary C.O. issued immediately and upon completion of all items, you can get the permanent C.O.  

 

PUBLIC PORTION OPENED

 

No one stepped forward.

 

PUBLIC PORTION CLOSED

 

Mr. Rilee made a motion to approve the application.  Mr. Bautz seconded.

 

Roll as follows:  Mr. Rilee, yes; Mr. Bautz, yes; Mr. Zoschak, yes; Mr. Shadiack, yes; Mr. Behrens, yes; Mr. Sweeney, yes; Mr. Meyer, yes.

 

Correspondence

 

Mr. Meyer stated in the correspondence there is a request for review and recommendation of Ordinance 08-07 and 10-07 for Capital Improvements.

 

Mr. Stern stated in accordance with Section 31 of the MLUL, the Board can make recommendations regarding capital improvements.    The Township Attorney asks that we make a determination of consistency with the Master Plan.  In looking at some of the bond ordinances, the ones I noted that would have some relationship to some component of the Master Plan are expenditures for Landing Road Park, Berkshire Valley Road Park improvements, new DPW facility, water system interconnection. 

 

I don’t see anything that is contrary to our documents.  The Board can make comments on the ordinances if they want to.  It is not something that needs to be voted on.

 

The meeting was adjourned by motion at 9:30.

 

                                                                        Dolores A. DeMasi, Secretary

 

lm/