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

A regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Township of Roxbury 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, Gary Behrens, Charles Bautz, Michael Shadiack, Steven Alford, Robert Schultz, Joseph Schwab, Robert DeFillippo, Richard Zoschak, James Rilee.

 

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

 

Also present:  Dolores DeMasi, Board Secretary.

 

Minutes of 11/7/07

 

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

 

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

 

RESOLUTIONS

 

EXTENSION OF SOIL APPLICATION FOR PRUDENT PUBLISHING

 

                                               ROXBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

                                                                 MAJOR SOIL REMOVAL/RELOCATION

PERMIT EXTENSION

 

Pursuant to Chapter XVII of the General Ordinances of the Township of Roxbury, Article 17-1 et seq. (the "Ordinance), the Roxbury Township Planning Board (the "Board"), having conducted a public hearing pursuant to the Ordinance, does hereby grant to the Applicant identified herein an extension of its Major Soil Permit, subject to the terms and conditions enumerated herein below.

 

1.  Applicant/Permittee:  Prudent Publishing

 

2.  Application Number:  S-10-06

 

3.  Property Identification:  Block 9501, Lot 2

 

4.  Subdivision/Site Plan Approval Date(s):  Amended Preliminary Site Plan, 5/9/01

 

5.  Major Soil Permit Approval Date:  6/21/06

 

6.  Extension Approval Date:  11/7/07

 

7.  Extension Expiration Date:  6/21/08

 

8.         This permit extension is subject to all terms and conditions of the original permit except as follows:

 

            N/A

 

The undersigned does hereby certify that the foregoing is an accurate recitation of the action taken by the Planning Board on the approval date designated hereinabove.

 

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

 

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

 

PBA-07-35 – TARIQ MAHMOOD – FINAL SITE PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON LENEL RD., BLOCK 9501, LOT 6 IN I-1 ZONE

 

                                               ROXBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

                                                                                           RESOLUTION

 

 Decided:  November 7, 2007

 Memorialized:  December 5, 2007

 

IN THE MATTER OF TARIQ MAHMOOD

FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL

BLOCK 9501, LOT 6

APPLICATION NO. PBA-07-35

 

WHEREAS, Tariq Mahmood (hereinafter the "Applicant") applied to the Roxbury Township Planning Board (hereinafter the "Board") for final site plan approval on 9/28/07; and

 

WHEREAS, the application was deemed complete by the Board, and a public hearing was held on 11/7/07; 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 67,127 sq. ft. located in the I-1 Limited Industrial District.  By Resolution memorialized 8/28/02, Applicant was granted preliminary major site plan approval with variances and design waivers to construct an 8,800 sq. ft. warehouse/office building, consisting of 7,800 sq. ft. of warehouse and 1,000 sq. ft. of office.  The Applicant is now before the Board seeking final site plan approval for the as-built building, consisting of 6,300 sq. ft. of warehouse and 2,500 sq. ft. of office.

 

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:

 

As-Built Survey, by James Baker PLS, revised 10/22/07

 

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 10/16/07 (updated 11/7/07)

Paul Ferriero, PE, dated 11/2/07

 

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

 

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

 

James Baker, PLS, surveyor

Reza Hashemi, PE, engineer

Tariq Mahmood, owner

 

6.  The Board finds that the Applicant has constructed the project substantially in accordance with the approved preliminary site plans, subject to the completion of those items set forth in the conditions herein below.  The Board approves the increase in as-built office space to 2,500 sq. ft. from the 1,000 sq. ft. depicted in the approved preliminary site plan.  The Board also approves the deviations of as-built architectural features from those depicted in the approved preliminary site plan, subject to 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 bonded and completed by 11/30/07:

 

(a)  Extend front retaining wall to prevent erosion, or topsoil and grade,

 

(b)  Address outstanding items identified by the Township Engineer (except weather-sensitive items per Condition 2(b) below),

 

(c)  Remove piles of plaster along property perimeter and interior,

 

(d)  Stake trees per plan,

 

(e)  Mulch all plants,

 

(f)  Replace all undersized, dead and marginal plants, and install missing plants.

 

2.  The following items shall be bonded and completed prior to 5/1/08 (regardless of change of property ownership):

 

(a)  The entire building foundation shall be treated with a high-quality coating product to be recommended by the Applicant’s qualified professional and approved by the Township Planner.

 

(b)  Complete outstanding items identified by the Township Engineer as weather-sensitive.

 

3.  The following items shall be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy:

 

(a)  Submission of detention basin volume calculations to satisfaction of Board Engineer,

 

(b)  Submission of properly signed septic as-built with Health Department approval,

 

(c)  Filing of new property Deed as approved by Board Attorney.

 

4.  The following documents shall be reviewed and approved by the Township Attorney and filed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy:

 

(a)  Conservation Easement

(b)  Stormceptor Easement

 

5.  The following conditions from the Preliminary Site Plan Resolution are reiterated:

 

(a)  The Applicant shall cause a new deed to be filed containing restrictions which: (a) provide that the property will be subject to a pro rata assessment if the Township constructs sidewalks along its Lenel Road frontage in the future, and (b) provide that the building will be connected to public water if a water line is extended in the future, and that the property will be subject to a pro-rata assessment with respect to such a water line.  (Condition 2)

 

(b)  Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant will provide to the Township Engineer a maintenance manual for the stormceptors and will grant the Township an access easement to same so that the Township can perform maintenance thereupon should a future owner/tenant fail to do so.  (Condition 3)

 

6.  Per preliminary resolution condition 7.3, wall signs are prohibited.

 

7.  Per preliminary resolution condition 16, outdoor storage and outdoor vehicle maintenance are prohibited.

 

8.  Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, Applicant shall submit to the Board Engineer turning templates for delivery vehicles.  Applicant’s delivery vehicles will be limited to the size that can safety maneuver through the site, as determined by the Board Engineer.

 

9.  Exterior trash dumpsters and/or containers are prohibited unless approved by the Board.

 

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

 

11.  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.

 

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 11/7/07.

 

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

 

Discussion.

 

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

 

PBA-07-31 – VIVIAN LIST – SUBDIVISION FOR 2 LOTS LOCATED ON FERRO-MONTE AVE., BLOCK 2604, LOT 1 IN R-4 ZONE

 

                                               ROXBURY TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

                                                                   RESOLUTION OF MEMORIALIZATION

 

 Decided:  November 7, 2007

 Memorialized:  December 5, 2007

 

IN THE MATTER OF VIVIAN LIST

MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL

BLOCK 2604, LOT 1

APPLICATION NO. PBA-07-31

 

WHEREAS, Vivian List (hereinafter the "Applicant") applied to the Roxbury Township Planning Board (hereinafter the "Board") for minor subdivision approval on 8/9/07; and

 

WHEREAS, the application was deemed complete by the Board, and public hearings were held on 11/7/07; 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 30,716 square feet (0.70 acres) located within the R-4 Residence District (7,500 square feet minimum lot size requirement). It is a corner lot with frontage on Ferro-Monte Avenue and Wheeler Street. The property is developed with a single-family dwelling exhibiting nonconforming front yard setbacks of 11.7 feet to Ferro-Monte Avenue and 11.5 feet to Wheeler Street. Four detached garages are located to the rear of the site that are accessed from Wheeler Street. The home was recently connected to public water and is also served by sewer. Curbs and sidewalks are not present on the property or in the surrounding area.  The property adjoins single-family lots zoned R-4 located to the north, south and east. Situated to the west is a paper street named Chester Avenue (40-foot right-of-way) and further west is a 20-foot wide easement. Adjoining the easement is the Morristown & Erie Railroad zoned OS Open Space.

 

2.  The development of the subject property proposed by the Applicant comprises minor subdivision approval to create two new single-family lots from the existing 30,716 square foot parcel.  Proposed Lot 1.01 along Wheeler Street will encompass 12,321 square feet after right-of-way dedication, and proposed Lot 1.03 along Ferro-Monte Avenue 8,006 square feet after right-of-way dedication. The remainder Lot 1.02 containing the existing dwelling will encompass 8,636 square feet after right-of-way dedication. All lots satisfy the minimum R-4 District lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet. All lots will be developed with single-family dwellings serviced by public water and sewer.

 

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 Lakeland Surveying, Inc.

 

-          Sheet L-1, Cover Sheet, revised 7/23/07

-          Sheet L-2, Minor Subdivision, revised 7/23/07

 

Prepared by Jaman Engineering Associates

 

-          Sheet J-1, Grading Plan, revised 8/6/07

-          Sheet J-2, Soil Erosion & Sediment Control Plan,

                revised 8/6/07

-          Sheet J-3, Standard Details, revised 8/6/07

 

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

 

Wetlands Preliminary Study by Professional

Environmental Associates, dated 6/12/07

 

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, AICF, PP, CLA, dated 10/31/07

Paul Ferriero, PE, PP, CME, dated 11/5/07

 

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, Township Engineer, two letters

regarding water and sewer availability,

both dated 12/30/05

 

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

 

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

 

Vivian List, owner

Steven Smith, PP, PLS, planner

 

9.  The development of the subject property as proposed by the Applicant involves continuation of pre-existing non-conformities with respect to front yard setbacks of the existing house on Lot 1.02.

 

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

 

-               A design waiver is granted from Section 13-8.602A with respect to insufficient pavement width along Ferro-Monte Avenue (20.8’ existing vs. 30’ required), because widening in this area would create a non-uniform pavement width.

 

-               A conditional design waiver is granted from Section 13-8.602A with respect to insufficient pavement width along Wheeler Street (20’ existing vs. 30’ required).  The waiver is granted conditioned upon the concurrence of the Township Engineer that pavement widening is not desirable.  If the Township Engineer finds that pavement widening is desirable, the Applicant may either comply with the Township Engineer’s requirements or seek further consideration of the matter by the Board.

 

-               Design waivers are granted from Sections 13-8.608 and 13-8.610A as curbs and sidewalks, respectively, are not provided.  These improvements are not present within this neighborhood.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board does hereby approve the minor subdivision 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 filing of the minor subdivision deeds:

 

1.  In order to promote greater consistency with existing front yard setbacks in the neighborhood, the owners of Lots 1.01 and 1.03, when they submit their lot grading plans, may locate their dwellings with a front yard setback of as little as 25’.  Township officials may encourage said owners to implement a 25’ front yard setback, but may not compel them to do so.

 

2.  Applicant shall receive sewer capacity allocation from the Governing Body.  (Section 13-8.501)

 

3.  The zoning data table on sheet L-1 shall be corrected or eliminated since the information is already provided on sheet J-1.

 

4.  A 25-foot rear yard setback shall be depicted on Lots 1.02 and 1.03 in relation to Lot 1.01.

 

5.  A trailer home, panel truck and trailer container are located on Chester Avenue.  These vehicles appear associated with the current property owner and shall be removed prior to filing deeds.

 

6.  All existing garages and pavement on Lot 1.01 shall be removed prior to the filing of deeds.

 

7.  Lot numbers shall be verified by the Township Tax Assessor.

 

8.  Minor subdivision deeds and deed descriptions for all lots and the sight easements and right-of-way dedications shall be submitted for review and approval by the Board Engineer and Board Attorney as well as the Township Attorney.

 

9.  The sight triangle easements shall be noted for dedication to the Township.

 

10.  Minor subdivision deeds shall recite that vehicular access to Chester Avenue is prohibited.

 

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

 

12.  Regarding Sheet L-1, Note 7 shall be removed, as sidewalks are not proposed.

 

13.  Regarding Sheet L-2:

 

                (a)  The sight triangle easement at the corner of Ferro Monte and Wheeler shall be adjusted so that it does not go through the existing building.

 

                (b)  The setback to the existing dwelling on Lot 1.02 from Ferro Monte shall be shown to the porch only (11.7’) and the zone table on Sheet L-1 shall be modified accordingly.

 

                (c)  A 8’ offset dimension shown from the existing three car garage on Lot 1.01 shall be removed from the plan.

 

                (d)  Lot 1.01 is shown to have four accessory structures on it.  A note shall be added to the plan that the structures are to be removed before the filing of the subdivision deeds.  Likewise, all fence that crosses the proposed lot lines, driveway, etc., shall be removed.

 

                (e)  Lot closure calculations and deed descriptions shall be provided for review and approved by the Board Engineer.

 

                (f)  The dimensions of the existing and proposed lots shall be more clearly shown on the subdivision map.  For example, the bearing and distance for the proposed lot line of 1.01 that is parallel to Ferro Monte Avenue is shown in Lot 1.02 and vice versa.  The overall line distances shall be on the outside of the exterior lot lines and the new distances shown on the inside of the lots.

 

                (g)  The bearings and distances shall be added to all sight triangle easements.

 

14.  Regarding Sheet J-1:

 

                (a)  The total lot coverage and overall area of disturbance shall be provided.  It appears that if the proposed lots are developed to the maximum permitted lot coverage, the subdivision will be classified as a minor project in the Township stormwater ordinance.  Based on this, a note shall be added to the plan that the development of each lot shall be subject to an individual lot development plan with the stormwater designed in accordance with the provisions of 13-8.402.A.1.

 

                (b)  A note shall be added to the plan that the foundations for all existing structure to be removed shall be completely removed and backfilled with properly compacted structural fill.

 

15.  Regarding Sheet J-2, the Soil Easement Sediment Control Plan shall note that the plan must be certified by the Morris County Soil Conservation District.

 

16.  Regarding Sheet J-3:

 

                (a)  The utility connection details shall be subject to the approval of the respective utility companies.

 

                (b)  The reference for the drywell design standards shall be updated to be consistent with the current Township stormwater ordinance.  The calculations shall be amended accordingly.

 

17.  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 [date] and memorialized by Resolution on [date].”

 

18.  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.”

 

19.  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, if any, shall be paid in full prior to filing minor subdivision deeds.

 

20.  Pursuant to Section 13-7.829, the Applicant shall pay a mandatory development fee equal to one percent (1.0%) of the total equalized assessed valuation of the residential development.  Fifty percent (50%) of the fee shall be posted prior to the issuance of any building permit and the remainder paid prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

 

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

 

22.  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.

 

23.  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.

 

24.  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 11/7/07.

 

Mr. Sweeney made a motion to approve the resolution.  Mr. Bautz seconded. 

 

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

 

Mr. Meyer announced Application PBA-07-11 – R. J. Investors will not be heard and is carried to 1/9/08.

 

AGENDA

 

PBA-07-22 – TOWER HILL ESTATES – SUBDIVISION FOR 12 LOTS LOCATED ON BEEMAN PLACE/SHEARMAN PLACE/HILLSIDE AVE., BLOCK 3602,LOT 9 IN R-3 ZONE

 

Attorney John Inglesino represented the application.  He said they have submitted revised plans and have received two reports from Russell Stern updated 11/30/07 and 12/3/07.  We are in agreement with most of the comments in the reports.  Mr. Stern calls for reverse frontage buffering, but it would be in the conservation area.  We will do the best we can.  We will replace some trees and will do the best we can.

 

Mr. Stern said that is reasonable.  If they put as many trees as they can, the Board can grant a flexible waiver.

 

The applicant agreed to put the trees in subject to Mr. Stern’s approval.

 

Mr. Inglesino stated regarding curbing on Hillside Avenue, there is no curbing there now.  We would ask for a waiver.

 

Mr. Rilee stated there is some discussion at the County and State about redoing that intersection.  I would suggest it be contingent on the County actions.

 

Mr. Zoschak said there is also a drainage problem there and I think the curbing would help with that.

 

Mr. Matarazzo stated they received a review letter from the County in June and they made some recommendations and made no mention of curbs.

 

Mr. Zoschak said this came up since June.

 

Discussion.

 

It was determined the matter will be left open until the time of final, and the Board may grant a flexible waiver.

 

Mr. Inglesino stated all other comments in Mr. Stern’s review letters are acceptable.

 

Mr. Stern said there were some questions about the size of the proposed homes and who would be maintaining the detention basin.

 

Mr. Inglesino said it would be maintained by a Homeowner’s Association.

 

There was discussion on the detention basin access.

 

Mr. Ferriero recommended the use of turf stone or grass stone (cement).

 

Mr. Stern said there was also a question of whether or not a fence should go in the conservation easement.  That is so that fencing could go down to the existing stone wall.  We have allowed that in other cases.

 

Mr. Stern asked if there will be any model homes.

 

Jerry Rumplick, architect, was sworn in.  He stated he is the owner’s representative and architect.  He said there will possibly be a model home.  He has a plan of a home, but is not sure they will all be the same.  All the homes won’t look alike.  He showed a rendering of one home (marked A-6).  The rendering shows a 2,800 sq. ft. 4-bedroom, 2 ½ bath, 3-car garage model.  We are very early on this.  He said there would be porches on some, with different facades and rooflines.  We would make them look different from the back as well.

 

Mr. Stern asked if the Beeman Place road extension is wholly within in the existing easement between Lots 19 and 20.

 

Mr. Matarazzo stated yes, it is all within the 50 foot easement.

 

Mr. Stern asked about the property owners of Lots 19 and 20 and the change in the appearance of those properties as a result of the cutting of Beeman Place and Shearman.  Have you provided any additional landscaping on those properties?

 

Mr. Rumplick stated we have submitted plans to the homeowners and have made some changes suggested by them.

 

Mr. Zoschak asked how the Zoning Officer would handle the shed in the front yard on Lot 20.

 

Mr. Stern said the resolution would mention that the shed is an existing condition.

 

Mr. Germinario asked about the status of the deed dedication with Lot 20.

 

Donna Frances, owner of Lot 20, stepped forward.  She stated she has verbally agreed to convey the easement area.

 

Mr. Rumplick stated he also met with the owners of Lot 10 and told them the drainage problem will be reduced and the applicant has agreed to do some berming there.

 

Mr. Inglesino stated the applicant is in agreement with the remaining items in the 12/3/07 report.

 

Mr. Bautz said there is a gravel driveway along Hillside Avenue that it was suggested would be used for construction vehicles. 

 

Mr. Matarazzo stated we would be using that in the beginning to avoid going by the other homeowners.  Once the detention basin is in, the road will not be available for construction vehicles.

 

Mr. Stern said the road also serves as access to the high school and they will be providing a sidewalk along Hillside Avenue.  There will have to be a detailed survey and the Township Engineer will have to be consulted on the actual alignment.

 

Mr. Ferriero said he has reviewed the revised plans and most of the issued in his report have been addressed and can be resolved as conditions of approval.

 

Mr. Ferriero stated regarding 1A, Sheet 2, Item 2B1A, if the sheds on Lot 8 are to remain there needs to be documentation.

 

Mr. Germinario stated there would have to be an easement.

 

Mr. Inglesino stated we will either ask the owner to remove the sheds or will require an easement.  The issue will be resolved between the applicant and the owner of the sheds.

 

After discussion, it was determined Mr. Ferriero will meet with the applicant to work out the other open items without substantial changes to the plans.  The items in the memo from Melanie Michetti will also be addressed.

 

PUBLIC PORTION OPENED

 

No one stepped forward.

 

PUBLIC PORTION CLOSED

 

Mr. Rilee made a motion to approve the application subject to all items agreed to.  Mr. DeFillippo seconded.

 

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

 

Mr. Zoschak stated this is a good application and the applicant worked well with the residents.

 

PBA-07-32 – ETEL REALTY – SOIL RELOCATION PERMIT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON RT. 206, BLOCK 9201, LOT 2 IN B-1A ZONE

 

PBA-07-25 – ETEL REALTY – SITE PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON RT. 206, BLOCK 9201, LOT 2 IN B-1A ZONE

 

Attorneys Fredric Azrak and Peter McArthur represented the applicant.

 

The following exhibits were marked into evidence:

 

A-16 – Site Plan rendering revised 10/15/07

A-17 – Alternate Concept Plan

A-18 – Septic Approval letter from Matthew Zachok dated 11/16/07

 

Mr. Azrak referred to exhibit A-17 and described the changes that have been made to the plans since the last hearing.  He said initially there was 4 feet between the loading space and the building and we now have 5 feet.  A parking variance was required, and that has been resolved.  When we decided to consolidate the two buildings, we were able to get an additional parking space.  At the last hearing there was concern about the southernmost area where there is an island that has been increased in size.  We pushed the parking down farther and moved the two handicap spaces to the end where there is less activity. 

 

Mr. Behrens asked what the width of the driveway is from the rear of the car to the curb there.

 

Mr. Bodolsky said anyone backing out there would be up against the curb.  However, a truck would not be able to go that way.  There is a sign directing trucks to bear left there.

 

Mr. Behrens asked if the trucks can make the right turn.

 

Mr. Bodolsky said yes, but not a tractor trailer.

 

Mr. Rilee asked Mr. Stern if he had indicated at the last hearing that there was deficiency in plantings.

 

Mr. Stern said yes.  They have requested a waiver from a street tree planting along Route 206.  The reason I had suggested the center planting island was to provide some additional greenery between the roadway and the building.  One of the end islands is occupied by a transformer and another is occupied by storm sewer structures, and another by the septic field.

 

Mr. Azrak stated the transformer is now at an alternate location.  Because the end island on the southerly side had been increased, another alternate is that there is the potential of putting the transformer there.  We would then stripe where the transformer is.  We would put it over the proposed well.

 

Mr. Bodolsky said the likely spot will be in what is labeled as the alternate location, subject to the power company.  If it goes there, we could put a tree in the other island.  I disagree with Mr. Stern on what he is calling end islands.  There were several discretionary end islands put in.  One was the one we are eliminating in the front.  It is not required that we put it there.  It was my discretion.  The one next to space#37 is not required by the number of spaces.  I could have just put asphalt there and striped that area.  I don’t consider it to be a requisite planting spot.  The second spot is opposite space #46.  It is the end of a row, but is not an end island.  The one I concur with is the one in the vicinity of space #1.  That is where there is a series of stormwater management tanks.  If the transformer pad goes next to space #33 or space #26, we can put a tree in there.

 

Mr. Zoschak stated you should put a tree next to space #38, and one next to #33.  That is the easiest place to screen the transformer with landscaping.  On the island near #26 and #27, can you put a planter in there?

 

Mr. Bodolsky said yes and landscaping is shown on the plans there.

 

Mr. Stern asked if the stormceptor could go to the north of space #48.

 

Mr. Bodolsky said no and explained why not.

 

Mr. Azrak said it now comes down to one tree that we are missing.

 

Mr. Stern said next to space #46 where the septic field is located about 1 ½ feet from the face of curb is the end of the parking bay and historically, in my interpretation of the ordinance, that is where we are requesting shade trees.  I believe one would go there and one would go in the location of the stormwater structure.

 

Mr. Bodolsky said it will require a design waiver.  I cannot move the septic.

 

Mr. Bautz said he has concern about the traffic flow and cars backing out of stalls 22, 23, 24, 25 and 33.  If this building were subdivided, would the handicap spaces be split for each store, or would it stay at one end?

 

Mr. Bodolsky said this is the layout that it would be.  There may be as many as 5 tenants.

 

Mr. Bautz said if there are 5 tenants, I would have a concern about ingress and egress.

 

Mr. Azrak said we will not have a high volume use here.  We are looking at retail.

 

Mr. Ferriero said regarding the end island, would they have to be maintained with a vacuum truck when the tanks are being maintained?  There will be a traffic control problem then.  That would probably only happen annually.  I don’t think keeping the manhole in the island would make the maintenance any easier.  What is the length of the loading area?

 

Mr. Bodolsky said it is 60 feet.  The parking stalls ahead of it are 24 feet.

 

Mr. Azrak said the applicant has indicated if you want it out in the traveled way, we will put it there.

 

Mr. Ferriero said if you are going to grant the design waiver, maintenance of the tanks is not really a compelling argument. 

 

Mr. Bodolsky said because there is inflow from two directions, we need a junction manhole followed by the stormceptor.

 

Mr. Ferriero stated that is a more compelling point.  It will be difficult to plant a tree there.

 

Charles Olivo, traffic consultant for the applicant stepped forward.  In answer to questions from Mr. Azrak, Mr. Olivo stated he reviewed Ptl. Prendergast’s report dated June of 2006 that he had compiled and sent to the D.O.T.   I agree with his assessment of the intersection and traffic data.  Over 3 ½ years from 2003 until June of 2006 there were 93 accidents at the intersection of International Drive and Route 206.  The most prevalent accident is the left turn movement traveling northbound on Rt. 206.  A number of the vehicles are being struck by the oncoming southbound traffic.  There is a left hand turn bay.  You can make the turn but you do have to yield to oncoming south traffic.  What Ptl. Prendergast found is that there is a bit of a perception problem there.  47% of those accidents were as a result of that left turn.  32 accidents were a result of the right turn movement from International Drive South to Route 206 South.  That seems to be as a result of the radius. 

 

Mr. Azrak stated there was a question about the left hand turn bay.

 

Mr. Olivo said of the 93 accidents, 3 accidents were a rear-end in the left turn bay.  We have requested a copy of those reports.  The main concern has to do with the right turn movement onto Route 206 South and the left turn into International Drive.

 

Mr. Behrens said we had said there should be no left turn into the site going northbound.

 

Mr. Olivo said this is a low intensity use.  There will be only be about 37 to 38 vehicles entering the site in the morning according to the DOT’s trip generation calculations.  The DOT is reviewing that now and we are waiting for their comments.

 

Mr. Alford referred to A-17 and asked the distance between the end of parking space 26 and the curb.

 

Mr. Olivo said it is 24 feet.

 

Mr. Alford said a straight job truck is 30 feet.  If he made a left into the site going north and a car backed out from that stall, wouldn’t he still be stuck in the south bound lane of the road?

 

Mr. Olivo said the throat is about 30 feet wide.  He would have room to sit there.  There is a chance that someone backing out there would delay a vehicle from turning in, but there will be low trips to the site and the deliveries would be happening during off-peak times.

 

Mr. Ferriero stated the Board needs to talk about the types of proposed uses.  When the Health Department talks about a low volume user, they mean a low volume water user.  For example, a Dunkin Donuts is a high traffic generator and a high volume water generator.  A Blockbuster Video is a low volume water generator but a high volume traffic generator. 

 

Mr. Olivo said the DOT does not have anything written into the access code, but they do look at sites like this, and given the type of use that’s going in, it would require a higher level of review.

 

Mr. Ferriero said they won’t see that at the time they give an access permit to this site.

 

Mr. Olivo said they could qualify the permit to only allow for certain types of uses.

 

Mr. DeFillippo said the issue of the left into the site is really not a volume issue, it is a safety issue.

 

Mr. Zoschak said on a busy weekend a lot of traffic comes out of the Trade Zone at the unsignalized right turn.  If that will be even a moderate volume site, the left hand queuing lane will be wrong.  Someone might have to wait a couple of lights to make that turn.  There will be an accident there.

 

Mr. Rilee said that is at the very beginning of the left turn.  Isn’t that a conflict with someone going into the left turn lane and immediately stopping for a turn into this site?

 

Mr. Olivo said that is about 500 feet to the end of the taper lane.  It is one of the longest I’ve seen.

 

Mr. Stern asked where it tapers going southbound.

 

Mr. Olivo said it is just about right in front of the driveway access point.

 

Discussion.

 

Mr. Zoschak suggested the Board may want to hire a traffic consultant.

 

The letter from Ptl. Prendergast dated June 24, 2006  was marked A-19.

 

It was determined the applicant will look at doing away with the left for the next hearing.

 

Mr. Azrak asked what else needs to be addressed before the next hearing.

 

Mr. Meyer stated the applicant’s professionals should contact the Board professionals and determine what issues still need to be addressed.

 

Mr. Ferriero requested a copy of the updated plans and he suggested Mr. Bodolsky do some research on the buffering issue.

 

Mr. Rilee stated the Board is considering granting several design waivers.  It seems the applicant doesn’t want to lose any building area.  It seems the applicant does not want to be inconvenienced in any way.  That should be considered by the applicant. 

 

Mr. Meyer said if the size of the building were reduced by 1,000 +/- square feet, would some of the design and waiver requests go away?  Yes.  This is a very visible property and we want it to look good and we want it to be safe.

 

Mr. Zoschak stated the report from Matt Zachok says the septic is at the limit.  Consider reducing the size of the building.

 

The application was carried to 1/16/08.  The applicant granted an extension of time to 1/31/08.

 

New Business

 

Villages at Roxbury - Mr. Germinario stated the Indiana Bat’s mating season is over and the Villages site will be removing all the trees in the development area of 32 acres.  We have cleared all the conditions pertaining to that.  They will be posting a restoration bond for the clearing.  This does not require any Board approval.

 

Mr. Rilee stated he would like to see the boundaries of the clearing area marked.

 

Mr. Germinario stated they are going to satisfy Michael Kobylarz as far as the limits of the clearing.

 

Prudent Publishing – Mr. Stern stated in 2001 the approval for Prudent Publishing was modified and they were going to construct it in two phases.  They want to move ahead.  They now need more warehouse space and they want to break the warehouse space in half and create a warehouse addition at phase 1 of 21,790 sq. ft., then they will do phase 2, and then phase 3.  All site improvements will be constructed.  The approval of the field change would be subject to the approval of the Township Engineer and Mr. Stern.  The COAH regulation in effect at the time of construction would apply.

 

The meeting was adjourned by motion at 9:30 p.m.

 

                                                            Dolores DeMasi, Secretary

 

lm/