 |
|
|
|
WORKSHOP MEETING Mr. Giordano called the meeting of the Mendham Township
Planning Board to order at ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Giordano, Mr. Tolley, Mayor Pierson, Mrs. Kinsel,
Mr. Majorossy, Mr. Timpson, Mr. Mountain Absent:
Mr.
D’Emidio Also Present: Mr. Falcon, Attorney; Mr. Kimball,
Planner; and Mr. Balut, Engineer Absent:
John
Aubin, Environmentalist SALUTE
TO THE FLAG
ADEQUATE
NOTICE OF MEETING of the Mendham Township Planning Board was given as
follows: Notice was sent to the Daily Record and the Observer
Tribune on MINUTES
FOR APPROVAL – MENDHAM
GOLF AND TENNIS CLUB – Pump House
Mayor Pierson disclosed that he, Mr. Schrier and Mr. Mountain
had met with Mendham Golf and Tennis Club officials -- Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Gruel
and Mr. Chris Boyle, Golf Course Superintendent, to review problems that had
occurred in the past. The Mayor further disclosed that nothing was discussed
that is relevant to the application before the Planning Board tonight. Chairman
Giordano acknowledged the Mayor’s full disclosure of this meeting. Mr. Michael Lavigne introduced himself as the attorney
representing Mendham Golf and Tennis Club (MG&T) seeking a completeness
determination for the pump house. Also present was Mr. Hal Reynolds, Vice
President of the Club. Mr. Lavigne recalled that MG&T had been before the
Planning Board a month prior for the paddle tennis court application, and that
the history and status of the pump house application was discussed at that time.
It was determined at that meeting that due to the significant amount of time
that had lapsed since the TRC Meeting and obtaining the area of disturbance LOI
from the DEP, the pump house application and plans would be resubmitted to the
Planning Board and consultants. The plans were submitted in early March and the
applicant met with the TRC Committee on March 25, where the application was
deemed administratively complete with the exception of two checklist items, Item
#35-- the Environmental Impact Statement, and Item #36 – the
Environmental Constraints Map. Mr. Lavigne noted that what they are asking the
Board for is similar to the paddle tennis application and with the understanding
and explanation that the Club has retained a wetlands specialist to ultimately
perform a club-wide application for an LOI to be sent to the DEP, as well as a
comprehensive natural resource inventory for the entire Club, Mr. Balut stated that what Mr. Lavigne has indicated is
accurate and noted that he has no problem with granting the waivers and moving
the application forward. Mr. Tolley questioned whether the Club’s request for a
waiver of these same items had been brought up before the Board last year? He
also questioned whether the work had been approved by the Club’s Executive
Committee and the proposed timeframe for completing same. Mr. Lavigne could not recall if it was discussed last year
and noted that the proposal does not include a time frame, but given that it
will take time mark the wetlands in over 160 acres, he estimated several months
but less than a year. Mr. Reynolds stated that the proposal was approved by the
Board of Governors on March 25. Mr. Kimball raised an issue that was included in his
completeness report regarding the fact that everything that has been submitted
by the Club, with the exception of the courts, has been interior to the Club.
Thus, the normal planning issues of how they impact other properties has not
been an issue and for that reason, Mr. Kimball has concurred that it makes sense
to waive the requirement for the checklist item that requires an indication on
the plan of the relationship of the improvements to the adjacent properties. Mr.
Kimball pointed out that, in the future, where other properties are clearly
affected and the relationship of those homes to those improvements are germane,
that information should be provided. It is a normal part of the process and the
Club should consider that in their plan. Mr. Lavigne noted that that point was effectively made at the
recent TRC Meeting and will be made a part of what is being prepared. Ms. Kinsel indicated that a firmer timetable for the study
would be helpful, and Chairman Giordano requested that the applicant provide a
status of the study at the public hearing. Mr. Tolley made a motion to grant the waivers for Item #35--
the Environmental Impact Statement, and Item #36 – the Environmental
Constraint Map with respect to Mendham Golf and Tennis Club pump house, Block
144, Mr. Lavigne stated he would provide public notice for both
the pump house and paddle tennis applications. Chairman Giordano changed the order of business and noted
that the conservation easement ordinance will be discussed first. STEEP
SLOPES/CONSERVATION EASEMENT ORDINANCE – Discussion
Chairman Giordano recognized Mrs. Sara Dean Link as the
presenter for this discussion. Ms. Link referred to the memo she had provided to the Board
regarding the purpose behind pursuing the conservation easement ordinance. She
noted that there were technical problems in that the original ordinance was
added to the Land Use Ordinances but the old ordinance was not deleted and there
were some words missing from the section entitled, “Water Courses.” Mrs.
Link noted that Mr. Roger Clapp’s task was to correct the technical problems
with the original ordinance and also respond to the Planning Board’s request
to have the various environmental areas listed in the ordinance as opposed to
simply saying conservation easements. She stated that Mr. Kimball drafted an
ordinance and sent it to Mr. Clapp who drafted the proposed that was herein
provided to the Board. Mrs. Link explained that the purpose of this discussion
is to give the Planning Board the opportunity to review and approve the
ordinance prior to forwarding same to the Township Committee for adoption. Mr. Falcon indicated that he has had several conversations
over the past week with Mr. Clapp and Mr. Kimball about the desirability of
identifying the substantive basis for requiring conservation easements in
various situations as they arise in connection with applications before the
Board. Mr. Falcon expressed his concern that a number of cases over the last
decade or so have gone to the U.S. Supreme Court having to do with exactions of
easements from applicants in exchange for the receipt of various municipal
permits. Mr. Falcon described the Dolan case in A full discussion ensued among the Board members,
consultants, Mrs. Link and Mr. Ray Nadaskay of the Open Space Committee
regarding easement size, walking easements, stream conservation easements, and
the appropriate definition of protected resources, such as historic sites,
roadscapes, scenic vistas, mature trees, etc. Mrs. Link stated that the way the ordinance is written is
that conservation easements may be required as a condition of approval and this
provides a list of possibilities for the Planning Board to consider each time a
subdivision or site plan is before the Board. Mrs. Link further stated that if
the Board feels it is appropriate, it may ask for a conservation easement on
something included in the ordinance. Mr. Falcon indicated that he believes that Mr. Clapp is
satisfied that each of these items included in the ordinance that may be
requested is elsewhere reflected in the Master Plan or the municipality’s
ordinances. Chairman Giordano referred to a copy of the current paragraph
16-10.8(f) and in consideration of Mr. Nadaskay’s comments, suggested the
following revised, broader verbiage for paragraph 16-10.8(f): “Conservation
easements in favor of the Township may be required to protect any natural or
historic resources, or environmentally sensitive areas as a condition of
approval of a subdivision or site plan.” Mayor Pierson indicated the Township Committee is interested
in all kinds of easements that protect the natural lands and would like to have
as many walkways as possible as a lot of people use them. Chairman Giordano summarized that Mr. Falcon will assist Mr.
Clapp and Mrs. Link with drafting issues related to the first section, the
definition list, and his suggested broad verbiage for paragraph 16-10.8(f). Mrs. Link then referred to paragraph 16.10.10(c) under steep
slopes where there is a question of 15 percent or 25 percent slopes. As a result
of this discussion, Chairman Giordano confirmed for the record that the Board
agreed to 25 percent slopes and tabled further discussion and review of
paragraph 16-10.8(f) pending the results of the meeting with Mr. Falcon, Mr.
Clapp and Mrs. Link. CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION DESIGN
Mr. Kimball referred to the materials he previously
distributed regarding alternative approaches to conservation subdivision design,
such as lot size averaging and cluster development. He described lot size
averaging as a simplifying of the development regulations and cluster
development as setting up very specific standards for essentially trying to
achieve the same goal, which is to preserve large areas of land from
development. Cluster development is the technique utilized to achieve a
community’s goal of preserving large areas of public open space. A full discussion then ensued around the two concepts
described by Mr. Kimball. Mr. Kimball recognized Mr. Ray Nadaskay of the Open Space
Committee and asked him to present the Board with the findings of a study that
had been done by the Open Space Committee regarding the properties in Mr. Nadaskay explained that over six months ago the Open Space Committee had a request from the Planning Board to look at areas in the Township that the Open Space Committee thought would be suitable for cluster zoning. He further explained that a study was initiated and proceeded with a resource tool which allows you to look at topography, steep slopes, historic preservation, and they considered all of these things to determine what was left to develop in the town. They looked at all parcels in the community that are developable for three or more lots, which are delineated on the map provided to the Board (copy attached hereto), designed around resources, and determined that the lots fell into various zones. Mr. Nadaskay stated that in the process, they found in many cases a piece of land next to one of these pieces that was developable into three lots where it would be a great benefit to condense the development into a smaller area to keep more space open, which would be good for homeowners. Mr. Nadaskay further stated that the complete study is available and could form a basis for exactly what the Board is talking about. He suggested that one answer may be overlay a whole new zone called a condensed development zone, which would be based on the basic amount of area allowed which determines the number of units but mandates in ordinance that it is to be done as condensed development. After further discussion, Mayor Pierson requested that Mr.
Kimball make this presentation on conservation subdivision design to the
Township Committee at its next meeting. CORRESPONDENCE
1.
Ten Towns Great Swamp Watershed Management Committee
re: Best Management Practices Award 2.
Morris County Planning Board dated 4/3/03 re: Block
125, Lot 25, Schoolhouse Lane. 3.
Morris County Soil Conservation re: Various ADJOURN
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn
the meeting. The motion was seconded, all aye, and the meeting was
adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Hope Warrington, Secretary |
|
