|
MINUTES
MENDHAM
TOWNSHIP
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 21, 2004
Chairman Giordano called the meeting of the Mendham
Township Planning Board to order at
7:40 p.m.
ROLL
CALL:
Present:
Mr. Giordano, Mr. Tolley, Mr. D’Emidio, Mrs. Link, Mr. Mountain
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ADEQUATE NOTICE of
this meeting of the Mendham Township
Planning Board was given as follows: Notice
was sent to the DAILY RECORD and the OBSERVER
TRIBUNE on
January
8, 2004
.
Notice was posted on the Bulletin Board in the Township Hall in
Brookside
,
New Jersey
on
January 8, 2004
, and Notice was filed with the Township Clerk on
January
8, 2004
.
STATEMENT
OF EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURE: “In
case of an emergency requiring the evacuation of this room there are two
emergency exit doors along the side that you entered.
In the foyer you may then either exit down the open stairwell to the
exterior or enter the enclosed stairwell and exit to the exterior at the bottom.
Then please move away from the building until instructed that it is safe
to re-enter.”
MINUTES
FOR APPROVAL --
October
15, 2003
– vote all aye.
January
5, 2004
-- vote all aye
BANKO MINOR SUBDIVISION – APPLICATION 03-06
Mr. Michael Rodgers introduced himself as counsel for the
applicant and noted there were two open questions of variances and the
conservation easement with the minor subdivision application. He
said there were three witnesses present – the professional engineer to
describe the changes that have been made to the plan, a certified forester to
describe the forest management plan and how it protects the property, and a land
use planner to confirm what was presented at the last meeting.
Professional engineer, Mr. Fantina, said that changes to the
plan were made in accordance with the reports of the Township professionals.
He noted that one of the major changes is that they have moved the septic
and it is no longer disturbing slopes as shown on sheets 2 and 3, which he said
had been a main concern. Mr. Rodgers
stated that the percolation test results passed.
Mr. Fantina further said that he had made several notes on the plan based
on the comments from Mr. Kimball and Mr. Balut, and had responded to Mr.
Aubin’s comments in writing. He
also said there was the technical matter of needing a variance for the driveway
distance to the property line.
Chairman Giordano requested comments and questions from the
professionals.
Mr. Balut stated that everything in his report dated January
15 had been satisfied with the exception of Item #8 regarding the addition of
the passing lane and drywells, which Mr. Fantina had indicated he would do, and
Mr. Balut would like to see this on the plans.
Mr. Fantina said that was handled on sheet 2 in note form in Note #6, and
as a condition of approval, he would be happy to show it on the plan.
Mr. Kimball stated he issued a report on the revised plans
dated January 15, 2004, and noted that the major change affecting his original
report was the addition of the variance request as Mr. Fantina has indicated.
Mr. Aubin referred to his report dated January 13, 2004, and
stated that Mr. Fantina had provided him with all of the requested information,
and said he certainly likes to see the septic system out of the steep slopes.
Mr. Falcon confirmed the condition of approval regarding Item
#8 and the need for the passing lane and drywells to be shown on the plans.
Mr. Falcon swore in the witnesses, Mr. Tom Doty, Certified
Forester, and Ms. Nancy Weaver, Professional Planner.
Mr. Tom Doty stated his credentials for the record in order
to provide the Board and the public with the opportunity to present any
questions pertaining to his qualifications.
Since there were no questions from the Board or the public, he was
accepted by the Board as an expert in the field of forestry.
Mr. Doty stated that he had prepared the Forest Management
Plan (FMP) for the Banko property as it stands today and noted that they have
had an FMP since 1986, and they have accomplished their goals.
He said that the Farmland Assessment Act requires five (5) acres of
farmland for assessment and an approved FMP.
Mr. Doty said he is one of many foresters that can write a FMP, which is
approved by the NJ Forestry Service, and if you don’t have a plan, you can be
denied farmland assessment. He said
the purpose of the FMP is for landowners who want to do the right thing with
their wooded lots and manage their forest for their interests, crops, etc.
Regarding retaining dead trees, he said a well-balanced approach is
needed and some dead and diseased trees remain so that organisms have a place to
dwell. Mr. Doty said he is familiar
with the Banko FMP and it includes timber stand improvement, which is individual
tree selection, and does not call for clear cutting.
He further said that the purpose of the FMP is to protect the wetlands.
Mr. Rodgers asked Mr. Doty if a conservation easement that prohibited
activity in the forest would be good or bad, and Mr. Doty stated it would be
restrictive and negative. Mr. Doty
also stated that this property lends itself to effective forest management.
Chairman Giordano opened the discussion to questions from the
Board.
Mr. Mountain noted that it wasn’t his understanding that
conservation easements and FMPs have to be exclusive of one another and asked
Mr. Doty if it wasn’t possible to have a conservation easement with conditions
in certain types of FMPs. Mr. Doty
said yes, and it would depend on the wording of the conservation easement and
the landowner and noted he would be against a restrictive conservation easement.
Mr. Mountain asked if there were non-mechanized methods that are
reasonable options for property owners to remove trees that are not more
difficult and can accomplish the same goals as mechanized options.
Mr. Doty said there are Amish gentlemen from
Pennsylvania
that
specialize in small properties and use horses or manual or physical labor.
Mr. Mountain asked if that would be the option Mr. Doty would prefer in
an area with significant slopes, and Mr. Doty said that option is available if
he knows the landowner would want to do that.
Mr. Tolley asked if mechanized vehicles are being used in the
current FMP, and Mr. Banko said yes. Mr.
Doty said they have used mechanized vehicles without damaging the property.
Mr. Doty said that a FMP is written for the property owner and submitted
to the NJ Forestry Service for their approval and is a 10-year plan and can be
15 years. He said the Forester
approves the FMP initially, then the tax assessor, and then the forester and the
landowner follow that plan. Mr. Doty
said that the Banko FMP is a 10-year plan that was revisited and renewed in
1998. Mr. Tolley asked if there was
anything that could cancel a 10-year program, and Mr. Doty said that if the
landowner is just in it to get farmland assessment and doesn’t follow the FMP,
the program is decertified. He
further said the landowner can back out of the farmland assessment but will be
penalized with a roll back in taxes.
Mr. Tolley asked if the FMP carries with the original
property owner with the subdivision of the property and two separate property
owners. Mr. Rodgers said it is the
owner’s intention to do whatever is necessary to qualify both lots for
farmland assessment. Mr. Tolley
asked if a buyer of the property would have to buy into the FMP, and Mr. Doty
said no, not if they so choose.
Mr. Rodgers stated that the applicant is seeking no easement
requirement, but if one were needed, they would like it to be sufficiently
liberal to have the FMP that will qualify for farmland assessment.
Mr. Tolley restated that what the applicant is trying to accomplish is
that as long as the property owner has an approved FMP, the property owner wants
relief from a standard conservation easement that will qualify for farmland
assessment, and Mr. Rodgers said yes.
Mrs. Link read aloud the first condition of a standard
conservation easement form and said we would be allowing dead trees or invasives
to stay or be taken out and it doesn’t allow the taking out of healthy trees
for timber standing improvement. She
said the Environmental Commission (EC) has worked with two different foresters
in tow of our parks who feel strongly that we should not be cutting any trees on
slopes over 25%, and a great deal of the Banko property is slopes over 25%.
In terms of thinning trees and opening up canopies, deer damage was
mentioned, and if you’ve ever been to Jockey Hollow, you will see where the
canopy has been opened up, there is no regeneration of trees on the ground
because of the deer and what you get is acres and acres of Japanese barberry.
Mrs. Link further stated that timber-standing improvement to qualify for
farmland assessment is something that the EC does not agree with.
She also said that she thinks Mr. Rodgers has a misunderstanding of our
local tree protection ordinance that prohibits any tree cutting and the
ordinance does not prohibit any tree cutting, but what it does is require a
permit for any tree of 24” or greater and requires a permit to take down a
tree over 6” in diameter in a buffer area, but everything else is fair game
for a chainsaw. Mrs. Link stated
that the EC feels strongly that the only way to protect the forests is with a
conservation easement.
Mr. Tolley asked about the regeneration on the Banko
property, and Mr. Doty said there is regeneration and invasives, which have been
addressed with Mr. Banko and he’s done the best he can to maintain and manage
it. He further said that in terms of
nature years and succession, it is accomplishing and working.
Mr. Tolley asked if the trees would fall down if there were just a
conservation easement with no FMP, and Mr. Doty said yes.
Mr. Tolley said in that case, there would be no plan and that’s what
occurred at Jockey Hollow.
Chairman Giordano said he understands the concept that, on
occasion, live trees have to come down for the health of the other existing
trees, and pursuant to any sort of farmland assessment, there needs to be a
certain amount of harvesting in order to qualify for the $500 per year income
generation. He asked Mr. Doty, in
his professional opinion, how often it is the case that live trees are taken
down for the health of the forest versus taking some down in order to generate
the $500 the landowner needs to get the farmland assessment.
Mr. Doty said that you have to prove two previous years of farming
activity and that could be with receipts for firewood, mushrooms, or other
products off of the land. Mr. Doty
said that the majority of the time that trees are taken down is for the health
of the forest.
Chairman Giordano asked why would it be a problem,
considering Mrs. Link’s commentary with respect to the ordinance, if removing
trees on a very steep slope area, in that, it’s not a specific prohibition,
and Mr. Doty said it takes away the flexibility in certain instances where he
may need to harvest, and if it’s a sensitive area, it can be done properly.
Chairman Giordano referred to a previous application where restrictions
were put in the conservation easement with respect to utilization of hand tools
only and no equipment, and he asked Mr. Doty if that is something that leads to
his point of tree removal being properly done on steep slopes.
Mr. Doty said that on this certain property, the majority of tree
harvestry has not been in the areas that are being discussed.
Chairman Giordano asked if the utilization of hand tools is something
that is onerous or is that something as a professional that we should be putting
into areas with steep slopes. Mr. Doty said the equipment would need to be
clarified and there are other alternatives such as the horse option.
Mr. Tolley asked if this discussion is about cutting two or
three trees down a year, is that reasonable for the value to be needed to get
farmland assessment, which is a tax issue. Mr.
Doty stated that the trees per acre in the current plan is 477 on 16 acres.
Mr. Tolley noted that at least there is a plan and it is better than
having no plan at all. He said there
are conservation easements where property owners don’t know where the boundary
lines are and with no plan or monitoring, they will do what they want.
Mr. Aubin stated that he personally does not see a conflict
between the conservation easement and a good FMP, and in the context of timber
standing improvement, he thinks it’s a good idea to have the conservation
easement and allow the FMP. He
further said that he didn’t think it would be a great hardship upon the
property owner to come to the Tree Protection Committee if tree removal was
necessary on steep slopes.
Mr. Balut asked Mr. Doty if trees are planted in the FMP, and
Mr. Doty said yes, especially with the deer issue.
Mr. Balut asked Mr. Doty if he provides these services for residents of
Morris
County
, and
Mr. Doty said yes, they charge fees for their services to offset costs.
Mr. Balut asked Mr. Doty if he prepared FMPs for property owners not
interested in tax breaks, and Mr. Doty said yes, he has done that in
Chatham
Township
.
Mr. Rodgers asked Mr. Doty if trees could be removed with a
lightweight tractor on steep slopes without doing damage, and Mr. Doty said yes.
Mrs. Link stated that a conservation easement on slopes of
25% or greater is being discussed, and there are areas on that property with
slopes that are less than that. She
said it is our responsibility to protect and preserve this property for the next
500-1000 years, and since Mr. Banko and Mr. Doty won’t be there forever, we
are looking at protecting that forest for as long as possible, and the EC feels
the best way to do that is to have a conservation easement on the property.
Mr. Rodgers then called Nancy Weaver, Professional Planner,
of John Cilo Associates to provide testimony.
Ms. Nancy Weaver stated her credentials for the record in
order to provide the Board and the public with the opportunity to present any
questions pertaining to her qualifications.
Since there were no questions from the Board or the public, she was
accepted by the Board as an expert in the field of planning.
Ms. Weaver stated that she had viewed the Banko property and
the neighborhood, the Mendham Township Zoning Ordinance and the plans prepared
by Mr. Fantina. She said the shape
of the property necessitates variances for frontage, the lot geometry circle and
the driveway lot line distance and provided a full explanation of the variances.
Mr. Rodgers requested that the map of the area showing the
two R-10 lots dated
January
21, 2004
, be entered into the record as Exhibit A-2.
Ms. Weaver provided photos showing the existing dwelling, the
position of the proposed driveway, the pond area and the forested area.
She stated that granting the necessary variances outweighed the
detriments by preserving the ten-acre zoning in this area and preserves the
traditional rural character of the Township.
Ms. Weaver stated there were no negative criteria in granting these
variances as they will not impair the intent of the Master Plan and will
maintain the existing character of the neighborhood.
Chairman Giordano opened the discussion to questions from
the Board and the professionals.
Mr. Kimball stated that the planner has addressed the
criteria except for the one on the impact of the public good, and we will need
to hear from the public.
Mr. D’Emidio made a motion to open the meeting to the
public; Mr. Tolley seconded the motion; vote all aye.
Chairman Giordano asked if the were any members of the
public who had questions of the experts.
Mr. Ralph Rhodes introduced himself as a member of the
Environmental Commission and reiterated that the EC is concerned about potential
logging on steep slopes, noting that this area is a real gulch, it’s very
steep and has some slopes of 50-60%. He
questioned how this area can be logged without disturbing the soil and noted
that this is 200 feet from Burnett Brook and could cause erosion problems that
could exist for generations. Mr.
Rhodes further stated that farmland assessment is really not an issue here and
encouraged the Board to grant the easement that has readily passed in similar
situations.
Mrs. Jamie Kinsel introduced herself as a member of the
Environmental Commission as well and said she is very concerned about precedent
setting and the standards that have been set for other properties with steep
slopes. She said she is not sure
that one of the goals we should be considering is the tax affect on homeowners.
Mrs. Kinsel further stated that the applicant asked to subdivide the
property, and she feels the Board has gone more than a mile in investigating
this aspect of the application but the goals and plans of
Mendham
Township
spend a lot of time respecting the environment.
She noted that if the applicant is interested in protecting his tax and
economic interests, he will find a way, but don’t let it be a detriment to the
rest of
Mendham
Township
.
Mr. Tolley made a motion to the close the meeting to the
public; Mr. D’Emidio seconded the motion; vote all aye.
Mr. D’Emidio asked if a property could be farmland assessed
and not have a FMP, and Mr. Rodgers stated that you have to have a FMP approved
by the Department of Forestry to qualify for farmland assessment.
Mr. Tolley said he agreed with Mr. Rhodes and Mrs. Kinsel and
was not interested in tax matters, and asked if there are any significant
changes or limitations that are anticipated for the FMP.
Mr. Doty said that, in his opinion, there would be no changes in the FMP
with any new regulations that may come out.
Mr. Falcon stated that there is more leeway than thought, and
in the final analysis, any easement that is required must be agreeable to the
Township. He said the Board is going
to need to make some findings or provide instruction as to what they would hope
to see in such a conservation easement. He
further said he wanted everyone to understand that they are not strictly bound
by the provision of paragraph 1 and there is leeway created in the Ordinance.
Mr. Mountain said that, at the risk of further complicating
the easement issue, he felt compelled to discuss the open space issue.
He noted there was a discussion at the last Open Space Committee Meeting
relating to, not just this property, linkages to larger parcels of Township land
and enhancing the connection to those Township lands.
There are a number of properties near Mr. Banko’s property and the
issue of pedestrian easements was raised an they were looking at 25 feet from
the stream area to see if there was any interest on the part of the applicant to
make that an additional provision. Mr.
Mountain stated that he was raising this matter for the Board’s consideration.
He also noted there are properties along Burnett Brook that are between
the Banko property and the Seeing Eye property that already have dedicated
pedestrian easements.
Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Falcon if, in his interpretation
of the way the conservation easement reads, it is flexible enough to accommodate
having a small portion of that easement available for a walkway.
Mr. Falcon said it would have to be a separate easement.
Mr. Mountain said that the Open Space Committee feels there is very
reasonable potential with these couple of lots to fill in the holes with this
particular linkage to the larger piece. Mr.
Rodgers stated that he would discuss this matter with his client.
Chairman Giordano stated there were no comments regarding
this application from the Department of Public Works and the Police Department.
He referred to the comments provided by the Fire Official, and Mr.
Fantina proceeded to comment.
Mr. Fantina noted that the Fire Official conditioned that the
new house be sprinklered and said that this is one lot and it is exempt by means
of a minor subdivision that would require additional fire protection.
He said that this house would be no different than the Banko house or
other houses and would have the services of the volunteer fire department and
would like to keep it that way. Mr.
Rodgers said the applicant prefers not to be restricted by this at this time.
Mr. Tolley said that the Fire Official’s comments are only
“recommended” and it is because the Fire Official is acknowledging that any
house built 2300 feet from any water source can be a big problem.
He further said the Fire Department is seeing houses built in very
difficult places to get to in times of fire, which means there may be loss of
life or property, and reiterated that the Fire Official is putting the applicant
on notice that it is recommended but no requirement is implied.
Chairman Giordano asked if there were any further issues from
the Board, and there were none. Chairman
Giordano then called for a five-minute recess, and the meeting was resumed at
10:12 pm
.
Chairman Giordano called upon Mr. Rodgers to make his
summation.
Mr. Rodgers stated that Mr. Banko is reluctant to have a
walkway easement across his property. He
said the area right down by the stream that they are agreeing to give a 150 foot
stream easement on permits nothing, and now to turn around and say we’ll let
the public go walking through here speaks for itself.
Mr. Rodgers said this area is very steep and the concern is liability,
and these are things you have to worry about if the public is allowed on the
property. He said other issues
include possible erosion and the aspect of privacy on a man’s property and
burglars casing the house and making fires and littering.
Mr. Rodgers said that it is for all these reasons that Mr. Banko prefers
not to give a walkway easement, but Mr. Banko also feels it is not appropriate
and would detract from the character of his property, and he is already giving a
150-foot, no activity easement. Mr.
Rodgers then addressed the conservation easement in question and said that Mr.
Banko agrees that this is a forest and he wants it to be a forest and is
agreeable to no clear cutting. He
said Mr. Banko would like to continue the forest management harvesting that
he’s been doing since 1986, run this little forest farm, and qualify for
farmland assessment. Mr. Rodgers
said the FMP is a very protected situation and protects the interests of the
Township, but to have to go before the Tree Committee every time to cut a tree,
although it is not insurmountable, it is inconvenient and unnecessary.
He said it shouldn’t be a restriction that you can’t use a light
tractor in flat areas to pull out the harvested wood.
Mr. Rodgers then reiterated that this property is 20.8 acres, the
subdivision is creating 2 10-acre lots, and the size of these lots says that
this is a very low impact subdivision. He
said the new house is invisible from the road and even the driveway will overlap
a curve cut for the existing driveway. He
referred to the variances they are seeking noting that they cannot put the 400
geometry lot circle tangent with the road and said that many of the lots in the
10-acre zone don’t have enough frontage for the lot geometry circle to be
tangent with the road. Mr. Rodgers
said the shape of the lot precludes this and all variances, and these variances
are helpful because they lock into the 10-acre zoning.
He said the planner has testified it protects and reinforces the
Ordinance and preserves the rural character of the area and there is no negative
impact on the neighborhood because the neighbors will not see the house.
Mr. Rodgers stated that he believes the criteria has been met for the
variances and requested that the Board vote on this application tonight.
He said if the Board agrees with the parameters they are talking about,
the exact details of the wording of the conservation easement could be worked
out.
Chairman Giordano stated that one of the variances also
listed is the LOI from the DEP on the wetlands.
Mr. Rodgers said they have asked that they not be required to do that,
but if they have to, they well. He
said it is an unnecessary expense and the wetlands were flagged and staked and
drawn on the plan. Mr. Aubin stated
that it is his recommendation that the applicant get the LOI as a condition of
approval.
Mr. Tolley noted that it was indicated in the testimony that
the actual number of trees removed in a given year would be extremely limited.
He asked if it was possible to build into their recommendation the number
level of non-invasive trees that might be removed in a year.
Mr. Rodgers said he spoke with the Forester, and they are agreeable to
not cutting down more native healthy trees than is necessary to qualify for
farmland assessment and to conform to good management practices.
He said they are agreeing they won’t do any clear cutting but on an
individual tree basis to maintain a healthy forest and qualify for farmland
assessment. Mr. Banko said he
hasn’t really cut many trees down since 1986 and is not looking to go in and
take out 200-250 year old oak trees. He
said what they are talking about is trees that are overstocked, and he is not
looking to make a living selling firewood.
Mrs. Link noted that the Environmental Commission has said
that this is one of the most environmentally sensitive areas in
Mendham
Township
with
200 feet along Burnett Brook, as evidenced by the fact that three members of the
EC are present tonight. She said she
didn’t want to create a delay, but if that were the plan that the applicant is
going to ask for, she would like to go back to the EC, and she doesn’t think
that what the applicant is offering will be acceptable as it provides no
oversight.
Mr. Rodgers stated that the applicant could live with the
steep slope easement as long as it permits them the limited removal that would
greatly restrict what can be done in the steep slope but leaves the applicant
with a little bit of an opening.
Chairman Giordano raised the conservation easement on the
steep slopes and recommended including that the only time trees not so
designated as the four “d’s” would be removed in the steep slopes was if
upon the forester’s recommendation, it was necessary for the health of the
surrounding trees and that simply to accommodate the $500 minimum income
generation would not be acceptable unless there’s simply nothing else
available. Mr. Rodgers said that
might work stating that, when appropriate, use the four “d’s” first and
not cut healthy native species unless it was for the health of the forest.
Chairman Giordano stated it would also require the approval of the
appropriate forester designated by the Township.
Mr. Rodgers said that was acceptable and alleviates some of their
concerns and is less objectionable. He
said that healthy native species would not be cut unless in the interest of the
health of the forest and would go to the Township forester after the
recommendation of Mr. Banko’s forester.
Chairman Giordano referred to the one open issue from Mr.
Balut’s report regarding making the passing lane and drywells a condition of
approval. The other condition of
approvals were then listed as follows: 1)
obtaining a wetlands LOI from the NJDEP, 2) if the title issue to the lot line
abutting the Township is resolved, an amended plan must be filed, 3) the
location of the new driveway from the new lot will be accomplished by the
Township Engineer, 4) a 150 foot stream corridor conservation easement, 5) a
steep slope conservation easement, and 6) location of the drywells to be
determined at application for LDP.
Mr. D’Emidio made a motion to have Mr. Falcon prepare a
resolution approving Application 03-06 for the Banko minor subdivision with the
listed conditions; Mr. Mountain seconded the motion.
Roll call – vote all aye.
LOT
SIZE
AVERAGING/CONSERVATION EASEMENTS
Chairman
Giordano tabled this discussion for the
February 2, 2004
, Workshop
Meeting.
FOLLOW UP TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ANNUAL REPORT
Chairman
Giordano tabled this discussion for the
February 2, 2004
, Workshop Meeting.
GLEN GARY DRIVE
RIGHT OF WAY VACATION EASEMENT
Mr. Mountain introduced the request and stated that
the Township Committee had received this request to vacate the
Glen
Gary Drive
easement.
He said it is standard procedure for the Township Committee to refer
right of way vacation requests to the Planning Board to determine if there are
any negative impacts on overall land use law with granting such requests.
Mr. Mountain referred to a map indicating the 50-foot right of way
easement and noted that this particular road right of way had a utility but the
utility has essentially been diminished by the fact that the property now leads
into parkland. He said that the
residents have requested that the easement be vacated because it basically
serves no purposes and causes discomfort to potential buyers.
Mr. Mountain further noted that Mrs. Joy Smith and Mrs. Joan O’Brien
were present in the audience to provide any additional information as needed.
Mr. Tolley said that this is a low and wet area so any purposes for this
easement are limited and indicated that the did not see any value to this
easement. Chairman Giordano
recalled, to the best of his recollection, that this was never intended to be an
access right of way for the Morris County Park Commission.
Mr. D’Emidio noted that if lot 42 had to be accessed in the future, it
could be accessed from
Tingley Road
.
Mr. Tolley made a motion to recommend approval of the vacation of the Glen
Gary Road right of way easement; Mr. D’Emidio seconded the motion – vote
all aye.
Chairman
Giordano stated that a memorandum would be forwarded to the Township Committee
advising them that the vacation is consistent with the Master Plan, is not on
the circulation plan, and is not contrary to any facet of the Master Plan.
INDIAN HOLLOW – VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT
Mr. Mountain introduced this request as different from the
previous right of way request in that it had a firefighting element associated
with it, but beyond that, it is a similar request.
Mr. Tolley said this request should be reviewed by the Fire Official
before taking action as that easement for the benefit of the Fire Department.
Mr. Mountain said that Mr. Florek, the property owner that has requested
the vacation of the right of way easement, is concerned that it could be used
for something other than firefighting.
Mr. Florek addressed the Board and stated the two key
issues are that the right of way hasn’t been used for firefighting for about
22 years, and there is sufficient access from
North Road
on
Sunrise
Lake
. He also said that, similar to the
previous easement discussed, this easement dead ends into the park area and the
contour of the land is such that it will be extremely difficult to get any kind
of equipment past the initial slope of his property and then goes up quite
steeply into the parkland. Mr.
Florek said the access from the
North Road
is about 750 feet and should firefighting equipment be required, it is readily
accessible there. He said that
vacation of this right of way easement provides a comfort level for the
neighborhood and a prospective buyer.
Mr. Tolley said he would like to discuss this with the Fire
Official, the Board will send an official letter requesting his input, and the
Township will be happy to notify Mr. Florek when it is discussed again.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman Giordano referred to the educational information
received from the NJPO, and suggested that Board members contact the Board
Secretary if anyone was interested.
ADOURN
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
11:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Hope Warrington, Secretary
| 
