Minutes

Mendham Township Planning Board

Regular Meeting

May 18, 2005

Vice Chairman Tolley called the meeting of the Mendham Township Planning Board to order at 7:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL:

Present:  Chairman Giordano (arrived 7:40 pm), Mr. Tolley, Mayor Krieg, Mr. Pierson, Mrs. Link, Mr. Majorossy, Mr. Mountain, and Mr. D’Emidio

Also Present:  Mr. Falcon, Attorney, Mr. Lemanowicz, Engineer, Mr. Kimball, Planner, and Mr. Aubin, Environmentalist

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 6, 2005 .  Notice was posted on the Bulletin Board in the Township Hall in Brookside , New Jersey , on January 6, 2005 , and Notice was filed with the Township Clerk on January 6, 2005 .

MINUTES FOR APPROVAL – April 4, 2005 – vote all aye

GOVERNOR ESTATES @ MENDHAM TOWNSHIP, LLC

Chris Hopkins introduced himself as counsel for K. Hovnanian and noted this was a continuation of the minor site plan application for the construction trailer and temporary signage at Governor Estates.  He noted this matter was last before the Board on April 20 and the Board had concerns, which they have incorporated in the revised plans.  Mr. Hopkins asked Mr. Villa to review the changes.

Mr. Villa said the revised plans basically conformed to the following suggestions made by the Planning Board:

·        Added additional parking to 10 spaces, including a handicapped space by the sales trailer;

·        Two signs previously shown have been eliminated;

·        One 12 square foot welcome sign back from East Main Street behind the granite wall;

·        Governor Estates sign on the back as people leave will say thank you for visiting;

·        Eliminated parking sign in vicinity of parking;

·        Sign at driveway entrance to the sales trailer that identifies it as sales center is a smaller three foot sign; and

·        Changes to berming.

Chairman Giordano joined the meeting at 7:42 p.m.

Mayor Krieg asked about the height of the landscaping lights, and Mr. Villa said the plan shows different sizes.  Mayor Krieg said the plan indicates between 25 and 54 inches, and Mr. Hopkins said it is relative to the landscaping and shrubbery.  Mayor Krieg asked about the lighting until 10:30 p.m. , and Mr. Hopkins said with respect to lighting, they do not have a problem with changing the lighting time to 9:00 p.m.   Mr. Villa said he could not tell what the proposed height is on the plan for the vollers.  Mr. Pierson indicated his preference for shorter ones, and Mr. Hopkins said the only issue he would have is that it is sufficient for safety purposes and not hidden by shrubbery.  Mr. Villa said the landscape engineer can review it in greater detail, and Mayor Krieg suggested a minimal height about the shrubbery. 

Mr. Tolley asked about the hours of operation, and Mr. Hopkins said the hours were 10:00am-6:00 pm , seven days a week.  He noted that the top of the brochure box has the hours of operation listed on it. 

Mrs. Link referred to the landscaping plan and said it includes a lot of deer food, and she suggested speaking to the landscaper about plantings that will not appeal to the deer.  Mr. Hopkins said he would as that was a good suggestion.  Mr. Pierson said Mrs. Link could provide him with names of landscaping options.

Mr. D’Emidio said the original plan had three flag poles and now there is one flag pole, and he asked how many flags would be on the pole, and Mr. Hopkins said one standard size American flag. 

Mr. Hopkins stated that because of the direction sign located on the front of the driveway and the second sign by the wall, he would be seeking an exception for that sign and for the “on lot” signs, which are lot designation flower pots, but they are not technically advertising signs. 

Chairman Giordano referred to the new report from Maser Consulting.

Mr. Lemanowicz said he listed the items in his report, and as has been indicated, there is an exception required for multiple signage – the flowerpots and for more than one sign on the lot.   Mr. Lemanowicz said it looked like the berm heights had been reduced on some of the landscaping and wondered if the Board would want those berm heights replaced.  He said he was referring to the ones in the northeast corner and on the southwest side – one went from 30 to 18 inches.  Mr. Villa said that was the one at the corner where the flagpole will be and the other one that needs to be labeled is.  Mr. Hopkins said he had no problem with keeping the berm 24 inches near the flagpoles since there are no flagpole lights.  He said there are some bluestone steppers that go to the flagpole and the landscaper may have reduced the height for that reason.  Mr. Hopkins said he was amenable to the engineer reviewing the condition on the berms and the lights. Mr. Pierson said he would like someone to look at the position of the berm around the trees, and Mr. Lemanowicz said he would send the landscape architect out to be sure there is no harm to existing trees. 

Mr. Hopkins stated that the other issue they would like to request is that this approval be renewed automatically rather than having to come back with a full application for the sales center in a year.   He said he does not believe there will be a change in any of the conditions, and he requested that approval could be done in writing rather than a full hearing.  Mr. Hopkins also noted they were selling out homes at the rate of 1 to 1-1/2 a month.   Chairman Giordano asked if there were any legal impediments, and Mr. Falcon said it was at the Board’s discretion; in the normal course, they would come back before the Planning Board.  Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Falcon if K. Hovnanian could send the Board a letter in 11 months and the Board could make the decision then, and Mr. Falcon said that would be fine.  Mr. Hopkins said that was acceptable to them. 

Chairman Giordano referred to the comments from DPW and the Police Department and asked Mr. Kimball and Mr. Lemanowicz if there was anything else, and there was nothing further.

Chairman Giordano summarized that, in terms of the resolution, the hours have been designated and the restrictions on the lights, the single American flag, variances for signage and the flower pot signs, and the Board will ascertain the request for extension in writing any way that Mr. Falcon deems fit so that it will not be forgotten a year from now.  Mr. Falcon added the additional conditions regarding the berms.

Chairman Giordano sought a motion to approve the minor site plan for the construction and sales trailers and the signage for Governor Estates @ Mendham Township, Block 145, Lot 3, shown on Tax Sheet 29,  with the aforementioned restrictions.

Mr. Lemanowicz said, with respect to the letter requesting an extension in the future, he suggested its submission 45 days prior to expiration so the Board can be provided with input as to how it has been working.  Mr. Hopkins said that was fine.

Mr. Majorossy made a motion to approve the minor site plan; Mr. Pierson seconded the motion.  Roll call – vote all aye.

MASEFIELD – APPLICATION 04-04

Mr. Henry stated they were last before the Planning Board on April 20, and as a result of that meeting, a very rough concept sketch has been prepared by Mr. Madsen and submitted to the professionals.  He said the Township Engineer has provided his comments and has been in dialogue with Mr. Madsen, and a more refined version of the plan was provided and submitted.  Mr. Henry said it is that version, with a revision date of May 5, 2005 , that is presently before the Board tonight.  He said it was his hope to nail down some of the matters subject to dialogue tonight and receive good input from the Board on how to proceed with finalizing the plan, principally with respect to stormwater management and drainage issues.  Mr. Henry said it is hope that they will be in a position to file those revisions and calculations and be back before the Board at the June meeting. 

Mr. Madsen reviewed the revised plan as follows:

·        Wright Lane no longer extending through to Carriage Hill;

·        Shows a cul de sac 2/3 of the way down;

·        First cul de sac retained the paved portion of Wright Lane and the second cul de sac beyond will provide frontage for Lot 52.04;

·        Shows six lots in total – five new lots and one existing lot with the existing house;

·        Lots ranging in size from a 3 acre lot to about 8.9 acres, which is the major lot to the left as you come in; and,

·        The road design is 20 feet wide with a 24 foot wide stabilized beneath.

Mr. Madsen said the stormwater detention system is not fully designed yet, but if they modify the underground system and backfill with clean stone around the pipe -- the additional volume coupled with the reduction in road length-- there will be lesser disturbance in the wooded area. which will allow them to reduce the proposed size.  He said he had a brief discussion with Mr. Aubin about being able to take some of the runoff from the proposed driveway on the new lots and allow them to reduce the system proposed, and the location of the system would still be on the inside of the curve at the low point of the road.  Mr. Henry entered for the record Exhibit A-10, the Soil and Sediment Control Plan, Sheet 7 of 19 of the previous submission.  Mr. Madsen said this has been modified to comply with the plat as submitted and is a colored rendering of what they are proposing to do.

Mr. Henry referred to the map and asked if those were necessary locations of the driveways and houses, and Mr. Madsen said no.  Mr. Pierson asked if lots 52.03 and 52.05 are accessed off the cul de sac, and Mr. Madsen said that was correct.  Mr. Pierson asked if the Fire Official had commented on lot 52.04 as far as the driveway, and Chairman Giordano referred to the letter received today from Mr. Betz, and there was no comment on the lot 52.04 turnaround.  Mr. Pierson referred to Mr. Betz’ comments on an additional fire tank and said he was not sure how one would get access to that from Wright Lane .  Mr. Pierson confirmed the applicant was putting in one 30,000-gallon tank, and Mr. Madsen pointed to the location of the tank on the map.  Mr. Pierson said an additional tank was a moot issue.

Mr. Majorossy asked about the proposed width of the Wright Lane driveway extension, and Mr. Madsen said he was thinking 12 feet.  Mr. Pierson said he believed 12 feet should be adequate and there has to be some encumbrance on lot 52.04 to allow for a turn on the property.  He said when the house is designed, there should be something that will allow the apparatus to turn, and if the Board agrees to put a bulb there, it may limit the ability to do any attractive landscaping.  Mr. D’Emidio stated this kind of issue gets addressed at the lot development plan phase and would be determined at that point. 

Mrs. Link said she went to a workshop meeting on detention systems where MSCS discussed the underground system.  She said they were definitely against using perforated pipe and sought comment from the experts.  Mr. Madsen said he was curious as to what their concerns were; he said any debris brought into the system might clog the pores.  Mr. Lemanowicz said he would have to ask them what their concerns are, as there are a number of problems with any system. 

Mr. Kimball, putting aside the issue of the extension of Wright Lane , reviewed his report and noted there were very significant benefits to the revised plan:

·        Substantially reduces the site disruption;

·        Gives more options to lot 52.05; and,

·        The benefits for the stormwater management system are very significant and will result in improved design aesthetically.

Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Lemanowicz if he had further comments or questions.  Mr. Lemanowicz asked if there is a definitive number of driveways allowed to use the undeveloped section, and Mr. Henry said one.  Mr. Lemanowicz further said the ordinance does describe private roads, but this plan doesn’t really meet that definition.  He said he agreed that the detention system is going to be substantially smaller, and the roadway width is a good decision.  Mr. Lemanowicz said the only other issue he had was the easement by the bulb of Saddle Hill Road for the maintenance of the dam of that pond.  Mr. Henry said pragmatically it ends up being on lot 52.04 and does not see any logic with the responsibility being on anyone else, so they would assume that the obligation would be on the owner of that property.  Chairman Giordano confirmed the maintenance obligation was not on Mendham Township . 

Mr. Aubin said he had a very productive conversation with Mr. Madsen this afternoon with regard to separating out the impervious areas and discontinuous units, and we are on the right track.  He further noted the amount of stormwater infrastructure is being greatly reduced. 

Chairman Giordano said there were no comments from the Police Department, and noted the Environmental Commission comments requesting a conservation easement for the wetlands for the benefit of the Township.  Mr. Henry said they had no problem with that, and Mr. Falcon advised the easement text is in the ordinance.  Chairman Giordano said there were no comments from HPC, and in response to the DPW’s comments regarding curbing, he asked Mr. Kimball and Mr. Lemanowicz to talk with Mr. Read.

Mr. Henry asked for the Board’s indulgence to ask Mr. Peel questions concerning the new plan.  The Board agreed, and Chairman Giordano noted Mr. Peel was previously sworn in.

Mr. Henry referred to Mr. Peel’s review of the proposed six-lot subdivision and asked Mr. Peel, in the general sense, whether anything he has testified to in connection with the seven-lot subdivision, as far as environmental, has changed.  Mr. Peel responded no, almost every aspect has improved. 

Mr. Henry asked Mr. Peel, with respect to the variances for those structures that end up in the front yard and design waivers for slope disturbance, is there anything about the redesign of this plan that changes his testimony.  Mr. Peel responded no, again, they are minor improvements. 

Mr. Henry said that was all the questions he had of Mr. Peel.

Chairman Giordano asked if there were any questions from the members of the public on Mr. Peel’s testimony, and there were none.

Mr. Henry stated that at this point they are most anxious to get this shepherded into the finish line, the matters which were seriously contested have been put to rest, and a couple of the members of the public are here are here to advise the Board of their satisfaction.  He said the Masefields have been taken through a long and tortuous path that no one anticipated at the front end.  Mr. Henry said there are engineering issues having to do with drainage and stormwater management, and yet, in his sense of things, they are down to the literal design feature and calculations and engineers working through what works and doesn’t work. 

Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Henry to outline again the specific variances.

Mr. Henry responded there are one or multiple variances needed for the larger garage shown on this plan, the garage studio, the pool, the patio, and the pool mechanical equipment, because once a road is put in, they are in the front yard.  He said a design waiver is required for the westerly sideline of lot 52.01 that intersects the extended right of way of Wright Lane and is not quite perpendicular but the ordinance requires it to be.  Mr. Henry also said, as various versions of trying to work out the swales and infiltration, there may be minor slope disturbances required; other than that, it is conforming.   Mr. Pierson said he would feel more comfortable seeing something as was done with Von Poelnitz, where the driveway is shown in the right of way.  He also said, on a different point, in response to the question about bringing the pool up to code, he recalled Mr. Masefield had previously indicated fencing of four feet and shrubbery would be done, and Mr. Henry said yes, that was correct.   Mr. Masefield added that the pool is elevated from the proposed roadway and landscaped and really cannot be seen from the road, but he would add shrubbery. 

Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was opened to the public.

Mr. Frank Cioppettini introduced himself as the representative for the Saddle Hill Association, and thanked Mr. and Mrs. Masefield for bringing this plan forward, noting it’s a win-win.

Mr. Russ McCabe of Carriage Hill noted the neighbors had had previous discussions with Mr. Masefield about shrubbery to block the garage.  He said the neighbors are in full support of the plans, and he thanked Mr. and Mrs. Masefield.

Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was closed to the public.

Chairman Giordano summarized that the variances requested are for the pool, garage, garage studio, pool, patio, and pool mechanics in the front yard, a design waiver with respect to 52.01 lot line and the second one would be a diminimus waiver of the RSIS with respect to the extension.  Mr. Henry suggested there may be miniscule slope disturbance and raised it because they anticipate that may be a waiver.   Mr. Kimball advised the deeds would have to reflect no further subdivision with the use of lot size averaging. 

Chairman Giordano noted the Board’s apparent acceptance of the aforementioned and advised this matter would be on the agenda for June 15 and all materials are due to the Board Secretary by June 3. 

COAH

Mr. Kimball referred to the memo from Susan Kimball concerning COAH recertification, which described the time frame and process for the substantive recertification expiration of 8/4/05 .  He said Mendham is one of the first towns to do this, due to a matter of timing with the expiration, and will probably be a model for other communities.  Mr. Kimball said they are working with Township offices to provide the necessary information and noted that downzoning has put the Township in a good position.  He said the Planning Board needs to have a public meeting with noticing, and the Township Committee must take action by sending a letter and resolution requesting the extension of the recertification.  Chairman Giordano said notice would have to be placed for the meeting on June 15, 2005 .  Mr. Tolley said if Kimball & Kimball can be ready for the June 15 meeting, we can then send over to Township Committee, or otherwise hold a special meeting. 

Chairman Giordano tentatively scheduled Mrs. Kimball’s presentation on June 15 and moved the backland lot ordinance discussion to June 15 also.  Mr. Mountain indicated the lot disturbance ordinance proposal could also be done when backlands is discussed. 

Chairman Giordano asked if there were any objections to canceling the June 6, 2005 , Workshop Meeting, and there were none.

OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. Tolley stated the Master Plan Subcommittee did meet on Woodland Lakes and they will have further meetings on June 6 and June 15.  He said if representatives from Woodland Lakes cannot make the June 6 meeting, they would cancel it. 

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 9:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Hope Warrington

Planning Board Secretary