MINUTES

MENDHAM TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

REGULAR MEETING

MAY 21, 2003

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 (departed meeting at 11:17 pm ), Mr. D’Emidio, Mayor

Pierson, Mrs. Kinsel, and Mr. Timpson

Absent: Mr. Majorossy, Mr. Mountain

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

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 January 9, 2003 . Notice was posted on the bulletin board in the Township Hall in Brookside , New Jersey , on January 9, 2003 , and Notice was filed with the Township Clerk on January 9, 2003 .

MINUTES FOR APPROVAL – April 16, 2003 , vote all aye.

VON POELNITZ

Application 02-07

Mr. Barry Osmun introduced himself as attorney for the applicants, Michael and Audrey Von Poelnitz, and noted that Mr. Scott Wyssling of Ferriero Engineering is also present. Mr. Osmun stated that this application was last before the Board on February 19, 2003 , and due to the time lapse, he briefly described the nature of the application. He further stated that revisions were made to the plans after the last meeting to straighten the lot line between lot 46 and lot 46.01, and asked that Mr. Wyssling review the plan changes and the situation with respect to the right-of-way and the rights to the right-of-way of Mrs. Martin, the owner of lot 47.

Mr. Falcon swore in Mr. Scott Wyssling and Mr. Michael Von Poelnitz.

Chairman Giordano requested that Mr. Wyssling undergo a short voir dire in order to provide the Board and the public with the opportunity to present any questions pertaining to Mr. Wyssling’s qualifications. Mr. Wyssling provided his credentials, and since there were no questions from the Board or the public, he was accepted by the Board as an expert in the field of engineering.

Mr. Osmun asked Mr. Wyssling to review the changes that were made to the plans after the last meeting. Mr. Wyssling stated that he was present at the February 19 meeting, heard the Board’s comments, and revised the preliminary and final subdivision plans based on the comments from the planner and engineer. He further stated that he met with the Township Engineer to review the location of the storage tank, which is now closer to Mountainside Road , and the improvements to the road are two passing areas and a K-turn to the cul-de-sac area. The lot line was also modified based on the comments and the lot area is now less than 6 acres requiring a lot size variance. He noted that the India Brook historic district, which runs along the property line along the driveway, is now also shown on the plan, as well as a conservation easement and a steep slope easement. Mr. Wyssling said there will be no disturbance to the conservation easement, the steep slopes will be protected and will still be able to maintain the forestry plan on the sight that Mr. Von Poelnitz has put into place. He noted that this summarizes the changes as discussed at the last meeting and the follow-up meeting with the Township Engineer.

Mr. Osmun asked if there were two kinds of conservation easements that are shown, and Mr. Wyssling said yes. Mr. Osmun asked if the removal of dead or diseased trees is allowed in one of those areas, and Mr. Wyssling said yes and pointed to the area, which they are calling a steep slope easement, which will still allow for the removal of dead and diseased trees. He also pointed to the area close to the brook, which will not be disturbed, which they are calling a conservation easement. Mr. Osmun noted that he had sent an easement to the Board, Mr. Falcon, and the Board’s consultants and it describes in that easement the two areas within one area where trees can be removed in connection with the forest management plan. Mr. Wyssling said he had sent a description of these areas to the Board’s attorney and consultants, which indicates that the steep slope easement is 3.7 acres and the conservation easement is 1.1 acres. Mr. Falcon asked for confirmation that there will be no removal or cutting of trees in the conservation easement area, and Mr. Osmun said that is correct.

Mayor Pierson asked about the proposed K-turn and the slope, and Mr. Wyssling said that there is a cul-de-sac that is minimized by putting the K-turn in the cul-de-sac. Mayor Pierson requested that the Fire Official review this proposed K-turn. Mr. Wyssling said that the K-turn is shown as 50 feet from the paved driveway, and there has been a request to change the width of the driveway from 12 feet to 18 feet, and Mr. Osmun indicated the applicant has agreed to make this change.

Mayor Pierson added that the applicant may consider changing the 3,000-gallon pre-cast concrete tamper tank to fiberglass, noting that the Township has had better luck with fiberglass and it is less expensive.

Mr. D’Emidio raised the issue of when to do the improvements, i.e., the fire tank, and Mr. Kimball said that he recommended in his final report that either the improvements would have to be put in prior to perfecting the final or that they be bonded before the perfection of the final, which is in accordance with the Ordinance. Mr. Falcon said that would be sufficient protection and that there would be an agreement with the Municipality.

Chairman Giordano called upon Mr. Balut to review the report from Maser Consulting.

Mr. Balut referred to his report dated May 19 and noted in Item #1 that they have relocated the property line to the center of the driveway, but he feels they still need a driveway easement on both sides, and Mr. Osmun said that was fine. Mr. Balut noted that Item #2 pertains to the non-conforming conditions previously stated regarding the shed and pool setbacks are still required. Item #3 deals with the land use ordinance, and they have shown FAR calculations on the map and they have shown net building envelope calculations, but Mr. Balut noted that lot 46 does not comply with the net building envelope area so relief of that will have to be required. Regarding Item #4, Mr. Balut said he met with Mr. Ferriero, and they were able to relocate the fire tank closer to Mountainside Road . Regarding the other items in his report, Mr. Balut said that the conservation easement has already been addressed, the water easement has been shown on the final plat, and the K turn and the widening of the driveway to 18 feet has already been discussed.

Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Balut if he has spoken with Mr. Betz. While he had not, Mr. Balut indicated that he had looked at it from an engineering perspective and noted that the area around the cul de sac is steep and appears to require a large area to be paved. He further commented that if the K turn is acceptable to the Board, he suggested widening the width of the road and the width of the K turn. He further noted that the portion at the K turn is relatively flat, is a perfect spot, the grade is adequate, and there is a gravel drive there already, which will be paved.

Mr. D’Emidio raised the issue of requiring the improvements (e.g., fire protection) at the point of the issuance of new building permits for lot 46 and lot 46.01 in the event something should happen. Mr. Osmun said that if a building permit for a new home must be issued for either lot 46 or lot 46.01, that requiring the improvements at that time would be fine.

A full discussion then ensued regarding the need and importance of having the Fire Official, Mr. Jeff Betz, review the revised set of plans and all of the fire protection issues involved in this application. Chairman Giordano asked Mrs. Warrington to prepare a memo to Mr. Betz, with a copy to Mayor Pierson, Mr. Mountain and himself, requesting Mr. Betz’ review of the issues raised in his August 21 letter regarding the fire tank, water flow and other issues, specifically those raised by the Mayor as to the ability of the K turn to handle both access and safety issues related to the access.

Mr. Von Poelnitz stated that it was obvious from his discussions with Mr. Betz that placing a fire tank onto his driveway will not only be important for them, but for all of the neighbors. The applicant noted for the record that they are doing a service to the water flow issue with the hydrants, which has been an existing problem for all the houses around the area, and the water tank will improve that problem for all neighbors.

Chairman Giordano called upon Mr. Kimball to review the report from Kimball and Kimball.

Mr. Kimball referred to his report dated May 9, and said that the Board is contemplating a special consideration for this final approval in terms of when the improvements are to be installed. He just pointed out in his first comment that the Ordinance contemplates that prior to perfecting the final plan either the installation of the improvements occurs or a performance guarantee that guarantees their installation would be posted. The second item regarding the lot line reconfiguration has been discussed, and the third item has also been discussed regarding the reconfiguration of the lot line resulting in a new variance and he said that, in his opinion, the new variance does meet the positive criteria requirements of planning with the advantages outweighing the detriments. In terms of the negative criteria and impact on the zone plan, he doesn’t see any substantial impact. He said that Item 4 has been addressed and the plan now shows the India Brook historic boundary, and his final comment regarding the proposed street design is that it be safe and adequate in accordance with the RSIS standards and suggested that it be added as a finding in the resolution.

Chairman Giordano called upon Mr. Aubin to review the report from Connolly Environmental.

Mr. Aubin stated that all of the recommendations made in his earlier report of September 17, 2002 , were incorporated into the plan.

Mr. Tolley made a motion to open the meeting to the public; Mr. D’Emidio seconded the motion, vote all aye.

Chairman Giordano asked if there were any members of the public who had questions or comments, and there were none. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was closed to the public.

With reference to the status of Mrs. Guinivere Martin’s right-of-way access, Mr. Osmun presented a small blow-up of the tax map noting that the property was conveyed in 1949 to Mrs. Martin and her husband, and the conveyance was made in two tracts. Mr. Osmun stated that the first tract is the one outlined in red, which constitutes existing lots 44, 45, and 46. He said it was conveyed to them, but excepted from the conveyance is the driveway shown in yellow and it gave access to Mrs. Martin over that yellow strip. Mr. Osmun reiterated that Mrs. Martin has a free right to that entire strip, and noted that it was previously discussed that the owner of lot 46 has an obligation to pay for maintenance and Mrs. Martin does not. Mr. Osmun said he doesn’t believe that Mrs. Martin uses that driveway because her driveway comes off of Old Schoolhouse Lane , and in addition to that, the owner of lot 46, Mr. Von Poelnitz, has a right-of-way over Old Schoolhouse Lane , if he chooses to use it.

Chairman Giordano referred to the correspondence from Mrs. Martin regarding the cattle grade, and Mr. Falcon stated that issue regarding access was a matter that came up in a previous meeting. Mr. Falcon said that Mr. Osmun’s search disclosed that Mrs. Martin has a right to access her property at all points along that access road. Mr. Falcon further stated that the outstanding matters raised by Mrs. Martin do not bear on the Board’s function in reviewing this application.

Chairman Giordano inquired about the tennis court, and Mr. Osmun said that he did not find a permit for the tennis court.

A full discussion ensued regarding lot 46, identification and ownership of the new lot – the 1.24 acres of the street, inclusion on the final plat, and a maintenance agreement. Mr. Balut said that fire tanks are normally on a public right-of-way, and on a private right-of-way it should have an easement around it to give the Township access. Mr. Wyssling said they could put an easement around the first 100 feet of the tank.

Mayor Pierson raised the issue of the pre-existing tennis court, which was obviously built in violation to existing Mendham Township ordinances, and recommended granting a variance for the court.

Chairman Giordano summarized that a letter would be sent to Mr. Betz respectfully requesting his response by May 30, and if minor modifications were necessary, Mr. Wyssling said he would be able to make changes within a week. Mr. Osmun then requested an extension to June 30, 2003 , and Chairman Giordano scheduled this matter for the Regular Meeting on June 18, 2003 .

LAWRENCE FARMLAND, LLC

Irene’s Spring Tree Farm

Application 03-02

Mr. Ed Trawinski of Schenk, Price and King introduced himself as the attorney for the applicant. He said that he would like to continue with the open items in the Maser Consulting Report that were pending the site visit and then continue with the report from Kimball & Kimball. Mr. Trawinski noted that Mr. Craig Villa was present and was still under oath. He further noted that that were additional escrows to be paid, and these had been submitted to the Board Secretary. Mr. Trawinski then asked Mr. Villa to proceed with review of the Maser Consulting report.

Mr. Villa referred to the Maser Consulting Report dated April 10, 2003 , and started with Item A-3 regarding elimination of the overhead pole line. Mr. Villa said that the field inspection showed that, in his opinion, the reason the line was taken off the road was to preserve substantial trees. Mr. Villa feels that the line can stay because moving the line out to the road would jeopardize the trees. Mr. Balut said that he was satisfied with that comment, and noted that it does appear that it purposely didn’t go on Hardscrabble to avoid the trees.

Mr. Villa asked Mr. Balut to address his recommendations and discussions with the Board regarding Item B-3, which pertains to proposed Road “B” as an extension of Beverly Drive . Mr. Balut said that there are two property owners at the end of Beverly Drive that are affected, and the property to the left side has a significant amount of trees along the property line and the property to the right does not. He said it appears that relocating the roadway somewhat to the right within the right-of-way would preserve a good amount of trees on the property to the left but would adversely affect the property owner on the right because it is closer to his lot. Mr. Villa responded that they needed to look at whether they wanted to save the spruce trees and whether it was prudent to push the road closer to the neighbor on the right or keep it in the middle of the right-of-way. He said they do not have a preference here but feels it is more prudent that both neighbors share, and they are willing to have a landscaper look at possibly relocating those trees and talk with the neighbor to see how he wants his driveway realigned.

Mr. Kimball stated that a landscape plan should be a prime consideration and recommended that a landscape plan for those two lots be submitted to provide screening. Mr. Balut suggested that Mr. Villa draw up a proposal showing the trees, easement and utilities to see how it lays out.

Further discussion continued regarding driveway locations, entrance columns, and tapering and curbing of the road. Mr. Trawinski said he understood the desire for a sketch and they will do that, but also noted that they need to get some direction from the Board as to how they would like to proceed with this process.

Mr. Balut referred to Item B-5 and noted that, in his opinion, the sight distance is not adequate. From a non-engineering issue, he feels that if the intersection were improved aesthetically, it would benefit the problem by removal of the two embankments on either side of the intersection. He noted that that is a Bernardsville Borough decision, and they would have to be consulted and advised and it would be subject to their decision. Mr. Villa said that if we attempt to improve the sight distance, the only way to do it is to cut into the banks which are now stabilized with trees. The Borough would have to get grading easements onto the lots adjacent to those rather high slopes, and this would take away from the rural character of the area. Mr. Villa reiterated that his research showed that the history at that intersection is good, and there is a 25 mph posted speed limit at that intersection, noting that there were previous discussions about lowering the speed limit in the Township on Hardscrabble up to Corey Lane. Mr. Villa stated that Mr. Balut has asked the Bernardsville Engineer to comment on this situation, but noted that this applicant has already gone to the Bernardsville Planning Board and based upon the stipulation that they were not making any improvements, there were no concerns expressed.

Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Balut to follow up on his request to Mr. Ferriero, the Bernardsville Engineer.

Mr. Trawinski referred to Item B-8, which pertains to a modification of the existing farm entrance to accommodate Road “A.” Mr. Villa pointed out that the plans show the intersection or the width of the road going into the site as being narrow, and if it is felt that it should remain as it is, that is not a problem. Mr. Balut said that he was talking about the radiuses coming out of Hardscrabble, not the narrowness, and if it were narrowed down you would have to remove pavement and change the columns. Mr. Balut said that the entrance has been there for many years and questions changing it, and Mr. Villa said they would not change it.

Referring to items C-4, C-5, C-6, and C-7 regarding basins, Mr. Balut said that there had been discussion regarding alternate means of drainage. Mr. Villa said they are willing to consider the basin(s) along Hardscrabble Road , but he doesn’t believe there are any major issues and this is something that can be resolved. He said the bigger issues are the actual road alignments that will result in reasonable changes to storm drains. Mr. Trawinski reiterated that they are prepared to provide revised drainage locations and/or types of drainage basins, but will need to know where the roads will be before that is done.

Mr. Villa said that the only other item in Section C is #11 regarding the use of HDPE pipe for drainage control that Mr. Balut stated is unacceptable and concrete pipe should be substituted. Mr. Villa respectfully disagreed and said it is now becoming standard in many towns and is acceptable per the RSIS standards. He said it is acceptable to DOT and specifically stipulated as being acceptable in the RSIS standards, and the Township is somewhat obligated to accept it. Mr. Balut said he does concur with Mr. Villa but considers concrete to be a better pipe in the long run but the RSIS does control, and Mr. Villa assured it would be structurally sound.

Mr. Trawinski said the only other item he had open was Item E-3, the outflow hydrographs, and Mr. Villa said this was discussed at the consultants meeting, and he said that was no problem and they will make it work.

Mr. Balut referred to the last paragraph in his report, which summarized his feelings on where the streets should be located and discussion ensued around this matter and the various options. Mr. Villa referred to Sheet 1 of 1 labeled Phase 3 Concept Plan, which Mr. Trawinski entered into the record as Exhibit A-7. Mr. Villa described this plan as an option to consider common driveway access off of Road B where you go beyond the extension of lot 40 and lot 39, which would require variances from the Board for the common driveway. Mr. Villa then referred to a plan entitled Conceptual Major Subdivision Plan Alternate 1, which was entered into the record as Exhibit A-8. He said this plan did not connect Beverly Drive and cut through the farm, but Mr. Irene preferred not to do this because of the interruption to the operation of the horse farm. A full discussion then ensued regarding the road options. Mr. Villa also noted that he had sent a letter and the plans to a gentleman from NJ American Water Company requesting a meeting to discussion possible water options.

Mr. Trawinski indicated that he had no further questions of Mr. Villa.

Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Kimball to continue the review of the report from Kimball & Kimball.

Mr. Kimball noted that we were in the midst of his report when the last meeting ended, and he referred to page 3 of his report pertaining to alternative designs. He said that the roadway design has clearly been designed to meet the minimum zoning requirements without the consideration of the physical realities of the site. He said that even if alternative design of lot size averaging is not utilized, he recommends that the roadway actually be located in the field and that this be made a condition of approval. Mr. Kimball said this would give the professionals the authority to meet at the site with the applicant and his engineer to make a determination about where exactly the road would be located, which trees can be saved, and make jogs in the alignment of the road to try and replicate a more historic look to the road.

Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Kimball to comment on Exhibit A-7 and the extension of Road A, northwest of Beverly Drive . Mr. Kimball said that there are pluses and minuses and one plus is connecting Road A through Road B and thus eliminating the need for the extension of Beverly Drive . He said from a design point of view there are advantages, such as it is a much more attractive entranceway for the applicant and can set a whole tone for the development. The downside is that it would be disruptive for the farm, because the farm could probably no longer meeting the 100-acre minimum requirements of the zoning, which is a conditional use requirement and the Zoning Board must grant a variance.

Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Irene if he had any thoughts about timing for maintaining the horse farm. Mr. Irene stated that they came up with the three-phase plan to extend the operation of the horse farm as far into the future as possible. He said the farm is a financial drain, and he is working constantly to try to do things to make it less of a financial drain. He further stated that he believes that the plan before the Board is closer to the type of character the Board is looking for, and feels that he and Mr. Villa and the consultants have come up with a good compromise with the elimination of Road C. He said he does not have an absolute answer and he is trying to satisfy everyone and take everything into consideration and will try to continue the horse farm as long as possible. Mr. Irene said that this is why they came up with the three-phase plan. Regarding the 100-acre minimum zoning requirement, Mr. Tolley initiated discussion around the definition of a public road, acceptance by the Township and the timing issue involved, and questioned if the rule about having lots fronting on the street applies if it is not a public road. After some discussion, Chairman Giordano noted that Messrs. Trawinski and Falcon would look into this concept.

Mr. Kimball commented that Road C is one of the most harmful elements of the design in terms of the Township’s goals. It would introduce a new public road off of Hardscrabble and will have a lot of impact on the streetscape of Hardscrabble, and noted that what the applicant has proposed is a great improvement – the common driveway that would come off of Road B – enhances the Township’s goals. Further conversation ensued regarding a public road versus a common driveway and the existing entrance to the Farm.

Mr. Kimball referred to the street trees item in his report, and noted there was an agreement from the applicant that they will redesign the location of the street trees to be more naturalistic. Mr. Villa said the landscapers have to make the revisions.

Regarding Item #5, Mr. Kimball said the applicant will provide a landscape plan for dealing with the two properties at the end of the cul-de-sac so they will each have appropriate screening from the extension of Beverly Drive in that existing right-of-way.

Regarding Item #6, Mr. Kimball said this was discussed at the previous meeting and with the applicant. Regarding house size locations, Mr. Kimball recommended that the applicant look at possible agreements with the individual property owners about an understanding of house locations and not being regimented so as to maintain the rural character.

Regarding detention basins, Mr. Kimball referred this to Mr. Aubin but emphasized that two or three of the detention basins are in locations in the current design that are very visible and will impact the roadscape from Hardscrabble. He said that everything possible should be done to minimize changing those roadscapes and suggested that the resolution provide for some timing as to when would be done.

Mr. Kimball said that Item #9 has been addressed and then referred to Item #10 regarding the Beverly Drive entrance. Mr. Kimball said that the Beverly Drive entrance retains very little of a rural character of a road so further changes to the entrance of Beverly Drive to address the engineering concerns are not going to have a major impact on the rural character. He said he has no problem with the entrance to Proposed Road A and suggested that the minor changes that have been stated should be done in the field at a specific site meeting with the professionals. Mr. Trawinski said he has no problem with meeting with the engineer, but from a cost standpoint, does not believe it is necessary to have the environmentalist and planner present for the meeting. Mr. Aubin and Mr. Kimball said that Mr. Balut understands all of the issues, and they have no problem with that.

Referring to Item #12, Lot 42.02, which is the large lot that fronts on Hardscrabble, Mr. Kimball said he has questions about the proposed house for this lot that has been shown in the field adjacent to Hardscrabble. He doesn’t feel it is in anyone’s interest to have a large, mansion style house located there, it should be located much further back in the lot, and suggested that there be an agreement to that affect. Mr. Villa referred to Sheet 14 of 56, entitled Grading, Utility and Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Exhibit A-9, and said there are physical problems with that proposal. He said this sheet shows where a typical house may be placed on that lot, and they didn’t feel it was necessary to cross the wetlands, cut trees and put the house toward the rear in a steeper slope. He said this house is fully conforming with the Ordinance in terms of setback from Hardscrabble, and there is sufficient room between the front setback line and the reduced buffer line, and they are proposing a slight reduction to give a little more rear yard area before hitting the power line easement. Mr. Kimball said that he was just suggesting that a house in that location would be very visible and given the overall size of the lot, a house under FAR requirements could be truly huge. Mr. Trawinski said that this is an item for the lot development plan, and they are more than willing to take a look at this in the lot development plan. Mr. Trawinski said that economics is really what is going to drive the placement of the house and doesn’t believe that some is going to pay for the lot and want to put a house within 100 feet off of Hardscrabble.

There being no further questions from the Board, Chairman Giordano asked Mr. Aubin to review the report from Connolly Environmental. Mr. Trawinski indicated that he would present a new witness for Mr. Aubin’s report, and Chairman Giordano called for a five-minute recess

The meeting reconvened at 10:20 p.m.

Mr. Trawinski asked to have Mr. David Krueger placed under oath and qualified as an expert.

Mr. Falcon swore in the witness, who identified himself as Mr. David Krueger, 423 Main Street , Chester , NJ . Mr. Trawinski stated that the last exhibit in Mr. Krueger’s EIS dated February 5, 2003, is his CV, and having utilized Mr. Krueger as an expert, he is aware that this Board has accepted him and qualified him as an expert in environmental planning and analysis in at least one application. Mr. Trawinski, in the interest of time, requested that the Board accept Mr. Krueger as an expert in the field of environmental planning without placing his credentials on the record. Chairman Giordano said that this was a valid request, and asked if there were any members of the public that would like to question Mr. Krueger’s credential as an environmental expert, and there were none.

Mr. Trawinski asked Mr. Krueger if he prepared the Environmental Impact Statement that was referenced in the Connolly Environmental Report of April 11, 2003 , and Mr. Krueger said yes. Mr. Trawinski asked Mr. Krueger to confirm that his position is that, except for the limited items for discussion with the Board tonight, he is prepared to comply with all other items in the Connolly Environmental Report and submit the information or data requested, and Mr. Krueger confirmed that is accurate. Mr. Trawinski said they will discuss a couple of items with the Board, but it is their intention for Mr. Krueger to submit a revision to the EIS that addresses the issues required by Mr. Aubin. Mr. Krueger stated that he and Mr. Aubin have discussed some of the issues further, and for the most part, he is prepared to answer all of the items that have been addressed in his report satisfactorily.

Mr. Krueger referred to Sheet 5 of 56, entered into the record as Exhibit A-10, and said that the main issue is in regard to Lot 42.10 and noted that the building envelope circle on that lot does contain standard transition area within it. Mr. Krueger stated that as part of the transition area averaging plan, they have proposed that area as a reduction area within the normal guidelines that they believe are approvable through a transition area averaging plan. He said that Mr. Aubin would rather not reduce that area adjacent to that portion of the stream, and will let Mr. Aubin address this. Mr. Krueger said to be able to do that; they would need some relief from the building envelope circle on that lot to be able to have transition areas. He said they also discussed the option of allowing the possible of developing the rear of that lot, as well as lot 42.02. Mr. Krueger said the plan would be to request driveway permits for both of those lots to at least allow the option of a homeowner to build in a rear of the lot if they chose to do so, and the permits would be in place and would not have to worry about deed restrictions and conservation easements. He reiterated that lot 42.10 is the lot that has the issue with the reduction in the building envelope circle and on lot 42.02 the building envelope circle is completely outside of any transition area.

Mr. Aubin referred to Sheet 1 of 56, Exhibit A-1, and pointed out Liddell’s Pond and the Passaic River running downstream from it. He said that portion of the Passaic River is habitat for wood turtles and this particular stream on the property is directly tributary to that portion of the Passaic River . He said it is a very high probability that this is wood turtle habitat and any reduction in this area should be avoided. Mr. Aubin stated that if the Board could provide relief from the building envelope circle and restrict the development up to the front of the lot or to the rear of the lot, it would be very easy to have a driveway to access the rear of the lot without disturbing the stream further. He said that building a large house on the other lot off of Hardscrabble Road can have a very adverse affect on the aesthetic look of Hardscrabble Road and the ability to access the back side of the lot is already facilitated inasmuch as there is already a stream crossing there.

Mr. Trawinski said they need Board direction on this because they are going to submit an application to the DEP. He said if the Board is willing to give a variance on the building envelope circle, they have no problem submitting a permit that would do what Mr. Aubin has indicated.

Chairman Giordano asked for comments from the Board, and there was a full discussion. Mr. Kimball noted for the record that the variance criteria that could be utilized is that the planning benefits outweigh the detriments in this case, which is the positive criteria for the “C” variance. He said that in terms of the negative criteria, he does not see a detrimental impact on the Township’s overall zone plan but benefits, and that only leaves the criteria having to do with the public good. He noted that the public will be heard on that score and unless there are compelling reasons why it has a substantial impact on neighbors, he then suggested that those criteria would be also satisfied.

Chairman Giordano noted that the Board unanimously consented to the two variances for lot 42.10, and asked Mr. Falcon to note this accordingly.

Mr. Aubin said he agreed wholeheartedly with Mr. Kimball that the road alignment should be carefully looked at to see if it could squiggle around a little even if it affects lot sizes and requires variances in order to protect and maintain the relationship of the forest and the field. Mr. Aubin also raised the possibility of much smaller storm water management facilities rather than the six large detention basins proposed. A full discussion ensued around this issue, and Mr. Trawinski said they would need to discuss this matter further.

Discussion ensued regarding the upcoming schedule and the timing of the revisions to be made to the plans. Chairman Giordano stated that Mr. Trawinski had agreed to an extension date of July 17, 2003 , and placed this matter on the agenda at the June 18 and July 16 meetings.

Chairman Giordano then opened the meeting to the public.

Mr. Jim Sheehan, 74 Beverly Drive, raised several issues for discussion including: 1) the three phase development and when the horse farm ceases operation; 2) the possible road layouts; 3) the economics of the horse farm and the cost of this project; and 4) the safety issues at Hardscrabble Road and Beverly Drive, which Mr. Sheehan believes is a very hazardous condition. Chairman Giordano noted that Mr. Balut has referred this matter to the Bernardsville Township Engineer for comment.

Chairman Giordano asked for further questions from the public, and there were none. He stated that no further notice is needed, and this matter will be carried to the June 18 meeting and July 16 meeting.

SMCMUA – Clyde ’s Pott Water Treatment Plant

Resolution PB-03-14

Mr. Falcon referred to the draft of Resolution PB-03-14, paragraph 2(a) regarding reexamination of the use of external materials, and a full discussion then ensued regarding the use of stone versus brick.

Mr. Tolley left the meeting at 11:17 p.m.

Mr. D’Emidio made a motion to approve Resolution PB-03-14 as amended; Mayor Pierson seconded the motion, vote all aye.

MENDHAM GOLF & TENNIS CLUB – PADDLE TENNIS COURTS

Resolution PB-03-15

Mr. Falcon referred to the draft of Resolution PB-03-15 and noted that the resolution recites the facts and information that was presented to the Board, and a full discussion then ensued, particularly regarding the hours of operation.

Mr. D’Emidio made a motion to approve Resolution PB-03-15 as amended; Mrs. Kinsel seconded the motion, vote all aye.

MENDHAM GOLF & TENNIS CLUB – PUMP HOUSE

Resolution PB-03-16

Mr. Falcon referred to the draft of Resolution PB-03-16, which describes the testimony offered by the engineer, Mr. Boyle, and provides for the Board’s approval of the pump house as described, with no conditions.

Mr. D’Emidio made a motion to approve Resolution PB-03-16; Mrs. Kinsel seconded the motion, vote all aye.

CORRESPONDENCE/OTHER BUSINESS

Chairman Giordano advised of the appointment of a Special Master Plan Committee comprised of Mr. Tolley – acting as Chairman, Alan Willemsen, Mayor Pierson, Sara Dean Link, and Patricia Zimmerman.

Mayor Pierson referred to a note from Russ Heiney regarding open building permits at Irene’s Spring Tree Farm, and after discussion, it was noted that the Board would wait to hear further from Mr. Heiney regarding the status of these violations at the June 16, 2003 , meeting.

Chairman Giordano referred to a letter from the Brookside Fourth of July Parade Committee regarding participation in the “Best Float” portion of the parade.

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 11:47 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Hope Warrington, Secretary