|
MINUTES
MENDHAM
TOWNSHIP
PLANNING BOARD
WORKSHOP MEETING
SEPTEMBER 7, 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, Mayor Pierson, Mr. D’Emidio (arrived
7:47pm
), Mr. Majorossy
(arrived
7:53pm
), Mrs. Link, Mr.
Mountain and Mr. Timpson
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
.
MINUTES
FOR APPROVAL –
May
19, 2004
– vote all aye
BOARD
OF ADJUSTMENT RESOLUTION DATED 7.8.04
Mrs.
Pat Zimmerman and Mr. Joe Daley introduced themselves as members of the Board of
Adjustment and are present this evening to discuss the Board of Adjustment
Annual Resolution. Chairman Giordano
acknowledged that the Planning Board receives a well-written and insightful
resolution from the Board of Adjustment annually regarding suggestions and the
purpose of the discussion tonight is to fully understand the issues before the
BOA.
Mr.
D’Emidio arrived at the meeting at
7:47
p.m.
Mrs.
Zimmerman referred to the report given to the Planning Board that outlined 2002
cases and initiated discussion about the use of the accessory building problem.
She read aloud the specific definition of accessory building in the
zoning ordinance. Chairman Giordano
explained that the Planning Board was interested in learning more about recent
cases because the PB is disinclined to recommend new ordinances if there is not
a current problem. Mrs. Zimmerman
gave an example of a situation that has not come before the BOA and referred to
a red and white barn attached to a home by some kind of fencing used as a
breezeway, which makes it part of the residence from the standpoint of the
ordinance. She said there are three
examples of this type of situation, and there is no way of knowing what is in
those buildings, and there is always the possibility it is an apartment
Mayor
Pierson read aloud the definition of a breezeway from the definitions section of
the ordinance.
Mr.
Majorossy arrived at the meeting at
7:53
p.m.
Mayor
Pierson said the red barn on
Winston
Farm Lane
was built first and then the main house was built.
Mrs. Zimmerman stated that it is inappropriate to have accessory
buildings in front yards, and in these situations, the buildings are all in
front of the principal residence. She
further said if a resident wants to come to the BOA, they could perhaps get a
variance, but the way the definition is written, it could be done without a
variance. Mrs. Zimmerman said the
BOA has had applicants come in with a lot the exact size of zoning with two
residences, and the resident wants to tear down one home to build another one
and then retain the second home for in-laws or a nanny.
She said they come in and ask for variance, but all they have to do is
build a pergola or stone wall. Chairman
Giordano asked what the ordinance is trying to achieve by allowing something to
be connected. Mayor Pierson said it
was assumed that it would be a breezeway from a cape cod to a garage and
believes a wall is something that was not caught.
A
discussion ensued about the sizes, lengths and types of breezeways.
Chairman
Giordano stated that the Planning Board now had a better understanding of the
problem, and Mayor Pierson suggested the possibility of adjusting for the length
of the breezeway, limiting it to “x” number of feet, and consider
eliminating the wall or other things that were not contemplated.
Mr. Tolley suggested the concept of covered space only with a 25 foot
maximum and restriction of the use of picket fences or walls.
Mrs. Kimball stated that in her experience the definition of breezeway
usually says it is connected to the principal building and it goes to the use of
the structure, and it is really up to the Planning Board.
She said an ordinance cannot address every circumstance but it seems that
some amendment of the definition is in order.
Mr. Falcon said the Board’s desired approach seems to indicate two
restrictions -- to limit in some fashion the distance between the buildings and
to make the requirements of the official connection a substantial one.
Mr. D’Emidio referred to Mrs. Kimball’s comment about nothing being
built further than the front façade and the breezeway could be closed or open
as long as it is a permanent structure with a roof.
He said that kind of recommendation could be submitted to the Township
Committee for their consideration. He
further said that if anyone comes in with a good argument as to why their
garage/barn/den has to be a little farther away, they would then have the option
to go before the BOA.
Mrs.
Zimmerman stated that the BOA wants to better understand what is desired by the
ordinances and wants to be fair with the residents and be consistent with the
ordinance. Mr. Tolley asked Mrs.
Zimmerman and Mr. Daley if the direction the PB was suggesting was acceptable,
and they said yes. Chairman Giordano
placed a discussion of a modest revision of the ordinance on the workshop
meeting agenda for
October
4, 2004
.
Mr.
Daley addressed the next issue of fencing and explained that the question of
fencing is largely a matter of neighbor complaints around heights and being too
close and suggested it would be better to spell out what is required or
permitted. Chairman Giordano said
that he is aware of other towns that regulate fences and some that do not, and
he asked Mayor Pierson if the Township Committee had considered the fencing
issue. Mayor Pierson said yes and
noted the gate ordinance that arose out of emergency access needs and the
automatic openings of gates. He
recalled that fencing has been discussed over the years but there are so many
different ways of dividing properties, and planting has been encouraged instead.
Mayor Pierson noted that the deer fences that residents have invested in
are 8 feet and almost invisible with the materials that are used today.
A
discussion ensued regarding various examples of fences in the community, such as
the solid stockade type, and issues around aesthetics and privacy.
Mr. Daley referred to stockade fences at corners and obstructing the view
of drivers, and it was noted that line of sight is state law and stockade fences
at corners cannot obstruct the view of drivers.
Mrs. Zimmerman read aloud a memo from Mr. Russ Heiney, Construction
Official, regarding responding to questions about fencing.
Mr. Mountain said that Mr. Read, DPW Official, has had fences moved when
located in the right of way.
Chairman
Giordano asked for input from the members of the Planning Board in an effort to
reach a general consensus on fences. Mayor
Pierson said that if anything, the only thing he would be comfortable doing is
banning stockade fences in the front yard. He
also said he would want to have public hearings on this matter because there are
lots of people on both sides of the issue. Mr.
Majorossy suggested limiting the height of wooden fences to 6 feet in height and
anything greater than 6 feet would need to be composed of semi-transparent
material or chain link fence. Mrs.
Kimball noted that anything taller than 7 feet in Harding must comply with
setbacks. Mr. D’Emidio suggested
making a recommendation regarding solid fences in the front yard, and Mr. Tolley
said that makes a lot of sense from a safety standpoint also.
Chairman
Giordano asked Mr. Falcon to come back to the Planning Board with some suggested
language for modifying Item “B” to ban solid fencing in front yards and a
height restriction of no more than 4 feet for solid fences.
Mrs.
Zimmerman then referred to Item “C” regarding the operation of a home
occupation and suggested that by limiting non-professionals to no employees,
commuter traffic can be reduced by telecommuting or by allowing only one person.
Mayor Pierson said this has been discussed and the Township Committee
came to the conclusion of waiting until this becomes a problem and then address
the issue. Mr. Tolley said these
businesses do exist in the Township, and it’s becoming more and more prevalent
for some to work out of their home. Mayor
Pierson stated that this has not become a problem.
Mrs.
Zimmerman referred to Item “D” regarding the definition of a professional
practice and noted the difference is that the BOA is suggesting that
professional practices are made a conditional use so that the Planning Board can
work with the people to provide adequate off-street parking.
Mr. D’Emidio asked if there was a current problem with this, and Mrs.
Zimmerman said she could not cite a problem.
Mr. Timpson noted that the vet does have a considerable amount of parking
on the street, and Mayor Pierson said he would rather see parking on the street
than in the yard. Mr. D’Emidio and
Mr. Tolley both said they did not see a problem with the parking.
Mrs. Zimmerman stated that she would report back to the BOA that there
are no changes in “C” and “D;” they will remain as they are.
Mrs.
Zimmerman referred to Item “E” regarding the revisions to the cellular tower
ordinance and noted that this recommendation is in anticipation of another cell
tower applicant coming in. Mayor
Pierson said the Township’s cell tower ordinance listing the 36 sites is null
and void, and there has not been a big push to put it back in, as we have no
cell tower site that would be appropriate since we have no commercial zones.
Mrs. Zimmerman stated that she would report back to the BOA that at this
time the ordinance does not exist.
Mrs.
Zimmerman referred to Item “F” regarding lighting, and Mr. Daley noted that
there are different sections of the ordinance that have different lighting
requirements and it would be helpful to consolidate these in some way.
A discussion ensued around problems with lighting, and Mayor Pierson
suggested that the Board Secretary distribute Sections 2117, 2121, 2113 and 2142
to the Planning Board to better familiarize themselves with these sections.
Mrs. Zimmerman said one of the problems the BOA has is that lighting is
located in all different places in the ordinance, and the BOA thought it would
be helpful to dedicate it to one section. She
also suggested the possibility of budgeting for the indexing of zoning
ordinances. Mr. Mountain said that
Mrs. Newell has requested quotes from codifiers and once those pricing quotes
for the land use ordinance are received, the Township Committee will discuss it.
He also said there is money in the current budget that would at least get
the process kick started among the professionals on the land use side.
Mrs. Zimmerman and Mr. Daley pointed out how helpful it would be to have
the date included on new ordinances when they are added.
Mayor Pierson said this was a good point, and Chairman Giordano noted
that this is not a recommendation of the Planning Board but Mr. Mountain will
pass this suggestion on to Mrs. Newell.
Mr. Tolley asked about a CD version of the ordinances, and Mr. Mountain
said it was to be included in the proposal so it can be attached to the website.
Mrs.
Zimmerman thanked the Planning Board, on behalf of the BOA, for inviting them to
come to the meeting and explain their recommendations.
Chairman Giordano asked Mrs. Zimmerman and Mr. Daley to come back to the
October 4 meeting to continue discussion on Mr. Falcon’s recommendations and
said that copies of such will be provided to the BOA.
BACKLAND
LOT
ORDINANCE
Chairman
Giordano referred to the draft backland lot ordinance from Mr. Balut and Mr.
Kimball, and noted that this is the first time he has seen the draft.
Mrs. Kimball stated that the backland lot ordinance requires double the
acreage and since up zoning to five and ten acres, Mr. Kimball and Mr. Balut
felt that this ordinance is not really effective under the new RSIS standards.
She said they feel and concur that flag lots should be permitted in five
and ten-acre zones and what would be allowed is a subdivision of up to 4 lots on
a common driveway rather than a street. She
said this technically wouldn’t come under RSIS standards as she understands
it. Mrs. Kimball said that requiring
1-1/2 times the acreage is adequate in backlands and should be encouraged
because the backlands would be developed in a low impact way rather than
subdividing under normal conditions. She
said the single flag lot has its own staff, but Mr. Balut feels multiple flags
should not be permitted.
Mr.
Tolley referred to subdividing four lots from a safety standpoint and the
possibility of having extremely long roads, which could be a couple of thousand
feet. He said a 12-foot road, 1,000
feet long and topography could be a problem and sees that as an issue.
He said he would like to talk with Mr. Balut and Mr. Kimball about the
1.5 times because he was thinking it should be a little larger.
Mayor Pierson said he would like to look at a map and think about what
would be done with these houses and the need for cisterns.
Mrs. Kimball said it could be required to have the 10 acres exclusive of
the staff.
Chairman
Giordano placed this matter on the agenda for further discussion with Mr. Balut
and Mr. Kimball at the
November
1, 2004
,
Workshop Meeting.
DRAFT
HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
Chairman
Giordano referred to the draft memo that had been distributed in which he made
an attempt to capture the comments of PB members from the last meeting.
He said that based upon that, both Mr. Tolley and Mrs. Link have
submitted separate e-mails, which have been attached to the packets.
He said he planned to have Mrs. Warrington send this packet to the
Township Committee with the cover letter and an index attaching the actual
ordinance, the letter from Mr. Maw, the fee schedule, the letter from Mr. Tolley
and the letter from Mrs. Link.
Mr.
Tolley moved to pass this packet on to the Township Committee in the manner just
suggested by Chairman Giordano.
Mayor
Pierson stated that a lot of good input has come out of this, and noted that
everyone has grappled with what is an old home and he has always had problems
with 50 years or more. He said this
was an attempt to try and save the 1700s and 1800s houses in this Township that
were most at risk. Mr. Timpson said
the basic misconception is the definition of historic houses and noted that the
Township Committee would determine this, not the HPC.
Mayor Pierson said that this group has hashed out the many of the things
we are concerned about, and he was wondering if it helped anyone if the age of
the houses was limited. Mr. Tolley
said we are not talking about historic houses, but landmarks.
Chairman Giordano stated that the only
thing Mrs. Warrington was going to change in the memo is the addition of the
last sentence in 2. -- people were also satisfied with the one year delay.
Mr. Timpson said that one section from the land use ordinance is missing
from this, which says the Planning Board must review all zoning and land use
ordinances first to determine its consistency with the Master Plan, and second
other issues. He said this is all
about other issues, and there’s no mention at all about its consistency with
the Master Plan and he feels that should be included.
Mr. Tolley said that would be true if it were presented to the Planning
Board by the Township Committee, but this is an informal presentation by the HPC,
not formal comment. Mr. Mountain
said it would be sent back to the Planning Board after it was first introduced
by the Township Committee.
Mr.
Timpson asked Chairman Giordano why his vote was excluded. Chairman Giordano
responded that it was his understanding that Mr. Timpson’s representation of
the HPC excluded him, and he did not think anyone on the Township Committee
would doubt which way the presenter of this matter would vote.
Mr. Timpson said when Mr. Tolley presented the ordinance for lot size
averaging, he presented it, made the motion and voted on it, and Mr. Timpson
wanted to know why his vote was not included in a straw poll for the HPC
presentation. Chairman Giordano said
it was the Chair’s understanding that Mr. Timpson was representing the HPC and
based upon that, he excluded Mr. Timpson’s vote with explicit notation in the
memo of the exclusion. Chairman
Giordano stated the vote was taken, and it is done, and he does not understand
why there is a problem. Chairman
Giordano said it was a 4-3 straw poll, and he assumed that Mr. Timpson was going
to present this to the Township Committee.
Mrs.
Link noted that she had redrafted her letter, and it basically says the same
thing but this version is the new one.
Chairman Giordano asked the Board
Secretary to handle distribution of the packet to the Township Committee.
RIGHT OF WAY VACATION REQUEST –
COBBLEFIELD DRIVE
Mr.
Mountain noted that the Township Committee received this request from Mr. David
Pulver and Mr. Bernie Herman. He
said this is a similar type request that is received from other properties with
an easement right of way existing on it. Mr.
Mountain explained that this property backs up to Irene’s Spring Tree Farm,
and Mr. Pulver had contacted Mr. Balut during the course of the Spring Tree
process, and he was advised by Mr. Balut that it was best to wait and let the
application go through the process. Mr.
Mountain said he spoke with Mr. Balut this afternoon, and his comment is that,
at this point, much like he advised the Board regarding the Beverly Drive
request, he does not see an issue with maintaining this easement and the Board
making the recommendation to the Township Committee for the vacation of this
easement, unless the Board has some reason other than he can see.
Mrs.
Link recalled hearing that the Open Space Committee was trying to get a trail
easement through Spring Tree Farm. She
suggested talking with the Open Space Committee to see if this right of way
could be part of that connection before abandoning that right of way.
Mr. D’Emidio said he saw no reason to rush this.
Mayor Pierson said there are a couple of ways of having this path, but he
said it certainly would be good to hold this just in case it needs to be
utilized. He said he spoke with Mr.
Larry Irene about a month ago, and Mr. Irene is amenable to the path.
Mr. D’Emidio asked about the conservation easement noted on the
diagram, and Mrs. Link said she thinks it is a pedestrian easement.
Mr. D’Emidio said he would like to see a bigger map and know more about
that and the potential one between lots 24 and 25.
Chairman
Giordano asked Mrs. Warrington to add this for follow up and send this request
to emergency services for input. Mr.
Mountain said he would respond in writing to Mr. Pulver and Mr. Herman.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman
Giordano referred to the correspondence received by all, and there were no
questions or concerns. Chairman Giordano recapped that the October 4 agenda
includes the Board of Adjustment Resolution discussion and the November 1 agenda
includes the backlands lot ordinance. He
asked the Board if there was any objection to canceling the September 15
meeting, and there was none.
Mr.
Tolley updated the Board on
Woodland
Lakes
and noted that the
committee is waiting for a site plan; however,
Woodland
Lakes
does have the
original site plan utilized to approve the development in 1970.
He said it is not exactly accurate in terms of houses that exist now and
sidesteps the issue of setbacks. He
said it is a pretty good
map and may be good enough for the committee’s purposes, and the committee
will evaluate how to proceed. He
said the cost to do what the BOA wants is $40,000.
Mr. Tolley said that pictures are available in the Board Secretary’s
office, and the committee will probably meet again in October.
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
9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Hope Warrington
Planning Board Secretary
| 
