TOWNSHIP OF MAHWAH
PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES
MARCH 9, 2009 MEETING
1.OPENING STATEMENT
The combined public/work session meeting of the Planning Board of the Township of Mahwah held at the MunicipalBuilding, 475 Corporate Dr., Mahwah, N.J. was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mr. Sherer,Acting-Chairman. The Opening Statement was read according to the Sunshine Law followed by the flag salute and roll call.
These minutes are a synopsis of the meeting. A verbatim audio tape recording is on file with the Board Secretary at the Planning Board Office, 475 Corporate Dr., Mahwah, N. J. Copies of the tapes may be purchased for a fee.
PRESENT:Mr. DaPuzzo (7:05),Mayor Martel, Mr.Spiech, Mr. Crean, Mr. Rudolph, Mr. Sherer(Acting-Chairman) and Mr. Williams
ABSENT: Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Jandris, Dr. Ross and Mr. Donigian
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE WERE BOARD PROFESSIONALS:
Planning Board Attorney,Peter Scandariato, Esq.,Engineering Consultant,Michael J. Kelly, P.E. and Planning Consultant,Joseph Burgis, P.P.
II.APPROVAL OF BILLS
Peter J. Scandariato, Esq. Meetings of 1/12/092/9/09 $400.00
Phillips Nizer, LLP Misc. Legal Services- January 2009 $5,157.00
A motion to approve the bills was made by Mr. Spiech and seconded by Mr.Crean. All voted in favor.
III.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the minutes of February 9, 2009 was made by Mr. Spiech and seconded by Mr. Rudolph. All voted in favor.
IV.MEMORIALIZING RESOLUTIONS
NONE
V.OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
A motion to open the meeting to the Public was made by Mr. Spiech and seconded by Mr. DaPuzzo. All voted in favor.
Planning Board Minutes
March 9, 2009
Page 2
- PUBLIC HEARINGS
DKT. #517A-OTO Development, LLC, 280 Route 17 South, Bl. 136, Lot 5;
Review of Signage Submission. The Board carried the application to the April 13, 2009 meeting for the initial public hearing.
DKT.#520 – Continuation of the Public Hearing on the Minor Subdivision
Application of the Estate of Marion Wiersma, Forest Avenue, Block 154, Lot 55 from the February 9, 2009 meeting.
Forrest Merrill, Attorney at Lawrepresented the applicant in this matter. At the February 9 meeting, the applicant presented plans in accordance with the application marked A-1 and A-2. Since that meeting, the applicant has submitted a revision to A-1.Project Engineer, Doug Doolittlewill testify to the revisions since the last meeting. Mr. Merrill explained the planshave been revised to eliminate the two variances that the applicant was seeking with regard to the accessory structure on one of thelots. The variances were for side and rear yard setbacks. He further stated that they met with the Fire Code Official and Construction Code Official, to discuss the widening of the driveway and the installation of a by-pass on the driveway which would permit access for emergency vehicles in the event there were two vehicles on the driveway at the same time.
At the February 9 meeting, the Planning Board asked the applicant to come back with an update as to what was happeningwith the applicant’s joint application before the Ramsey Planning Board. Mr. Merrill reported they were before Ramsey for a second appearance last week. They tendered their revised plan and finished their presentation. However, due to the application before the board, there was a procedural problem with the notice and at the conclusion of the applicant’s testimony, the Ramsey Planning Board carried the application for further discussion and deliberation.
At this time, Mr. Merrill called upon Mr. Doolittle who was previously sworn in. Mr. Doolittle will testify as to what the revisions are on the applicant’s plan.From the review of the amended application and review letters, there are no variances or waivers being required at this time. The application is now a simple minor subdivision application.
The following exhibit was marked for identification.
A-3 Previously marked Exhibit A-1 revised through February 19, 2009.
Mr. Doolittletestified the plan was revised to eliminate the two variances for rear yard and side yard setbacks along the existing garage that was to remain on the property.
Planning Board Minutes
March 9, 2009
Page 3
They took the property lot line that goes around the existing garage and moved further to the west and to the south. They jogged it along the 140 lot dimension back from the right-of-way, which is where the town property in Ramsey zoning ends and brought it past the garage on the side yard with 15 ft. to a right angle point at the back and ran east 30 ft. off the back of the garage. Basically, they have eliminated the variances and now have a clean application.
Mr. Doolittle continued testifying in meeting with the Fire Official and Construction Official,at their direction; they have taken the entrance driveway and widen it from 10’ to 15’ for the reason of being to get an emergency vehicle comfortably into this site. There is a by-passthat’s been put on the property just southwest of the garage, on the new property that would be the vacant parcel and they requested to extend the fire hydrant back tothe easement 10’ wide so there would be a hydrant at the property for the pumper to be able to pump water in case of a fire.
The plan showedtrees to be removed 4” in diameter and greater. It also depicts 19 trees to be removedbased on the drawing for theproposed construction. They re-adjusted the Zone Table to eliminate the variances and change the required setbacks and sideyards. Mr. Doolittle noted that the revisions made to the lot lines around the side and rear of the accessory structure will not have any effect on the variance being requested from Ramsey. They can maintain the 15 ft.off the side of the garage and still satisfy the Ramsey requirements.
Mr. Dapuzzo asked what the total number of trees were to be removed? Mr. Doolittle
stated a total of 20 trees are proposed to be removed, 19 in Mahwah, 1 in Ramsey.
Mr. Kelly indicated that the total number of replacement trees was five, one tree for every four trees taken down. Mr. Doolittle will put that note on the plan and become part of the application.The applicant will comply with the Environmental Commission requirements to satisfy the tree replacement and soil movement application when the new home is constructed.
Mr. Kelly followed up with questions for the witness. How did the applicant anticipate filing the subdivision, by deeds or by map?If by map, the applicant would have to meet all the requirements of the map filing law. Prior to filing the map, the applicant would have to remove any shared improvements, the driveway that goes back to the other lot. The applicant was asked to provide a monument detail.
Mr. Kelly asked Mr. Merrill what was Ramsey’s position with respect to providing water and sewer? Mr. Merrillspoke with Mahwah Business Administrator, Mr. Campion and reviewed the Inter-Local Agreement. His understanding after speaking with Mr. Campion and the officials from Ramsey, was that the new house would be a Ramsey WaterCustomer and Mahwah Sanitary SewerCustomer subject to the allocation pursuant to the
Planning Board Minutes
March 9, 2009
Page 4
Inter-Local Agreement between the two towns that was last amended in 2007. He did not review it with the Ramsey Planning Board.By the terms of the instrument, Ramsey anticipatedfuture additions to the inventory of properties. His understanding is that neither Mahwah or Ramsey considersit until the lot is in existence. Mr. Doolittleindicated that Ramsey’s Engineer did not review it. The Ramsey Planning Board did state that if the application was approved, it would be conditionedupon the engineer’s review of the documentand making sure there was adequate capacity there.Mr. Kellystated that if the applicant did not get Ramsey’s water approval, they would have to come back to this board to put in a well.
The Board asked why the water and sewer was not coming from the same municipality.
Mr. Kelly was not sure why the new lot would be a Mahwah sewer customer. He did know that Ramsey water would be directed the sewer system which maybe directed into Mahwah.
All the comments in Mr.Burgis, P.P.previous memo have been addressed. He directed a question to the witness that was raised at the last meeting regarding the street addressfor purposes of emergency service protection.Mr. Merrill clarifiedthere is a Forest Road in Mahwah and aForest Avenue in Ramsey.
Mayor Martelrecalled at the last meeting, the applicant was asked to look into how emergency response would be addressed. Mr. Doolittle responded that one of the comments that Ramsey requestedwhich the applicant has agreed to, was to put a pillar out front with a street number, street name and the town name so that the emergency response would knowwhere the address was.
Mayor Martel expressed disappointment that the applicant has not taken upon themselves to try and find out the issue governing, water, sewer and emergency services which were brought up at the last meeting. These issues did not seem to be resolved and should have been addressed with Ramsey, so the Board had answers with that regard for tonight’s meeting.Mr. Merrill stated with regard to emergency response, they met with Tom Dillon who told them that any 911 calls that came in, Mahwah would be the receiving town for that and they would respond.Mr. Dillon did not seem to think it would be a problem. Mayor Martel in speaking with an official inRamsey was told because of the fact that there is a Forest Road in Mahwah and a Forest Avenue in Ramsey and because both towns have a mutual emergency response agreements, that it would be no problem for Ramsey to handle this particular property to avoid any disaster happening. Mr. Merrill
did receive a response from Mahwah’s Police Chief who had no comments.
Planning Board Minutes
March 9, 2009
Page 5
The Board asked how the emergency calls are handled for the homes located in the Fox Meadows Subdivison. Mr. Merrill did discuss that subdivision with Ramsey. They were familiar with it and it is pretty much the same situation as the application before the board.
Mr. Merrill received from Township Business Administrator, Brian Campion a copy of the inter-local agreement. He did not anticipate that there would be any problem in adding this lot to the agreement. By the terms of the agreement, they specifically refer to future properties that would be added to it. They brought it up before the Ramsey Board. No one expressed any concern that it would not be added.
Mr. Merrill indicated that the pipe servicing the lot startsfrom one jurisdiction and ends upintheother.He mentioned there is a mechanism in the agreement if the other town should accept the flow from the other town, the mechanism is there for adjusting it and billing between the two municipalities. Mr. Kellystated the only difference was this was not just a house service, there is a 6” water main that will extend off the stub and then off this 6’ main is the house service.It is a little different than a normal lateral to a house. He recommended Ramsey look at it.
Mr. Spiech followed up with questions for Mr. Doolittle on the Fire Hydrant. Mr. Doolittle clarified this is going to be a privately owned fire hydrant. The applicant will be responsible for the service and maintenance of it and will be recorded as an easement.
The Mahwah Fire Prevention agreed the 6” main would be sufficient.Mr. Kelly asked the applicant to add a note to the plans that clearing states it is a private line. This way if the
lot wasto be approved and built, the township will have it on record as a private line and that Mahwah assumes no responsibility for the maintenance of it.
The Board asked if the applicant received their approval from Ramsey.
Mr. Merrill informed the board that the applicant’s presentation was concluded at the last meeting with Ramsey. The application was carried for consideration to their next meeting on April 7th.
There were no further questions from the board members.
A motion to open the meeting to the Public was made by Mr. DaPuzzo and seconded by Mr. Williams. All voted in favor.
Linda Moor, 186 Forest Avenue, Ramsey, NJ, questioned the witness on the driveway issue in terms of emergency services responding with other vehicles parked in the driveway and would parking restrictions be neededon that driveway in order to assure adequate access to the hydrant and to the home.
Planning Board Minutes
March 9, 2009
Page 6
Mr. Doolittle stated he did not see the need for any parking restrictions. Mrs. Moor asked if the 19 trees in Mahwah included both the driveway and the house. Mr. Doolittle responded “both”. She questioned the fire hydrant maintenance being undertaken by the property owner and asked who would verify that the Fire Hydrant was being adequately maintained to the sufficient level that a Fire Department would require in order to use the hydrant.
Mr. Doolittle believed the Fire Department did not require any level that it needed to be maintained. The property owner would self-maintain the hydrant and have it tested and flushed when required, which he believed was twice a year.
Mrs. Moor asked if the Midvale Roads being referred to were actual roads or private driveways that have configurations similar to this situation. Mr. Doolittle stated Midvale Road was an actual road (right-of-way).
Mr. Craig Andreotta,58 Highwood Drive, Ramsey, cross-examined the witness onhis testimony. His first question was with regard to the requirements for maintaining a fire hydrant. Mr. Doolittle confirmed there is a requirement by law. The information was provided to them by Tom Dillon, the Mahwah Fire Prevention Inspector. Mr. Andreotta
requested copies of all reports received by the board in order to have the opportunity to review them and ask questions. Copies of the reports were provided. Mr. Andreotta asked if the requirements and additional comments in the Fire Prevention report have to be met by the applicant. Mr. Scandariatostatedthat if it is shown on the plan then the applicant must comply with the plan and adhere to all the conditionsin the resolution of approval.Mr. Doolittle will amend the plan to comply withfire prevention report.
Mr. John D’Anton, Esq.. appearing on behalf of Peter and Rafaelina Lella of Mahwah
cross-examined the witness on his testimony. He asked Mr. Doolittle why the 300’long driveway makes so many bends as opposed to making it a straight run back to the house driveway. Mr. Doolittle explained the reasons are they are trying to traverse the existing driveway that services the existing dwellingand remove the least amount of trees as possible. Mr. D’Anton asked if the driveway plan design would make it difficult for the emergency response vehicles to navigate the driveway. He noticed there were no provisions on the plan for no restrictions of parking either on the driveway or the area by the house which looks like an extension of the driveway. Mr. Doolittle did not see thatbeing an issue.Mr.Scandariatoanswered Mr. D’Anton’s question that Ramsey and Mahwah did not have the authority to put restrictions on a private driveway.
Mr. Spiech asked who will pick-up the recyclables and refuse from this house. Mr. Merrill was told by Ramsey that there was another inter-borough agreement for the pick-ups. That would have to be worked out between the town’s DPW coordinators as to how
Planning Board Minutes
March 9, 2009
Page 7
they will exchange services. Mr. Merrill believed it is resolvable between towns. Mr. Merrill brought up the allocation of taxes when there is a split lot and that it would be taken up by the Tax Assessor’s Office. Mr. Merrill had a copy of the inter-local agreement which specifically referred to the four Mahwah lots in the Fox Meadow Subdivision which indicated that they would be Ramsey water customers and Mahwah sanitary sewer customers and refers to the mechanism in there by which there is an allocation of the sewer charges. Mr. Merrill did not see any provision for recyclables and trash removal. Mr. DaPuzzo was not aware of any inter-local agreement for trash and recyclables.
Mr. Merrill assured the board that it would be rectified and worked out.
A motion to close the portion of the meeting for public questions was made by Mr. DaPuzzo and seconded by Mr. Williams. All voted in favor.
A motion to open the meeting for public comments was made by Mr. DaPuzzo and seconded by Mr. Williams.
Mr. Craig Andreotta, 58 Highwood Drive, Ramsey lives across the street from property.
He stated at last month’s meeting he was under the pretense thatthis meeting would not take place because the applicant had not received Ramsey approvals. He also believed that was a condition of this meeting. Mr. Andreotta stated his main objections to the proposed subdivision. The lots in theneighborhood are very uniform in size and dimensions.He had concerns with the various Mahwah Department Reports. He was not satisfied that those reports were well documented. No reports were seen from Ramsey’s Department Officials that they have agreed to certain terms and conditions being proposed this evening.