to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. All right. Um, statement of adequate
notice under the sunshine law. Adequate notice in accordance with the open public meetings act was provided on January 16th, 2025 of this meeting's date, time, and location. The agenda was mailed to the Cranary Press and Home News Tribune, posted on the township bulletin board, mailed to those requesting personal notice, and filed
with the municipal clerk. Roll call, please. Miss Anderson, >> here. >> Miss Elbadawi, >> here. >> Mr. Giddings, >> here. >> Miss Conram, >> here. >> Mr. Mildenberg is out. Mr. Mucelli >> here. >> Mr. Pulk
>> here. >> Mr. Stewart >> here. >> And Mr. Whitman >> here. Thank you everybody. >> First on the >> excuse me, first item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes from August 7th, 2025.
Are there any corrections, comments on those? [Music] >> Hearing none, I'd like to have a motion to approve. >> So moved. >> I'd like to have a second. >> Second. >> Okay.
One second. All right. Roll call for the August 7th minutes. Miss Anderson, >> here. >> Yes. >> Miss Conram, >> yes. >> Mr. Mucelli, >> yes. >> Mr. Pulk, >> yes. >> And Mr. Whitman,
>> yes. >> Thank you. >> Excuse me, keep leaving that off. At this point in time, I'd like to open it up to the public for comments for items not on the agenda. Hearing no public comment for items not
on the agenda, I'm going to close that portion of the meeting and go into our application for the meeting. >> Chair, before you do that, um do we uh will we be approving the meet the minutes from the special meeting at the next meeting?
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Did we need to do that tonight or >> I believe that we we need to do that. We've had special meetings any minutes. I believe we >> Well, we're going to do that, but did we need to do it tonight? >> No. I just wanted to make sure that >> Yeah. No, we're going to do that. Yes. >> Did it. That was my question. Are we
going to >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um item first item on the agenda in fact only item on the agenda is application PB 407-25 BP properties LLC
and we carrying this over correct >> correct so they didn't need to renotice. >> Okay. Now will will all our prof the >> I think if um our fact that everybody was sworn in that still carries over. >> Okay. And you're not bringing anybody
new to testify tonight? >> Mr. same witnesses. Two did testify, but all three >> use the mic. >> Yeah, the right button >> there. >> No, the right >> that one. >> There you go.
>> Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are three witnesses. Scott Kennel did not testify at the last hearing. I don't know that he'll testify this evening. He's >> he's a traffic expert. He's here just in case there are questions. Would you like to? >> Yeah, we should swear him in and then
get his qualifications. >> Okay, then why don't you just come up and >> Yeah, >> very fine. >> Right hand. You swear that the testimony that you're about to give before the sports truth, cold truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Okay. And then uh you want to give your qualifications?
>> Scott Kennel, Ken Nel, with Mcdana and Ray Associates. Okay. On Lakewood Road, Manisquon. Uh, I'm a principal with Mcdana and Ray Associates with over 40 years of traffic and transportation planning experience. I testified before this board a number
of years ago, but I've testified in over 2,000 site plan applications and I've been qualified by the New Jersey Superior Court as a traffic expert. >> We will accept your qualifications. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much, >> Mr. Chair, members of the board, boards,
professionals, this is an application that began on July 10th. It's a two lot minor subdivision. It's the property that is between Maplewood and Ryan. And we after presenting the application to the board, the board members and board
professionals all shared considerable comments with regard to elements of the design. And this evening we would like to present a modification of the design to you for your consideration. The people who I intend to call are Peter
Strong who is the engineer who previously testified as the engineer and will continue to do so and Mr. James Kyle who is our planner. The planning testimony will address the revisions that were made to the plan. Is that acceptable to you, Mr. Chair? >> Yes, it is.
>> Thank you. Then Mr. Strong, who was qualified as a professional engineer and placed under oath. I'll remind him that he's under oath and ask that he begin presenting to you the revision the plans that were were revised. I think we should be marking
>> I think we're up to exhibit A4, right? >> I have two exhibits. >> Okay. >> One of which is >> Oh, that's A3 then. >> Hello. Hear me? Uh yeah, one I gave this to Gina after the last hearing. I wasn't sure it was going to be available again,
so I just reprinted it and brought it again. It's just the >> Was it already marked though? There was an A3. I remember, but we didn't talk about it. >> I don't know what the >> um All right, let me see what it was. >> Um we had an A3 that was the minor sub a colorized minor subdivision blown up
map. Is that that? Uh, no that's this is the aerial this is an aerial map showing the vicinity of I think it was A1 >> the site >> so we're this is A1 and you already have it marked we're good okay >> so I don't need I don't need to bring this one >> yeah that's again I just wanted to bring
it along just in case and refresh everybody as to where where the site is um L-shaped piece of property on Maplewood and Ryan Road just off of Route 130 and Plansboro Road halfacre road so just to orient everybody as to where we're where we are
the uh the revised map. Um from the last meeting uh we uh heard the board's comments from from May 10, sorry, July 10th and um we we revised
the plan. The uh this plan shows the uh property outlined in yellow and proposed new subdivision line marked in green. What? >> Okay. And that one is a um is it's the one page um
>> yeah it's it's actually >> minor subdivision plan or is this a different >> actually sheet three or four of the set of plans. >> Okay. So A4 is um exhibit um is sheet three of four of the set I guess >> the new set. >> Yeah.
>> The revision date. >> So are we giving that a new exhibit number? We give them a new exhibit. A4 A4 A4. >> Could I just ask a question just because what's the difference between the
onepage minor subdivision plat and then the this set as far as like what does what does this one show that's different? Well, the the four sheet set shows a lot of information about uh the
property, the surrounding area, notes, details, other things. The the plat is the survey plan, >> the survey >> would actually if if we filed in in the county clerk's office to create the lot. That is the sheet that would get filed in the in the clerk's office. So the
other pages that you have, they don't have all the meets and bounds descriptions on them and such like there's no there's no sheet in that set that's showing the right >> meets and bounds like you have on this. >> Well, they the meats and bounds are on the other on the other plan,
>> but this will so you intend you intend when you um file this when you create these deeds to file do a filed map instead of a minor subdivision deeds. >> Well, we haven't decided. We haven't decided too minor. You have the option. >> I know
>> probably we would file the map because it's cleaner. >> Okay. >> Probably. >> Okay. But you >> Okay. >> We we create the plat along with the subdivision set of plans. >> Okay. >> Just in case somebody wants to file file it that way and it's it's relatively easy to do. So
>> Oh, I know. I mean, you could do it either way like your attorney said. So, I just wanted to clarify which one. >> It's okay. >> Okay. So, uh, the comments at the last board meeting, uh, were were several. Um, one was that the, uh, we we were
asking at that time for the subdivision line to be closer to, uh, Ryan Road, which would have created a rear yard variance to the existing dwelling, the six Ryan Road existing dwelling. Um,
where 40T is required by the zone. I think it was 21.7 feet at the time. Um, which uh created more room for the the new lot. Um, we had a bigger house box shown at the time and we're uh
encouraged to look at revising the subdivision line to move it away from Ryan Road. Uh, leave the 40 foot setback that the zone requires, create a new 40 foot setback on the new lot, and then reduce the house size. um
accordingly, which we have done um to uh uh satisfy those requirements. Uh we still um we still have the uh twocar garage and a twocar driveway and a turnaround on site that would uh help
preclude backing out onto Maplewood Avenue. Um, and those that's the the major change that took place on the plan. Reducing footprint, moving the lot line, uh, getting rid of the, uh, the 21.7 foot variance to the existing
dwelling. Um, this particular subdivision uh, still requires some variances. First off, the uh lot area for the new lot is 14,139 square ft instead of 15,000 that's
required in the zone. Um but we do respect the 40ft setbacks. Um as was emphasized to us at the last hearing. Um we still need a rear yard setback to the existing dwelling, but that's something
that's nothing we created. It's an existing condition. Um, it's 38.2 feet from this back corner here to the corner of the existing dwelling. So, that's a technical variance, but it's not something that's created by the subdivision. It's it's there regardless.
>> All right. So, let's let's sort of break this up in two parts. So, the the the h the the lot with the primary h I'm going to call the primary house the one that's already existing. >> You you you've eliminated the one variance. >> Yes. And the other one is an existing
condition that it's it's not like this was created. It's an existing condition that's was already there. >> That's correct. Yes. >> So I guess from them subdividing is that trip that into
that 38 ft as a variance then? >> Well, it's technically still a variance, but it's noted as an existing condition, right? That's where I'm trying to get at prove it, you know, again. >> Okay. So those are the So that's the only thing with the house on the front
that >> with regard to the zoning standards. Yes, Mr. Chairman. That's Yes, that's that's correct. >> I'm trying to boil it down and break this down into two parts. So we we pretty much >> eliminated one variance. The other one is a pre-existing condition. So that
that's not like we that's no fault of your own. That's the way the house was and it wouldn't be any different anywhere else. Um, >> that's correct. >> Okay. So, there are no other conditions on the front part of the or the primary property.
>> Correct. Zoning conditions. Everything else matches. Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> And you've looked at the and you're correct at the drainage in the backyard or at least try to address it then. So, >> Mr. Chairman, I think that we need to revisit that situation and make a
promise to this board that and we we went over it with our client early this afternoon. I think that we're going to have to add a drainage structure or do some minor regrading. We have a ponding condition. So, we acknowledge that it's there and we would be prepared to commit
to the board as any condition approval that it has to be solved to the satisfaction of your engineer. >> Mr. Chair, can I say something? >> Sure. The applicant uh this is Dave Hoder, engineer for the board. The applicant did put two dry wells on the property, one in the front, one towards
the back on the existing house. Um though they didn't do any connections to where maybe that ponding is. So they're going to have to figure out where the ponding is and put a couple small yard inlets in to make sure it drains into those dry wells. Otherwise, it looks good.
>> So just to clarify, those drywalls those those drywalls are not shown on this plan yet. >> They're shown on this plan. Yes. the newest the newest plan I have. >> I see associated with the new property. You said it's >> maybe I'm wrong. >> So you're looking at additional drywalls
on the existing property >> to the satisfaction of your engineer to solve that pond. >> I'm trying to break I'm I'm sorry for the board's sake. I'm trying to break this into two parts here because then we'll get on to the other part. I want to finish one and then go on to
the next one. Jason, you're correct. I hadn't hadn't looked at the plants since August 4th. >> Okay. >> Sorry. No problem. >> But yeah, they they they're going to have still have to address it. >> So, they know there's a water problem on the property and they've got two dry wells now. They can use the same design for the other ones because they're big.
600 gallons each. >> Good. Thank you. I think it's a lot more than that. I was just at the site again. >> Okay. >> And they built a patio that's not shown on these plans, which is, you know, probably
six, eight, 10 inches below the adjacent grade. >> Yeah, it'll have to be regraded, >> but the whole backyard drains to that patio, which is has sliding glass. >> Now, was that an existing patio that was there? >> It's wasn't on the survey when the
survey was done and it's brand new concrete. >> Oh, >> another another company did the survey since I've been associated with it. Um >> the uh patio has been there as far as I know. >> So it was built in correctly.
>> I the point made by Mr. Giddings, Mr. Chairman, >> we we noticed it. We brought it to our client's attention. We told it to client. We must agree to re rectify it. Client gave us permission to make that representation to you. We must fix that
situation. I'm offering to do it to the satisfaction of Mr. Hoder. While I totally trust all members, professional members here today, I I have a lot of the cloud of the buyer of the
owner of the property I have concerns about. You know, he hasn't been here for the two meetings. He's asking for a variance. He hasn't he hasn't shown things. Things haven't been appear to be totally forthright. There was a lot of removal of of shrub of
trees on the front property that wasn't included in the in the shade tree. I just want to make sure this is done correctly. He's selling the property. It's going to become the next the buyer's response, you know, issues. I don't want anyone coming back to the board saying, "Why did you approve
this?" The survey of the of the front property, in my opinion, is insufficient. There's a new concrete pad there that is 6 in higher than the garage floor. The drawings don't show that there's a brand new concrete
walkway just draining that water straight into the garage door. It's going to rot it out. It's just I'm very discouraged in what I've seen, you know, done here so far. I don't I don't feel like
it makes me question what this end product is going to be and what the buyers of the properties are going to get stuck with. So, I think it's really critical that whatever we do tonight. >> Well, that's what I'm trying to work this out. >> Make sure that this is fully addressed.
It's not minor drainage issues where the sanitary line is shown along the property. There's other landscaping that wasn't shown on the landscape plan, but the landscape plan, the tree removal plan still shows the old building, not the new building.
It's this isn't complete. I'm very I'm just disappointed personally. I've been out there twice. We were very clear on what we were looking for at the last meeting and we're here. You did a great job on scaling down the building, giving us the 40 foot setback. Still not happy with
the turnaround in the front of the house taking out the >> Well, let's let's focus on the on the front property first. Okay. And then we'll and then we're gonna then we'll go back into the second part. So on the front part of the property, we have drainage issues. We have landscape
issues. We have >> accurate survey, accurate representation of landscaping and what additional landscaping has to come out for the new sanitary line. Is there a new sanitary line that needs to be put into the property? >> Yes, there is. There is a uh there is no
sewer out in Maplewood Avenue. So, the sewer line for the house the new house. >> No, we're talking about the front property. I'm talking about the the original building. >> The sewer for the new house. >> The original build the house where the house is. I'm trying to break this up into two parts here for the moment. So,
where the original house is, you've addressed the 40 foot setback, but there's still drainage issues and there's some landscape issues that are >> look just driving by, I noticed there were trees. I didn't really look at it in care carefully. I looked at Google Earth. There's seems to be a lot of
trees along where the um sanitary line is proposed. There's just nothing shown there. There's not a complete survey drawing showing all these what's really out there. that I feel like we're we're making an accurate >> on the on the the property with the existing house.
>> Right. >> Okay. >> I know. I'm I'm I'm breaking protocol here a little bit. I'm just trying to No, no, no. That's my fault. Um I'm just trying to segregate these things out. So, we have We're talking about one
thing first, try to resolve that and then go on to the subdivided piece of property with the new house. Okay. So, I want to try to work this out for the original house and get that resolved. So, are they going to have to rip up the
concrete pad in the back of the house? Is it too low? I don't know. I mean, this is something your engineers are going to have to look at and and determine if this was built put in incorrectly. Um, yeah. And and I don't know if there if
if it is new, was it approved by our construction department or you know, did somebody pull permits for that to do that? >> There's a concrete pad on the side of the house on the plan, but nothing in the back. Am I correct?
>> Yeah, >> you are. Yes. >> Yeah. So, we don't know the elevations of that thing. >> No, we don't. And and have you want have you gone out since I'm sorry for interrupting, but have you gone out since the last time you were here to locate any additional trees? >> No,
>> they haven't. >> Just just as a point of clarification, too, because we've Oh, do you want to ask your question first? You go. We sometimes have left it to you to review and approve things afterwards as part of the resolution, but I'm not really usually perceived that you're
someone who's going to go on site and verify an actual field condition, which seems like it would be required. >> I haven't yet. No. Is that >> I could if you put it in the resolution. That's fine >> because it seems like that's what would be required here. If there's a condition that has to be modified, >> would you be happy? >> It's not just an issue of you approving
a new plan. Yeah, at the last meeting, Bill brought up the the trees. He wanted to try to save as many trees as we could on the property and and and tonight he's saying that a lot of them not even aren't even on the plan. Uh and we knew about the drainage last
time. Um but I don't think that but that hasn't been addressed. Normally, if I could just say something, normally in a minor sub subdivision, grading is usually not part of it. We've done quite a few in this town years past
where you approve just the file map, that one sheet, but in this case, the applicant submitted everything. So, we had more to look at, which actually is good. >> One other point of clarification, Bill, since we didn't see it, where was the which side of the property that got the
new pad, the new concrete? >> There's a new walkway between the concrete pad existing the concrete pad that's shown on the drawings. There's a new concrete walkway about five or six feet from the pad that's shown there
sloping water right down into the into the garage door. >> And the side >> the side the right hand side. >> So it's not shown on the plan. >> Not shown in the plan. And on the back of the house there's a concrete patio. You know, because it's a split level,
there's a sliding glass door which is lower. It was always there. Probably there was something there, but it looks like it brand new concrete pad and all the water just doesn't I don't see any way of draining that water. It needs a major regrading.
It's more than just putting a lawn drain into a dry well. It needs some serious design. So, I have full confidence in our engineer. I don't feel very I'm not happy with what were being presented
after last time's meeting. You know, I think the uh you address the zoning issues, but there's so much questionable stuff that's happened on this site already. I'm very tempted to ask for a current
plan, though. I don't really want to see you guys. You guys don't want to come back. I I feel like we there's a lot of misrepresentation going on by lack of information. >> Right. So let's >> whether intentional or not, it's not complete.
>> All right. So let's let's hold that for the front property, the existing property. And then I want to go I'm going to take this in the different direction. And I'm sorry I kind of let renegade here a little bit. I was trying to speed things up. But let's go on to
your proposed new lot with the new building. And then what I'm going to do is do what I normally do. I'm going to let my professionals talk first and then we'll go around um instead of trying to beat you up here over over this. So um >> finish their test.
>> No, no, no. We're talking about the new lot with the new house on it. >> I just heard you started talking about the questions. >> Yeah. No, I normally I would let them talk and then we talk, but I was trying to break this up and see if we can get this resolved before that and we can't.
This there's problems here yet and we're going to have to back go back and address it. But I want to hear what they I want to hear their their plans for the new lot. Pretending like this is just like a blank piece of paper. We got a new lot to work with. >> Okay. So, why don't you why don't we
start that way with the new lot and what you've done >> and then we'll and then I'm going to let our professionals weigh in and then we're going to go from there. Okay. >> This house. >> So, the uh the new lot, as I said before, is 14,139
square feet. Uh it's got three sides, yellow and one side is the green. Um, it's got a 1500 square foot footprint for the main building with a 20 by 24 foot garage attached to it. All within the uh
required setback lines. Um, twocar uh driveway, twocar wide driveway going out to Maplewood Avenue with a turnaround area in the front yard. And we have um seepage pits that are designed to take
the additional impervious area from the roof and the uh driveway to uh store the water and perk it back into the ground. For the most part, sewer and water water will be coming in off of Maplewood Avenue from the main in there and sewer
would come through out the back of the house and into the sideyard of the six Ryan Road property and out to the main in Ryan Road. That's how the sewer service would be handled. >> Peter, that lot has a single bulk
variance and that is the size of the lot where we're some >> That's correct. >> A couple hundred feet under. >> Yes. which was I think it's important when which was created in order when you created the 40 foot rear yard for both lots that line wasn't exactly 15,000
square feet. >> That's correct. >> And I remember for the record there was maybe it was you Mr. Giddings but someone said compromise the lot don't compromise the usable rear yards. >> So that >> that is correct. >> That came from me.
>> Oh okay. Okay. So that's that my not >> that might my count but uh you know that came from me. I'd rather I would have rather seen the the 40t on the back of the house over there. So >> the one thing that's not shown on the
plan and there was a discussion about whether the K turn should be where it is or should be on the other side of the driveway. We have our clients permission. It can be moved to either side of the driveway. Whatever is the preference of the board. It fits on it fits on either side and it it
There's no geometry with driving that makes it preferable to be left or right. >> I think Mr. Fanda had that recommendation in his report actually. So we can we can do that easily. >> There's room on both sides. I thought we'd have two.
>> If you move it to the other side, it looks like it's in near the near or over the dry well. Is it not material where the drainage is on that side? Well, we'll have to shift the dry well a little bit farther away from the street, but uh it's not otherwise it's not
otherwise impacted. It'll work fine. That Mr. Chair, members of the board, that is the description of the two lots as proposed. Mr. Kyle is here to discuss support for the variance relief if the chair or the board members want to hear that. Well, so what I like to do, I'm
gonna turn it over to professionals to talk about the new lot with the new house and then we'll I'm going to then ask questions and comments from the board then. Okay. So, Andrew, you want to your time at
bat? Okay. Um, they did a good job um updating, revising the plans. Uh I did have a couple of small cleanup items adding sight distance lines at the driveway on Maplewood. Uh and the reason I'm asking
for that there is a sign structure uh towards 130 uh to the left. It has multiple signs on it. I just want to make sure that that's not in the site triangle. if it is maybe a request to the DOT to relocate the sign structure or I just want to make sure that they
have visibility from the vehicles coming in from 130 because they could be traveling a little bit quicker from the state. >> Yeah. >> So those Andrew, correct me if I'm wrong to reiterate um that that part of the street is part of the
is part of Route 130. Is that correct or >> DOT jurisdiction? Correct. Uh I believe that whole section of road because it's part of the ramp to halfacre is all DOT jurisdiction. Right. >> Any relocation of that sign, anything um
that goes on there, even your access, it's a >> yes, >> residential access certainly. But >> right, >> any sign relocation could be part of that access, requesting the sign be moved slightly, that shouldn't be an issue. But it all starts with showing the sight distance line. If if it's
fine, the safe distance line works and the sign doesn't have to be moved, that's fine, too. I just need this. >> Right. Well, once we know for sure where the driveway is going to be, then we can set the sight distance line. >> True. True. >> Um, street address. Again, that's something to be worked out with the, uh, county
fire department. Uh, I guess the township has to agree with that. And relocating the, uh, turnaround to the other side of the driveway makes a lot of sense. That way there's not parking in the front yard and there's a usable front yard or something that makes sense. So, yeah, I agree that uh, that
was a good thing to shift to the other side as long as you can relocate the drive well or do what you need to do with that. >> Yeah, we can do that. Not a problem. >> Okay, that was uh the extent of my comments. >> The only other thing I have, Mr.
Chairman, is um in my letter the fourth um there is uh a comment about adding additional drainage uh and as you pointed out and Bill pointed out um the existing lot really needs to be uh done over in terms of for being a a grading
plan. >> How about the new lot? Well, the new lot has grading on it and really the only deficiency is that is there uh there should be some additional work done in the backyard to make sure that the water doesn't flow towards the
existing house. >> Okay. And >> so that dividing line basically between the two points is basically uh >> right now it flows >> between the Pacific and Atlantic. So, you know, you're going two different directions from there. >> And they're, like I said before, they're
putting in the two dry wells, as Jason properly pointed out, but they can, based on the calculations, they can also use them to collect water in that rear yard because most of it's going to be coming off the roof anyway uh to make sure that it doesn't go to uh the
existing lot. And in the existing lot, there's they're proposing no grading at all. And um there are some problems as pointed out tonight that need to be fixed and I've written them all down. Uh and either the board can uh if they
decide to approve, they can either prove it with lots of conditions or wait for another month. >> Right. Well, I want to just make sure I'm trying to separate these two properties. So, I'm looking at the new the new house lot. So with your are you
okay with everything on that with with with the with the exception >> exception of needing additional drainage in the rear yard? >> Yeah. So maybe some and some grading >> grading and drainage in the rear yard. >> I can add some spot grades to >> Yeah. Well, so it doesn't affect the other lot and nor the properties left or
right. Right. >> I mean this they're bringing out uh the sewer out to Ryan. Uh they're showing water going out to Maplewood. Um we talked Ed we Andrew talked about the driveway going out to Maplewood and um
and there are they are showing some um you know some grading in that on that lot to show the water either going out to Maplewood um or into the dry wells. >> So >> nothing on the existing lot. >> So is there going to have to be an
easement for the for the sewer to go? Yeah. >> Yeah. They they actually they show Is that a flag lot? Is that what that is? Is that >> I'm doing the lawyers. >> It's a 20 foot easement along the side the sideyard of six Ryan Road. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> 20 foot wide utility easement.
>> Y >> 2,000 square feet, >> right? >> There was a limited disturbance there. So it looked like a property line, >> right? >> I couldn't figure that out either because then the thing makes a a right turn. I wasn't sure what the easement had to do with the right turn. mimics the new water.
>> Yeah, that's the sewer line. >> Yeah, that's the physical. >> Yeah, >> actually on that point then to the point that was made a moment ago about drainage. It looks like the sewer is going to be right at the back of the lot which is also below the burm.
So, how do you prevent water flow from the burm going to the other site? I might have thought you would have done something to connect to the drywall, but you're going to have a sewer right there. Well, there's no I don't think that's a burn. There's a stockpile >> which will be right. Is that what you're talking about? The soil stockpile that's
going to be removed. That's part of soil erosion type stuff. >> But the the sanitary sewer will be underground and it'll be capped. So, it shouldn't have a problem with any drainage no matter what happens even if it floods because that's how sewers are built. >> So, once the stockpile is removed, the
back of the yard is not at a low point relative to the other lot. the once the stock piles are removed, the flow that runs the the flow that that rains down on that rear yard can go to the existing yard. So, they have to do something. That's what I was saying. >> And I guess that's the point I'm making
is the very back of that point is going to be hard for them to do something if there's a sewer line running through it. >> No, >> no, the sewer line is perpendicular. It's only on one side. >> It It runs No, but it goes here, too, is what there's I thought that >> there's a sewer line that runs along the
back of the of the house. That's that's >> when I asked what this was, they said you said a sewer. So, I need clarification. Okay. >> So, it the reason it looked like a flag lot is because of the right turn it makes. And then a minute ago, I heard that that's because the sewer line makes that right turn. >> That does it goes back to it goes back
to Ryan. Yes. >> Um the sewer the sewer line runs from the back of the house here and then straight out to Ryan Road. >> There's nothing there's nothing that goes along the back of the house. That's >> well let's call it a sanitary sewer runs out to Ryan roof.
>> The storm sewer is different. >> Storm sewer is only a pipe at the back of the house that runs out towards the drywalls. >> Takes the roof under the ground to the drywalls. >> And that's the one that's running parallel to the property line. >> Uh pretty much. Yeah. Yeah. Not exactly,
but yes. And that has to be modified now because right now all it's doing is taking in the gutters leaders. We got to do some We got to do some work to make sure that there are yard drains in the back to catch any water that flows there because we know that this is the one.
>> Yeah. The property next door is a problem property and we have to make sure we take care of it now or it'll never happen. >> Did the applicant ever think about raising existing house a block or two? >> I don't think
>> because that's that would solve a lot of problems. I mean, it's a lot of work. >> It has a basement. >> I'd go with the grading >> probably. >> That what I'm with you on. >> So, any condition of approval would be
subject to a sewer easement, sanitary sewer easement. Um, who's being proposed to be responsible for the maintenance of the sanitary source easement? >> I believe it's a p it's going to be a lateral for the benefit. It's a private u sanitary sewer inside a private eastment.
>> There's no responsibility for the town. No one's proposing that at all. >> No, it shouldn't be. No. >> No. Because the sewer line the sewer line to the street >> Yeah. >> is your problem, >> right? It's still it's not it's not. >> So, the reason I'm asking is because um
there's a difference between who between who reviews that. >> Oh. um board attorney would reviews the review the sanitary stories if it's private but township attorney would because town's being accepted. >> Okay. >> You know, so I mean usually that's what happens.
>> Okay. Liz, do you have any >> for the proposed lot? Um I don't they they reconfigured it I think to address what was you know conveyed at the last hearing from the board so that you now have the 40 ft setbacks um on both the
proposed and existing. They've also moved the driveway 10 feet you know further away from the route 130 uh whatever exit x ramp. So I don't have any specific concerns that there's now
just the one and they did this knowing they did this I think at the board's suggestion knowing that they were going to then need a variance for lot size on the proposed lot. So it's it's you know it's 14,000 and something >> 139
>> yeah 139 where 15,000 is required but they did that you know to uh accommodate the board's concerns but that's it. That's all I have. >> Yeah. Well, again, yes, we we'd asked them to do that and they did inform us at the time that would make the lot
smaller. So, um it's either or on the variances. So, and I'd rather have a bigger backyard in the other house um at least on that. So, because again, it's it's more than a quarter. It's close to a third of an
acre lot right now. So, all right. Um, what I'm going to do is I'm going to go around the room, ask the board members to make comments, but let's focus on the new lot and not the existing lot. Um, so Lisa, do you have
any comments on the new lot? >> No, it was clarified. I couldn't figure out what this top soil stockpile thing was, so it was clarified. >> I just have a quick question on this that what's the speed of the road of what is it? Maple >> 25.
>> It is 25. Okay. And >> nobody get them slow suggested. >> Yeah. So I I think it's really important that we figure out how to make how to impress that upon drivers prior to this driveway. How >> other than speed bump? I don't I don't know.
>> It's DOT. >> Yeah. >> You won't get a speed bump in the DOT. >> No, I know that. I proc um >> but what what about additional signage though, right? >> Yeah. Slow post the speed limit, you know, as soon as they come off. slow.
Um, you know, children, whatever. You know, as much as you can, I think your point is valid that additional signage >> subject to the Department of Transportation permitting it. You tell us what you would like, we'll gladly ask the DOT for See, unlike um like at our
special meeting when we discussed the senior housing project and we we're basically across the street when everybody's coming off of Route 130 going on to South River Road, they're accelerating. People are coming off of Route 130 here and decelerating to to to
slow down going in there. So, it's not that they're it's not that they're speeding up, but they're coming off the highway at an at extended, but they're slow they technically are slowing down and most of the time there's cars at the intersection there anyway to slow people down anyhow. So, and it it it is posted
25 and and the police are very resilient and diligent in enforcing the speed limit laws along Maplewood there. So, um >> but something >> but something else should be put. I'm not disagreeing with that. >> I I I think that I would feel more comfortable with something sort of
really reinforcing that speed. Now, um the the gas station is not too far right from across >> across right do and I mean and I don't know whether that has any bearing on this or not, but like something's going on there. >> That's not the preview. That's Yeah,
>> but what whatever that's doing is not going to affect anything here. >> No. >> Okay. >> No, we don't even know what's going on over there. I don't know. I don't know if the town is >> I didn't know when it was open what was going on there. >> Yes, we don't. >> Yeah, I have my suspicions, but I won't
go into it here. So, is that >> Jason? >> I'm good on the new lot. >> Can you do it? >> Bill, >> um it looks like they're on the tree removal plan.
If the if the driveway turnaround is flipped to the opposite side, it looks like T8, that is a 38 inch silver maple, could remain. Um, and also it looks like they're
removing T4, which is a 32 inch Norway spruce, which doesn't seem to be affected by the construction at all. You know, these are really nice mature trees. Has the shade has the I saw in the I saw in the application
the the application removed the trees. Has it been re have those trees been re reviewed um but they should come out that you know how does that work? Because they're very
mature trees. It's a shame to lose, especially the one in the front of the house if it's healthy. >> Not sure what the request is. We've offered to move the turnaround on that side. Um, want us to explore whether
moving >> I I would I would again you might if they do have to be taken down, you're you going to have to seriously consider replanting. Maybe obviously not something the same size but something else to try to replant and and
>> well the tree or is every 6 in caliper you it's you have to either provide pay so much money or provide that many trees so there is no proposed landscape plan of how all that's happening with this application
the existing trees are shown in the survey but they're not shown at the design I think that's the problem. >> So we don't >> I think that the best answer that we can offer to you is that we can look to see
if there's a place to plant and to the extent that we can we do and to the extent that we can we're funding. >> I think to Mr. I think to Bill's point, um, >> usually what happens when with the tree ornaments is when you're cutting down a
tree, you send in the application, they come out and look at the trees, see if they agree or not. Um, I think it's important that whoever's reviewing this, whether it's Kathy or who's doing that now, knows the final design and what has to come down and not
come down for the for the proposed design and evaluate particularly T8 and T4 whether or not they think it's acceptable to remove those or they should be removed or not. So, I'm just cons I'm concerned about coordination here that it's just done correctly.
is the direction that if if the trees are deemed that they shouldn't be removed that we leave the driveway turnaround on the other side. >> My I personally think that flipping the driveway turnaround to the other side makes a nicer house for them. It makes a
nicer front yard. It makes it more sellable for them. Taking up your whole front yard with the turnaround and cutting down a beautiful tree doesn't make sense to me. That's just my personal opinion. >> We had we had done a tree removal plan
and sent it into Kathy >> Eastston. >> We gotten an email back from her saying that Shade Tree has approved your tree application with certain conditions. Um what are those? >> One of which was to go through >> what are those conditions? >> Replacement tree ordinance and we did
that. We have a a a replacement tree plan or detail has been added to the uh the removal plan. So we've done that. >> What are the proposed trees and where what plan? What drawing?
>> We haven't shown the exact location, but we've shown how many trees have to be replaced and what size they need to be and what the species of the trees are supposed to be based on their ordinance. So they can put them on the property anywhere.
>> Hold your question a second. Bill Liz, >> sorry. >> Are you referring to the tree removal plan that's attached as the map? Um that's that's one you're talking talking about else. It's a >> Yeah, it's a tree removal plan original dated 6205
revised through 8625. And that's got T1 through T13 on it as far as the inventory. >> Yes. >> That's the inventory of the existing trees. The >> replacement chart for the replacement trees and >> that's on the revision which the board
doesn't have. >> Correct. >> Really? >> Yeah. >> I don't think so. >> You don't have the inventory. Is there another map then? >> Sorry. >> A revision of the map you have Sharon in your hands. >> Okay. Is it on the four page one?
>> It's not in your packet. >> Is it an exhibit? You have >> this is a separate standalone sheet. >> Okay. >> There's not. So, so this one uh that you just mentioned, the 620 I there's no revision dates on this one. >> Okay.
>> Sorry about that. I'm sure we had sent it in, but >> So, do we have it or don't? We don't. >> No. Okay. >> I don't know unless >> could you provide to me the the approved tree plan as well as the comments from the sha tree commission?
>> I can. >> Yeah. Scan it and send it. >> So, do you actually have with you um a revised sheet for that plan with you >> that this? Yeah. >> Maybe we could mark it as exhibit A5. Is
that what we're up to now? I believe. Okay. >> Okay. And then um I don't know maybe you can just go through the >> can you put it >> put it up on the map and show where you're up on the >> on the easel >> just show it to the board
>> doesn't show where to trees and caliber and trees. >> All right. So, let's let's just be clear. You have we don't have a landscape plan, do we?
>> Well, Mr. Chair, if I may, I'm looking at my my transmitter letter which was handd delivered to Gina on August 6th. And the second line item in says 15 additional copies of the tree removal plan prepared by Crest over the signature Peter Stone and it identifies
that we delivered. >> Well, that's the tree removal plan. That was the original one cuz I had asked for you had sent in um the revised I think site plans for it and then I wanted the application document originally and then
I don't know if there was revised. >> This was what we delivered on August 6th which is the date of the revision. So, we don't have um a landscape plan that we we have what's recommended, but no plan where they're going on the site. Is that
>> correct? >> No plan that shows >> the actual placement of these >> in a certain location. >> Okay. >> This group of trees will be planted on this propert. >> All right. So, Liz, I'm going to go to you now. Um, when we have an applicant come in, it doesn't matter if it's a
million square foot warehouse or this, we we usually have a some kind of landscape plan that shows Do we have a landscape plan that shows where the plantings are going to be? >> We do typically in Cranberry. Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. So, um, Mr. Chairman, is it worth the applicant going through the trees they want to take out now that are shown on that plan and what the sizes are and what country they are? And I think you have that information, right? Existing trees.
>> Yeah. And the shade tree commission approved that. Right. >> Right. So, we'll have an idea. >> That's fine as long as long as >> Okay. So, you don't want to hear it? No, I think um >> yeah, if they approved it, they approved it. I'm not questioning that. What my
concern is is that >> Well, I can't talk about the other site. So, >> not yet. >> We're on this one now. >> Mr. Chair, I just want to say we actually only require landscape plans for sub uh Wait a minute.
>> No, for a site plan and subdivision. So, yeah, I guess we would typically >> All right. So, so my concern really is just that given what I've seen on the other lot that we know what we're getting the
once it's approved by David Holder, I really do want you to walk out here with an approval tonight, but it's making it very hard for us because whatever Dave approves, then somehow we got to make sure it's enforced as well. And I know that's normal protocol going to be on
this this board unfortunately, but just a list on the drawings is the other engineer who's has to review all this probably is going to miss it quite frankly and if landscape plan is is required, we should have that. Um
those only comments. >> All right. So I want to try to >> the only other comment real quick is because the whole site slopes typically between property lines you have a swale that then drains that water somewhere you know whether it's you know through the
easement or and that that's a utility and drainage easement or whether it's it's to you know >> they're not proposing water from the east they're running into the drywalls right but they're a lot of the water's just going to run in the direction towards Ryan Road anyway. Unless they
>> But but you can't do that. You can't drain your property onto another property. >> You have the chance to fix it now. >> Exactly. >> So, it should have some type of swell between the property lines where you collect either collect that water or, you know, or drain it on your own
property to the street. >> Okay. Bill, you done with your com? All right. Diana, >> I agree with um the idea of moving the K turn to the other side and pushing um
the drywall back. Um you know, I just in my own neighborhood, I know when you take out all those anybody takes out those big trees, you're only creating more of a a water issue. So that kind of bothers me that even if you're taking these out and you're putting 16 little ones, you know, I agree with everybody,
this drainage is is is my biggest concern. And but I know we're only talking about the new house. Coming from a I know nothing about storm water management. Should we understand what they're doing?
Are the two concurrent? You know, like whatever they're doing on the new house lot is going to affect the other house or should we know what they're going to do to the other house at the same time. You know what I mean? >> We will at the end of the night. >> You will at the end of the night. Okay. No. And that I just would like to
understand what we're doing on both of them. is my idea that we're gonna at at the property line somehow we're gonna make these go like this or slope these in opposite directions so we don't get the water from the new lot running onto
the old lot or it's intercepted somehow where it's it's not you know unless we have a monsoon um you know the water doesn't flow from one property under the other >> is porest concrete an option here or
porous driveway. Is that an option here? >> Uh yes, they could do that. Um but the driveway is only a small part of it. >> Yeah. So the roof >> roof's bigger. >> Oh, come on. >> And and the square total square footage of the house is going to be is it 3,000?
Did somebody say 1500's? Two. Two levels. >> 1500 I think is the four, >> right? So it's a 3,000 foot house. >> Two levels. Yeah. Four four bedrooms or five? Four. >> She says,
>> "Okay." >> Yeah, I It is a big still a big house on a on a small lot. >> Okay, John, any comment? >> I have no comments. >> Les any >> My only comment is just about the
driveway. Um just a concern there is the way that it's drawn now. It works well if there's two cars in the garage only. Um but you know when there's people visiting and you know a house of this size eventually will have you know kids driving. So there's likely going to be
you know more than two cars in the driveway. Um I don't know if you you know put two or three cars in the driveway or more how people are going to be able to use that turnaround to safely pull out head first onto um Maplewood. I feel like people are gonna end up backing up regardless, which is pretty
risky move. >> I believe the driveway is 20 foot wide, which is a double width. Um, yes, >> if one car goes in the garage, you still have room for two cars, so that'll be three cars. And I agree that you don't necessarily want the turnaround to be
used as parking area because it's used for turnaround. We do want the cars to head out rather than back out into that state ramp state ramp section. So, the double width driveway helps. It goes to
the double width garage. I don't know that there's anything you can do from keeping them from using that turnaround as parking. It's It's >> I think there's no parking on there. >> Well, yeah. I didn't mean park on the turnaround. I just mean when the
driveway is full, how do you util you can't utilize the turnaround at that point? You know what I mean? It's like a jigsaw puzzle of cars at that point. >> You can ask other questions like a landscaper or a UPS truck or other things that would happen and certainly
that's going to happen. What's then going to occur potentially to stop out on the road and that's, you know, going to be problematic on the state ramp section. Uh, but I'm not sure other than no parking on the road. Um,
I I don't know what else can be done to keep them. >> I don't know if there is no parking on there. I don't know. >> There's probably not signs because it's kind of intuitive that you can't park. Just imagine parking where the cars are
lined up stacking to go to half acre. just I think a resident would understand that quickly that parking out there you're going to get people backing up onto state highway and you probably have state enforcers having a problem with that if the uh
vehicles start stacking back onto 130. So >> yeah, >> that might even be a police issue for safety on 130 if that occurs. I don't know. The answer to your question is I don't know if there's more
than four or five cars in that driveway how that would work, but typically you're providing RSIS compliant driveway. And I believe that's what they're doing with the garage and the double lift driveway. >> The idea of adding signage is one that
we have no issue with. signage guidance from your professionals or from the board. We'd have to bring to the DOT with a request. It's they control all of that that sign whether it's a sign that says no parking or a
sign that says children playing or please drive slow. All would be >> something we would have to take to the DOT. >> Okay. >> The DOT would then require an ordinance by the township. So there's a couple steps in the process. The DOT doesn't put up no parking signs. that has to be
requested of the township and then the township committee would have there's steps to getting the no parking. >> I'm not I'm not even suggesting that right now. I'm just I'm trying to follow up with what Les said, you know. Um is this a single one one the the turnaround
is just one car turnaround. So, one thing that was just brought up, it sounds like they're selling once they get subdivision approved, they're they're just selling it. So, as part of the resolution, what what improvements are going to have
to be done as part of this and how long is that good for? I'm just How does all this work? Because I was up to this point, I was assuming that they're building the house and it was going to be complete. But it sounds like they're just doing a flip and selling the property
>> with an approval. >> With an approval, but I assume within a certain amount of time, the driveway cut has to be put in certain things, utility. I don't I'm I'm asking the question. I don't know. How does all that work? we have to apply to the DOT to try to
get the driveway cut, right? And then that that's probably going to take three months or four months. Uh and then um they probably will build nothing uh until they try to go get their building permit. >> Well, they just said they're they're going to sell the property, >> right? So they they probably will build
nothing. They won't build swailes. They won't storm. They won't do anything. >> Okay. >> Until until they try to get a building permit. >> Uh the existing property next owners >> the exist Yeah. the existing property doesn't need a building permit. It has it's it's has a continuing CO. So,
that's a bit of an issue. Um, >> I think the gist of what Bill's trying to understand is >> we can approve a bunch of stuff now, but it could take a year and then someone buys it, they take another year to look at it. >> What is the mechanism in this case where
there's not just the need for approval but for review that it was done? The only thing we can do, we can put it in the resolution that there has to be a grading plan. There has to be a landscape plan. >> So somehow you're going to have to get notified two years from now to go. >> No, no, no. I'm requiring now required
as part of requiring it. But how do we find out that two years from now when they do it that it was done? >> I have a longer on that which we for your consideration the concerns that a future property owner isn't isn't fully informed.
Your resolution can be attached to a deed of restrictive covenant that is that document's reviewed by your council and then it is recorded at the county clerk and it is in the chain of title. Okay. >> So that any subsequent purchaser is
informed the entire resolution is >> I I certainly understand that and I appreciate that. So I have no doubt that the next owner will legally understand what their requirements are. What's unusual here is there we're suggesting that there will be a larger than normal
number of things where we're basically saying something has to be determined in the future and approved by the board engineer and in this case the board engineer may need to go out and review which is unusual that it was done.
That's one thing if this is being done shortly afterwards by the applicant and it's another I'm unclear what the procedure is. >> If I could what happens is once once the plan is brought into compliance, let's
say they do the grading plan, they do the drainage plan, they put in more dry wells, they put in swale, they do all the landscaping that we're talking about, it then gets approved by me. It gets signed. Gina signs it, the chairman signs it, and it can sit on the shelf, but the next person that picks it up is
the town engineer. >> Right. >> Right. Which is goes to what we were earlier. Earlier it was it was specified that given how much we're relying on >> Yeah. I've done in the past for you. You've asked me to, but but that's not what's happened in the last four years.
>> We're expecting a town engineer who wasn't part of this process to interpret some of these. I'm going to I'm going to make sort of a weird comment here, but ever since the architecture problems that were on the Hagerty property, if you remember that. >> Um Tom has been really good. He he grabs
the resolution. He gets my final letter. He looks at the plans. He really has instructs inspectors. He's been he's been really good about taking care of these little things. is, you know, there'll have to be an escro amount put up. Normally on um
minor subsidies, there's no escrow and that's a problem. So, this board will have to say that yes, an escrow has to be placed and it probably will have to be like a thousand bucks for him >> to do inspections. >> Inspection fee. >> Yeah. Yeah. But it seems like in this
case certain improvements need to be done before the sale, such as >> on the existing house. Yes. and the new site. >> I don't know, you know, >> before the sale of the new the existing house, you know. >> No. Well, I'm concerned about that. I was not the >> I don't know how you can do that,
>> but I'm also concerned that all the drainage issues all need to be dealt with now before the property is subdivided. So that >> I don't know I don't know of a way to do that. >> Well, why why not? Part of the requirement would be that the regrading
has to occur within a certain amount of time period or before the before the subdivision is complete. So they cannot sell the property until that grading is taken care of in terms of a swale because it's just not fair to the person who buys this and no one no one no one
doesn't develop the house for three years, five years or whatever. >> That's not normal. I would I'm gonna send it over to to Sharon. But you got all that water coming down on your property. >> No, you're right. You're right. >> And every subdivision you you have to you have to take care of water with on your own property.
>> So, we're creating >> Well, we're we're talking about two different things here. I mean, it it we don't want the water from the new lot running onto the old lot. So, that's going to have to be addressed. I agree with you there. Now, what they do
whether they need to do the entire new lot, >> right? That's all I'm concerned about, too. I I've just >> both could be sold to different people. >> Correct. And most likely will be. Um but the thing is >> when we have the existing lot, we can't
have water running from the new lot onto the existing lot causing continuing to cause the current condition on the existing lot. So that's going to have to be addressed before the sale of the other lot. Now whether they do every
whatever they do later they'll have to answer your question we lose control if when once it leaves us because we had this problem believe me I got my my I got beat up over this trying to follow up something on the pretendic property
and we were we we have no jurisdiction unfortunately. Well, that's the only why I'm bringing it up is so we're applying a review later that I'm not >> The only thing I could say is I'm just gonna jump in here that when we when we uh impose conditions on a resolution,
they have to be all fulfilled before the the map's filed. You know, the lots are created because the lots aren't created until all the conditions are satisfied. So, if you have conditions in here that um right now the owner owns the lot, right? So, they have control over it. If
it has to something has to be installed before um the map's filed or the deeds are filed then then that's what's going to have to happen. >> So the conditions I would propose would be you know that we approve the set we're basically approving the
setbacks in the buildable envelope and the design of the driveway. They have to get it approved by the county. they have to take care of any drainage >> and those are you know like being out all outside agency approvals that's in every resolution that we do. I mean I
don't know if you you've probably seen it and so so go ahead continue with your um >> I guess in my mind that they have to take care of the drainage they have to I would propose that
they see they've torn up torn up the lawn. This could be here for years. Who knows who's going to buy it, when they're going to buy it, if it sells. So, and then it's going to be no man's land and an eyesore that they should reed it. If they're going to cut down,
they're asking for approval to cut down the trees. They should cut down the trees, plant the new trees or not, or that goes to the new owners. It just needs to be thought out that we don't get stuck with an isore, you know, and that the new person buying the property doesn't get stuck with an isore in case
nothing happens in two to five years because it's going to take that long for someone to build a house probably and they may come back with a whole different plan. But we want to if we're if we're approving a sub plan that none of us are that crazy about in terms of the location of the driveway
and it requires variances, we need to protect the adjacent homeowners and the person buying buying the house from potential problems that's within our jurisdiction. >> I have an offer again for you. I mean the offer I'll begin with because I I
think it shouldn't be taken off the table is recording the resolution. so that it follows the property. But you could and it would be an acceptable condition to require that we secure a grading plan approved by Mr. Hoder and
implement the grading plan as a condition of perfecting the subdivision. I would ask that the the implementation be limited to the existing lot. the new lot is going to be under construction and and all of the drainage and all of the improvements that are associated
with that lot should be conditions of either a building permit or ultimately a certificate of occupancy. But >> but I think part of what we've established is that if you that could be an indefinite period of time and in the interim that lot could be adversely
draining onto the other lot until those improvements are correct. Well, I would defer to your engineer to require that we come up with a drainage plan that he finds to be acceptable. >> But if it's only a plan, then we could have five years.
>> He just said he would implement it >> on the existing lot. >> Right. I think it's what we're saying is are I think what they're suggesting is somehow you could do improvements to the existing lot that completely handled any drainage coming from the proposed period
of time >> and then it has to be stabilized stabilized in the long establish. >> So but I feel like different things are being said and I want to clarify it. >> So it sounds like you're saying which is what we were bringing up a minute ago that they will also have to make initially improvements to the lot that's
going to be for sale. That doesn't sound like what what um council was saying a minute ago where they were saying it would only be to the existing lot until building occurred on the new lot. So which is it that you're agreeing to describe that in a resolution? Actually, I just did. >> Sure. But is that is is that what you
are amenable to? >> Say I'll say it again. >> Well, the concern that I have is that we go on to this new lot and we do a a a grading plan and then someone comes in with a house and the house has a plot plan. And the PL plan has a grading plan. That grading plan is going to be
submitted. It would have to be consistent with what Mr. Hoder approved. >> But what you're saying, because then I want to come back to Mr. Hoder. You're saying you're prep your what you think is reasonable is that any actual improvements, not proposed improvements,
but any actual improvements that occur prior to the building of the new lot by a future owner occur only to the existing lot. My question for Mr. or hoder if that's the case is is it even possible to define a list of improvements only to the existing lot
that would satisfy any drainage concerns coming from the yet to be improved future lot what there should be is an there should be an intermediate grading plan >> that shows the drainage structures the piping the swale and full stabilization
on the new lot that can sit until the new house is built and if you keep those drainage structures and piping away from the footprint of the house 15t 20 feet then you have some freedom to do the house maybe that will get changed later
on and I can work that out with Tom Decker who's the town engineer whether he does it or I do it we we have a pretty good relationship that way >> I just like to hear whether the whether >> will the applicant do that >> whether the applicant is finds that something that you can accept
>> an interim grading plan I I think >> grading action like you would actually have to do it. >> You would have to do it >> prior to the prior to the filing of the M. >> I know I'm going to get to finish this sentence any minute now. >> Okay. >> An interim grading plan that is implemented sounds reasonable. An
interim grading plan that requires the installation of dry wells that are primarily to collect the water off of the house seems premature, but I would >> Well, we need something to to collect the water off the backyard that's flowing now. then then an interim
grading plan that includes such structures that are required to capture water that's running off of the property would be reasonable. But putting in the full system that's tied to the house seems premature. Okay. Well, we don't need the whole system and Pete can calculate that out and maybe it's one
out of two. And you just put it a little further back halfway between the house and the property line. And you drain along that swale in the back into that drywall. And later on you, you know, you have a connection to the house into the other dry well. And maybe even connect
the two together for overflow. And that's it. >> You can do that. >> Okay. So, >> like he said, >> like he said. All right. So, I'm trying to So, it looks like for the new lot,
we're going to put in the minimum amount of intercept intercepted grading to what he said on the new lot. Everybody agrees that we're going to flip the >> the turnaround to the other side to give
a bigger front yard. We've got the We've got the tree removal plan. >> I'm Can I just interrupt for a second? >> Yes. >> I am not looking at the map right now, but I'm going to have to go back and write this resolution. Where are we flipping the uh turnaround? If we're
looking at the house, is it on the east side, the west side, >> the south side? Okay. So, we're going to flip it to the south side of the house. So sorry to be difficult on this, but with what's being this whole proc this whole thing kind of changed from what we
initially understood was happening. So usually with a subdivision, we're not approving the house footprint. It could be anything, >> right? >> And at that point, it's they're they have to submit their final plans for the
house that fits within that building envelope. and where the driveway uses this curb cut and what they do after that point. So really all we can do at this point is require a turnaround
I guess you know and they've got the new owners have to design it and come up with a site plan that's approved by the town the other town engineers. bill. I would like to see an
intermediate grading plan and a final grading plan. The final grading plan will show a box where the house is going to be their best guess. And Pete's going to make it extra large just in case so that it's designed for the drywall that
you think we need. Uh and then and but there'll be an initial drywall put in for the rear yard and there'll be a second one put in for the house or maybe two because right now he's got he's got two for the house because of the roof. >> Okay. >> So there might be a total of three with some piping and and some yard inlets uh
to keep the water off the uh the existing property. Now with the existing property that should be a design that should be done as part of you know prior to uh the filing of the maps also prior prior to me signing the plans but the um
the work I'm not sure how you're going to schedule that how you'd schedule the work on the existing lot prior to the sale maybe of the lot to somebody >> you're going to have to do you're going to have to correct the drainage from the new lot to the old lot before you before
you before you you know because you can't have the water continuously it's got to be done simultaneously subdivision isn't complete they can't sell old house until the subdivision is complete >> I think the commitment that has been requested and we have said okay is as a
condition of perfecting the subdivision so what does that that's your signature on the construction drawings and a lot of signatures on the plat as a condition of that the the drainage problem in the rear yard has to be solved, not just on paper. I think that's what you were
asking. Yes. For that lot. >> Okay. So, we we know that the the drainage problem on the new lot has to be solved in terms of how it would impact the old lot >> prior to signing of the plans, >> right? But then the old lot drainage conditions need to be >> When when do you guys want that to be
solved? >> Now, >> now. >> Also now. Okay. >> Yeah. Because you can't we're not going to have the new owner of the old house be be stuck with a drainage problem. It's got to be done now. You can't
>> we we know about it. If we didn't know about it, that's one thing. But we know about it. We know that this is an issue. >> And I can't I can't let it leave the room here knowing that it's an issue for the next person coming in the door because then they're going to come down here and scream, "Why didn't you guys
catch this?" it. Most likely it's going to have to be some type of small retaining wall, some drains in the lower patio, some swailes or drains above the retaining wall. It's not >> that's these guys. >> They need to figure it out. But my point is this isn't something simple. There's there is an issue that needs to resolve.
The only other thing I would say is if there's any way you can make the utility easement also the drainage easement and swale rather than draining the drywalls, all the better. >> But then you're bringing it back to Ryan. >> Okay. I leave that to you. Yeah, I don't
know what to structure there is in >> I like natural drainage. >> There may not be. >> That's up to you. >> Well, while you're thinking and talking, I'm >> just like I don't like drainage relying on dry drywall clog and if it's if you can do it naturally, it's you're always
>> there will be no problems in the future between the the property owners. >> Oh, the DOT will not take it unless it's flowing there now. >> But it goes to Ryan. >> Yeah, I know. Let me >> And it's currently going to Ryan anyway, I would argue. So, but I don't know if it's even possible. You guys need to
design it. >> Do we know what we're doing by now? >> I will go back and make sense of all of this. >> I think we cleared the issue of the drainage at least conceptually. Somehow we went from a new question
about how to assure that the uh K turn was on the right point getting back into the issue that was already resolved. I think what's been established is the Kturn is going to have to get finally resolved with whatever the final application is when someone buys the
lot. Um >> but we're not saying it's going to get flipped. >> You can require it of us. >> Yeah. No, they can require it of us. as a condition of the subdivision. >> Yeah, we can put it in the resolution. >> But then does that involve just the K
turn or the entire driveway? Because if the lot is suggested rather than specific, someone moves the driveway to the other side and suddenly South is on the wrong side. >> That's why I'm asking location to satisfy your request. >> Yeah.
>> All right. So even if the final footprint is going to be different, the driveway cannot be. >> Yes. Okay. So then there's no issue. >> So >> it could be moved a foot or two or three feet or something.
>> Got to get around to satisfy bill. >> There's a telephone pole. We got to get around. >> There you go. Is that it on the new lot yet? Are we on moving on to No. >> The DOT is gonna gonna have to approve that driveway anyway. >> The old lot the issues on the old lot is
drainage. And I think that's the primary one, right, Bill? is is drainage and and the the ponding of the water on the back patio, which I'm not sure how you're going to handle that by by whatever means. So, but is that in our preview to
worry about that? >> I can make it more complicated. >> Well, I know I know you can. You know, we could >> I mean, the first thing I said in my letter is this property is not subject to the stormwater rules of both Cranberry andor the state of New Jersey.
>> So, uh, all this is practical common sense that we're talking about right now, >> right? >> And and I think since the applicant's asking for relief, we can impose those conditions. I think Sharon can back me up on that. >> Yeah, I agree. >> U, so, uh, but it's not normal and I'll
have to talk to Tom Decker and how he wants to handle it with me. which is not a problem. >> Okay. >> All right. So, >> well, I I'll have to get a survey crew out there to >> Yeah. >> locate that patio that's out there and get elevation on the whole >> and then so
>> backyard and house >> with the strong assurance of Mr. Hoder. It's all on you, bud. So if if you will take on that responsibility to work with the town engineer and their engineer on this, I
think we could move this thing forward. >> Did what did we decide regarding a landscape plan? Were they already um satisfied because they got the tree? >> Well, the problem is until they know where they're going to put the house on the property, it's it's
>> if they're cutting down the trees, they got to provide the new trees. They're going to leave the trees. >> Why don't we call it a tree replacement plan? So, because we're not going to I don't think we worry about found foundation plantings here or whether or not there's a, you know, a uh a dog wood
in the center of the of the drive. I mean, center of the lawn. I think we're worried about what are you going to do about the trees you taken down and how you going to replace them. That's >> what he's saying. What I hear, >> what he's saying is we don't if they change the building configuration, we can't dictate where the trees are now.
Well, you could you could plan along you could along the street and you could plant them between the two neighbors in the backyard. So I think it is reasonable to say half half along the front property line and half along the pro the rear property line or they don't
remove any trees and they don't have to replace any trees >> until it's on the new I think they should spot the trees on the plan now in a location that they think is good for their development and hopefully I can approve it resubmit to the shade tree commission
hopefully they'll approve it and then if it changes Tom Decker in the future because he'll probably worry about the future building, not me, >> right? >> Can decide if it's too much of a change and send it back to you guys or approve it as a field change. >> Okay?
>> That's how it's normally done either way. >> Okay? >> You know, I mean, he won't go too far off existing, you know, >> Oh, no. >> Oh, no. All right. Well, that's okay. We're on uh YouTube, right?
We've approved a million square foot of your warehouse with with less. >> Lisa, am I running out of time here? You like >> Okay. >> All right. So, should we So, I have Sharon read something that we could kind of craft a resolution for. So, we're um
going to uh put the tree replacement in uh we're going to revise the map to show the tree replacement. Correct. And and it has to be um acceptable to the town the board engineer basically. >> Before you ask to do that, do you want
to like Bill a lot of his comments on the >> Are we good? Oh, I think we're right. >> I don't know if I can read back all these res um conditions exactly, >> but and I don't want to miss them. So,
>> give We're going to give you the transcript. >> We're going to get a transcript. Good. Okay. So, we have to basically just This is just general. We're going to correct the drainage on the existing property and it has to be implemented prior to uh
signing of the maps. And uh we have to also um let's see um get a sanitary sewer easement >> and correct correcting the drainage on the existing property >> existing and the proposed propert.
>> So there will be an interim uh interim drainage >> plan that has that will address those items. >> Okay. >> Uh that will be built out prior to the filing of the Okay. And let's see then we're we said we talked about um tree replacement being
showed on the plans. Um >> one more issue regarding that. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Um is the sewer going in now or later? >> So here's another complication that's happened I've seen happen before.
The new owners are going to come in and dig a sanitary line, destroy all that landscaping potential trees that are in that easement. And what are they required to put back when they're done because
they can't plant anything on the ement? >> Yeah. And the sanitary sur meant they're not going to be um allowed to do put put trees in there. >> No. >> No. So all the trees that are there currently get removed. >> Well, now >> guess that's what has to happen.
>> We don't see that on the plan. Just two plans are not together on one map. >> But sanitary sewers roots growing. You don't want trees. >> So then they should remove all that landscaping now. >> Yeah. Because people who buy this house
are going to think that that landscaping is going to stay there and be very unhappy when person who buys this tears out all their landscaping and >> they lose all their their landscape buffering. Won't that be won't that be something
that's stated on your map as a note >> that the trees are going to be removed? >> More than that, it's it's an easement that's recorded at the county clerk that shows up when someone is buying a piece of property. It says that there's a drain. It says that there's a sanitary easement and the terms of the sanitary
easement are memorialized on the text, >> but a buyer has no clue. I have no clue that you I mean you lose all your trees, right? If you're a real estate agent, you know, you're going to have an unhappy buyer and
so the trees have to be removed now off the easement. Is that what we're saying? Can you can you give us a general idea how many trees are on in that ement now from that plan you have up there or from the from the tree removal plan you submitted to the shade tree commission? >> There is a row of trees along the
property line which >> which we wouldn't have to take down I don't think because they're they're close to the property and there's it's a 20 foot easement so we've got enough room to >> so you could actually you could actually push the sewer line to the to the one side of the ement if you had to. >> Yeah, we could do that easily like 15
and five. So the condition is to um locate the sanitary sewer easement such that the trees along the row uh property are not disturbed. Basically >> minimal minimal disturbance of the property. Yeah. The trees along the property line >> and I would just add that the trees
should be surveyed and the new sewer line should be approved by Dave. >> I want to spot those. I want to know what trees are out there. I mean, if there's a if there's a 60inch tree and you go by it 10 feet away with a sewer
line, you're going to the tree's probably going to die, right? Because you're cutting off half the roots with the trench. So, we want to know that. And then I believe uh the other condition had to do with um
determining whether or not additional signage could be posted um regarding the speed. And so that would be subject to DOT approval and and no parking signs too. >> That would be subject to the DO's consent and the governing bodies
agreeing to adopt an ordinance in support. Yeah, that that's correct. And if the DOP doesn't want to do anything, then that's that's that >> story is over. >> Okay. >> You know, if I write C next to everything that's a condition. So, if
I've missed something, I'm sending a draft resolution around to everybody before it's approved and, you know, we can correct it if anything is missing. Okay. and and I have my normal conditions approve pay all escros make sure real estate taxes are paid such
okay >> right so do we have to grant the variance on the new lot tonight is that part of the >> oh that's part of the application yeah you'll be approving the minor subdivision and the uh variances >> and then for the old lot do we have to >> well you the whole thing is
>> okay >> the whole thing is approved together you're approving a minor subdivision that's will be the motion right >> and then it and then need to approve the variance with for the lot size. That's the only lot size we have and we have just the um setback, right? But that's an existing condition. >> Correct.
>> Sharon, I had one question on the inspection of uh the work being done either intermediate or in the final. Um most of the time minor subdivisions aren't subject to inspection fees and bonding, right? >> Because they're minor subdivisions. So,
I think what we got to do is put something in the resolution that says that the applicant shall post XXX uh for um inspection fees uh prior to uh the intermediate plan
being implemented as required by the township engineer. >> Okay. >> Or the board engineer. And and I should also say that um all the um the approvals conditioned on all the outstanding items in all the
professionals reports too, right? >> But I don't see any I don't think there's any ability to do bonding. I mean >> no because um there's no public improvements. The only thing you >> landscaping you do landscaping. >> I was in another town where I was the
engineer and I asked for um a safety and security bond. Yeah, you can you that's one that you can >> and that's that's only what 5% of the construction cost. So if you're going to spend 50,000 on drainage, it's 2500 bucks for the bond.
I know we keep filing these things on you guys, but it's probably worth it. >> We als we also have some disturbance to the Ryan Road pavement sidewalk that is going to happen because >> Okay. So that will be that will be public.
>> Yeah. Okay. >> So, yeah. So, it'll be subject to uh offsite learning on uh municipal improvements and uh a safety and stabilization bond. >> Is that happening now or later?
>> Uh I would you have to do it before any construction at least a safety and stabilization bond. >> So, but he has to bring this >> if if we're doing the improvements prior to the subdivision being perfected. We're not posting a bond. the posting bond if there are improvements that are not installed when the subdivision
lands sure would allow you to do to do that. Yes. But no, but then you'd have to do the uh inspections. Absolutely. Inspection fees. >> Inspection fees upfront. Bond is only if we are asking to perfect the subdivision with improvements in place. I think attorney the attorney's right here that
if they build on on before final >> which is required here >> approval and and and filing I think they can do it without a bond but >> that is true because you can actually install the improvements without posting a bond if you're going to go ahead and do it
>> right which is you're directing that we install these improvements before we perfect so >> there can be a bond calculation for purposes of coming up with the inspection calcul population inspection funds would have to be posted. >> Okay. So, there >> but I'm confused because you said
something about the sewer and the sidewalk in the street, but that's not happening. Is that happening now or is that happening when >> I think the sidewalk and the and the and and the and the curb and any street work would be later once they built the house. You don't want to defer that stuff building a house.
>> So, that that requirement for that bonding is part of a next another application or whatever prior to the building permit for the new house. >> Okay. >> Any other comments from the board? Any
other comments from our professionals? >> Okay. So, what I'd like to do is move >> a question. Sir, >> what's that? >> I'm sorry. I when we were before you in July, there were there's many more people here tonight
than were here in July. Just if we could qualify who is is who can vote. >> Yeah, before the meeting started um both uh let's see was who Mr. Stewart and Miss Anderson um signed a certification
that they had reviewed the transcript um prior to >> uh meeting and who else? >> And John did too. >> John Mucelli. Yes, Mr. Miselli. So, they've all signed certifications and they are eligible to vote. >> Thanks. >> Okay. >> Thank you, counselor, for picking that up. Okay.
So, we're going to I'd like to propose a resolution including the variances requested plus all of the items Sharon and our engineer laid out for us here to move this forward for the subdivision
of this lot. Can I have a motion to approve? >> Always so shy. So moved. >> Can I have a second, please? >> Second. >> All right. Roll call for PB 407-25. Miss Anderson.
>> Miss Eladawi? >> Yes. >> Mr. Giddings? >> Yes. >> Miss Conerum? >> Yes. >> Mr. Mucelli? >> Yes. Mr. Pulk, >> yes. >> Mr. Stewart, >> yes. >> And Mr. Whitman. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Motion pass.
>> Thank you everybody. Thank you, counselor, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, board professionals, to each and every one of you. Thank you and good night. >> Good night. >> We definitely usual. Everybody gets it. Yeah. Um
>> for the board >> for the board. We have a couple other quick items here. Um >> under old and new business. Would you would the zoning subcommittee like to make any comments on that? I need to
schedule another meeting where we finish up the design guidelines and specifically review uh an email that I got from the chair of HPC about their um inability is not the right word, but
some challenges that they were having going through the design guidelines as they pertain to the historic uh district. So, that'll be the focus of the next meeting that I'll take the hit on. I just have not scheduled it, but
I'll go back and see the times and dates that were most amendable to everybody and I'll throw a couple. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Lee. Um, now we have a new item in business. I'm going to make this just I want to throw something out in the table and Bill and I initially talked about
this. Um, and it's literally one minute cuz we're all I'm I'm exhausted right now, but I want you to just bring it up for the board what what your what your concept was or just something for us to maybe think about for the future. Okay. So, if you want to bring this up.
>> Yeah. >> Um, so, you know, just ParkPlace West, you know, a lot has happened on ParkPlace West over the last 25 years. um that we've seen that I've seen personally living on the street with with the library. It used to be a back
service road. It now has become a center of town, you know, leading to the library. There's there's a lot of um there's a lot there's a new development, you know, happening on the corner of Maplewood and Main Street. There's the
township parking lot. There's, you know, a lot of there's a lot of trees that over the years, shade trees, uh, along the streetscape that have died or been removed, not replaced. So, I was just proposing that,
uh, to look at a master plan of Parkplace West in terms of handicapped access. Right now, there's not no sidewalk that connects Main Street to the library or this or the senior housing. So here, you know, there are people in the senior housing that are in
wheelchairs. They got to go out on the go down the sidewalk, out on the road, and then and then get back on. So there's a lot of issues there that I think could be proved that it's worth looking at for the town. >> Yeah. And I don't know how how we proceed from here. I mean, I I totally
concur with Bill. I mean, before the library was like, okay, nobody really goes back down here anyway, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have done anything back in the day. But now we have everybody going down that road into the library and it's it's a corridor road now. Um and a main access point
into the library. So it would be nice if we came up with I I don't want to call it beautifification plan, re-engineered plan, re-imagine plan, whatever you want to call it. Um and do we come up with
that or we propose it to the township? Is that the the corner where the old cranberry pizza was? >> Yes. But it >> So we have Park Place that's coming in. Anybody who was at PRC saw their plans, >> right? >> And we just have to make sure that they do our part, their part and maybe a
little more to provide what Bill's looking for. >> Well, but we talk we flip it over across, >> right? But but no, I mean that's a way of doing it without the the bur the township paying for it, >> right? But you're you're talking about the lot across the street. You know,
there's the old building that's in the middle of the parking lot. That's >> right. >> I'm not even sure what you know, God forbid if it's historic and we want to rip it down. We'll never get it ripped down there. But if if it's something where it it you know, Bill proposed
expanding that lot, beautiful, you know, new lighting in the lot. I don't even know who owns that lot. I don't know if it's Teddy's, if it's private, if it's public. I don't I don't even know. and you know improvements to the sidewalks and everything so we can >> because who owns what on terms of the
sidewalks there could be 17 people responsible for that part of it right based on the ownership of the property. >> Yeah. So I I think it's a good idea. I think it's something we should look at. Um I just don't know if we should look at it or the township has to propose it
or we propose it to the township. I I don't know. But would wouldn't it normally work where the the town council would committee would would have to you know tell the planning board to do a little study and whether or not you you know have funds available or not I don't
know you might because I know we don't use that much of our funds on zoning matters really >> most of it's from applicants so there might be money around for this year for example for Liz to do some concept plans and then we you know move around
And because of that, because of that proposal to the DRC, maybe part of this is two phases because we're not quite sure where that's proposing. Maybe we're looking on the south side of Parkplace West. >> Well, and then move to the north side of
Parkplace West depending on what they're >> maybe we come up with something to tell Park Place what to do. >> Right. Right. Because because now we're doing a comprehensive plan that shows both sides and >> typically they would call that a streetscape plan that you work on a
streetscape and that gets the street and the >> furniture lighting. >> Previously I know there were grants that were that did the main street. I don't know if there's grants that could be applied for for you know doing the sidewalks to library. one particular um opportunity for grants that we seem to
have gotten 100% of in the last three years and we we could maybe tap into that. We had chatted about this last year as well, but I think that your vision or the suggestion may be a little bit larger than what we spoke of last year. Last year was more of like you know trees that had gone bad and the road is just you know it's decrepit.
It's in it's in sad physical appearance. It's something it's >> 100% >> I looked at as a master plan how it happens and how long but at least there's a plan at which we're working toward that that improves the different issues >> and and it may be simpler than having to to do that. I think that it Lisa you
don't mind taking this back to admin that would be great but a little bit of horse before the cart like if we're looking at a structure that we may want to incorporate into this this discussion we have to know the owner of that structure first >> and what their plans are. Yeah.
So the township you you you can talk I guess talk about it at the township committee level and then if it's if it's like that >> and I'll use your email as a guide and I like the the describing as a street
space. Yeah, >> because especially with Park Place's plans, you know, the vision is now this is almost an extension off of Main Street that will only get busier and will be more welcoming to visitors and
residents in the town. So, okay. So, we'll take that action to bring this up and discuss it at Monday's township committee meeting. >> Okay. And the final the final part of that is that you could use any plan that comes out of this uh as an application to
either uh to get a block grant uh community affairs or get something from the DOT, you know, for sidewalks and and safety. >> Okay. Very good. um at this point in time. So we'll wait
you guys committee and then we'll hear back from you and then um if you need any further information committee stuff I guess you know you could provide whatever >> any questions call me. You want to walk
it. Um >> I've been meaning to do that for years and I just figured you know what it was a good time to just get it out. I I do know that there um a resident after the paving of Main Street had complained that into Park Place on both sides
there's still some potholes right past the uh crosswalk there and that is being taken care of by DOT with you know just simple remedy of filling those potholes but it's right off that county line of responsibility into Parkplace but I so I
went out there took pictures and I I saw what they were talking about so at least that alone phone will, you know, get a little it's a little bumpy, a little dicey when you make a left or right on there. >> They said they will do it. >> Yeah, there it's on their plans. So, it's on the list on the punch list.
>> Okay. Um, we have an close session if needed and I believe we need to have a close session meeting tonight. litigations that have come up over the last few days in challenging our
affordable housing plan. So, I would like to make a motion to discuss litigation issues for our affordable housing plan to go into close session. >> Second. >> Second. It's a move.
>> Okay. >> All right. We'll call for close session. Miss Anderson here. Miss Eladawi. >> Yeah. Mr. Mr. Giddings. >> Yes. >> Miss Conro. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mucelli. >> Yes. >> Mr. Pulk. >> Yes. >> Mr. Stewart.
>> Yes. >> And Mr. Whitman. >> Yes. >> You want to shut down?