TOWNSHIP OF WASHINGTON
                                                                               WARREN COUNTY
                                                                               LAND USE BOARD
Municipal Offices                                                                                                                        350 Route 57 West
(908) 689-7209                                                                                                                         Washington, NJ 07882
                                                                                         MINUTES
                                                                                   APRIL 25, 2007

Chairwoman K. Pflugh called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

ADEQUATE NOTICE was given as follows: Notice was sent to the “Star Gazette” and “Express Times.” Notice was posted on the municipal bulletin board in the township administration building in Washington Township, New Jersey and notice was filed with the Township clerk.

ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Mayor Horensky, Mr. Howell, Mr. Elbassiouny, Mr. Artigliere, Mr. Rossi, Mr. Iwaniszyn, Ms. Pflugh, Mr. Klinge, Mr. Zaret, Mr. Vergos

Members Absent: Mr. Bundschuh

Also Present: Attorney S. Gruenberg, Engineer W. Gleba, Planner S. Doyle

CORRESPONDENCE: A list will be provided to the land use board members.

MINUTES: Minutes from the March 28, 2007 meeting.
A motion to approve the minutes from the March 28, 2007 meeting as written was made by Mr. Zaret, seconded by Mr. Klingel, Vote: Zaret, Klingel, Horensky, Elbassiouny,  Iwaniszyn, Vergos

COMPLETENESS:
1. Joseph DeLuca - WTPB#2007-04 - Second completeness determination for a Minor Subdivision application for block 22 lot 3.17 located on Brass Castle Road.

Engineer B. Gleba addressed his review dated April 23, 2007.

Mr. Gleba reviewed the application for the board, the applicant’s Attorney J. Broscious requested the board undue a prior minor subdivision application. Mr. Gleba stated in the final note of his letter someone should appear to discuss the situation.

A motion to deem the application incomplete per the Engineer’s letter dated April 23, 2007 was made by Mr. Klingel, seconded by Mr. Elbassiouny, Vote: Klingel, Elbassiouny, Horensky, Howell, Rossi, Iwaniszyn, Pflugh, Zaret, Vergos - Ayes, 0 - Nay, 0 - Abstain, motion carried.

2. Benchmark Enterprises LLC - WTPB#2006-13 - Second completeness determination for a Variance application for block 22 lot 3.16 located at 390 Route 57 West. Engineer B. Gleba addressed his review dated April 23, 2007.

Mr. Gleba reviewed the status of the application beginning in November of last year. The applicant was requesting additional sign age on their lot which is adjacent to the prior Ames building therefore as part of a prior site plan approval it does not allow them sign age on their property. Mr. Gleba stated the zoning officer was approached with an application from the applicant and remanded it back to the land use board for a decision.

Mr. Gleba stated the applicant has resubmitted information, no contact with the applicant.

A motion to grant waivers for completeness purposes per Mr. Gleba’s April 23, 2007 review letter was made by Mr. Klingel, seconded by Mr. Rossi, Vote: Klingel, Rossi, Horensky, Howell, Artigliere, Iwaniszyn, Pflugh, Zaret - Ayes, Elbassiouny - Abstained, Vergos - Nay, all ayes motion carried. The public hearing for this application was scheduled for May 30, 2007.

DISCUSSION & PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
1. R. Robinson - WTPB#2007-06 - Public Hearing for a Variance application for block 1 lot 3 located at 148 Brass Castle Harmony Road. Attorney S. Gruenberg determined the board had jurisdiction to proceed. Attorney S. Gruenberg swore in Mr. Ralph Robinson.

Mr. Robinson described the proposed second addition for his home and the proposed shed for the site. Mr. Robinson explained the foot print would be the same, the original foundation was for a porch. Mr. Robinson explained he would not be exceeding the side or front of the house and not expanding the principle structure. Mr. Robinson presented a survey and plans reflecting the proposed location of the second story addition. The proposed second floor addition will not result in any further encroachment upon the existing structure.
Mr. Robinson described the triangular shaped lot and the existing septic location.

Members of the board raised concerns regarding the location of the shed within five feet of the property line. The applicant testified the adjoining property was large and wooded and would not result in any further development. The property is bounded by a large wooded parcel and Township lands. Mr. Robinson agreed to move the shed ten feet from the property line as opposed to the requested five foot variance. No members of the public presented in opposition to the application. A motion to grant variance approval was made by Mr. Klingel, seconded by Mr. Howell, Vote: Klingel, Howell, Artigliere, Elbassiouny, Horensky - Ayes, 0 - Abstain, 0 - Nay, motion carried.

2. M. Kendra - WTPB#2007-01 - Continuation of a public hearing for a Variance application for block 40 lot 109 located on Jackson Valley Road.
Eligible to Vote:  Klingel, Iwaniszyn, Bundschuh, Zaret, Vergos
At the request of the applicant this application will be re-scheduled to a future date.

BREAK: 7:55 - 8:00 p.m.

3. The Village Shoppes at Hawk Pointe - WTPB#2006-14 - Continuation of a public hearing for a Preliminary Major Site Plan application with variance relief for block 65 & 65.02 lots 2,4 & 1 located at 294 Rt. 31 south .Eligible to Vote: Horensky, Howell, Klingel, Iwaniszyn, Pflugh, Bundschuh, Elbassiouny. Mr. Rossi, Mr. Artigliere and Mr. Zaret stepped down for the application and left the meeting at this time. The applicant was represented by Attorney L. Tubman, Engineer E. Back, Architect E. Pavese.
 
Village Shoppes continued:
Ms. Tubman stated she would like clarification on page one April 19, 2007 review letter exhibit BB-3  under evaporation we will have to determine our water source for the wet pond prior to final approval. Ms. Tubman stated she has clarified with Ms. Doyle that her statement that if there are any changes in the method of maintaining the water level we would have to come back to the board for discussion purposes that would mean post final. Ms. Tubman stated on page three on paragraph two clarification is needed of the stormwater management plan, Ms. Tubman reviewed the procedure for if the Township would be allowed to clean the basin should be included in the resolution and the procedure should include penalties, I think you Ms. Doyle did not mean penalties, Ms. Tubman explained typically an applicant would provide an easement that allows the township to come in and do maintenance if the applicant or property owner fails to do the maintenance and the property owner has to fully reimburse the township for any expenses.

Ms. Tubman stated on page three she will require Mr. Pavese to review  exhibit A-9 Northwest elevation and exhibit A-10. Mr. Pavese clarified the first sign on the chart exhibit A-9 which shows the logo which is on the corner of the building, it is practically at a forty five degree so we count it once, I think Ms. Doyle may have counted it twice.  Mr. Pavese reviewed all four sign locations on the North elevation of the Shop Rite building, Mr. Pavese stated we need variance for area and for number of signs. Mr. Pavese stated on the South elevation we have an illuminated Shop Rite logo and enter sign, we need a variance for area and number of signs and internal illumination.

Mr. Pavese stated the East elevation will have a Pharmacy sign by the drive thru which will require a variance for internal illumination. Mr. Pavese stated the West elevation will have a ten foot diameter logo in addition to the word Shop Rite, a variance would be required for area, number or signs and internal illumination. Ms. Tubman stated they agreed to remove the pylon sign from the plans per Ms. Doyle’s request. Ms. Tubman stated she had no more testimony from this witness.  Ms. Doyle stated she would have to modify her chart on page three.

Public Questions:
Ms. L. Scovil of 5 Osprey Court
Ms. Scovil asked Mr. Pavese to review the colors chosen for the buildings, white or harvest gold.
Mr. Pavese stated it would be neutral.

Mr. F. Cregan of 62 Merlin Drive.
Mr. Cregan asked if there would be free standing signs along route 31. Ms. Tubman replied signage would be addressed on a future application along with the sign package for this and the Regency, when that sign package comes in we will have to notice and you will be aware of it.

Ms. Tubman summarized the application, the application is  for a Shop Rite to be located on a single parcel with cross utility and roadway connections for the existing and approved potential residential use, it is a permitted use in the zone what is not permitted is the signage. Ms. Tubman stated she has asked the board for a  deviation from the lighting standards based on testimony presented that is yet for the board to discuss, we otherwise comply apart from the signage and the lighting and have put in sufficient testimony to justify what we have to do. Ms. Tubman stated there is a waiver requested for temporary construction trailers to be removed prior to a certificate of occupancy.
 
Public Comment:
Mr. W. Cooper Washington Township Fire Official
Mr. Cooper addressed a letter from Finelli’s office addressing fire zone lines.
Mr. Cooper stated they would require fire zone lines in the front of the building and by the entrance. Mr. Cooper stated the curb should be painted yellow three foot out from the curb a yellow striping and inside of the striping no parking fire lane, possibly two or three over the distance. Ms. Tubman stated she would provide a plan to the fire official as a condition of approval.

Mr. F. Cregan of 62 Merlin Drive.
Mr. Cregan stated there was some confusion as to what was five foot candle power, was that resolved, there were some comparison were going to be made.
Ms. Tubman stated there was no sense in comparing to car dealerships which we know are in excess of that and gave testimony to that effect.

Mr. J. Lombard of 21 Asbury Anderson Road.
Mr. Lombard expressed his concerns for the number of variances being requested and deviations from the code and the impact on the water supply and on the community near the proposed site. Mr. Lombard expressed concerns with vacant properties throughout the township and the borough, what will happen to the old Shop Rite building.

Mr. Lombard asked the board to consider the impact for the residents here in Washington Township.
Vice Chairman R. Klingel stated in the past ten years this Township has purchased more open space property to eliminate development, most recently preventing two hundred and fifty or more proposed units. Mr. Klingel stated the Shop Rite’s lease is up, the letter that was submitted to the township committee was they would move out of the township unless they can find another suitable building site.

Attorney S. Gruenberg stated the board’s job is simply to review the application for development and whether it conforms to the ordinances within the township and if relief required is appropriate. Attorney Gruenberg stated it is not up to this board to determine whether Shop Rite comes in or not, just whether it meets with the ordinances and whether should be granted.

Mr. Lombard asked the township to ask themselves what the impact will be for the township residents and property values.

Ms. Tubman reviewed  conditions:
Ms. Tubman recommended the professional’s review letters be appendages to the resolution to keep that straight, 4/9/07 J. Cilo letter, 4/19/07 J. Cilo letter, 4/7/07 Finelli letter.
Ms. Tubman stated with all of those letters we take very few exceptions, we addressed those exceptions in testimony but I would like to re-cap them.

Ms. Tubman reviewed the clarification from Ms. Doyle’s April 19, 2007 letter regarding finalizing the water source for the wet pond prior to final approval, and that if the source were to change subsequent to final approval we would come back to the board to discuss the replacement source. Ms.Tubman reviewed from Ms. Doyle’s April 19, 2007 letter under operations and management, we will provide for clarification purposes an easement to the township to allow the township maintenance of our stormwater management facilities, if we fail to do so we would be obligated to reimburse the township. Ms. Tubman stated the signage would be reflected in the transcript and in Ms. Doyle’s updated illumination chart. Mr. Tubman reviewed the letter from Finelli & Associates dated April 7, 2007 on page eight at number eight at your last meeting  I believe it was agreed and we took exception and addressed in testimony they agree with the site access comments except we do not agree to provide an additional five foot offset of the site triangle to re-locate the electric cabinet, Mr. Finelli’s associate and our engineer agreed at the last meeting that we meet the appropriate design standard and is not necessary.

Ms. Tubman reviewed page thirteen number forty four on Finelli’s April 7, 2007 letter that paragraph provides for plan revisions of satisfaction of all conditions of approval, a submission of compliance all prior to a pre-construction meeting. Ms. Tubman stated we can do site work under your ordinance prior to the satisfaction of all conditions but we must have final approval, we would like that paragraph forty four on page thirteen to reflect that we must satisfy all conditions prior to a final approval. Ms. Tubman reviewed page thirteen number forty six of the Finelli letter, we agree that the plan should be modified to show all easements and the actual easement documents to be delivered to the township should be a pre-condition of final approval. Ms. Tubman reviewed page fourteen item number forty eight the developer’s agreement should be in place prior to a pre-construction meeting, my client’s position the developer’s agreement is a contractual document which will not only have conditions of your approval but obligations including payment of Mt. Laurel fees and there should be a pre-condition to final approval, we have no quarrel with the substance only the timing. Ms. Tubman stated substantively we have little question with any of the review letters. Mr. Gleba addressed comment number eight regarding the site lines, my office has reviewed that information with regards to the five foot offset we are in agreement that the site line was shown on the plans adequate for these purposes however the electrical cabinet that is going to have to be relocated due to the fact it is higher than thirty two inches in height. Mr. Gleba stated that is the control panel for the pump station, I don’t believe that under electrical code that has to be located within the fenced area. Mr. Gleba addressed comment forty six regarding easements I am not quite sure what the request is for forty six, will this be a condition of approval. Ms. Tubman replied as a condition of preliminary to be satisfied prior to final. Mr. Gleba addressed the request for site disturbance item number forty four, what exactly is proposed certain items have to be satisfied in order for site disturbance to occur, where are we going with that a number of the items have to be addressed prior to a pre-construction meeting. Ms. Tubman replied as with the Regency we will have to give you a listing of the permits that are necessary, none of the work that requires a permit can be done prior to having those permits, the reason I had a problem with forty four is it appeared I had to satisfy all of those conditions of approval which could include the elevation of the wet pond which could take some time but have no relevance for site disturbance. Mr. Gleba recommended the condition be very similar to what was put into the Regency, we are going to have to go through the Regency resolution and some of these items are very similar in nature with regards to what can be done. Mr. Gleba stated a schedule would have to be developed and submitted to the township engineer and board engineer to come to a resolution of how far this can go under site disturbance before permits are required for other improvements to the property. Ms. Tubman replied as she recalled a construction sequence and a listing of permits necessary for each of the items, this could certainly be worked out in the resolution. Mr. Gleba addressed the developer’s agreement, Mr. Gleba stated he wanted to be sure the board was comfortable with not having the developer’s agreement prior to commence- ment of construction, I understand you are willing to do this prior to Preliminary approval,

Ms. Tubman replied absolutely and the town is protected under the site work by performance bonds that have to be posted as well as inspection fees. Mr. Gleba recommended if the applicant would like to start construction prior to the developer’s agreement they formalize and agree to a performance bond being posted for the project based upon this list of permits and request of scheduling. Ms. Tubman stated the purpose of requesting site work prior to posting performance bonds is to avoid the cost of the bond it is expensive and it is not required. Ms. Tubman stated we would not get final approval or apply for a building permit until we  have put in some improvements and bonded for the remainder. Ms. Tubman stated the developer’s agreement will take time to formulate and Steve time to do a resolution, we have to work out with the township committee what they need to see in a developer’s agreement, we are questioning the timing. Attorney S. Gruenberg stated it is up to the board, they are suggesting that the developer’s agreement be a condition of approval but not be required before they do construction and their pre-construction meeting. Mr. Gruenberg stated they would have to come back before the board and satisfy those conditions before they can get a building permit they have to get final approval and satisfy all conditions set forth. Attorney Gruenberg explained  performance bonds and stated it is up to the board. Mr. Gleba addressed his concerns regarding the performance bond.

Mayor Horensky stated he had no problem with it being a condition until such time as final approval, Mr. Elbassiouny agreed. Attorney Gruenberg stated these are the conditions dealing with the board professionals correspondence which have been marked BB-1, BB-2 and BB-3 into the record including Mr. Gleba’s February 23, 2007 letter B-1, Ms. Tubman stated she had no objection but if there are inconsistencies I will point them out.

Conditions addressed during testimony:
Ms. Tubman stated we agreed to a developer’s agreement prior to final approval, and that the professional’s review letters that have been addressed or modified by testimony should be appendage’s to the resolution. Ms. Tubman stated the hours of operation will be Monday through Saturday 7:00 a.m. thru 11:00 p.m., Sunday 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. anticipated hours, if we have to deviate in the future we will come back to the board. Ms. Tubman clarified the hours of lighting, photocell operated for light level turn on, regular parking lot lights will be lowered or turned off at midnight or one hour after closing. Ms. Tubman agreed to provide drainage easements to the township, storm water maintenance easements to the township and internal cross easements for drainage and utilities as necessary. Ms. Tubman stated we will maintain the appropriate level in the wet basin and will require any permit necessary to use the treated effluent for which ever method, we will determine the method to maintaining that level prior to the application for final. Ms. Tubman stated they would provide calculations requested by Mr. Gleba for the wet pond and details of the pond aeration units for both professionals. Ms. Tubman stated they would commit to no outdoor sales or display of merchandise other than plants and flowers, the HVAC units if they are visible from Route 31 they will be screened to prevent visibility. Ms. Tubman stated if there are any landscaping plan issues or species issues that are not resolved we will bring that back to the board for discussion and resolution.

Ms. Tubman stated she would expect of course all of the standard conditions, affordable housing contribution obligation for commercial property.

Attorney Gruenberg stated he had notes through out he will need help with from the professionals, a discussion regarding the re-alignment of Hawk Pt. Boulevard extended to Rt. 31 and a revised plan submitted during the testimony. Ms. Tubman the plan was submitted and addressed in Mr. Gleba’s review letter.

Attorney Gruenberg reviewed the locations of the crosswalks, Mr. Gleba stated those are on the plans now. Attorney Gruenberg stated the landscape plan reviewed to the satisfaction of the board’s planner, no signage in windows, no open neon signs, no monument signs and pylon signs, with this application building signs only. Ms. Tubman stated signage for this and the Regency will be the subject of a separate site plan application for this board prior to final per comment number twenty seven of Mr. Gleba’s review letter. Ms. Tubman stated there was an agreement they would bank the parking to eliminate a waiver, Ms. Tubman stated there was a waiver of strict compliance for your stormwater re-charge requirement, which is being satisfied on the golf course lot. Attorney Gruenberg addressed waiver requests for the two irrigation ponds and the stormwater reduction plan, Mr. Gleba replied yes.

Attorney Gruenberg stated there would be no storage of shopping carts on the west side of the building, Ms. Tubman agreed, Attorney Gruenberg stated that was all he had.Ms. Tubman stated they will provide and include on their plans a site plan sheet that will incorporate the suggestions of the fire Marshall both as to location and to signage.

Ms. Tubman stated the other condition that is to be incorporated is the level of lighting,
Ms. Doyle reviewed the conditions from her February 6, 2007 report and issues discussed from her report. Ms. Doyle requested the banked parking be included in the developer’s agreement,
Ms. Tubman stated it would be more appropriate in the resolution as a condition parking demand is such that we feel we have the right without coming back to the board then if additional parking is shown the township has the right to require it of us, Ms. Doyle agreed.
Ms. Doyle stated the retaining wall will be made of stone the same color as the light post stone and would be worked out with professionals, Ms. Tubman replied fine.Ms. Doyle stated there is to be no parking on Club House Drive and the signage will be to the satisfaction of the Engineer, Ms. Tubman agreed. Ms. Doyle stated lighting should be defined.

Relief requested:
Attorney Gruenberg reviewed relief, Preliminary Site Plan approval, Stormwater waivers from the April 7, 2007 Finelli report for Stormwater and the twenty acre tributary area. Attorney Gruenberg added waiver for six construction trailers which will be removed prior to the applicant getting a CO, Mr. Gleba reviewed. Lighting, applicant requesting relief for five foot candles and foot candles for the property line. Mr. Gleba stated there would have to be a reference to banked parking the ordinance does not permit a bank, Mr. Gleba stated there should be a design waiver required but if the banked parking gets constructed they are meeting the number of spaces. Attorney Gruenberg reviewed building mounted signage,

Attorney Gruenberg stated that is all of the relief I have listed, otherwise the site plan fully conforms with the ordinances of Washington Township in all other respects.

Chairwoman K. Pflugh stated she would like the board to go through and breakdown the waivers, Attorney Gruenberg suggested the relief requests should be taken first.

Mr. Gleba reviewed strict compliance from the stormwater quantity and groundwater recharge waivers being granted, Mr. Gleba clarified the permits, no questions or comments were made.
A motion to close the public hearing at this time was made by Mr. Howell, seconded by Mr. Klingel, all ayes motion carried.

A motion to grant the request for waiver from stormwater conditioned by obtaining site plan approval and all other conditions, by Mr. Howell, seconded by Mr. Iwaniszyn,
Vote: Howell, Iwaniszyn, Horensky, Elbassiouny, Klingel, Pflugh - Ayes, 0 - Nay, 0 - Abstain, motion carried.
A motion to grant relief for temporary construction trailers on the site to be removed prior to CO was made by Mr. Iwaniszyn, seconded by Mr. Klingel, Vote: Iwaniszyn, Klingel, Horensky, Howell, Elbassiouny, Pflugh - Ayes, 0 - Nay, 0 - Abstain, motion carried.

The board had a brief discussion on the new lighting ordinance, Attorney Gruenberg reminded the board each application falls under its own merits and may or not apply in any future applications.

A motion to deviate from the lighting levels set forth in the township’s ordinance section 123-19 was made by Mr. Klingel, seconded by Mayor Horensky, Vote: Klingel, Horensky, Howell, Elbassiouny, Iwaniszyn - Ayes, Pflugh - Nay, 0 - Abstain, motion carried.

A motion to grant a  parking variance as described was made by Mr. Elbassiouny, seconded by
Mr. Klingel, Vote: Elbassiouny, Klingel, Horensky, Howell, Iwaniszyn, Pflugh - Ayes, 0 - Nay, 0 - Abstain, motion carried.

A motion to grant variance relief for signage as described was made by Mr. Howell, seconded by Mr. Elbassiouny, Vote: Howell, Elbassiouny, Horensky, Klingel, Iwaniszyn, Pflugh - Ayes, 0 - Nay, 0 - Abstain, motion carried.

A motion to grant Preliminary Site Plan approval subject to conditions discussed was made by Mr. Elbassiouny, seconded by Mr. Klingel, Vote: Elbassiouny, Klingel, Horensky, Howell, Iwaniszyn, Pflugh - Ayes, 0 - Nay, 0 - Abstain, motion carried.

Ms. Tubman thanked the board and its professionals for the detail to the application and your patience through several meetings.

PUBLIC COMMENT: No further public comment offered.
Chairwoman K. Pflugh addressed the board regarding considerations the board has to make, environmental considerations, important considerations which we as board members do not take lightly. Ms. Pflugh briefly addressed the current masterplan revisions which will be shared with the board and the township committee. Ms. Pflugh briefly addressed the new wastewater management plan, Ms. Pflugh suggested the board members take the time to review the plan which will have direct impact on this town.

ADJOURNMENT: 10:25 p.m.
With no further business before the board and no public comment offered the meeting was adjourned.

Respectfully Submitted,

Margaret Housman, Secretary