MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD

OF THE BOROUGH OF MOUNTAIN LAKES

June 25, 2009

 

Chair Sandy Batty read the Open Public Meeting Advertisement Notice:  Adequate notice of this meeting was given to the Citizen and the Daily Record, posted with the Borough Clerk and the Bulletin Board, and made available to all those requesting individual notice and paying the required fee.

 

 

ROLL CALL:

Members Present: Nachshen, Holmberg, Tempesta, Shaw, Batty, Kane (8:35pm)

Absent: Selver, Bailey, Gormally, Nix

Also Present:  Attorney Peter Henry, Engineer William Ryden

 

REVIEW OF MINUTES:  Sandy Batty made a motion to adopt the minutes of the May 28, 2009 meeting with corrections. Joe Tempesta seconded the motion; they were approved by voice vote.

 

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

            KLINGENBURG                    123 Lake Drive

            Bl. 101 Lot 48                          Appl. 09-237

            Minor Subdivision                     R-A zone

 

Richard Clark, an attorney from Laddey, Clark & Ryan, with offices in Sparta and Denville, introduced the continuation of the Klingenburg application. He presented Daren Phil of Suburban Consulting, in Mount Arlington, as the Engineer who would continue the application. 

Mr. Phil explained all the changes made to the set of site plans (exhibits A-1-7) that were previously submitted. All the revised sheets are dated June 3, 2009. The changes made were as follows: Sheet 2 shows Front and Rear Setbacks as interpreted by the input from the last Planning Board meeting.  Sheet 3 shows the two lots that are proposed. The setback calculations are based on the 74.47 ft Lakefront Setback at its closest point. The Front Yard Setback is determined by averaging of Lot 52 and 46. They will be developing Lot 50 first. Sheet 4 shows the placement of the houses. The houses are the same as the houses presented at the last meeting. The zoning table on this sheet has been updated.  Sheet 5 shows the grading with no changes. Sheet 6, 7 and 8 have no changes but are re-dated.  Mr. Phil presented a new Setback Comparison Exhibit (A-8). The red lines show what were presented as the setback lines for the properties at the last meeting. The gray lines were what they are presenting today as the setbacks.

Sandy Batty said she had a question on the soil moving application. I understand you are excavating and taking soil away from the property but you mention Mount Hope Quarry as the supplier of fill. Mr. Phil clarified that soil will be taken to the quarry and the quarry will be supplying truck loads of stone and other building materials.  In the application the proposed hours of operation were 7am to 7pm. The Board stated the trucks can not move any material that early. They can not operate before 8am because of our town ordinances.

Peter G. Steck, a Professional Community Planning Consultant from Maplewood, New Jersey, has been licensed since 1976. He was asked to review the Klingenburg application by Richard Clark. Tonight he was submitting Exhibit A-9, a seven page presentation on the property. 

Mr. Steck visited the site two times, obtained aerial photos, and visited the town hall to view the records on the property. P-I of exhibit (A-9) shows the aerial view of the property with the proposed lot lines. P-2 shows an addition to the existing house superimposed on a map showing the existing lot conditions. P-3 shows the proposed subdivision and setbacks.  P-4 shows town maps at various times in the town’s history. P-5 and 6 are photos taken by Mr. Steck showing the existing dwelling from different angles on the property. The photos also show the view of the lot line shared with Lot 46.  P-7 shows an aerial photo of Lot 48 superimposed on the topography map taken in the spring of 2007 by the Morris County Planning Board. The last exhibit (A-10) shows a larger aerial map of the property from the county. 

Mr. Steck stated that the application is a minor subdivision creating two conforming lots with two single family houses. Based on the original concept of the community the property is made up of four 50ft. wide modules. The property had received subdivision approval in the past but the subdivision was never perfected. The planner looked at the surrounding area. The lots on the lake are all different depths with many of them having 15% steep slopes or more to the lake.  He also looked at the town’s Master Plan. The property is part of planning area 1 (PA1) in the State Development Plan and is in the Planning Area of the Highlands.

Mr. Steck explained that the town’s current ordinance for FAR does not allow you to fill the entire building envelope.  The 85’ x 50’ rectangle has open space around the dwelling once the FAR calculation is applied. A 15% slope is not a steep slope under the Residential Site Improvement Standards.  There is no planning publication that says you can not build on a slope of 15%.With a slope at 15% you need to address stabilizing the slope but it does not mean you can not build on it.  Mr. Steck pointed out that our ordinance did not specify the contour intervals to use when calculating the 15% slope. Sandy Batty informed the applicant that our site plan contours are two feet.

In conclusion Mr. Steck stated he could see the applicant seeking relief under both the C-1 and C-2 variance. Under the C-2 variance the benefits out way the negatives. If the lot was not subdivided the negative would be building a very large house that is out of character with the town.  The benefit of building two new houses would be dwellings that are in scale with the rest of the neighborhood. A C-1 variance is a hardship due to the physical make up of the lot itself. He pointed out that Lot 48 is fully conforming and without 15% slopes within the building envelope. The steep slopes move away from the house. On Lot 50 a new house will be built where the existing house is located. The lot already has terraces and the area has already been disturbed by past construction. Two thirds of the existing house is already in the steep slope area. Under the 15% slope ordinance most of the lots in the area would not meet the steep slope ordinance requirements. It is his opinion the board could grant the variance under C-1 or C-2.

Sandy Batty questioned why Mr. Steck chose the 4 foot contours for this illustration. She said building on any slopes can cause erosion and the proposed Lot 50 is in a steep slope area. Bill Ryden said Mr. Phil used topography maps to determine the site plans he presented; are you saying his drawings are incorrect? Mr. Steck stated that from the visit he made to the property he could see the area behind the house was flat and not a slope.  Bill Ryden stated the Board needs to rely on the work of the engineer and the maps he created.

Sandy Batty asked if there were any questions from the public and there were none.

Once again Richard Clark reviewed the property’s history. He presented the board with exhibit A-11, a copy of the 1941 application and exhibit A-12, the minutes from the Board of Adjustment dated July 24, 1941. Exhibit A-13, a Sketch Subdivision Plat for the property from 1971 and letter dated June 24, 1971 from Planning Board Secretary. Lastly he submitted Exhibit A-14 the Resolution and minutes from the Planning Board dated November 19, 1997.

Sandy Batty asked if there was any public comment.

Frank Luzzi, 115 Lake Drive/Lot 46, questioned who would be responsible for watching that the applicant stayed within the limits set by the Board.  The approval by this board would create the two lots and would reduce the size of the building envelope. Then the construction department would make sure that the limitations would be followed.  Sandy Batty stated the FAR would also restrict the construction size. Stephen Shaw mentioned the applicant would need to prepare a much more detailed plot plan which would be review by the Zoning Officer for compliance and then it would be followed up by inspections by the construction office. 

Joe Riccardi, of 110 Lake Drive, asked if the plans would be executed as drawn.  Would the applicant commit to build the houses Mr. Nelson presented? 

Peter Henry asked if the applicant planned to live in one of the house. He said yes. He also asked if the applicant would be controlling the building of the second house. He said it is his intention to do so. Mr. Riccardi requested the attorney work that into the resolution.

The board comments were as follows. Stephen Shaw said the applicant did a very thorough job preparing the application.  The original design of the town was intended to have houses on lots of this size. Mr. Nelson’s streetscape exhibits were very compelling. He was in support of the application with the conditions discussed.  Peter Holmberg agreed with Stephen Shaw.  The board’s job is to guide the applicant not tell them what to do with their property.  He would support the application.  Joe Tempesta stated if the applicant was going with the house designs presented it would ensure keeping the neighbors happy with the outcome.  Corey Nachshen questioned how the water restrictions would apply in this situation. He understood the homeowner could do one hook up and the other lot would have to be serviced by a well. Once the restrictions are lifted they would have to hook up to the town water supply and abandon the well. Stephen Shaw explained, under the town’s current water restriction the applicants needed two permits for the well, one from the Board of Health and one from the NJ Department of Environmental Protection.  Sandy Batty mentioned the existing house is non-conforming so it is better to have these two homes.

Stephen Shaw made a motion to approve the to subdivide the property into two lots as presented, subject to a reduction in the size of the building envelopes as depicted on the plans, the old house would be demolished, Lot 50 would be developed first, the applicant would comply with the requirements for soil moving, they would comply with the water restrictions the town is currently under, a well would be drilled on the newly created lot, and the application would be subject to the Scarce Resource Restraints of  Highlands Municipalities. Joe Tempesta provided the second and the application was approved by a 5-0 roll call vote.

Richard Clark question if the applicant had to demolish the house before he perfected the subdivision. Could they bond for the demolition on Lot 50 so they did not have to move out and demolish the house in 90 days? The applicant may want to live in the house until he was ready to build the new house. Bill Ryden asked if creating the subdivision first created variances. Peter Henry suggested using a letter of credit to secure the demolition of the house and that a building permit not be issued until the house was taken down. Under this scenario the applicant would not have to move out in 90 days.

 

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

 

Master Plan Committee – No report was made.

 

Highlands Committee – The Environmental Resource Inventory changes were done by Mr. Ryden. He sent the changes to the town’s Highlands Council through Cathy Harvey.  He did not send them to the state Highlands Committee yet. Bill Ryden went to the state Highlands meetings on Modules 3 and 5.  The town planners, Duggan and Susan Kimball, need direction from the town so they know how to proceed. The Highlands Committee needs to show the Environmental Resource Inventory changes to the Environmental Commision for comments.

 

Ordinance Committee – No report was made.

 

OTHER MATTERS & PUBLIC COMMENTS:

Corey Nachshen mentioned he had talked to resident Brian Marshall. Mr. Marshall stated not all our ordinances are up to date on the web site. The board confirmed that the town has a service that updates the ordinances and they are currently on schedule with their periodic updates.

Stephen Shaw is still collecting names to fill the open board position.  Please send your recommendations to him by email.

 

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.

 

                                                                                    Respectfully submitted,

 

 

                                                                                    Cynthia Shaw, Secretary