PLANNING BOARD MEETING

BOROUGH OF WANAQUE

 

MINUTES

 

Regular Meeting

October 16, 2008

 

PUBLIC HEARING ON REDEVELOPMENT PLAN

 

 

Meeting called to order by Chairman Gilbert Foulon with a salute to the flag.

 

READING:  Open Public Meeting Announcement

This is a “Public Hearing” for the New Jersey Redevelopment and Housing Law, N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-1 and was advertised by the placement of a notice in the Bergen Record on October 4th and the Suburban Trends on October 5th and a notice thereof has been posted on the bulletin board in the Municipal Building in the Borough of Wanaque and a copy thereof has been on file with the Borough Clerk.

 

ROLL CALL

 

Chairman Gilbert Foulon

John Di Meglio                                              William Rucci                        

Mayor Dan Mahler                                       David Slater

Joseph Graceffo                                             Eugene Verba

Kevin Platt                                                     Ed O’Connell

 

PRESENT:  Attorney Steven Veltri and Engineer Michael Cristaldi

 

ABSENT:  Member John Shutte

 

Chairman Foulon announced to the members that this is a “Public Hearing” on the Redevelopment Plan and all members received a copy of and Mr. Benecke will explain this plan to everyone.

 

Mr. Robert L. Benecke of Benecke Economics and Borough Administrator Tom Carroll came forward. Mr. Benecke explained he is here on behalf of the Mayor & Council pursuant to a resolution adopted by the Council on July 14, 2008. This resolution was adopted pursuant to the local Redevelopment and Housing Law. His firm, Benecke Economics, was engaged to help guide the Planning Board in their deliberations respecting whether approximately 25 properties qualify and satisfy the criteria of the local Redevelopment and Housing Law. On the report and study includes Dr. Henry Coleman on the Ringwood Avenue Redevelopment Study and Planner Fred F. Suljic who was also involved in the Ringwood Avenue Redevelopment Study. These gentlemen were instrumental in preparing the report. This study allows the Council to move forward with the plan but it does not do one thing; there will be no Eminent Domain with this project, study and redevelopment effort. The reason for that is that they are trying to obtain buying from the various property owners. Mr. Benecke then presented his documents as evidence and everyone should have a copy of The Redevelopment Study: there is Exhibit A-1 Study with the Map Attachment dated October 6, 2008, Exhibit A-2 photographs of the majority of properties which are attachedto the same report, Exhibit A-3 a letter dated May 18, 2005 from the Borough Administrator to Kelley, Drye & Warren a law firm representing U.S. Aluminum, Inc. confirming closure of the U.S. Aluminum property, and Exhibit A-4 a building evaluation report dated July 1999 by Tri-State Architects, P.C. indicating the deplorable condition of the municipal building in Wanaque.  Mr. Benecke then proceeded to go over the report. Mr. Benecke said they divided the 25 parcels into five (5) distinct areas. The first area is called Proposed Potential Redevelopment Area-Midvale 1; this area has seven (7) properties and includes the former public school at Block 231 Lot 11 (Rhinesmith School Property) and this is where the new Municipal Building might be built. The second area is called Proposed Potential Redevelopment Area Midvale 2 and that’s where the current Municipal Building is located. They would be taking this building and moving it to the seven (7) parcel area over near the Rhinesmith School and the current property at 579 Ringwood Ave. would be redeveloped with a moderate residential property consistent with the surrounding neighborhood characteristics. The third Proposed Potential Redevelopment Area has three (3) properties and includes a vacant corner lot at Ringwood Ave. and Stephens Ave. and would require the buying and the approval of the property owners. The fourth area Proposed Potential Redevelopment Area is at the U.S. Aluminum site and includes two (2) parcels, the U.S. Aluminum site itself and it would also include the small property behind it which is Block 435 Lot 5 & 5.01. The fifth Proposed Potential Redevelopment Area is in Haskell and is directly across from the new Town Centre Project and there’s approximately 4 lots plus a fifth if the property owner so desires and located directly along Ringwood Ave. Block 435 Lots 14.01 through 17. The purpose of the particular redevelopment area would be to have the area declared so that grant funds for façade and property and infrastructure improvements can flow to that particular property area. The nature of the properties would not change and would remain in the business area and perhaps a business service district and hope to attract community development block grants, community development  re-investment funds and other state grants into that area to have a companion piece to the properties across the street along Ringwood Ave.

Altogether there are twenty (20) properties plus five (5) properties that are residential in nature that would require the specific approval of the property owners moving forward. They have been broken down into five (5) potential proposed redevelopment areas; three (3) in Midvale including the current Municipal Building, two (2) in the Haskell area, one along Ringwood Ave. directly across from the Town Centre and the other one is the U.S. Aluminum site.

Mr. Benecke added that they did an analysis of the value of the improvements to land and most if not all of the properties under study, putting aside the five (5) residential properties, had land values greater than improvement values. They also looked at the Master Plan and believe this is consistent with the Master Plan and looked at the under utilization issues and not only the issues of value but also the issues of further investment, vacancies and there are three major vacant properties. They looked at the State Development and Redevelopment Plan, while Midvale isn’t an endorsed town center,  Haskell is, so the last two properties are in or adjacent to the Haskell Town Center. Midvale has been addressed by the town as a generic Town Center on a village scale similar to Haskell.

Tom Carroll added that there are also several other properties included as part of consideration for the site of the Municipal Building. Going north from the Rhinesmith property it would be the residential house that’s there, and next to that would be the two story structure with commercial on the first floor and residential on the second, next to that is another commercial property with several residential on the second floor and two small houses in the rear. Behind there, is a single house with a large open field lot that the property owner is willing to work with the town as far as the municipal property goes. Also included in the study is the property known as the “King Center” and the parking lot that’s adjacent to it. The purpose of including them is to make them available for Community Development Block Grant monies. The Borough did submit an application to Passaic County Community Development and this is the first year Passaic County has its own pot of Community Development Block Grant money. The application was submitted for $400,000.00 for the properties in Haskell for façade improvements. In order to qualify for any money that comes, they have to be in an area in need of redevelopment, otherwise they won’t qualify for the funding.

 

MEETING OPEN TO PUBLIC:

 

John Maiello, 26 Rhinesmith Ave.  came forward. Mr. Maiello said he doesn’t understand  how they picked out the properties they are interested in buying. Mr. Maiello said there should be a plan to show exactly what they want to do with the current municipal building site before this is approved. Mr. Benecke told Mr. Maiello that this is a study and this is not the plan itself. The plans are in a very ripe very rich state because of the Board of Adjustment Application in the work of the U.S. Aluminum site, they are talking about the status of the properties and typically, they would never talk about them. The Planning Board’s charge tonight is applying the statutory criteria of redevelopment and redevelopment area to the properties and vice versa. The charge is not to decide upon the worth-while ness of a plan, that’s up to the Borough Council and Mayor many months from now.

Mr. Maiello said the Board has a responsibility to the residents before this redevelopment plan is passed, to find out from the builder what he’ll be going to do with this redevelopment.     Mr. Carroll said that Mr. Maiello is claiming that his property is not included; Lot 11, which also includes the merger of Lot 12, is included and all the properties south of the Municipal Building to Cross Street are included in the study. The report states that includes all merged lots and Lots 9, 10 & 13 which are residential properties are at the options. This is to allow the developer if he so chooses to go to increase the size of what his proposal is and possibly look at developing down to Cross Street if they work out a plan with the Borough Council and he’s willing to go that route.

 

Mr. Benecke said to keep in mind that this study before the Board tonight, does not authorize anyone to build anything ever; before that is done, the Council has to pass a concurring resolution and a plan has to be developed and an ordinance has to be adopted, but before the ordinance is adopted, the Board has to approve it or give feedback and if the Council disagrees with the feedback they have to pass a separate resolution. This is just one of three stages and this is only the planning stage.

Atty. Veltri added, that what they are doing tonight is looking at the proposed area and seeing if it’s a redevelopment area in accordance with the statutory requirements. Atty. Veltri said the Board might want to visit the site to see how it’s going to affect the property owners. Atty. Veltri made it clear that the Board tonight is not approving any plan what they are considering are the properties involved to see if they are redevelopment areas in accordance with the statute.

 

Richard Duhame owner of Valentine Beauty Supply came forward. Mr. Duhame wanted to know what the plan was for the business owners down in the Haskell section. Mr. Carroll said those are the properties that are opposite the Haskell Town Centre, and the purpose of including those five (5) properties is solely to qualify them for possible Community Development Block Grant Monies that are available for grants for façade improvements and other improvements in those areas and that is the sole reason to include them.

 

Grace Maiello, 26 Rhinesmith Ave. came forward. Ms. Maiello wanted to know who determines the redevelopment area. Mr. Carroll said the properties were included in the two resolutions that were adopted by the Mayor & Council. Ms. Maiello thinks it’s a strange configuration on the properties that were chosen.

Mr. Benecke said that Mr. Carroll and the Mayor & Council have asked that he examine the entirety of Midvale over the next two years. It’s very critical that the retail shops and the merchants along Ringwood Ave. in the Midvale section are healthy just as they are in Haskell.

Mr. Carroll added that the Borough is going to have to do a complete Master Plan to be in conformance with the Highlands Act. The Borough has received a $15,000.00 grant to begin that study as to a needs assessment as to what the Borough is going to do. Therefore, that too will be incorporated with the redevelopment studies that they will be doing over the next couple of years.

 

CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING:

 

 

MOTION TO APPROVE THE STUDY AND FOR SUBMISSION TO THE MAYOR & COUNCIL FOR THE NEXT STEP TO THE PROCESS: 

Atty. Veltri said what the Board is essentially doing; the motion is inclusive of viewing the proposed properties that are listed in the report as a redevelopment area in accordance with the criteria set forth in N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-1 et seq. Section 5.

Motion made by Member Rucci, seconded by Member Graceffo, voting yes were Chairman Foulon, Member Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Graceffo, Platt, Rucci, Slater, Verba and O’Connell.

 

RECESSED AT 8:19 P.M.

 

RECONVENED AT 8:35 P.M.  All members present as before the break.

 

REGULAR MEETING

WANAQUE PLANNING BOARD

OCTOBER 16, 2008

 

Meeting called to order by Chairman Foulon with a salute to the flag.

 

ROLL CALL:

 

Chairman Gilbert Foulon                   William Rucci

John Di Meglio                                  David Slater

Mayor Dan Mahler                           Eugene Verba

Joseph Graceffo                                 Ed O’Connell

Kevin Platt                            

 

PRESENT: Attorney Steven Veltri and Engineer Michael Cristaldi

 

ABSENT:    Member John Shutte

 

READING: Open Public Meeting Announcement

This is a Regular Meeting of the Wanaque Borough Planning Board and adequate notice has been given and it has been duly advertised by the placement of a notice in the Trends and the Herald News, mailed on January 18, 2008 and a notice thereof has been posted on the bulletin board in the Municipal Building in the Borough of Wanaque and a copy thereof has been on file with the Borough Clerk.

 

MINUTES: from the September 18, 2008 Meeting.

 

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Graceffo, seconded by Member Di Meglio, voting yes were Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Graceffo, Platt, Slater and Verba.  Chairman Foulon, Members Rucci and O’Connell abstained.

 

COMMUNICATIONS/REPORTS:  No questions asked.

 

APPLICATION STATUS:  Eng. Cristaldi said he has one new application, which is a Minor Subdivision and is waiting to receive additional paper work before he can deem it complete.

 

NEW BUSINESS APPLICATION: “Accurate Auto Care” (Mechanical Auto Shop), 1185 Ringwood Ave., Block 448 Lot 8.01.  Owner of building is Cosimo Santoro, 27 Dartmouth Road, Wayne, N.J. Owner of business is Richard Doremus, 31 Oakwood Ave., Pequannock, N.J.

Owner of business, Richard Doremus stepped forward. Mr. Doremus explained that his business is an auto repair shop. His business was previously located at 455 Ringwood Ave. and wants to move his business to 1185 Ringwood Ave. Chairman Foulon said all inspections are in compliance except for the Fire Prevention Bureau and they stated that the applicant needs a minimum of two fire extinguishers and will reinspect. Member Di Meglio asked if they were planning on putting new doors on the building and the applicant said yes. Member Graceffo commented on how nice the building looks since the owners did the renovations.

 

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Graceffo, seconded by Member Di Meglio, voting yes were Chairman Foulon, Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Graceffo, Platt, Rucci, Slater, Verba and O’Connell.

 

Application #08-08 Pulte Amended Site Plan for Sales Trailer at 1237Ringwood Ave., Block 448 Lots 16.01 & 16.02 (16B).  Amended Site Plan Approval to permit existing structure, which was approved in 2001 as a temporary structure, to remain on the property as a permanent structure.  Authorized Agent is Edward Israelow, Esq., Director of Approvals for Pulte.

Atty. Veltri told the Board he looked at the file with the certified mailings and advertisement notice and said everything is in order and the Board can proceed.

Atty. Israelow came forward and explained he is an in-house attorney for Pulte Homes. Mr. Lars White who is an acquisition manager with Pulte also came forward. Atty. Israelow said back in March 2001, when Pulte was first getting started with Wanaque Reserve, the Planning Board at that time granted Final Site Plan Approval to allow Pulte to construct a one story Temporary Sales Trailer at 1237 Ringwood Ave. The trailer is approximately 5500 sq. ft. with 35 parking spaces. About two years ago Pulte moved their sales operation out of this trailer and over to the site in Building 6. Atty. Israelow said this trailer meets all the criteria for a permanent structure and received a final Certificate of Occupancy from Jeff Brusco, Building Inspector. It also provides a significant ratable for the Borough. The relief that they are seeking is an amendment to the 2001 Site Plan Approval to allow them to continue and have the structure remain as a permanent structure at the location on Ringwood Ave. They have received a fair amount of interest from people who are looking at possible office space.

 

Atty. Veltri said there are a couple of issues the Board needs to address. The Board did receive two letters regarding this application. One letter was from the North Jersey District Water Supply Commission dated October 14, 2008 and their concern with the brook on their site, which hasn’t been completed and is also asking Pulte to put up a $1,000,000.00 Performance Bond for said work. Atty. Israelow said they needed to acquire an easement from the North Jersey District Water Supply Commission so they could do some road widening as well as to put the traffic signal in place at Warren Hagstrom Blvd. They had long drawn out negotiations with NJDWSC and entered into an agreement with the Commission to do certain enhancements and betterments on their property. A lot of this work has already been accomplished. The primary work to be done is the demolition of the existing security building that is up in the front on Ringwood Ave. Because it’s a state entity the permits and inspections are done by DCA and they have all the permits necessary to begin work. This work would be done in the Spring of 2009 with the expectation of finalizing it by September of 2009. Atty. Israelow doesn’t think it’s appropriate for this Board to impose a condition on them to bond this particular work.

Atty. Veltri wanted to know why NJDWSC is citing July 1st of 2009 as the completion date in their letter. Atty. Israelow said there’s not an affirmed date in the agreement and he thinks they’re just trying to put as much pressure on to get the work completed. Atty. Israelow said they gave the NJDWSC assurances that they would be performing the work and will be completed by late Summer/early Fall of 2009.

Atty. Veltri asked, when they made their agreement with the NJDWSC to do this work, did they need to post a Performance Bond? Atty. Israelow said it was not required.

Atty. Veltri said the other letter dated October 15, 2008 from Atty. Jeffrey Kassover from Pompton Lakes representing the Wanaque Borough Sewerage Authority. Atty. Kassover said in this letter that the Authority is a holder of a 15 ft. sanitary sewer easement over the subject property. He’s pointing out that there’s an electrical control panel that encroaches upon the easement and would like, if the Board approves the application, require that the encroaching equipment be relocated off the easement and that the final location of the equipment be inspected and approved by their engineer. Atty. Israelow said that is correct and received a call from Atty. Kassover before he wrote the letter to the Board. Atty. Israelow said they were out at the site and there is an electrical panel that is within the easement area and they have no problem with a condition being attached to the approval of this application. Atty. Israelow mentioned that when a potential buyer looked at this property, it was brought to their attention by the Building Inspector, Jeffrey Brusco that there was a condition in the 2001 Resolution that stated at the ending of the sales effort that the trailer would be demolished. Atty. Israelow continued by saying that the structure has been built to code as a permanent structure.

Atty. Veltri told Atty. Israelow back in 2001, there were discussions about a monetary contribution for fire equipment that was stipulated and agreed to. Atty. Veltri asked Atty. Israelow if he would stipulate tonight on the record on behalf of Pulte that that contribution for fire equipment will be made by no later than January 15, 2009.

           

Atty. Israelow agreed to Atty. Veltri’s request. Atty. Veltri also mentioned the condition set-forth in Atty. Kassover’s letter regarding the encroaching equipment and Atty. Israelow also agreed to that.

Eng. Cristaldi said one of the stipulations in the Resolution of approval was that Pulte would grant easements to the utilities that are on the property that exists which are drains and sewer lines. One of the sewer lines is a 12” trunk line and runs under the corner of one of the buildings. Atty. Israelow said he thinks an easement was given for that. Eng. Cristaldi also said there is a sewer line that runs through the property north/south and there is also a drain line that runs parallel to the street and goes out to Post Brook. Eng. Cristaldi said once you make this structure permanent how are you going to get at that sewer line if they have to fix it without removing the building? Atty. Israelow said he spoke to his construction people and said the structure is on piers, and if necessary to repair the sewer line, it could be accessed. Eng. Cristaldi said if they’re going to make this a permanent structure, they should know where all the easements are on this property.

Eng. Cristaldi and Atty. Israelow went over the plans looking for the easements and utilities. Atty. Veltri said that they should amend the site plan to show the location of the easements and it should be a condition.

Chairman Foulon said he thinks they should go to the Sewer Authority before the Board can make a decision. Atty. Israelow said the Board could make that a condition for approval and added that the granting of the drainage easement and resolution of the sewer easement and showing this on the plan. Member Graceffo said he thinks the Board should wait before voting on this and wait until next month to make sure these things get done.

Atty. Veltri said he would propose generally that all easements, drainage and sewerage be put on the site plan and present it to the Sewer Authority for their review and approval. In the event they have an objection to where the sewer line is, the applicant will have to indemnify them for any damage done to the property or the building as a result of them trying to get to the pipe in the future. They will also have to grant the Borough a 20 ft. drainage easement on the southerly section of the property and that easement needs to be prepared by the applicant and would be responsible to pay out of escrow any legal fees associated with that easement. The other conditions mentioned previously such as  removing that piece of equipment and pay a $200,000.00 monetary contribution to the Borough for fire equipment by no later than January 15, 2009 and all County Planning Board conditions of approval have been satisfied and met. Atty. Israelow said there was a letter sent back in December 2007 from the County Planning Board and was given to Atty. Veltri. Atty. Veltri added that NJDWS is asking the Board to ask the applicant to post a Performance Bond and Atty. Veltri doesn’t think that is appropriate from where the Board sits. It was brought to Atty. Veltri’s attention that a letter dated December 6, 2007 from the Passaic County Planning Board to the Building Inspector, Jeff Brusco stating that a reinspection of this site has shown that all of the work appears to have been completed in a manner acceptable to Passaic County and they have no objection to a permanent Certificate of Occupancy being issued for this property.

 

Eng. Cristaldi said he has a set of calculations that was submitted to the Building Inspector, Jeff Brusco and they show that the building is satisfactory on the piers for purposes of a Building Permit. Eng. Cristaldi wants a set sent to the Building Inspector, Jeff Brusco signed and sealed by the engineer that prepared it. Atty. Israelow believes that the Building Inspector already has one in his file because he thinks that was a pre-condition to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.

Member Di Meglio asked if they get the approval what are they planning on putting in there. Atty. Israelow said they have spoken to a couple of different users and the latest was someone looking to do some kind of financial services.

Mr. Lars White from Pulte Homes said a couple of the uses have been basically office space uses or day-care centers.

 

OPEN TO PUBLIC HEARING:

John Maiello, 26 Rhinesmith Ave. came forward. Mr. Maiello asked what happens if Pulte decides to sell the property. Mayor Mahler said the reason for this whole thing is that it can be sold. Member Rucci said he personally went down to inspect the site this week with Mr. White and there was a hole cut in the floor to look for any dampness underneath and it was dry as a bone. Member Rucci said the structure appeared to be very solid and he was impressed and his opinion changed drastically as he looked at it more and believes it is a viable structure for resale.

 

Sandy Lawson, 28 Haskell Ave. came forward. Ms. Lawson wanted to know about the $200,000.00 contribution to the Fire Department and is it the original $200,000.00 contribution or an additional one. Ms. Lawson was told it is the original one.

 

CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING:  

 

MOTION TO APPROVE FOR AN AMENDED SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR PULTE TO PERMIT THE EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN AS A PERMANENT STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY AND DOING SO BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: #1 THAT PURSUANT TO A LETTER FROM ATTY. JEFF KASSOVER A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT AN ELECTRICAL CONTROL PANEL WILL BE RELOCATED OFF THE EASEMENT AND THE FINAL LOCATION OF THE EQUIPMENT BE INSPECTED AN APPROVED BY THE WANAQUE BOROUGH SEWERAGE AUTHORITY’S ENGINEER. # 2 THAT A  $200,000.00 MONITARY CONTRIBUTION FOR FIRE EQUIPMENT BE PAID TO THE BOROUGH BY PULTE BY NO LATER THAN JANUARY 15, 2009. #3 THAT THE SITE PLAN BE AMENDED TO SHOW ALL EASEMENTS WHICH ARE CURRENTLY AND WILL BE ON SITE AND THE APPLICANT, AFTER THAT PLAN IS COMPLETED, MUST PRESENT IT TO THE SEWER AUTHORITY FOR THEIR REVIEW AND APPROVAL AND THE BOARD IS SPECIFICALLY CONCERNED THAT THE SEWER AUTHORITY BE IMDENIFIED IN THE EVENT THERE IS DAMAGE TO THE BUILDING IN THE EVENT THEY NEED TO GET TO THE SEWER PIPE SINCE THE EASEMENT IS VERY CLOSE TO IF NOT RIGHT UNDER A CORNER OF THE EXISTING BUILDING. #4 THAT THE APPLICANT GRANT TO THE BOROUGH OF WANAQUE A 20 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON THE SOUTHERLY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO PRESENT THAT EASEMENT TO THE BOROUGH ATTORNEY AND PAY FOR ALL LEGAL COSTS AND FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND FILING SAME. #5 THAT THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT SIGNED, SEALED STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS SHOWING THAT THE BUILDING AS IT EXISTS IS EQUIVALENT TO A BUILDING WITH CONTINUOUS FOOTINGS:  made by Member Rucci, seconded by Member Slater, voting yes were Chairman Foulon, Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler,  Platt, Rucci, Slater, Verba and O’Connell. Member Graceffo voted no.

 

RESOLUTIONS:  None

 

VOUCHERS:  None

 

PUBLIC DISCUSSION:  None

 

MOTION TO ADJOURN: at 9:17 P.M. made by Member Slater and seconded by Member Rucci, carried by a voice vote.

 

_______________________________

Gerri Marotta

Planning Board Secretary