PLANNING BOARD MEETING
BOROUGH OF WANAQUE
MINUTES
April 16, 2009
Regular Meeting
Meeting called to order by Chairman Gilbert Foulon with a
salute to the flag.
ROLL CALL:
Chairman Gilbert Foulon David
Slater
John Di Meglio
Mayor Dan Mahler John
Shutte
Kevin Platt
William Rucci
PRESENT: Attorney Steven Veltri
(came in at 8:09 P.M.) and Engineer Michael Cristaldi
ABSENT: Members Joseph Graceffo
and Ed O’Connell
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 16,
2009 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 March 19, 2009 Meeting.
MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Di Meglio,
seconded by Member Rucci, voting yes were Chairman
Foulon, Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Platt, Rucci, Slater and Verba. Member Shutte abstained.
COMMUNICATIONS
REPORT: No questions asked.
APPLICATION STATUS
REPORT:
Chairman Foulon announced that the Borough Council has
introduced an Ordinance Establishing a Redevelopment Plan for Certain Areas
Within The Borough of Wanaque and the Planning Board will consider this plan on
Ordinance #5-0-09 tonight.
Robert Benecke, Economic Development Consultant came
forward. Mr. Benecke explained that he is here tonight representing the Mayor
& Council. The Mayor & Council have introduced an ordinance as a follow
up to the October 16, 2008 Planning Board Meeting where the Planning Board
recommended the designation of four areas in need of redevelopment which are
the U.S. Aluminum Factory site and an adjacent piece of property, the four
stores across from the new Haskell Town Centre, the property where the present
Municipal Building is and the Rhinesmith Property. In March the Borough Council
introduced this ordinance establishing the zones for the U.S. Aluminum Factory
site as a continuing industrial area allowing for COAH or other types of
housing if appropriate to be added to the small lot adjacent to the U.S.
Aluminum Factory site; keeping the zoning in place for the four properties
along the front of Ringwood Avenue for the purpose of solely receiving the
grants and establishing the zone for this property is a mixed use zone for the
purposes of having a Business Zone together with the allowance for a
residential component; the Rhinesmith Property would continue to be a Business
Zone with a mixed use allowing for Municipal Offices on the Rhinesmith School
Property.
The least significant of these properties are the four along
Ringwood Avenue that have the ability to be updated using state grants, federal
grants, CDBG Funding provided that they’re in a redevelopment area. The U.S.
Aluminum Factory is in an environmental contaminated site and there is an on
going cleanup and an on going remediation plan that is being worked on by the
Borough’s consultants. The property owner and the DEP are monitoring this. The
adjacent sliver of property
The property owner at the Rhinesmith Property had previously
a Board of Adjustment Application for 18 residential units plus medical
offices. The Borough has entered into preliminary discussions as to possibly
having the new municipal facilities located there and having the present
municipal facility turned into residential buildings together with the parking
lot adjacent to the building.
Therefore, the Council has moved forward with the
introduction of this ordinance and is looking for feedback from the Planning
Board and the most critical piece is the Rhinesmith Property vs. the present
municipal building. The Council has to move forward with other types of documents
authorizing the construction of the new municipal building and a land exchange
or land swap. Mr. Benecke explained what he’s looking for tonight is for the
Planning Board to test the reasonableness of this and the property owner for
the Rhinesmith Building who would then be engaging in any land exchanges here
tonight to show the Board what they may use and have envisioned for the present
municipal building property. The lands are approximately the same in size, an
acre plus, and that’s in the redevelopment plan. The Council is considering
this on Monday evening, April 20, 2009.
Chairman Foulon asked Mr. Benecke if the property at the
present municipal building and the parking lot next door is the same size as
the Rhinesmith Property square footage wise.
Mr. Benecke said it’s approximately the same size. Mr.
Benecke added, that there is no change to the U.S. Aluminum Factor site and
will remain Industrial.
Mayor Mahler mentioned that the Borough has received a grant
from the County for the four buildings along
Brian Chewcaskie, Attorney
representing Realty Associates and Robert McNerney
one of the principles came forward. Atty. Chewcaskie
explained that Realty Associates, LLC currently owns the Rhinesmith Property
and had an application pending before the Board of Adjustment to develop that
property with a combined commercial/residential structure.
Towards the end of last year the Municipality approached
them that there was some concern with regard to acquiring that property to
include in a redevelopment area. As a result of those meetings, they suspended
the application before the Board of Adjustment to determine what would be done
between the governing body and the Planning Board. Atty. Chewcaskie
said they were provided with a draft of the proposed Redevelopment Plan and
were requested to come up with a concept plan of what could occur on the
existing Municipal building site. Atty. Chewcaskie
said they have prepared a concept plan and a rendering that they brought
tonight for the Board to see. The proposal right now is to have 27 units in two
(2) buildings, one (1) building of 18 units and one (1) building of 9 units,
six (6) units per floor for the larger building, three (3) units per floor for
the smaller building, and a mix of one and two bedrooms with six (6) one
bedroom and twenty-one two (2) bedrooms. Mr. McNerney
passed around a concept plan to the Board Members which is basically two
buildings facing each other with a center parking lot. The landscaping around
calls for shrubs and trees and there will be a total of 53 parking spaces for
this project. The building will be brick and particleboard or hardy planked
siding and will have an asphalt shingle roof. Mr. McNerney
said this complex would be all residential. The monument presently in front of
the
Member Di Meglio asked where is
the Municipality getting the money for the new
Member Rucci asked about the
breakdown on the bedrooms and was told 21 two bedrooms and 6 one bedroom.
Chairman Foulon asked how many COAH units and was told none. Member Slater
asked how are they escaping the COAH obligation. Atty.
Chewcaskie said it was discussed with the
Municipality about a separate COAH facility.
OPEN TO PUBLIC
DISCUSSION:
John Maiello,
Mr. Maiello said he hasn’t said anything for the simple
reason that it would appear he’s looking for something. Mr. Maiello owns a
piece of property by the proposed site and continued to say if the Mayor &
Council bought two units (which he pointed to on the plan) there would be
25,000 sq. ft. and demolish this (a building he pointed out on the plan) and
put a two story building they could probably do the whole project for 4 or 5
million dollars or less and save the tax payers 8 or 9 million dollars. Mr.
Maiello thinks the Mayor & Council should start looking at different
prospects of doing things.
Georgeann Gongora
came forward representing her mother, Jeanette Biggio who lives in the Haskell
area. They received a letter saying her mother’s property was involved in this
Redevelopment issue. Her mother’s house is behind the four stores on
Grace Maiello,
Ms. Maiello said she read the Redevelopment Law and it says
once the Ordinance goes through, the Mayor & Council have the ability to
really control this situation and do what is proper. Ms. Maiello said her
square footage of her property in the study was incorrect. Mr. Benecke said
there is no square footage in the Redevelopment Plan and it stands on its own.
The Ordinance was introduced and published in the newspaper. The Council has
limited their abilities under the Redevelopment Plan. The first limitation is
that the prior zoning remains in effect, so whatever she has now she will have
in the future. She has the flexibility to up zone this zone if she so chooses,
they have also taken off the table eminent domain with the exception of a tax
foreclosure proceeding on the property adjacent to the U.S. Aluminum factory.
Mr. Benecke told Ms. Maiello if she doesn’t want to sell her property nobody is
going to force her and the current zoning’s in place and she could sell it as
is.
Mr. Maiello came forward again and stood beside his wife and
said what his wife is concerned about is that they are already fully assessed
for the whole property. But they said the property was 750 sq. ft. and actually
it’s 50 X 250 and it’s that way on the town map and they noticed it on whatever
Mr. Benecke had in his report. Mr. Maiello said they are being taxed on 50 X
250.
MOTION THAT THE
PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE #5-0-09 TO THE MAYOR &
COUNCIL: made by Member Rucci, seconded by
Member Slater, voting yes were Chairman Foulon, Members Di Meglio,
Mayor Mahler, Platt, Rucci, Slater, Verba and Shutte.
APPLICATION #07-08
Robert Barbagallo,
Attorney
Atty. Veltri announced he looked
at the mailings and notifications and they are all in order and the application
can proceed tonight.
Atty. Walker said Mr. Barbagallo
is the owner and occupant Block 240 Lot 7 and the property is located at 10
Mountain Ave. Presently the lot consists in excess of 117,000 sq. ft.
The lot contains two different residential structures; this
is a pre-existing non-conforming characteristic of the property. What they are
proposing is a Minor Subdivision to divide the one large lot into three lots
and all three lots will be conforming to the Borough Ordinance in the R-15
Zone; no new variances will be created.
Mr. Barbagallo wants to construct a home for
his daughter and will be constructed on what is proposed as
They are seeking to divide the lot into three separate lots
and each one of the lots will be well in excess of the lot area requirements,
which is 15,000 sq. ft. Propose Lot 7.01 will be in excess of 22,000 sq. ft.,
Lot 7.02 will be almost 28,000 sq. ft., and
This application is subject to Highlands Approval and the
application has been filed and is pending and has been told that everything
seems to be in order and they are just waiting for final approval.
Eng. Cristaldi said the only
variance that there is, is a preexisting variance which is Lot 7.02 which has a
garage at the rear of the property is currently 3.04 feet from the rear
property line where five (5) feet is required; there are no other variances
created by the subdivision. They will probably need some kind of easement
agreement with the property owner where they’re planning running the water and
sewer easement out to the road. This will not affect the Borough because the
Borough’s water stop is still at the curb and once it goes into the property its an easement and is the property owner’s concern. Eng. Cristaldi also said they may want to put in a seepage pit
because there’s not much drainage up there and it would be to catch their roof
leaders and any additional runoff. They will also need “Highlands”, any “DEP”
or
Atty. Walker said he has a letter from the Sewer Authority
with respect to the new proposed dwelling and they have indicated there is
sufficient capacity to handle it; on the existing residences there are septic
systems.
OPEN TO PUBLIC
DISCUSSION: None/Closed
MOTION TO APPROVE:
made by Member Shutte, seconded by Member Platt, voting yes were Chairman
Foulon, Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Platt, Rucci, Slater, Verba and Shutte.
CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION
for
Derek Meyer one of the owners came forward. Chairman Foulon
reminded Mr. Meyer that whatever is said or discussed tonight is not binding on
either party.
Mr. Meyer mentioned he was before the Board about a year and
a half ago with another conceptual plan. They have submitted a revised plan to
the Board. Mr. Meyer said on the original survey,
Another thing that came up was the zoning for
Atty. Veltri answered Mr. Meyer’s
question. Atty. Veltri said, certainly if they need a
change of use, this is not the place to be, they need to go to the Board of Adjustment.
They also have concurrent jurisdiction on major subdivisions (more than 3
lots). Mr. Meyer can apply to the Board of Adjustment not only for the change
of use but the entire subdivision application. Or alternatively, the applicant
may want to go to them just for the change of use and if they obtain that
variance, then they could come back to the Planning Board and the Planning
Board could hear the subdivision part of the application, but that’s generally
not what’s done. Because the Board of Adjustment has concurrent jurisdiction,
they hear both ends of the application, generally.
Mayor Mahler asked what was on the property now and Mr.
Meyer said a house. Mayor Mahler said then that’s not a change of use, it’s
being used residentially and is just a non-conforming use. Atty. Veltri spoke up and said it then goes to the Board of
Adjustment.
Mr. Meyer said the lot presently configured and does not
conform to the R-10 Zone.
The conceptual plan they are presenting tonight is actually
trying to enlarge that lot to get the 10,000 sq. ft. which is the minimum
required in the R-10 Zone.
Atty. Veltri said your dealing
with two different zones, so you can’t consider this all R-10 because this
Board does not have the power without that variance to give them the
subdivision. Mr. Meyer asked, if they were to keep the lot precisely the way it
is, would it be necessary to appear before the Board of Adjustment or is that
not the case?
Atty. Veltri said your dealing
with two different zones in one subdivision application, and that has to be
clarified before the Board can comment on the subdivision part of it, or the
Board looses jurisdiction. Mr. Meyer asked if it would be a reasonable approach
to literally say they are leaving that lot exactly as it is, zoned exactly as
it is and they are going to present the Board with a subdivision for everything
else. Atty. Veltri said if it’s not part of the
subdivision application and they present the Board with a plan where it is
subdivided out of this plan, not considered as part of a plan, could the Board
look at the rest of it? Atty. Veltri said the answer is yes if it’s not part of the plan.
Mr. Meyer asked if the Board had any idea how this happened.
Mr. Meyer added that the people that he has known who owned this property for
an awfully long time never thought or believed that this property was zoned for
commercial.
Chairman Foulon said this possibly was done when Venezia’s was towing and needed a storage
lot etc. Mr. Mc Crum, the other owner, said his mother owned this lot and was
never notified that it was changed from Residential to Commercial.
Chairman Foulon said the Master Plan has to be redone and
why doesn’t the Borough take care of this problem when the Master Plan gets
redone. Chairman Foulon asked Mr. Meyer what his timing is with this project
and Mr. Meyer said obviously and economically speaking things aren’t great
right now but they’re trying to lay the groundwork in the belief that the economy
is going to pick up and that’s why they would like to do this now. Chairman
Foulon said the Borough is obligated to do the Master Plan and he thinks that
would be the best way to correct this zoning issue. Mr. Meyer asked when would
the Master Plan take place and was told before the end of this year.
Mr. Meyer thanked the Board for their time.
DISCUSSION:
Chairman Foulon mentioned that Mayor Mahler, Member Rucci and himself attended a meeting tonight on “Valley
View at Wanaque”. The developer has been trying to get the Board to agree to
take away the age restriction. Chairman Foulon explained that the Board no
longer has that choice. The State of
Atty. Veltri said the Board should
wait and read the “Bill” in its entirety because there could be conditions and
other things that the Board may have in it’s tool box
to try to restructure the approval.
Member Shutte spoke up and said it’s a disgrace what the
property at the candle factory site look like. Member Shutte said there is
Styrofoam insulation blowing all over the place, there’s a sewer pipe that’s
been broken and rolls across the street, there’s dirt and broken asphalt all
over the place.
Chairman Foulon suggested that the Building Inspector should
go and look at this property.
Atty. Veltri said this developer
has final approval and probably a Developer’s Agreement with the town and Atty.
Veltri is sure there is a condition or paragraph in
the Developer’s Agreement that should address that concern.
Member Rucci said the developer is
aware that the Board wants this project to be appealing with a nice quaint look
to it and told the developer to use the
Chairman Foulon announced to the Board that they have to
appoint a Planner. Received were resumes from Kenneth Albert, P.E., P.P. from
Member Rucci did the research on this and said these were the only
two received and there wasn’t a great
response for this job. Member Rucci said there are
some pros and cons to both.
Mayor Mahler said the Council appointed two Planners, Alaimo
Engineering and Engineer Kenneth Albert. Eng. Albert is a “Highlands Expert”
and Alaimo is a bigger firm. The thought was that the expertise from a bigger
firm like Alaimo would be beneficial as well as the expertise of Eng. Albert
with regard to the “
Chairman Foulon said the Board has to appoint one to do the
Master Plan. Member Rucci said it depends upon what
the Board really thinks what they need; do they need the “
Eng. Cristaldi said his firm
(Alaimo) could work with Eng. Albert and Eng. Albert could take care of all the
“Highlands” issues that come up.
Chairman Foulon added, that Alaimo could prepare the Master
Plan and Eng. Albert as a “
MOTION TO APPROVE
TWO PLANNERS; ALAIMO ENGINEERING AND ENGINEER KENNETH ALBERT: made by
Member Slater, seconded by Member Shutte, voting yes were Chairman Foulon,
Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Platt, Rucci, Slater, Verba and Shutte.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
None/Closed
MOTION TO ADJOURN
AT 9:25 P.M.: made by Member Di Meglio,
seconded by Member Rucci. Carried by a voice vote.
____________________________________
Gerri Marotta
Planning Board Secretary