PLANNING BOARD MEETING
BOROUGH OF WANAQUE
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
December 18, 2008
Meeting called to order by Chairman Foulon with a salute
to the flag.
ROLL CALL:
John Di Meglio David
Slater
Mayor Dan Mahler Ed O’Connell
Joseph Graceffo John
Shutte
Kevin Platt
PRESENT: Attorney
Steven Veltri and Engineer Michael Cristaldi
ABSENT: Member
Eugene Verba
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 October 16, 2008 Meeting.
MOTION TO APPROVE:
made by Member Graceffo, seconded by Member Rucci, voting yes were
Chairman Foulon, Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Graceffo, Platt, Rucci,
Slater and O’Connell. Member Shutte
abstained.
APPLICATION STATUS REPORT:
NEW BUSINESS APPLICATION: “The World of Astrology”,
No when came forward on this application and the
Secretary told the Chairman that the applicant has left town.
NEW BUSINESS APPLICATION: “Blue Gotham-Kids Club” (Ceramic
Studio), 207 Ringwood Ave., Block 204 Lot 5, Wanaque, N.J. Owner of building is
Ibrahim Fayed, 206 Warren St., Harrison, N.J. 07029. Owner of business is
Monica & Brian Ribarro,
Mr. Ribarro, owner of the business came forward. Mr. Ribarro explained they are taking the old space where “Crown Liquors” was. It will be a contemporary ceramic studio for children where the ceramics are already made and the children paint and fire them. They will also have children’s birthday parties.
MOTION TO APPROVE:
made by Member Slater, seconded by Member Di Meglio, voting yes were
Chairman Foulon, Members Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Graceffo, Platt, Rucci,
Slater, O’Connell and Shutte.
ORDINANCE #24-0-08 AMEND
ZONING ORDINANCE – AH ZONE –
Robert Benecke, Consultant and Thomas Carroll, Borough
Administrator came forward.
Attorney Steven Veltri swore in Mr. Benecke. Mr. Benecke
explained that he and Tom Carroll are here tonight representing the Borough
Council and they have referred Ordinance #24-0-08 to the Planning Board
pursuant to the local redevelopment and housing law. This is a modification to
a prior ordinance #10-0-05 which is the original ordinance of the
Chairman Foulon said to Mr. Benecke that the Board’s duty
is to review the ordinance within 35 days and should make a comment to the Mayor & Council, however, the 35 days started 35 days
ago. Chairman Foulon said the Board is not changing the ordinance, it’s the Mayor & Council who does and the Board can tell them the
Board likes it or they don’t like it but it’s in their lap to do it. Chairman
Foulon added, that the Board could also skip right over it and say nothing but he thinks as a Board they should talk about
it and then make a recommendation. Chairman Foulon’s feeling on this is, it was
a good application and a good use and a good ordinance when it was adopted it
and now all of a sudden it’s no good; he just doesn’t quite agree with that.
Chairman Foulon went on to say that it was a good use, a good possible ratable
and he doesn’t think the Board should recommend the Mayor & Council do the
change to the ordinance. The adult community concept started with Pulte and
seems to be working very well and the Board is not responsible for the market
falling apart or not and the market for housing just completely fell apart.
What happens next year, if they can’t sell it to the general public under age
so therefore change the zoning to garden apartments? Chairman Foulon thought
the plan approved by the Board was a good plan and he doesn’t think the plan should
be changed based on market conditions and if things have to sit for a year or
two until the market changes that might be what has to happen; it’s happening
all over the country.
Member Shutte agreed with Chairman Foulon and said he
doesn’t know if this project will sell any better for a non-age restricted as
it would for a 55 and over. Member Shutte said he’s afraid of the school
situation, being an ex-teacher, he thinks there will be more than 10, 12 or 15
children moving into the project and that’s one classroom right there and
doesn’t think the Haskell School has room for that. Member Shutte also doesn’t
like the architectural look of the project and thinks the 55 and over is a much
better idea.
Member Rucci spoke up and said it will change the tax
structure, if you have 20 children which is probably a reasonable estimate, your looking at $300,000 in costs to the Borough for those
20 children and that money comes out of the tax revenue and we’ll be losing
changing it from an adult housing to non-adult.
Member Slater asked if the
Chairman Foulon said what you’re going to get is a lot of
people that have lost their million dollar home with three or four kids and
will be buying into this project and putting bunk-beds in the bedroom etc.
Chairman Foulon added, that things are totally
different now than they have ever been in our lifetime in this country. Mr.
Carroll said keep in mind, that if this development should not move forward,
that this property will then get thrown into the COAH mix and then you’re
looking at a possibility of a higher density and a higher number of
low-moderate income units going on the site. Mr. Carroll explained it becomes a
vacant piece of property that when COAH comes in and looks and he believes the
property is eight (8) acres and COAH is looking at a density of 20 units an
acre, that’s 160 units, of which 32 would be low/moderate income. Of those 32,
20% will be 3 bedrooms, 20% will be one bedroom and 60% will be two bedrooms.
Member Graceffo, said he feels
the Board never has a choice, they are always being pushed into what they feel
uncomfortable with. They already went through the process where the Board
decided in terms of the density and terms of the building height that they
wanted there and providing COAH units and the project was approved. Now,
because of economic conditions and are no fault to anyone it becomes the
Board’s burden to resolve the remedy. Member Graceffo said the Board approved
the project and it should stand for what its worth and move forward with that
project. Member Graceffo feels there are just too many units which is causing
the density problem and a safety hazard to this community and all you will see is
house upon house with no space to move; all housing, macadam and all parking
and that’s all you’re going to see.
Mr. Benecke informed the Board that in the State of New
Jersey just about virtually every project of any size of 25 or more that was
age restricted is no more; they all converted.
Mr. Benecke is suggesting that the Board recommend to the
Mayor & Council that they put in protective measures to ensure that there’s
no outside shot of having 50 school age children and to ensure that the marketing
continues to the age 55 and older and to have a sunset provision in the
redevelopment agreement.
Atty. Veltri asked what limitations he is suggesting? Mr. Benecke said he did state the
recommendations earlier in the meeting. First, a sunset provision in the
redevelopment agreement, that this ordinance and use and the approvals and
agreement expires in two or three years, depending upon what the timing is for
them to bring back their amended site plan etc. The second is,
they are recommending they continue to market to the 55 and older and to have
an earnest effort in doing so and Mr. Carroll can address that. Finally, they
are recommending that a study should be funded by the applicant to determine
the number of school age children that will come from this project. Atty. Veltri asked why that wasn’t done
before the first reading in front of the Mayor &
Council? Mr. Benecke said they actually did do one, but they did one as part of
a memo and not a formal study. Atty. Veltri asked if that was supplied to the
Board and Mr. Benecke said no. Atty. Veltri asked if Mr. Benecke if he had the
memo with him tonight so the Board could look at it and Mr. Benecke said no.
Member Graceffo asked what was the memo about? Mr.
Benecke said it was in reference to the school age children. Mr. Benecke added,
that if there are design issues and criteria that the Board doesn’t like, then
the applicant and the redeveloper have to come to the Board. Mr. Benecke said
they tried to keep design elements out of the redevelopment process, but if the
Board has issues with coverage, design, building elements and materials used in
the building, then bring the redeveloper back for those issues.
Member Graceffo said his concern is that over the last
couple of years the ordinances
presented to the Board have been such that they’ve been built to the
specifications of the applicant vs. in terms what the community thinks it
should have in those areas. Member Graceffo said maybe the Mayor
& Council need to do a better job and get a little more restrictive
within the ordinances. Member Graceffo also said its never an option where the
Board is making a choice; its either this or it gets rammed down your throat
and this has been the tone of this Board for the last three years.
Chairman Foulon added, that its time to stop ramming.
Chairman Foulon asked Mr. Benecke if they could put a restriction that there
will be no children and Mr. Benecke said no. Mayor Mahler said maybe you could
drop the 55 and older age limit and just say no children under 19 years old.
Mr. Benecke said he doesn’t think that would pass.
Atty. Veltri told Mr. Benecke that the Borough has a
three-page ordinance, but doesn’t have statistics, studies or memos that Mr.
Benecke is mentioning tonight. Mr. Benecke said the Board has testimony tonight
that the market has changed. Chairman Foulon said, from what he is hearing, the
community doesn’t want the change on this project. Member Rucci agreed with
Chairman Foulon that he hasn’t heard any good response back about the changing
of the application. Member Graceffo told Mr. Benecke the Board is just not
happy with the change and what are the other options besides the three
provisions he mentioned earlier. Mr. Benecke said it’s going to be a choice of
the governing body ultimately and how they want to handle this. Chairman Foulon
said a letter could be sent to the Mayor & Council
that the Board doesn’t recommend the zoning change and they don’t have to
listen to the Board and they can do whatever they want. Mr. Benecke added that he doesn’t think the
age-restricted market is ever coming back in the State of
Atty. Veltri said he’s hearing that with 55 and older
there will not be certain things and in return for that when the planning was
done we added to the density; this amendment seems to be saying take away the
age and increase the density, therefore, what’s the rational for that? Mr.
Benecke said the rational for that is the pricing is between $250,000 and
$300,000 range and to reduce the number of units you would have to increase the
unit price and increasing the unit price then retards the marketability of the
project and then retards the totals of cost concept.
Mr. Carroll said the redeveloper is in the audience
tonight listening to the comments tonight and will take the comments into
consideration. One of the other options is to take the original plan for the
114 units and leave the plan as is and remove the age restriction. Mr. Carroll
said maintaining them as one and two bedroom units you’re not generating as
many children and when you’re in an apartment style as oppose to townhouse
style that is on Carter Road and Brookside Heights, townhouse style tends to
attract more families than condominium type design.
Member Graceffo said sometimes he passes the
Chairman Foulon said now is the time the Board take a vote on this as to whether they recommend it or not.
MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE ZONING CHANGE TO THE MAYOR & COUNCIL: No one made a motion.
MOTION TO RECOMMEND NOT CHANGING THE ORDINANCE:
made by Member Shutte, seconded by Member Platt.
The reasons for not recommending the change are as
follows: the number of potential students in the school system, the original
plan was a good plan with the age restriction and the new plan has no age
restriction, the original plan was a nice looking development and the new plan
isn’t as nice looking, what happens if the market deteriorates even further to
the group that they think they’re going to market it to and what do we do then
they come back to the Board for another change to rental units etc., because
the market fell apart the Board can’t help that the developer maybe did some
poor marketing research and should have known before 2005 that the market for
the age restriction housing in New Jersey was going down drastically and it
didn’t happen overnight and the density of the project for that particular
property has increased.
Atty. Veltri said the ordinance changes as he reads it is
the use in terms of the age, the number of units, the height (4 ½ stores) and
two of the setbacks.
MOTION CARRIED BY: Chairman Foulon, Members Di
Meglio, Graceffo, Platt, Rucci, Slater and Shutte. Mayor Mahler and Member O’Connell abstained.
RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #08-08 Pulte Amended Site Plan
for Sales Trailer at
MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Rucci, seconded
by Member Slater, voting yes were Chairman Foulon, Members Di Meglio, Mayor
Mahler, Platt, Rucci, Slater, O’Connell and Shutte. Member Graceffo voted no.
MEETING OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
Atty.
Glenn Kienz representing the applicant for “Valley View at Wanaque” came
forward. Atty. Kienz said their application is in and they couldn’t file it and
begin to process it until action is taken on the ordinance (Ordinance #24-0-08
Amend Zoning Ordinance – AH Zone –
VOUCHERS: submitted by Atty. Veltri for
Application #08-08 Pulte Communities for review of application and site plan
review of prior application and resolution for $475.00. Vouchers submitted by Richard
A. Alaimo Engineering Associates for Invoice #045364 Project #P0495-0000-000
for engineering services ending 10/01/08 for $190.00.
MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member
Shutte, seconded by Member Graceffo, voting yes were Chairman Foulon, Members
Di Meglio, Mayor Mahler, Graceffo, Platt, Rucci, Slater, O’Connell and Shutte.
MOTION TO ADJOURN AT 9:04 P.M.: made by Member Slater, seconded by Member Shutte. Carried by a voice vote.
_____________________________
Gerri Marotta
Planning
Board Secretary