UPPER TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
FEBRUARY 21, 2008
The regular meeting of the Upper Township Planning Board was held at the Township Hall, 2100 Tuckahoe Road, Petersburg, New Jersey at 7:30 p.m.
Present: Daniel Bready, William Brown, James Kelly, Curtis Corson, Gary Riordan, Donald Kissling, Duane Terwilliger, Susan Ragan and Renee Scrocca.
Absent: James Schroder and Mayor Palombo.
Also in attendance were Dean Marcolongo, Board Solicitor; Paul Dietrich, Board Engineer and Shelley Lea, Board Secretary.
A motion to adopt the minutes was made by Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Brown and approved.
Application is for preliminary approval of a 17 lot major subdivision at 121 Perry Road, Petersburg.
Paul Dietrich did not participate in this application due to a conflict. David Battastini, Professional Licensed Surveyor and Professional Engineer acted as Board Engineer during this application.
Mr. Battistini was sworn in as a Board Professional.
Eric Garrabrant, Esquire, represented the applicant.
Vincent Orlando, Professional Engineer and Joseph Tocci, 121 Perry Road, were sworn in.
Mr. Tocci testified that he purchased the property in 1973. He built his home on the property in 1974. He retired in May 2006. He would like to subdivide the property and sell off the lots to supplement his income.
Mr. Orlando referred to an overlay of sheet 2 and 4. The overlay was marked as Exhibit A-1. He testified that the subject property consists of 20 acres on Perry Road. This is an irregular shaped lot. The applicant’s home is on the property. The applicant has received a Certificate of Occupancy from the New Jersey Pineland Commission.
Mr. Orlando testified that the property is located in the (PV) Pineland Village zone. All the proposed lots comply with the bulk standards. They meet the new vegetated buffer requirement of 10 ft. between lots. He described the proposed drainage. The inlet detail will be revised. The sidewalk shown on the plan will be relocated to the north side of the road. The plan meets the RSIS standards.
Mr. Orlando testified that lots 12.01 through 12.05 do not comply with the newly created tree preservation requirement. They feel the lots don’t need a variance given the intent and purpose of the ordinance. A Tree Preservation Analysis was marked as Exhibit A-2. The applicant maintains the open field on the property. Approximately 24 percent of the entire area is wooded.
Mr. Orlando explained that the retention basin is located in the rear of the properties. The houses will be located closer to the road for visual reasons as well as safety and security purposes. This also helps to reduce clearing. He feels the benefits of granting the variances outweigh any detriments. He doesn’t feel that 50 percent preservation in this particular zone is fair when the residential zone only requires 35 percent. There will be no negative impact to the neighbors by granting the variance.
Mr. Battistini has concerns about the buffering around the perimeter of the site. He feels it should be heavier landscaped along the perimeter. Mr. Orlando agreed to additional landscaping near the drainage basins to provide a secondary canopy and good visual buffer.
Mr. Battistini reviewed the two technical reviews he prepared dated 2/20/08 and 2/21/08. Mr. Orlando agreed with the recommendations in the report. He will work out item #10 with Mr. Battistini. They have agreed the sidewalk will flip flop to the north side and run up the one side of the cul-de-sac and that the parking restriction will be on the sidewalk side and that the parking will occur on the opposite side.
Mr. Orlando verified that the well and septic for the existing house would be within the confines of the proposed lot and would not have to be reconstructed. He will provide this detail at final.
Mr. Orlando agreed to a pay a $1,000.00 per lot into the Fire Capital Improvement Fund and a contribution to the recreation fund in lieu of the required recreation facilities. He
also agreed that the applicant would satisfy the increased COAH obligation that is created as a result of the subdivision.
The meeting was open to the public. Hearing no response the meeting returned to the board for findings of fact.
MR. KELLY – Joseph Tocci is the owner of Block 455, Lots 11 and 12 located at 121 Perry Road. The original date of the plans are 1/15/07 and last revised 2/6/08. The applicant is requesting preliminary approval of a 17 lot major subdivision. The property is located in the Pineland Village zone. Eric Garrabrant, Esquire, is representing the applicant. Vincent Orlando of Engineering Design Associates has given testimony in regards to the subdivision. A variance is needed for tree preservation. They have made changes to the plan so that a front yard setback is no longer needed. An overlay of sheet 2 and 4 of the subdivision plan was submitted as Exhibit A-1. A tree preservation analysis was marked as Exhibit A-2. Mr. Battistini has submitted two reports dated 2/20/08 and 2/21/08. The applicant will comply with both reports. There were no public comments. The sidewalk is being relocated to the north side of proposed road B. The applicant will make a contribution of $16,000.00 to the fire fund. The COAH requirements will be met. Additional buffering will be added in the rear.
MR. CORSON – The subdivision will include 17 lots. Only 16 will be new building lots.
MR. KISSLING – The tree preservation variance is for proposed Lots 12.01 through 12.05
MR. TERWILLIGER – The applicant has agreed to make adjustments as recommended.
MR. RIORDAN – Testimony has been given that the proposed subdivision complies with the Pineland requirements and that 52% of the wooded area is being maintained. The positive effects outweigh any negative.
MR. BROWN – The retention basin meets the Pinelands standards.
MRS. SCROCCA – The subdivision complies with all bulk standards but the new tree preservation ordinance. She agrees with Mr. Orlando’s interpretation of the intent and purpose of the ordinance is for preservation of natural resources. Mr. Orlando’s interpretation that it would add natural open space furthers the intent of the ordinance. It also promotes public health and safety. It is better not to have the houses so far from the street for fire and police purposes. It eliminates the need for more clearing on the lots. She thinks the benefits do outweigh the detriments and the variance can be granted without impairing the intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance.
A motion was made by Mr. Bready and seconded by Mr. Riordan to grant preliminary approval with the standard conditions. In favor: Brown, Bready, Kelly, Corson, Riordan, Kissling, Terwilliger, Ragan, Scrocca.
Application is for preliminary approval of a 5 lot major subdivision at 220 Tuckahoe Road, Marmora.
Paul Dietrich was sworn in as Board Professional.
Noel McCreesh, 905 Stagecoach Road, was sworn in. Mr. Orlando was previously sworn.
Solicitor Marcolongo announced that this application would not be heard due to a difficulty with notice. The application will be included on the March 21, 2008 agenda. A notice will be published in the newspaper, however the certified mailings have been sent.
Mr. McCreesh agreed to waive the tolling of time.
Steven D. Scherzer, Esquire, was present to represent Ralph and Deanna Holt. The applicants are requesting that the Board consider a zoning change from the Center Residential District to the Town Center District (TC). The TC zone allows both residential and commercial uses. He stated that they are not here tonight to discuss any type of allegations in regards to alleged violations of the zoning ordinance.
Solicitor Marcolongo indicated that the Board does not act in a way of making a zoning changes. The Board is to report to the Township Committee with recommendations as to whether they believe the proposed zoning change is consistent with the Master Plan and if it is appropriate in the sense of the benefits of the zoning change will outweigh the detriments. The Board is not making any decision only making recommendation to Township Committee.
Mr. Scherzer stated that they first made the request to Township Committee who referred the request to the Planning Board. His clients presented a petition signed by approximately 300 people. He stated that his clients have been at this location for several years and that they are attempting to be good citizens and neighbors. They believe the surrounding area is becoming more commercial. The new supermarket being built will create more competition that will hurt their business. They are a non-conforming use in this zone and it is difficult to do business.
Vincent Orlando, Licensed Professional Engineer and Licensed Professional Planner and Landscape Architect, was sworn in. He testified will be higher intense commercial uses in the area due to the development of the new Shop Rite. He has reviewed the report from Maser Consulting that recommends they keep the zoning residential. He stated that maybe all 16 lots should not be zoned commercial but that at least the 3 corner properties need to be looked at commercially. There is a post office and car wash across the street. In the future there will probably be 3 big box stores. The area is becoming very dynamic. The applicant has a non-conforming use in the residential zone. He stated that in time the residential development in this particular area would wither and dye. He discussed Rio
Grande where he is the City Engineer. He understands people don’t want to sell their properties but to eliminate this particular site from rezoning hurts his client. He stated that rezoning the entire 16 lots may not be the solution but rezoning at least the 3 corner lots would blend in with the development that is occurring. He doesn’t feel this would be considered spot zoning.
Mr. Orlando testified that Mr. & Mrs. Holt want to expand their business. If the property were zoned TC they would no longer require a use variance.
Mr. Scherzer stated that they are not sure if making the entire block commercial is appropriate. The Board should recognize that the corner is getting more commercial and should be changed to a commercial zone. The best way to not adversely affect the residents is to address the corner as opposed to the whole block. He stated that it is hard to be a non-conforming use requesting a variance since it is difficult to show special reasons for granting.
Marcia Shiffman, Associate with Maser Consulting, Licensed Professional Planner, AICP Certification, Certified Landscape Architect, was sworn in. She testified that she is familiar with this area since she has worked with the township on their Land Use Plan, Plan Endorsement Petition, Housing Plan and Master Plan Reexamination. She was asked to review the appropriateness of a zone change for 121 Tuckahoe Road, Block 652.01, Lot 19, the location of the bagel shop. She has reviewed the entire block. She has visited the study area consisting of 18 properties. In preparing her report she has reviewed aerial photos, road maps, existing land use in the area, the goals and objectives of the Master Plan and any potential rezoning changes. The entire block is 14 ˝ acres. The lots are irregular in shape. She reviewed an existing land use map showing the study area with one commercial building. The rest of the lots are residential and there are also 2 vacant properties. Most of the houses are smaller in size. She reviewed tax information on the properties and found it interesting that most of the properties are under utilized meaning the land is worth more than the building on the property. These types of properties in the long term may tend to be candidates for acquisition, private redevelopment or assemblage. The lots are small and to develop them for commercial uses they would have to be assembled.
Ms. Shiffman further stated that the largest lot in the subject area is 2 ˝ acres. The smallest lot is .17 acres and is vacant. There are mostly single-family dwellings with the exception of one two-family structure. The site is on the edge of the Town Center Core zoning district and is primarily residential. Across Tuckahoe Road is also primarily residential. The Shop Rite is a development of over 100,000 sq. ft. and is currently under construction. There is other commercial development on Tuckahoe Road and Route 9. She compared the area with another area that was rezoned TC in 2006. The area had only 10 lots and was a larger area with more opportunity for land assembly and redevelopment.
Ms. Shiffman reported that the study area has public water but relies on on-site septic systems. A large lot is needed to accommodate a package treatment plant or alternate wastewater treatment facility. The area cannot accommodate any type of large scale development. The report discusses the road network surrounding the area. Primary and secondary collector roads surround the area. The construction of the Shop Rite will increase traffic and will impact the study area. There will be more noise and more activity that will impact the area. The latest Master Plan Reexamination retained this area as residential. She was concerned that if the area were developed commercially it would be difficult to control and protect adjacent uses. If the 18 lots converted to commercial there is a potential of 18 commercial driveways.
The conclusion of her study is that the zoning accommodates the existing development that was completely residential until the bagel shop was approved. The area is unique due to its location and roads. Due to the nature of the existing lots redevelopment would require at least some assemblage of lots to develop reasonable sized properties. Rezoning is not an appropriate way to develop the study area. The town just changed the zoning in 2006. If it were rezoned at this time private redevelopment would likely occur spiraticly. She feels the Board should see how development occurs in the remainder of the TC area. If the entire study area were changed it would result in 15 non-conforming lots. The benefits of a zone change are outweighed by the detriments at this time.
Solicitor Marcolongo marked the report by Ms. Shiffman as PB-1.
The meeting was open to the public.
Maurice Stein, Esquire, represented Keith and Sally Jack, owners of lot 16 and Wayne Jack, owner of lot 18. He stated that the applicant requested a use variance and put the use in an area they knew was not zoned for a commercial use. He feels that nothing Mr. Orlando testified to is considered good planning. He feels the Holt’s property is already overloaded. Changing the zoning would be considered spot zoning. His clients are not going to move. He submitted that nothing has been said that constitutes a reason for the board to make a recommendation to township committee that any changes be done.
Donald A. Hurf, Sr., 14 N. Old Tuckahoe Road, was sworn in. His property is within 200 ft. of the subject property. He agrees with Ms. Shiffman that the property should be assembled first before any changes are made. He does not feel the area should be rezoned.
Andrea Scholler, 6 Burning Tree Lane, was sworn in. He believes that with the new Shop Rite being developed a residential buffer area is a very desirable thing to have. He feels that chopping up the parcels and making some commercial is detrimental to the whole area.
Robert Lea, 42 Stagecoach Road, was sworn in. He is a property owner within 200 ft. It seems to him that the rezoning only benefits one individual. He feels that rezoning the area hurts the neighborhood.
Phebe Dickson, 15 Ash Terrace, was sworn in. She also feels that a residential buffer is important for the other residential areas. She doesn’t understand why the area would be rezoned to commercial. She requested that the board see what happens with the large tract of land currently being developed. She also suggested going the other direction, toward Route 9.
Father Robert Gregorio, 200 W. Tuckahoe Road, was sworn in. He is within 200 ft. He understands the opposition of the neighbors from not wanting to see their property values go down or their nice residential area become a parking lot. He feels that if spot zoning were allowed the bagel shop would be permitted to open a ballroom in the second floor that would accommodate 100 people. He doesn’t see this as becoming a nuisance to the neighborhood. If it did become a nuisance the Holt’s could be sited. Until that happens why not let them open their upstairs in a manner that will not hurt the neighbors.
Steve Wolicki, Marmora Postmaster, was sworn in. He does
not live within 200 ft. but he runs the post office across the street. He
commented that if the area were zoned commercial there would be the same amount
of driveways. There is inadequate parking in the area as it is. His biggest
concern is the intersection. There have been 5 accidents on the corner in the
past two years. He has questions as to whether rezoning the area would hurt or
benefit the area.
Ms. Shiffman responded that to rezone the area as commercial and have it
developed as 18 separate properties would not be desirable and would make the
situation even worse than it is now. If it was assembled as a commercial use
and there were limited driveways and controlled access then commercial could be
accommodated. Using the properties as commercial without a unified plan would
be negative.
William Miller, 36 Stagecoach Road, was sworn in. Right now he doesn’t feel anything should be changed to commercial. He sees no benefit in rezoning the area. He feels that rezoning the area could be hazardous to the neighborhood. He is in the fire company and they are called out at night to the different accidents. Too many people don’t obey the law and don’t even know the speed limit on Stagecoach Road.
Jacqueline Salkeld, 14 Burning Tree Lane, was sworn in. She stated that everyone is looking at the study area but rezoning would also affect a lot of other properties. She wishes the Holts success and feels the additional traffic in the area will benefit their business. Only rezoning the Holts property would create a problem for everyone else. She feels the areas need to be planned well or no one would want to live there. She referred to Cedar Square and the fact that there are vacant stores. She hopes the Shop Rite will be planned well. As the planner said we have to wait and see how that
develops. We have to encourage people to want to live in this area and to want to shop there. If the stores are successful then everybody’s property values will go up. She feels
that no more property should be zoned commercial at this time since the township is over supplied with commercial property. The car dealerships are empty and the gas stations on Roosevelt Boulevard are also empty. She feels it is just too soon to rezone.
The meeting was closed to the public and returned to the board for findings of fact.
MR. BROWN – This is an application by Ralph and Deanna Holt to rezone Block 652.01, Lots 1 through 23. They are requesting to change from Center Residential to Town Center Core zone. The property in question is bounded to the southwest by Old Tuckahoe Road, to the southeast by Stagecoach Road and to the north by Route 631, commonly known as Tuckahoe Road. The Board has heard testimony by property owners within 200 ft. and outside 200 ft. This testimony has been recorded.
MR. KELLY – Mr. & Mrs. Holt are the owners of the property located at 121 Old Tuckahoe Road in Marmora. The property is currently zoned RC. Stephen Scherzer, Esquire, is representing Mr. & Mrs. Holt. The applicants engineer is Vincent Orlando. There was testimony by numerous people as well as the planner hired by the board. A copy of the planners report was marked as PB-1. The Board is to make recommendation to Township Committee as to whether or not they believe the area should be rezoned.
MR. CORSON – The report by Marcia Shiffman indicates that rezoning the area would create 15 non-conforming uses and 1 conforming use. He believes the Board should recommend that the rezoning not be approved.
MR. BREADY – Nothing to add.
MR. RIORDAN – There were numerous comments by the public. A majority of the comments were in disagreement to the request to change the zoning. The zoning study conclusion states that current zoning is based on accommodating the existing development. The area was completely residential until the zoning board of adjustment granted a use variance permitting the bagel shop to be located on the site. The lots would have to be assembled since they are so small. The zone change would create 15 non-conforming uses in order to create 1 conforming use. The benefits of a zone change at this time would be outweighed by the detriments.
MR. KISSLING – He concurs. It seems the neighbors do not want to change the zoning.
MR. TERWILLIGER – The applicant has proven that the rezoning would benefit only them. He sees no benefit to the township.
MRS. RAGAN – She agrees with the board members. She feels that with the existing commercial inventory in the township they should wait and see what happens.
MRS. SCROCCA – When Mr. Scherzer began his presentation he said that the Holts had been in this location for several years and that the surrounding area has become more commercial and traffic has become heavier. He indicated that the Holts want to rezone so that it would help them conduct their business without hurting their residential neighbors. The Cox book indicates that the Board must determine if the request amounts to spot zoning and is the request consistent with the Master Plan. Section 34.8-2 defines spot zoning as rezoning to benefit the owner for a use that is incompatible with the
surrounding uses and not for the purpose of furthering the comprehensive zoning plan. It is spot zoning if it benefits private interest rather than the interest of the community. Mr. Orlando said during his testimony is that the current zoning hurts his client. There was
no testimony as to how rezoning would benefit the community. She finds the testimony by Ms. Shiffman to be creditable. The goals and objectives of the Master Plan were to guide development into centers to keep traffic in one area and to share driveways. Another goal is to minimize the conflict between land uses. She feels this is spot zoning. There is no proof that rezoning benefits the interest of the community. Splitting the zone would create a conflict between uses.
A motion was made by Mr. Kissling and seconded by Mr. Brown, to make recommendation to the Township Committee that the proposed rezoning not be approved. In favor: Bready, Brown, Kelly, Corson, Riordan, Kissling, Terwilliger, Ragan, Scrocca.
RESOLUTIONS
A motion to adopt the resolution was made by Mr. Bready and seconded by Mr. Kelly. In favor: Bready, Brown, Kelly, Corson, Riordan, Kissling, Terwilliger, Ragan, Scrocca.
A motion to adopt the resolution was made by Mr. Riordan and seconded by Mr. Kelly. In favor: Bready, Brown, Kelly, Corson, Riordan, Kissling, Terwilliger, Ragan, Scrocca.
A motion to adopt the resolution was made by Mr. Riordan and seconded by Mr. Corson. In favor: Bready, Brown, Kelly, Corson, Riordan, Kissling, Terwilliger, Ragan, Scrocca.
A motion to approve the bills for payment was made by Mr. Corson, seconded by Mr. Terwilliger, and approved.
Solicitor Marcolongo informed the board that another request for a zone change has been submitted to the board. Mr. Patterson’s property was part of the recent rezoning in the Township. The property is now zoned Conservation.
A motion was made by Mr. Corson and seconded by Mr. Riordan, to retain Ms. Shiffman to prepare a report for the board.
The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m.
A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Terwilliger, and approved. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Submitted by,
Shelley Lea