MINUTES OF THE HARDYSTON TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD OCTOBER 19, 2000

STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE: Pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 231, P.L. 1975 adequate notice as defined in Section 3D of Chapter 231 P.L. 1975 has been made to the New Jersey Herald and is also posted on the bulletin board at the Hardyston Township Municipal Building.

ROLL CALL:

Ken Worflar - Excused
Leslie Hamilton - Present
Maribeth Boffa - Present
Randy Roof - Excused
William Castiglione - Present
Thomas Zygmunt - Present
Robert Neubig - Present
John Eskilson - Present
Greg Eisenecker - Present
Ed Frisbie - Present
Ed Zinck - Present

APPLICATIONS:

Sussex National Development- Block 16, Lots 1, 1.03, 1.05, 1.07, 6.02, 8.02 and Block 17, Lots 2 and 12.01 - PB-9-00-4: Mr. Michael Hiller of National Evaluation Services was present to give testimony. Mr. Hiller was sworn in. He gave his qualifications and they were accepted by the Board.

Mr. Hiller provided a report relative to the real estate, tax revenue impact and services impact that the proposed development would have on the municipality.

He gave testimony relative to information contained in the report. He stated that based on the analysis, the development would have a positive net tax impact on the municipality.

An analysis was done with respect to the actual number of students within the development in school currently. The 240 completed homes accounted for 33 students or 3% of the total number of students in the Township. The number of students per home is .13 students per home. The average throughout the township represents .44 student per home. If the ratio is used for the total build out, the development will generate 199 students.

Based on the analysis, it was Mr. Hiller's testimony that the build-out will result in a positive tax benefit to the school, as the anticipated tax revenue generated from the development would exceed the cost of education for the anticipated students by $500,000 per year.

The meeting was opened to questions from Board members. Mr. Hiller advised that this calculation was done based on current values, but he felt that the value of the homes in the development would grow in value, particularly when the rest of the anticipated development, golf, commercial and hotels, build out, the development will become more exclusive and valuable, thus generating more tax base. The analysis also does not include the tax benefits of any of the proposed commercial development under the plan.

The witnesses testimony was opened to the public for questions. Mr. Gary Kiss came forward and asked the witness what is the flavor of the housing that he used to generate the study, what type of houses were used, condos, townhouses or single family. Townhouses and condominums currently represent 70% of the total build-out currently. 40% of the homes are patio or single-family homes. The prices of the single family homes are very high and not affordable for families and do not often attract families since the lots are small and often on the golf course.

Mr. Murphy advised the Board that they have brought Mr. Ketchell back who was their hydrological expert who wanted to bring the Board additional testimony relative to their water test results. He advised that they did a number of monitoring tests when they did the pumping. Monitoring data from area wells was described by Mr. Ketchell.

Based on the data, they feel that the well is good to produce 600 gallons per minute without significant impact to other area wells. He advised what the next steps that needed to be taken in order to get their permits. The projected need for gallons per day for the project is in line with what is produced by the well. It was noted that the proposed well will be used for irrigation at a much lower rate. Based on the data however, this test proves that the acquifer has significant water to provide for the development. Mr. Mulvhill advised that these tests were done in order to get a well permit for the irrigation well, but due to the timing of the test, it was pertinent information to provide to the Board with respect to the available water supply to serve the proposed development.

The witnesses testimony was opened to the public for questions related to the witnesses testimony. Mr. Kiss stated that he did not agree with Mr. Kechell's testimony relative to the testing done on his well. He indicated that while the monitoring was done initially, there was no follow-up monitoring and they did not come back to cap the well.

Mr. Ketchell responded that all monitoring was followed up on to gather results.

There were no further questions of the witness.

John Lehman, P.E., came forward to give testimony. Mr. Murphy advised that Mr. Lehman had prepared a response report to Mr. Guerin's September 26, 2000 report. He indicated that there were three professional meetings which took place since the last meeting where many of the issues contained in the Board professional reports have been resolved. Mr. Lehman went over Mr. Guerin's report and his response report simultaneously.

With respect to the proposed third golf course and the fact that it would traverse the municipal boundary into Vernon, Mr. Lehman advised that they have to go to the Vernon Board to seek approval. Mr. Collins noted that the Board may want to impose a condition that requires that the applicant provide a sketch showing an alternate plan for the area that includes a golf area that is in connection with the existing courses, in the event that they are unable to obtain approval from Vernon, as presently the area is not zoned for golf. The applicant agreed to comply.

Mr. Lehman advised that in the alternative to providing individual sidewalks, they are proposing a hiking trail that goes along the perimeter of complex. Mr. Mulvihill advised that he felt that the trail would connect the entire community. They feel that it is more in keeping with the natural flavor of the openness of the development. They advised that they plan to pave some of it, but other parts will be wood chips. Mr. Lehman advised that the surface of the hiking trail according to ADA standards can be paved or wood chipped.

Mr. Collins gave direction to the Board with respect to RSIS and sidewalk provisions. He advised that while Crystal Springs I was not subject to RSIS standards, Crystal Springs II is. He gave the board advice relative to diminimus waivers.

After discussion the concept of accepting the hiking trail in lieu of standard sidewalks, the Board considered requiring that the hiking trail be a paved surface in areas found to be appropriate by the Board and their professionals, particularly in high traffic areas between the clubhouse area and the housing on the north end of the project up to the park area.

The question of the trail being private/public was discussed. Initially the trail would be private, but if ever it could be connected to Interwest, then it would probably be public, but still subjective to the association rules.

It was concluded that the hiking trail was acceptable with the paving in the areas noted.

Mr. Lehman gave information relative to the fact that they have eliminated 40+ houses originally proposed along the ridge in the northern portion of the project. He further noted that they are able to provide sewer to 1530 units within the two projects Crystal Springs I and Crystal Springs II. Under this scenerio, Crystal Springs I has a build out of 942 and Crystal SpringsII has a build out of 588. If any unit count change is contemplated, updates on both projects have to be submitted so that the total never exceeds 1530 overall. This amount of housing coupled with the proposed commercial development will not exceed the allocation available to the developer.

Mr. Lehman continued to review his response report to Mr. Guerin's report. He gave testimony relative to their proposed phasing plan, based on market conditions, but they could vary depending on the economy. They are seeking a 15 year approval in order to complete the project.

The Board was given the opportunity to ask questions of the witness.

Ms. Hamilton asked about senior citizen housing. Mr. Mulvihill advised that they were willing to age restrict 100 units to 55 and over at the 250 unit count. The area were these homes will be located will not be strictly limited at this time. The applicant will come back to clarify what pod of development will be age restricted.

The questioning period was opened to the public. Jim Vecchio came forward and expressed his concern that curbs should be made to be required. Mr. Collins advised that curbing is still required where applicable under RSIS standards.

Bruce Patti came forward and asked when they planned to start residential construction on the north side and the commercial on the north side. Mr. Mulvihill advised that the commercial retail area would be first. He anticipated possibly coming before the Board with commercial construction plans within the next six months. The first conference center to be built will be the Crystal Springs I portion of the project. The other conference centers would not be proposed to be built for 5 to 10 years.

Mr. Patti noted that he has a horse training facility adjacent to the proposed development. He had concerns that the golf activity would effect his property in view of the sensitive nature of his horses. Mr. Mulvihill said the nearest golf hole is 250 feet from the property line and 1000 feet from the proposed conference center.

Mr. Collins recapped potential conditions that the Board may consider. He indicated that Bob Guerin's and Janice Talley's final review reports on the last submitted revised plan as reflected through Mr. Lehman's response letter be either made conditions of a resolution, or in the alternative if the Board feels comfortable voting tonight.

Mr. Guerin stated that he could prepare a report ready for next week's meeting, however, he did not anticipate that any issues raised couldn't be made conditions of the approval if the Board were so inclined to vote tonight. It was concluded that Mr. Guerin will provide a final report for the special meeting scheduled for November 6, 200 at 6:00 p.m. It was concluded that the hearing of the application would conclude at the proposed November 6, 2000 special meeting and if appropriate a vote would be taken at that time. In preparation of a potential decision, Mr. Collins will prepare a draft resolution based on the testimony offered so far. A motion was made by Mr. Neubig and seconded by Mrs. Boffa to adjourn the hearing to the November 6, 2000 meeting to be held at 6:00 p.m. at the Hardyston Township Municipal Building without further notice to the public. All were in favor. The matter was carried.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:

The meeting was opened to the public. There was no public participation. The meeting was closed to the public.

ADJOURNMENT:

Having no further business, a motion was made by Mr. Neubig and seconded by Mrs. Boffa to adjourn the meeting. All were in favor. Motion was carried. Meeting was adjourned.

Minutes prepared by:

Marianne Smith