MINUTES OF THE HARDYSTON TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD JULY 6, 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:

Ann Kievit - Excused
Bill Walsh - Excused
Jim Armstrong - Present
Carl Miller - Present
Santo Verrilli - Present
J. Laughlin - Present
David Toye - Present
Gary Bargiel Excused
Candace Leatham - Present

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Minutes of the June 1, 2000 meeting were reviewed. A motion was made by Mr. Verrilli and seconded by Mr. Toye to approve the minutes. All were in favor. Motion was carried.

APPLICATIONS:

Sussex National Development - ZB-7-00-1: Joel Murphy, Esq., was present to represent the applicant. Mr. Niall Frasier, John Lehman, P.E., and Jack Kurlander were all sworn in. Mr. Frasier gave his qualification and advised that he is a field superintendent who makes sure that the job is done according to plan specifically with respect to golf courses. He is the field superintendent for the Wild Turkey course presently. He stated that he is aware of the need for the application before the Board for soil removal. He is an expert in golf course design and construction. Mr. Brigliodoro asked if Mr. Frasier had ever given testimony before a land use board as an expert. He stated that he had not, however he has provided information in the past that was presented by others. The Board accepted the witness' qualifications.

Mr. Frasier stated that hole 11 is a tough fit and they had done a cut and fill balance, but it was not really the best alternative. They tried to locate another area where they could transfer the material. The decision for a better golf hole necessitates the removal of the soil and the applicant does have another location where they would eventually need fill for an additional future project.

Mr. Frasier advised that he will be responsible for the removal of the material so that it is taken out in such a way that will enable the shaping of the hole. He advised that there are no housing units near the area where the removal is to occur.

The hearing was opened for the public to ask questions of Mr. Frasier. A member of the public asked questions relative to what he perceived would create a steep slope on another side by removing soil for the construction of the hole.

Mr. Fraiser advised that they are proposing to lay the whole slope back so that they are maintainable on both sides. They are trying to get a 3 to 1 slope.

There were no further questions of the witness from the public. The hearing was closed to the public.

Mr. Lehman gave his qualifications to the Board. Mr. Lehman described the soil movement that is projected under the application. He advised that they would not be using Oak Street as a route to move the soil. The route to be used will be through their property behind the maintenance building out into an area in the new golf course to the top of the VanDecker property and through the VanDecker property to Route 94. They have met with the VanDeckers and have permission to use their at-grade crossing for the movement of the material to the parcel across the road where they have cut a road in. They will be going to the back left corner of the property to fill the area.

He further advised that they are pursuing a development of commercial centers for the site where the material would be moved to. He advised that they will need approximately 200,000 plus yards in that area. 110,000 yards will be available from the excess from the golf course material described under this application.

He advised that at the rear of the property there are wetlands. Their delineations are into the DEP. He advised that there is critical bog turtle area and they are staying away from that area. The are planning on staying 150 feet from any wetlands on site until the LOI is received from the DEP. Orange snow fence will be installed to clearly delineate the wetland buffer areas so that contractors do not make a mistake.

He advised that there would be an impact at the intersection of Route 94 due to the truck traffic, but he did not feel that the impact would be significant. They will not be near any residences or businesses, with the exception of the VanDeckers who have consented to the plan, as a result of the proposed soil movement.

He further stated that the contemplated uses for the lot where the soil will be moved to will be conforming uses.

Mr. Murphy asked about noise and dust problems. Mr. Lehman noted that the trucks will create dust if it is not controlled properly. They will need to employ measures to keep the areas moist. He further noted that they are not proposing a soil mining operation, but a soil movement operation.

Mr. Lehman reviewed Mr. Vreeland's report dated June 30, 2000. He advised that they will comply with comment 5, as well as #6.

Item 7 was reviewed. Mr. Lehman will provide the information to comply with item 7.

Mr. Lehman advised that they are limiting the disturbance to at least 150 feet away from the bog turtle corridor. He will have Ray Walker provide a written verification of that fact. Mr. Walker is their wetlands expert. Mr. Vreeland advised that he was comfortable with that.

Mr. Lehman advised that they will comply with items 10 and 11.

Item 12 related to a time limit within which the project will be completed. Mr. Lehman stated that they did not have a problem with having a limit to the end of the year, but asked that there be flexibility in the event that there is an unforeseen problem that they would be allowed to finish in the Spring. Mr. Miller suggested that if there was a need to extend beyond December 31, 2000, then the applicant would come back to the Board to seek an extension.

Glenn Key asked by what method they would be moving the soil. Mr. Lehman stated that it would be by truck. Mr. Lehman confirmed that that there will be impact at Route 94, but not within the development. Mr. Key also asked questions relative to what soil erosion measures will be taken. He asked how they plan to stabilize the soil once the removal is complete at the end of the year, since they will be unable to plant grass. Mr. Lehman answered the question.

There were no further questions of the witness from the public.

Mr. Murphy called Jack Kurlander to give testimony. Mr. Kurlander gave his qualifications as a developer. He advised that he is a partner in the Crystal Springs development. He gave testimony that the movement of the material will not have an adverse impact on the values on the surrounding properties. He further agreed that the transfer of material to the site will benefit the site and benefit future development of the site.

Mr. Miller asked what the estimated completion date for the golf course would be. Mr. Frasier stated that they would like to get it done before the frost.

A motion was made by Mr. Verrilli to approve the soil removal use variance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Laughlin. Mr. Brigliodoro recited the conditions of the approval based on the testimony given. Roll Call: Armstrong, yes; Verilli, yes; Toye, yes; Laughlin, yes; Leatham, yes; Miller, yes. Motion was carried.

The applicant continued to give testimony relative to the storage of construction material upon Block 14, Lot 24.01. He advise that they do not want to create an eyesore. He further explained what is on the site and what they will propose to do. He advised that the material consists of Alpine Slide parts and bunje tower parts and 15 trailers housing furniture. Additionally there are several trailers that have furniture in them purchased from the Legends conference center. They will be used for the conference center in the future. They were able to obtain them at a very low cost.

He stated that if the material were close to Route 94 that would be unacceptable. He stated that the only thing that can be seen from Route 94 is the top of the bunje tower material. He stated that within six months they will be in with an application for site plan approval for the commercial site. They are seeking an approval to store the material for a period of two years. He further stated that there will be an additional few trailers with furniture as well.

Mr. Lehman advised that the applicant is willing to screen with landscape until they are able to move them.

Mr. Murphy asked if the storage will have an adverse impact on the adjacent properties. Mr. Lehman advised that if the material was left indefinitely to rust there - there would be an impact, but over a period of two years, he did not feel there would be an impact.

The Zoning Official, Arden Svedman, was sworn in. He provided the Board with photos of the subject property, which were marked as exhibits. Mr. Svedman explained the photos.

Mr. Lehman went over Mr. Vreeland's report. The Board discussed comment #2. The applicant agrees to comply with item 2.

They will comply with Item 3. Item 4 was discussed. Mr. Lehman noted that there is limited movement in and out of the site. It is not active storage and they do not intend for it to be.

Item 5 related to time frame within which the material needs to be removed.

It was noted by Mr. Svedman and Mr. Vreeland that there is minimal visual impact, and if there were landscaping buffering there would be virtually no visual impact. The applicant was seeking a two-year time limit within which they need to have the material removed.

Mr. Vreeland suggested that there is a date by which the applicant has to have the material put behind the screening and another date by which the material needs to be completely removed. Mr. Lehman said that they could get the material screened within 60 days to the engineer's satisfaction. The two years will run from the date of the approval.

The meeting was opened to the public. Gary Kiss came forward. He asked about the additional trailers that would be located there as well. Mr. Lehman advised that there are 12 there now and there will be an additional 8-10 trailers added to the site.

There were no further comments from the public. The hearing was closed to the public.

Mr. Miller asked if there were specific dimensions of the area where the material could be stored. Mr. Lehman testified that it would be an area which would include a maximum area of one acre.

Mr. Vreeland advised that he felt that they could work with the applicant to develop a landscaping plan which will reduce the visual impact.

The two year period will run from the date of the decision, which is July 6, 2000.

A motion was made by Mr. Toye and seconded by Mr. Miller to approve the use variance. Mr. Brigliodoro outlined the conditions as cited in the testimony. Roll Call: Armstrong, no, Verilli, abstain; Toye, yes; Laughlin, no; Leatham, no; Miller, yes. Approval was denied.

There was a ten minutes recess.

The Board resumed the meeting.

Boyer, Jeff - Block 75, Lot 17.04 - ZB-7-00-2: Jeff and Linda Boyer were sworn in. Mr. Svedman, who was still sworn in, gave a historical perspective on the property. He advised that in the 80's a previous owner had received approval for a residence on the upper floor with two offices downstairs and a limo service was also on the site. He advised that there were numerous problems with the building and the owner was no where to be found the property feel into foreclosure.

Mr. Boyer purchased the property and got a zoning permit to locate his excavating business on the site. He had tried to get tenants in for the offices on the first floor, but was unsuccessful. Mr. Boyer then converted the first floor area to an additional apartment for his in-laws with out appropriate permits. However, Mr. Svedman advised that Mr. Boyer has made significant improvements to the site and they have had a septic system designed to service both units. Mrs. Boyer testified that her parents live there and her mother has medical problems and needs assistance. Mr. Boyer advised that there are other residences in the area, a deli and an automotive body shop surrounding their property. There are no direct neighbors on either side of the property.

Mr. Boyer stated that they tried to rent out the office space for a period of 2 years. He stated that there are numerous competing office spaces in the area and they have severely limited parking area. He further noted that that they live on the third floor, the business is run from the lowest level where there is a garage in the rear. They have to keep all of the construction equipment in the rear of the property.

Mr. Boyer advised that he took title to the property at the end of 1996.

Mr. Brigliodoro asked if there were other structures that have mixed uses that include residences in the area. Mr. Boyer advised that there were and he enumerated them.

Mr. Vreeland advised that they did visit the site and found no engineering problems on the site.

It was noted that the applicant did receive approval of his septic plan which will accommodate the two living units. Mr. Boyer advised that their existing system is located at a lower level than anticipated, which may complicate the installation of the system as designed. The issue was discussed.

It was concluded that the applicant will provide the additional information to the health inspector and a resolution of the septic issue will be done within 6 months.

The hearing was opened to the public. There was no public comment.

Mr. Armstrong asked if the approval could restrict the use to a mother/daughter use and not a multi-family use. Mr. Brigliodoro suggested that the Board consider requiring a deed restriction.

Mr. Boyer contested the deed restriction requirement for financial reasons.

The Board discussed the options and what is in the best interest of the community.

It was determined that the applicant has an intended use as mother/daughter. If that use ceases, and the owner wants to use the property for anything other than a permitted use, he will have to return to the Board.

A motion was made to grant the variance for a mother/daughter use by Mr. Armstrong and seconded by Mr. Verilli. Mr. Brigliodoro explained the conditions of the approval relative to septic issues and uses. Roll Call: Armstrong, yes; Verilli, yes; Toye, yes; Laughlin, yes; Leatham, yes; Miller, yes. Motion was carried.

RESOLUTIONS:

Advanced Self-Storage - Block 16, Lot 3.04 - ZB-2-00-1: The resolution was read into the record. A motion was made by Mr. Toye and seconded by Mr. Verilli to adopt the resolution. Roll Call: Armstrong, abstain; Verilli, yes; Toye, yes; Laughlin, yes; Leatham, yes; Miller, yes. Motion was carried.

BILLS:

The bills were reviewed by the Board. A motion was made by Mr. Toye and seconded by Mr. Armstrong to approve the payment of the bills. All were in favor. Motion was carried.

ADJOURNMENT:

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

Minutes prepared by:

Marianne Smith