##VIDEO ID:9SjPLf_UeZE## good evening everyone this is the township of Franklin planning board meeting um if everyone please rise FL flag salute the United States of America to the for it stands one nation God indivisible liy and jce for Chris roll call uh the open public meeting statement please notice of this meeting has been given as required by the open public meetings Act and the annual notice of meetings a copy was posted on the township website a notice of this meeting was sent to the Sentinel and a copy was posted at the Franklin Township Municipal Building okay thank you roll call Mr Mady here Mr KY Mr cahoot Mr Constantine Mr Doyle Mr Ranson Mr swed here Mr Clark Mr Bruno here Mr Travelon here chairman PES here all we do have a qualum uh there's no resolutions from the previous meeting first application tonight is PB 2406 glester County EMS I said uh right there is fine is good yeah so we can see it from two directions yep so everybody can see that this is too small to see do you have any other professionals with you this evening I anyone else who's going to testify just myself sir all right uh last solicitor s you please your right hand do you s firm to tell the truth testimony about to give the truth I do very good I don't know if you need my qualifications sir yeah yeah uh name name firm and qualifications please sure my name is Edward Farrell III I'm a professional engineer in the state of New Jersey as well as a certified Municipal engineer in the state of New Jersey I work for Bry and Yates and I'm here to represent uh the glester County EMS okay my qualifications are graduated in 1999 licensed in 2006 I've given testimony about a dozen different boards throughout the state and I presently sit on three boards as well as review engineer okay anybody questions on the qualification n not all right let's we we'll proceed okay great I actually not sure if this is even working or if I need it I'm allow individual fine it's not being issue what we're presenting here tonight is just a small expansion of the existing EMS building on C Mill Road this year is the existing plan right now there is a garage attached to the actual office building and next to are a couple concrete pads and a shed and what the EMS is looking to do is let's get everything Consolidated Under One Roof so what they've uh what they're looking to do is basically an expansion a 700t garage into a 1200t garage and get rid of the just basically kind of clean up the area now the expansion is I guess it Nets about 500 square ft which still keeps it under the threshold of the uh require the maximum requirement of prvious surface for the site which would be 50% it's going from about 40 uh about 4.89 to about 42.1 which is really a negligable amount of purf there's no change in parking there's no change in use uh there aren't any additional employees and this is basically a by ride plan in that the garage I actually have the AR tal elevation if you want to take a look as well but the present garage is about 20 ft tall and the new garage will be 24 and it just has to be under a threshold of 35 ft so it basically from the existing the garages even with the front of the administrative building now will jut out about 6 ft which makes uh no change to the circulation no change to the parking uh it doesn't affect any of the setbacks so there's basically no variances needed there is an existing condition where the lot area is less than what is required that's an existing non-conformance but other than that it's just taking an older garage and a shed and getting rid of it and then putting in in a nicer garage with some storage space that's it anybody time out of record well I hold the record okay first off I forgot to announce uh this is a what's considered a cursory review uh we actually uh we do this for High School uh public buildings and it's uh handled just as if it was a regular application but as far as jurisdiction we don't we would make comments the uh applicant would take the comments back but they're not found by those comments uh known as a cursor review okay um any members have questions for the applicant before we move the engineer and that planner no no good all right Ed Chris who wants to go first any comments I I'll go real quick I don't have any actual comments just to say like you just said as a courtesy review you don't actually have jurisdiction to approve or deny this as a site plan application this is just because I believe this is Township owned property with the EMS actually operating U by Gloucester County so they're really just presenting to you to allow you to comment and really that's it so we're not not there's no actual approval or denial here and that being said you know I we've looked at the plans a few months ago I have no comments they're taking an existing impervious surface area where there's a shed and concrete and they're just expanding the garage it doesn't seem to be impacting circulation and even if we considered existing non-conforming conditions it's not something that you'd be required to Grant a variance anyway con head yeah I don't really have any comy they're they're maintaining the existing drainage patterns that's that's it okay the uh should we just uh entertain should we entertain a motion to approve it uh because we don't have our U to say accept accept it with uh with uh no comment you can just uh you know uh entertain a motion to accept the I guess application or courtesy review with no comment um there doesn't seem to be any impact on anything at this point um just as the professionals indicated and it is just a cur review okay and there there's no need for public comment on this correct um you every let's be safe let's be safe I'll entertain a motion to open the open the hearing to the public motion second moveing second all in favor I all right we're open to the public for comment on this application motion to close open public portion second okay do I have a uh motion to uh accept the applicant as a coal review before we do that I have a question for the engineer sir since you're tearing down a shed it is concrete and impervious cover under it is that impervious cover being removed or is it retained the there are a couple concrete pads here that are being removed and replaced so you're retaining the same impervious cover plus additional because of the addition yes thank you all right a motion I'll make a motion to um when not we approving this make it's a motion uh to to accept the applic accept the application as a cursory review I make a motion that we accept the application as a cursory review Mo second roll call vote Please Mr Mady yes Mr suede yes mayor Bruno yes Mr Travon yes chairman PES yes all right thank you very much you all right our next application is PB 2404 uh Michael and Susan Costello if I pronounce that right good evening Mr chairman board members my name is Christopher penda I'm an attorney in Northfield New Jersey here tonight on behalf of the applicants Michael Susan Kevin and Michelle Costello I'm here tonight with Joe M who's setting up to my left uh Mr M is an engineer with engineering design Associates he's also professional planner uh the applicants are all seated to my right uh and we're here to discuss the uh property at 805 Stanton Avenue it's block 1101 lot 122.0 one it's a total of 2.86 acres in size and it's located in the Township's ra zoning District uh it's currently used as a single family residence uh we're here tonight seeking minor subdivision approval to create two lots uh the subdivision itself is mostly by right and variance free but we do need two variances uh for proposed lot area uh for the the new lot and uh lot Frontage for the new lot as well uh otherwise the projects conforming for area of the remainder lot the width of the remainder lot uh the building setbacks for both lots and the height of both buildings uh we will hear from Mr maay tonight uh who as I said before is a professional planner and engineer uh might as well have Kevin cost sworn in the event we need him I don't anticipate that but if we do need him we might as well have him both Okay Kevin you want to step forward please yeah all three yep ra your right hand you s firm the testimony you're about to give it the truth yes it is thank you would you give for the benefit of your credentials so that they can have you recognize sure I'm J Le engineer president of3 represent city city city out everybody okay with the uh professionals okay yep than just like to note for the record that you guys have accepted him as uh an expert in engineering and planning J provide your address for the record sure you're familiar with the subdivision plan that's on file for the hearing tonight the site you familiar with surrounding neighbor property and and can you describe the property as it's currently configured and in terms of location size and configuration well the existing is actually all stand that uh currently out front you got your dist single family homes the lot is prly deep it's actually about 172 ft of Frontage along standing but it goes back uh about 770 ft all the way back so it's a rather deep lot uh and that was the reason for what we were proposing was to make sure that the existing lot as it is which is a single family home is a performing lot will stay performing lot and of course the variant looking for is the frontage for the new lot which would be 22.6 ft afterward standing at which driveway will be able to come out out there and of course the bu area back all total will be 1.36 Acres of for 1.5 Acres required so okay and surrounding uses in in neighborhood uh basically a lot of single family actually the property to the north is is you farm uh you've got a couple homes that sit back towards the west and adap on a private driveway actually has three or four hes back on that course s Avenue there's also single family matter fact there's another lot across the street and similar to this flag lot to a house in the rear and the proposed lot and the existing lot will both be used for single family residential purposes yes it will okay we need describe the new lot correct correct uh we do need some C variant Rel correct yes so we need that for lot area and Street Frontage and as you know we're obligated to show that we advance purposes of zoning and satisfy the positive criteria also satisfy the negative criteria um what purposes of zoning are advanced in your opinion with respect to this I think this is a perfect location for this again roll short by 214 Acres not that much fact that actually ADV one of your sections which I know you don't like to have long narrow Lots Fact one of the way were asking for even with the Lots we still are a little bit more deep we are with the lot so in sense by cutting this lot in two we actually improve that situation you make that that existing condition working for yes um does the uh proposed uh new lot provide adequate light air open space and um go that yes yes all right and uh it'll be all the work requirements of there sea uh coverages under the 60% lot clearing that building everything other in the lot area and and having shown that we advance at least two purposes of zoning we also have to satisfy the negative criteria is it your opinion that the requested variances will not substantially impair the intent or purpose of the Zone plan or zoning ordinance okay and is it your opinion that the requested variances will not substantially impair the public that well basically we've got similar activities already in the area uh we are pretty much meeting the area department4 uh but it's not different than what already do exting area any potential uh detriments outweighed by the public good no again this is a single family the use is allow okay and would you speak to the required waivers uh sure we have the width the depth ratio the sidewalk yeah they're actually outlined in the engine report through that oh we did have the one of the Vari an existing shed oh yes I bring that up right now there is a shed located along the property line once we make the subdivision it will need a variance for for that uh it's nothing any extreme circumstance it is on the concrete slab one block like that if it has to go it has to go but we would see Rel for that again I don't believe that would be any detriment any the idea the the home that actually both owned by members I don't see issue with that uh getting back to the labor that's a lot dep with this is way I spoke to before your actually the dep of lot lot with even though we're actually improving it technically both Lots still will be that ler and the wer with sidewalks but you know there's actually sidewalks out in this area all large and we've reviewed the CME Associates review letter yes and subject to the adjustments we spoke with Mr dony about earlier we agree with everything in that review letter yes and actually just to add to it one of the the questions was whether or not we were able to Wi the flag portion a lot the reason we actually set up the what we did is we want to make sure that the lot that exists currently does does maintain as a performing lot if we were to shift this line further to the South to create a wider driveway opening then you would actually create a non-performing lot with the the currently occupied lot so we all just that situation we still have 22 and a half Fe obviously we subject to any outside approvals required get them um theater PL is there is there preference on deer plan if we get this approval for the township I'm sorry what was the question the subdivision do you prefer a de or flat uh I don't know if it matter I don't think it m Kate does it really matter I don't think it really matters the last one I did hear one of the comments was okay either one has to be filed within 190 days correct um which goes by very quickly yeah anything else really go order yeah no again it is a fly straightforward application okay uh I have Mr Costello if you have any questions for him uh I do know come on up so uh your dad right my he own the property up front and you're proposing to uh yeah build the house behind I lived in there my whole life love it out there I'd like to stay there have a family if I can stay out there and build would be great what are you thinking in terms of construction at least for the um about 2,000 foot uh your comments on the shed on your father's land yeah and your I would like you to comment on the shed I'm sorry uh the shed uh he's the shed but if we have to get rid it we get rid of it no problem build a new one you preer you prefer it to stay I would I built the shed I I don't want to do my hor but I did a pretty nice job and it's very very handy I really like to what is the side Lot setback for The Shed from the right of way 5 okay where 10 required 20 is it 20 foress I thought it was build is it 10 yeah it's 10t okay it's 10 okay and as far as U the uh dment the positive and negatives here um you didn't there was no mention on lot uh 12.01 did the applicant approach the uh adjoining property owner for Relief to uh widen this road uh widen this uh driveway [Music] Lane is that I think that's only required in instances where the properties are undeveloped uh so there were no Buy sell letters or anything there was some conversation about accessing the property from butches Lane uh but with the the pole of the flag uh we think it would just be simpler to do it that way sir eliminate easements and cross access easements okay Butch is the adjourning property to the north it's like a private driveway on which is Lane which is Lane yeah okay that's the one that Serv or four right okay um any question any questions before we go to professionals I just wanted to Mr penda um you had um Mr castel's father he gave some testimony I just don't have um your name sir it's Michael Michaels Costello Costello it's a little late but could you raise your right hand and do you s from that the testimony you've given and may give uh again this evening to the board is the truth very good thank you thank thank you welcome head yeah so the the one comment that I have it's in our our letter is regarding the uh Township ordinance requires a driveway that's in the length of greater than 500 ft to have a passing uh area I know you obviously don't have a proposed uh land out yet um that that would be my general comment separately I think this might be one of our planning comments where are you ultimately proposing to access the property from are you planning on sharing these some driveway because there's a couple utility okay and they going to relocate the utility polls Associated that are in the way right now okay just when there's no issue with okay yeah that just the I I would assume that the fire Marsh probably have to take a look at that make sure emergency access ability s [Music] through anything else say no Chris sure um first I do have to point out I don't know why they didn't bring this up maybe they're trying to save me a little bit of embarrassment there is an error in our report in terms of the variances I had noticed I think they played a little trick on me in the way they labeled the plans uh they have the at the bottom they showing 83.0 and 22.6 as if those are the frontages it's actually the existing lot 12201 does have 150 ft of front Ed so I called that out as a variant for insufficient lot width they do they do have the requisite P have the with so that's one less variance than is is noted in our report okay so there's also a few other numbers that we mentioned in our report in terms of lot width that are incorrect because they do have 150 so it's 150 and 22.6 for the lot width so they do definitely need that the variant for lot width for the um the flag lot portion but not for the the larger lot that will contain the existing dwelling other than that my only real questions were about accessing the rear lot in terms of it wasn't clear on the plane if they're going to be cutting a new driveway through that flag pole portion or if they're going to use cuz the plan we got does show an existing they call it Earth driveway so a dirt road I guess or dirt driveway goes from the existing front of the house all the way to the back of the lot and I don't know if they're going to be using that or they're going to be Paving um and same thing I had the question I put in the report was I noticed that Butch's Lane is immediately north of this this property like maybe 10 to 15 ft off of the property line that's a driveway that already goes 600 or 700 feet back immediately adjacent to this lot so I just asked the question if they had tried to see if they could use that as access rather than having to cut an entire new driveway in here um and I think they've already discussed that at least I don't know if you have any additional questions on that but that was my thought that instead of having two driveways run parallel to each other to access properties that are all back there if they use the same driveway that might be beneficial but we can't force them to acquire an easement if the property owner to the north isn't doesn't want to participate in that um yeah then I I don't think I have any other real questions about this otherwise the lot would be big enough they could build a house that would be variance free uh there is Township Code does have clearing limits for for lot so I don't know how the amount of trees you plan on clearing but if you did more than 60% you probably have to go to the zoning board to get a VAR from that yeah and then that would be determined they go in if this gets approved they'd go get their building permits and anything they need to deal they could do with there you can deal with it yeah other than that I don't I don't really have any additional questions it's it's fairly straightforward it's um there are variances and waivers involved because I'd say in general the Township Code even though it's not expressly prohibited kind of discourages the creation of flag Lots but it is a situation where we have a lot of properties in town um where we see these long narrow Lots I do also have to point out that the design waiver for lot depth and width um we did recommend in the master plan that you all just adopted a couple of months ago that that that provision of the code be be removed right so uh in terms of any negative criteria there we did as a board just say we don't even think that should be in the code okay so really it's just the only concern I have is is accessing that back lot and like Ed said there's a requirement in the code that for driveways of a certain length you have to a pass by Lane so I however would accommodate that I guess with at 22 ft wide I guess that's wide enough to have the driveway be 20 ft wide at some point but I don't know exactly what they're planning on doing so that's really all I can say on this is there's a few waivers and variances but it's um relatively straightforward just a little concern over accessing the property and how that's going to work okay I'll ask that question now um there's an existing earn driveway accessing the rear lot the drawing indicates it comes off the uh existing home's horseshoe shaped driveway is the intent to keep it that way or is the intent to have your own separate curb cut off of Stanton Avenue no the intent was to have the curb cut all the way out Stant that we have the separate driveway doesn't mess it up as far as thank you and we can actually wide it to meet here again we have 22 ft so more room to make driveway for short distance enough car yeah we'll talk about that in a few minutes here let's uh open it to the public first uh motion to go into open public portion second mov second all in favor I all right we're we're in public uh session on this application does anybody uh wish to come forward questions on this application or comments as a direct neighbor as a direct neighbor yeah come on no come on up come on up yeah actually anybody can comment on it you don't have to be the direct neighbor or within the 200 ft uh what I ask you do is come up to the microphone name and address please and then uh just speak it in the microphone your comments Cindy Aliana I'm not live directly next door to 767 okay sty King 94 Sten okay sorry about [Music] that sir were you going to comment as well I didn't know if they were done why they were looking at I was going to bring you forward my name is Chris Kelly I live at 151 gles Lane so I'm directly behind I don't know my directions gentlemen I'm sorry I know I know where you're at between Costello's and Jim Butch's you're you're west of the I'm west of The Proposal um I was just curious about where on the property they propos to build the home should the variances and everything we I would ask you to turn around right there and the engineer uh Joe will show you uh the where the uh proposed footprint would be so on the spot here we actually have the setback we have OT setb back from the rear have 20 side set and additional 75 set be within that no we what it will need all okay the two ladies that were up here do you have any comment or you just wanted to look at the plan uh no we want to look at the plan okay driveway y does anyone else have any comments at this time motion to close open public portion second moov second all in favor hi okay go ahead one one quick question regarding the driveway are you going to eliminate the connection between the existing proper okay driveway obviously if flag lots have been a problem from uh from my perspective the uh 22 ft uh I'm not looking at the the resident uh I live out state in Avenue I know the property well I know butcher's property I'm looking at it from access for the fire department you know obviously the last I guess it was time flies last year you know there was a large fire back behind butches back in there access was atrocious trying to get back into that area so 22 ft uh I'm looking at a driveway that is uh is wide enough to get apparatus back into that area uh you know look at what we're going through right now with with the dry spell um so um the driveway itself held wide and clearing on either side of the driveway I'm uh uh I'm I'm looking at it from the perspective of getting trucks back there versus the uh in Residence vehicles uh so uh would the applicant or professionals want to comment on that uh it's it's a concern yeah we do is we can get in touch with the fire chief and double check and make sure he's okay with that it's 20 ft wide or 22 ft wide we can comment that which is obviously similar to most a lot of streets and I know it's not just the width as well but you got to it's the height the overhang uh and like I said we didn't have experience with uh you know a large fire next door back back behind butches uh you know trying to get a truck in there was was very difficult not a lot of things but not only that but you put some sort of description there but you can only M or you have to maintain a certain height as well as a certain corre sorry all right so I'll good withit Mr chairman I mean you talk about that dryway being 22 ft and that's all fine and gy when it's brand new and the house is done 5 years from now you know you got to warn these folks that they built these houses back there that that's when it becomes an issue about these apparat coming on the drive all right uh should this application be approved can we word in the resolution that a height of say 12 foot must be maintained and a minimum width say of 15 ft must be maintained are those uh adequate numbers I'm okay with the 15 and I would go uh with a ladder i' go to 14 on the height we that if we do the uh subdivision by De we can add that as a de restriction so 15 wide 14 I yeah problem it's yeah that it'll run with the land you know once once the noer there the new owners will be on it's it's an ongoing problem you know it's just be becoming very difficult so all right I have I have nothing else yet you okay okay all right I'm motion a motion to approve PB 2404 uh with a resolution stating a height of the driveway to be maintained at 14 ft withd to be maintained at 15 ft uh both variances uh to be approved second motion second roll call vote Please Mr Mady yes Mr swed yes mayor Bruno yes Mr traval Young yes chairman FR yes thank you a y all right our last applications PB 2407 uh [Music] we and it's in the right place my name is we're here for a minor sub tonight with me is RA Leber and also Father Henry Leber and You' like to swear to me nowy raise your right hand please you s swear from the testimony the [Music] TRU thank you the uh the property is 609 Willer grve Road it's owned by Henry and sandre Le and Rachel Le which is born in as their daughter uh the property is blocked 2703 lot 39 it's a preserve Farm total acreage is 29.5 Acres uh proposal is to subdivide a separable Inception area which is an area that is not preserved but still part of the property uh to separate that off to create a separate 1.5 acre lot that 1.5 acre lot would not be subject to Farmland preservation restrictions uh it would conform to all of your uh ordinance requirements including the actu requirements which are going to be put on the plan that is submitted to the application uh the remainder will be 2804 Acres all preserved uh there's an existing single F dwelling on the property which will be replaced uh since it's preserve farm that replacement had to be approved by the sabc which is the state act Pro development Commission and also the blost County Agriculture development board uh those what they have done is said that it's okay for my client uh Rachel Weber when she purchases The Preserve Farm to demolish and replace the house on the farm so that she can live there uh the current house on the farm is a little too close to the road it's 50 ft set back 75s required uh the new house will conform with all applicable setback requirements and actually that's something that is memorialized in the sadc's and plusps resolutions and also have depicted on an exhibit that is with the sac's resolution and all that was includ materials uh the uh remainder of the uh the new lot 1.5 acre one would remain vacant for a while and I think the ultimate objective is for Henry and sand ever to build a house there some right for retirement so that that would be developed and Henry and S would live there the retirement home so uh youd wind up with Rachel owning and living on The Preserve farm and then the subdivided 1.5 acre cars would be where hry and Sandra live uh so uh We've looked at the review letter here uh it looks like there's not a whole lot of concerns about it from your professionals there were two questions uh and one of them had to do with whether the new house on the berser parcel would conform and I just explained that it will and the other had to do with what the existing shed on The Preserve Park will be used for and R would you explain that that's for equipment storage and that is all be under [Music] the that's what that used to be uh I at this point I think I've La it out pry clearly I submitted the L Sub in draft form you contain the U uh buckers that are shown in so you have any questions for my client over andly go through the review letter that's have proceed any members have questions it's just my understanding that Mr Weber is looking to live in the existing house theable lot I will be putting in the paperwork to build a new home the existing on the 1.5 yeah the existing house is going to be taken down on The Preserve kece the 28 AC kece and Rachel's going to build a new house there and live on The Preserve okay yeah I'm sorry if I didn't make that okay Chris uh yeah I'll be quick minor subdivision no variances no design waivers it's by right just to make it clear because the one thing I did make sure to check they actually do include the requisite Farm buffers on the a lot of the 50 ft on the side and 100 ft in the rear so they they even meet the right to farm buffer requirements of the code okay excellent and no additional comments other than my letter okay I have some additional comments um I helped preserve the property I knew your grandfather and he was the very second farm that this Township preserved June 25th 2009 um I'm quite familiar with severable exceptions you're meeting all the requirements uh for your attorney Mr her I was quite impressed with your packet uh you included anything and everything to answer my questions because when I saw the application I first said aha they're going to do something wrong but uh you covered all you dotted all your eyes crossed all your te's uh the existing home stead that's being torn down the sadc does allow for it to be replaced as you stated you're going to put the proper setbacks to allow it to conform my only question is on the existing home that you Rachel will live in are you required to retain the septic system or do you have to build a new one have to replace that and the health inspector will be coming out to see that the old okay same with the well the well has been tested and that was just so they do a water test before I so I have all those [Music] results I saw the paper trail it's taken you quite some time I know the sadc is not the easiest to deal with once again I'm impressed with all the paperwork everything was done correctly okay just time I entertain MO open to the public motion second second all in favor I we're in public any comment from the public hearing none a motion to close public portion motion to close open public portion move second all in favor I okay uh Ralph you have a motion uh motion to approve pb2 24-7 and I have a second roll call vote Please Mr Mady yes Mr sued yes mayor Bruno yes Mr Travon yes chairman PES yes conratulations good luck thank you very much up one say Roger coook you expect to argue law tonight better to Happ than somebody in a crazy moving on uh I have no correspondence this evening at this time I entertain a motion to approve the minutes October 15th I have a motion there a second to approve the minutes move in second all in favor I I Kate no uh requirement for a Clos session no thank you very good and at this does any board member have anything uh to bring [Music] up you have anything Chris no okay thank you uh any board member have anything uh to bring up this evening makeing motion toour I ution is there a second second all in favor I thank you very much everyone and have a great Thanksgiving thank you see you later good a lot for