requirements of the open you're good the notice the notice requirements of the open public meetings act have been satisfied by the placing of a notice of this meeting on the Bolton board at the municipal building filing the notice with the Township Clerk and transmitting the notice to the Hun in County Democrat The Courier News The Star Ledger and the Trenton Times thank you Mr Bardo roll call please chairman Mr Edward gettings here Vice chair Miss Donna Drews she's asked to be excused uh m Robin Fatu she's arriving late U Mr Scott McDade here Miss Michelle kavaki here Mr Dennis conanan here Mr James Miller here Mr Glenn solowski here board professionals board attorney Mr John Bardo here virtually Township planner Mr Jeffrey Vella here and all other board professionals have asked to be excused okay thank you very much I'm going to ask everybody in the room this evening to join me in the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence for our folks in the armed services Al to the flag of the United States of America to the for it stands one nation under God indivisible liy and justice for all thank you okay next up we go through comments and reports I don't have any reports for this evening anybody on the board have anything they want to mention at this time no okay Engineers comments have the engineer with us tonight plannner comments Jeff you got anything for us I just have one comment the board is now uh registered as um a member of the njpo so there may be more uh correspondents or pack informational packets being passed out at Future meetings okay information's good great thank you Jeff Mr Bardo any attorney's comments this evening not at this point Mr chairman okay thank you there is no correspondence uh this evening so our first items up are our minutes from two meetings the first being the May 22nd 2024 meeting and the second the June 12th 2024 meeting so let's start with May 22nd our minutes had been distributed thank you Taylor ahead of time for review does anybody after review have any comments or questions or suggestions I do not oh good do I have a motion to approve second chairman Mr Edward gettings yes Mr Dennis conanan yes Mr James Miller yes Mr Glenn sokowski yes very good next up are the minutes from the June 12th 2024 meeting same thing we received them in advance is any body have any questions or comments or changes to the minutes I do not okay I have a motion to approve it's a motion wait so who made the motion okay you got first got Scott on the motion and Glenn on the second okay chairman Mr award gettings yes Mr Scott date yes Mr Dennis conanan yes Mr James Miller yes Mr Glenn Sosi yes m Michelle ceter I think I was AB oh were you oh June 12 my bad I thought it was July uh yeah they look good I don't remember okay next up we have some resolutions to act on this evening the first resolution is resolution 10-2 d not that 10-22 4 which is Woodmont RIT and bronze LLC and we had received this in advance it understandably is very detailed because there was an awful lot to this application so let me ask any members of the board if you have any questions or comments on this I do not Mr Bardo let me ask ask you I I thought this was really well done and has the level of detail in it that we need anything else you wanted to comment on with respect to this because it's such I I I I also want to thank all the board Professionals for their their input um and their proof reading and revisions it was a truly a a collaborative team uh effort okay thank you then I'll ask for a motion to approve resolution 10-22 4 a second chairman Mr Edward gettings yes Mr Dennis conanan yes Mr James Miller yes Mr Glenn Sosi Yes W that okay great next is resolution 11-202 4 which is from just two weeks ago from the Calvary Presbyterian Church of Amwell this was a minor site plan approval and conditional use permit for expansion of the parsonage I also on this one do not have any changes looks very good anybody else have any comments or okay the owner and applicant are SP just on the applicant just want to thank Mr Bardo Andia for getting that resolution done so fast it was quick really very app app well we know Pastor bush is anxious to get going yes he's bursting at the seams so good for him okay can I have a motion to approve resolution 11- 2024 so move second one moment sure chairman Mr wward gings yes do we want to put on the record that Robin Fatu has attended and she is present uh miss Robin Fatu yes okay Mr Scott McDade yes Mr Dennis quanan yes Mr James Miller yes okay thank you okay the next and last resolution for this evening is resolution 12-2020 which is Magna Power Electronics again if there's any comments or changes to this it's a fairly straightforward application right Jeff looks good to me can I have a motion for approval of resolution 12-22 4 so move second chairman Mr Edward gettings yes Miss Robin Fatu yes Mr Dennis conanan yes Mr James Miller yes Mr Scott McDade yes okay citizens privilege we do have some people in the room with us this evening I do not know Taylor can tell me yes there are there are residents online there are okay so this is the time at citizens privilege that if there's anybody who would like to address the board on any issues other than what's coming later which the only remaining item is the public hearing uh but if you want to address us on anything now would be the time to do so so I'm going to go with people in the room first if you do want to address us on something you're more than welcome to come on up to the microphone identify your name and address okay there's nobody taking me up on that so how about online if somebody online wants to address the board as I just described please identify yourself your name and address please okay there being none we're going to move on to the public hearing for the SE evening which is William and Paul no this is a preliminary major subdivision and concept plan review not an application a concept plan review and Mr gromberg is here good evening we were here a year ago last night that's right on this no okay it's been about a year since you saw me on this one anyhow um this the applicant went back with its engineering team on this application and after we listened to comments from the board Bo and and uh concerns raised by uh members of the public with particularly with respect to storm water and and flooding issues and has actually decided to scale back the project to be five Lots instead of seven in a cluster format and the benefit of doing that which we I'll have Mr O such provide some actual testimony on it um is that we reduce the size of the length of the roadway and we have no variances now so this this project I think in a cluster formation as opposed to the conventional which we can still do on a five lot um subdivision um is more appropriate and your ordinance requires before we go through all of the rigar roll of getting it fully engineered and dealing with professionals correspondents and stuff is for us to come before you on a concept and saying do you like the cluster versus the conventional layout um I think this is a quick thing because it's pretty evident that shortening the road and making a cluster is a better alternative than having a longer road with more impervious coverage and having to deal with the storm water um we've received your professionals reports um it's really just a threshold issue about cluster versus conventional what would happen is if you say yes Steve we like the cluster you can go ahead and do that then we fully engineered a cluster and then we come back before the board on notice of hearing to the public where the public gets to participate in a public hearing process so this is really just a concept review of cluster versus conventional um we I I don't think we needed to provide notice of hearing but because of the interest that the public had in this application previously we gave notice of hearing just in case anybody wanted to know what was going on on the application and I provided that in advance to Mr Bardo as well so what I can do is I can have Mr uch sworn in and provide some basic testimony as to the the clustering provision and how we comply and then if the board has any questions sounds and I'll be glad I'll be glad to do that it's a concept plan hearing um so I really don't need to swear him in because um the board is just going to decide what plan it prefers and then as Mr gromberg indicated they will be back with a fully engineered plan so I want the public to know that whatever plan the board picks tonight that does not mean they're going out and and building uh tomorrow they still have to come back in for a a full review so I'll ask the engineer to raise his right hand do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God you're sworn you're sworn sir thank you uh yeah it's Kelly uch k e l l e y o apostrophe suu CH I'm going to make the qualification real quick just to indicate um Mr uch you have a license in good standing and you're a professional engineer and provide expert testimony throughout the state uh yes and I've provid a testimony before this I offer miss an acceptable sorry not oh good I'm usually the one who gets yelled at um so Mr uch can you just give the board an overview of what we're proposing with the cluster versus the conventional how the five lot is conforming and the cluster is a better alternative sure so uh as Mr gromberg noted there is some history on this project were here about a year ago and at that time the application had seven single family um seven sing sorry now it's loud seven single family residential lots and that application did have variances and based on the feedback as Mr gromberg noted um from both the board professionals and the the public the applicant decided to kind of scale back the application and come into the board with a what's a full F conforming subdivision uh so the the application now would be proposing five single family lots and one open space lot and within the ordinance as Mr gromberg noted there's Provisions to allow within the R3 Zone that this property is within uh what's known as a cluster subdivision so basically reducing the size of the lots and clustering them for lack of better term in one portion of the property and then the remaining portion of the property um would be dedicated as open space or remain um undeveloped and would remain that way in perpetuity so what we've PR prepared and sent into the board are two separate plans um conceptual plans one is a conforming conventional subdivision which is shown on uh the easel that is Coy now um and that proposed subdivision has a driveway that enters along Sergeantsville road comes down and makes a right-and turn or an L into the property and goes almost all the way to the end of the property near where old Field Court is uh located um within this subdivision the five single family lots all meet the R3 Zone uh bulk requirements for lot area improvable lot are area the lot width the frontages um lot Circle requirements uh the of the five single family lots three of the Lots would be intended to be served by public sewer and RTM has confirmed they have capacity for up to three and then the remaining two lots would be served by septics but those two lots would likely have what's known as a dry sewer hookup so basically connect to a main have it capped at the line and if and when any capacity te available with RTM they could potentially tie in at that point can you because that kind of jumped off the page at me when I was reviewing this could you just talk to the logic of that uh I think that the main logic is you put in the infrastructure now so that if capacity comes available you don't have to open up the road to put in a new yeah so it's basically into the lot into the grass area and you don't have to reopen the road to put in a new connection we're very familiar with the capacity issues I know that that was the exact reason thank you yep excuse me I just while we're on that topic I just wanted to verify that you you have three edus was there correspondence then there was a memo issued by RTM in August of last year and if it's not part of your file we'll be happy to send that off okay thank you yep um so the open space lot on the conventional conforming subdivision would be about 5.39 acres and I and that would just be on this plan kind of on this lower section of the property or the southern southwestern portion of the property um one thing I didn't mention but obviously is very important and was was um subject of some of the the public comment previously as well as the boards concern is the property is environmentally constrained with both streams flood Hazard areas Wetlands um and the majority of those features are along the Eastern property boundary and a little bit along the southern property boundary um and this conventional subdivision is kind of laid out in a way that we can access Sergeantsville Road and come in and try to stay as far away as possible with the Lots while still providing the the necessary bulk requirements with the lot Circle and the improvable lot area on the on the properties so for all intensive purposes it does meet all of the bulk requirements so it is a conforming conventional subdivision but what we want to propose and this is what we're presenting to the board now is a cluster subdivision under Section 296 132 of the ordinance which allows for the clustering of subdivisions within the R3 Zone as well as other zones in the um in the in the township um and again this layout thank you Mr gber uh for the record the plan now up on the easel has also been provided to the board no changes have been made to it so it's it's not a new exhibit um again the the site access would remain very close to the same location along Sergeantsville Road and you would come in and again make a a right hand turn to where culdesac would be um in the center of the property rather than almost all the way to the Far Western portion of the property as the yeah sure yeah and laser pointer doesn't work on the screen oh yeah sorry I learned that last night actually anyway um so the the right hand side of the screen is the Eastern portion of the property and that's where kind of the the ditch and the wetlands and that's what those a lot of those colored lines are kind of delineating the various regulated um features again so that the property's access along Sergeantsville road which is the northern property or Northern portion of the property top of the page and you would be entering to the South and making a a right hand turn to the West into the center of the property and the five lots are all kind of clustered within that central portion of the property um within that cluster ordinance the lot areas can be reduced down and then there's separate Provisions for if the lots are served by sewer and or if they're served by on-site septics uh all the Lots with three being served by sewer and two being served by septic still meet the lot area requirements for the various um uses or what would be served um so if the board um agrees with the clustering provision here we would fully engineer what they're seeing here now um to address any uh comments that the board professionals might have correct that's correct and um I think Mr Bell's correspondents rais questions about Road names and and things of that nature uh and possible testing that's going to be needed in the future um we're we're agreeing that we're going to have to come back with the board with all that information including soil testing um and I think Mr um Thomas's report that we've received uh this afternoon um raised some issues about tree tree removal and um and the again the uh detention basins and storm water all of that would be fully engineered at the time that we come back correct that would be correct and any any concern about meeting all of those issues no I I reviewed Mr Morgan Thomas's memo and and did some quick calculations this afternoon and I believe will be fully conforming with the canopy removal or or um tree removal ordinance and with respect to storm water we have to deal with the engineering part of that storm water right and there's it's a it's a major development from a state standard so we have to meet all the state requirements and the state rules associated with that now obviously on this subject the specifics as you just said are not on this plan but storm water being so critical for the township for us but also for this plan because that first the shanic river is right there we do know that that floods uh so but at at a conceptual level from for us could you speak to one plan versus the other and how storm water you see correct so on both plans there are easan areas and dedicated call them reserved areas that we've preliminary gone preliminarily gone through and kind of done some back some actual design work on storm water management anticipating what we think the overall coverage would be on the site the overall disturbance and the size of the basins obviously they're not shown here we haven't issued any storm water report but we basically laid it out anticipating that those areas would be adequate now as we get through the design those locations May shift the size May adjust but we're very confident that we can meet a complying storm water management for the overall project both with a conventional and more importantly and we think more appropriately with the cluster subdivision because it reduces that impervious coverage significantly from I I didn't give you actual numbers but that length of the road shrinks by approximately 600 feet and it's 28 feet wide that's a lot of impervious coverage that just gets taken out of the project um so in doing that we we have dedicated I'll call it preliminary areas of where we anticipate storm water management to go and we believe they're sized adequately for what we anticipate the storm water generation on this project to uh create and that's pretty much fair to say the reason why we are coming back with this cluster plan and have reduced the scope of this original project so it's Varan free and um five lot five residential lots instead of seven correct correct and with the state regulated areas on this property it'll very likely have to seek D approval for that storm water review so they'll also be reviewing to make sure it meets their requirements as well that's our concept review um questions I can't see too well up there is so that's the cluster plan we got the road coming in the way we're looking at it here where would the house would be to the left side of it how many houses would be on the left side of the road right there would be uh which left sorry well as we're looking at it okay so the Western portion of the property there would be two kind of in that little L and then at the end of the culdesac um well no there would just be two above the road and then three along the southern side Eastern portion of the they all have on the southern side the sewer uh I don't know if I we we've dedicated right now the last two along the cuac we have those two boxes shown those are kind of the anticipated septic areas but again we haven't fully design this out so they're subject to change on the location of where those septics would be and last one on those typical lot size the cluster how big um the the cluster Provisions yeah let me just the minimum well well it it's weird it's written as minimum lot area but the way the minimum lot area for the cluster is written is it's really minimum lot or minimum improvable lot area which is 35,000 square feet so every lot is at a minimum has 35,000 square feet of improvable lot area based on the the ordinance of the township and they're they're all larger than that larger than that 22 well there there's a difference between if you have public sewer and public sewer public sewer you can get down 25,000 square feet but we're actually providing more the flood plane line in red is that can you describe that better than just as it states on the plan uh so that would be the state has a design flood elevation that is um set based off the flood Hazard area rules so it it's njac so New Jersey Administrative Code seven colon I'm G get I believe it's 14 is it a 50y year 100 year like yeah so that would be yeah sorry it's it's the 100-year flood elevation but within the past couple years the state have changed the way that you measure that so this is an antip or not anticipating it's showing that change that additional elevation current to the latest standard that's correct okay yes and how close is it in proximity to any of the nearest homes to that line well actually the the existing structure that's on the property would following that line would be inundated within that 100-year flood line that structure and all the structures on the property we intend to demolish as part of this this project as move forward um but all of the lot circles that are shown on the the conceptual plan are outside of any of the regulated areas which is a requirement of your ordinance so there is again buildable area outside of the regulated areas and above the the elevation of the flood flood line which explains why on that first lot you've got it the buildable area correct in the lower western part of that correct pretty large lot yeah that's really the only place you could fit it in correct and is this considered a C1 waterway that what designation of Waterway are we looking at that intrudes on the Eastern side we have a a verification from the state and it shows a 50 foot repairi in zone so I don't it's not a C1 water it's not a C1 I just had uh one question regarding lot 46 not pertaining to any of the proposed Lots but adjacent to where the road is will that will either concept create a corner lot for that lot uh you're you're saying the the to the west of where the existing property that's not subject to the application but technically both would create a corner lot situation for that out parelar off tracks um property okay is there an issue there Jeff that you see or I'm sorry is there an issue there Jeff it clearly yeah potentially for that for that lot going forth they're not part of this application if they were to potentially improve on their lot they would be restricted to uh to where the placement is because of that road okay and that's under either plan right yeah that is not part of the plan but it's not an issue for that property okay okay odd answer I like giving out answers okay like to hear it from the property owner this property is owned by the two brothers that property is owned by one of the brothers okay so it's not part of this application okay the person one day it be own by someone else yeah we we still have to treat it regardless of who the property owner is as the impact to the property given our variances and ordinances but it it does not trigger a variance because it's not part of applications for this it doesn't trigger a variance in the future it could need a variance that property owner for that person because you decided to build a road here yeah but it it does not trigger it's not to be considered a variance for purposes of his application and it's not something that is a concern for this board right now with what is being proposed just considering the impact of any future owner of the property okay any other questions from the board members I have a question for Jeff do you see any reason that the conventional is a better option I mean these Lots look a little bizarre in size and shape but sorry I was asking Jeff if he sees any preference for the conventional plan versus the cluster I understand why they want to do the cluster but just looking at the drawing the lots are small they're they they look very irregular yeah for instance I mean a couple of the Lots is future improvements may be difficult or um not really conventional but as far as the township ordinances is uh stated it's it's a more viable option for a cluster subdivision and if it's compliant and that's that's the more desirable option okay I would like to point out that um Mr Thomas's report uh dated July 24th he indicates the cluster subdivision appears desirable in that it significantly reduces the length of roadway and creates a large contigous open space parel of over eight [Music] Acres this is not technically a hearing but if there's anyone from the public who would like to come up and ask any questions of Mr osuch please feel free to do so just go up to the microphone no anybody online with us this evening who has a question for Mr uch on his testimony uh I'd like to ask a question if that's okay certainly you your name and address please sure my name is Kevin Palumbo I live at 8 Meadow Brook Road um I'm just looking at at these plans and I understand the cluster as opposed to the conventional on each of those lots there seems to be a dotted Circle I wasn't exactly sure what that was entailing was that where the Improvement was intended to go because I see on proposed lot 4.01 that kind of circle kind of got squeezed between all those colorful lines that indicated water so so yes that circular dotted line is a requirement of the ordinance which is known as a lot Circle and there's specific locations that we have to provide those circles that are outside of the regulated areas to meet the ordinance requirement so while you your your points correct we we are for lack of a better term kind of fitting it outside of that area because that's what the ordinance requires okay that's what I thought it was I did just want to make sure I was seeing that correctly an excellent question so if you look at each of the five Lots right you'll see five circles and that's where in theory that's where in theory that's where the the buildable area would be that's not to say it's the only area on the property that could be built or improved oh come on up man hi I'm Bonnie Henshaw I'm 45 Sergeant Bel Road I'm gonna need you to speak louder and clearer just because they're a lot online Bonnie Henshaw on 45 Sergeant bille road so I couldn't see I can't see that picture either um you asked about how close the houses were going to be to the houses that were already in the surrounding area was that one of the questions or did I misunderstand so your I I don't think that was necessarily a question that was asked but did the the subdivision plan provides the setback requirements for both the conventional the for both the conventional and the cluster this is coming in from so on the the cluster this is just an open space lot so there would be no development here but on the individual Lots these Dash lines are the setback requirements so any proposed dwelling would have to be within that dashed area uh of the setback requirements and that's part of what we have to prove on the subdivision application is providing new setback limits that meet the requirement and that's to the property line you don't show on here where the correct existing homes are of course well proposed yeah there is one existing or two questions about existing homes on the neighboring property but it's only from our property line that we have to meet the requirements yep so I'm on flag [Music] so thank you anyone else anybody online have any questions okay and again as we explained at the beginning of this evening this is not the application there's a whole lot full work that Mr uch has to do um I'll throw it out John do we have to make a motion on this or Mr Mr gromberg I Mr gromberg I believe you're seeking the board to indicate its preference for the cluster is that correct yeah I think it would if if the board were to entertain it be a motion uh if they agree with us to um find that the cluster provision uh ordinance has been complied with and that the board prefers that version over the conventional okay that would that would be your motion again subject to subject to obviously them coming back for a formal hearing at which time the board would decide whether to approve or disapprove the cluster application I spent a lot of time looking at these plans today and I know we're always concerned about storm water and the great reduction and impervious coverage uh I think the plan it it works better than what we saw a year ago certainly so for me if you want just want to have a show of hands I would prefer the cluster approach that's where I'm coming down okay thanks for the cluster as well when I was waiting to be disproved I want it was the cluster cluster plan was yours to blow I think it's defin the way to go like you said it also looks like that would keep the house is more centrally located and further out from the rest of the neighbors yeah I appreciate the work and the diligence can you let the residents look at your back there couldn't see it before so then I'd like to make a motion that that the board having heard the presentation this evening of conventional versus cluster for this property our preference for the applicant moving forward would would be the cluster approach motion second chairman Mr Edward gettings yes Miss Robin Fatu yes Mr Scott McDade yes Miss Michelle kakiri yes Mr Dennis conanan yes Mr James Miller yes Mr Glen Sakowski yes thank you all very much com back the board on fully developed plan okay with that we are adjourned for this evening thanks everybody thank you have a good evening thank you thank you we went over oh my gosh and I the wrong road and it was like