|
MONTVILLE TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD
7:30 PM Start
195 Changebridge
Road, Montville Municipal Building
MINUTES OF JANUARY 25, 2007
ROLL CALL
Mr. Rosellini - absent Mr.
Karkowsky - present
Ms. Kull - present Mr.
Daughtry - present
Ms. Nielson - present Mr. Visco – present
Mr. Lipari - absent Mr.
Lewis - present
Mr. Hines - present Mr.
Witty (alt#2) – present
Mr.
Speciale (alt#1) - present
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Stated
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
Stated
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
Deborah Nielson: discussed the request from Township
Committee for a joint meeting w/Planning Board members to have board’s
professional present an overview of Highlands legislation, Impact and COAH
issues. Date established was 2-22-07
with an early meeting start of 6:30PM.
Linda White was requested to invite the Board of Adjustment,
Environmental Commission, Housing, EDC and any other agencies that may find
these subjects of interest.
Gary
Lewis: do we want to have the Highlands
staff available at this time? Deborah
Nielson: at this time, she thinks the
planning board staff should present their overview and asked that the board’s
professional present a synopsis of what they intend to present prior to this
special meeting. These are general issues facing our community. We should also put this on our website to
let residents know.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
None
PLANNING BUSINESS
Rezoning Hearing re: Hook Mountain Associates – Old Bloomfield Avenue – Carried from 9-28-06 & 11-06-06 &
1-25-07
Rescheduled to: 2-8-07 – applicant’s request
Rezoning - GI Auto site -carried from 9-14-06 and agenda of 10-26-06 & agenda of 11-20-06
Reschedule to: 3-8-07 – applicant’s request
Wellhead
Protection Ordinance – Recommendation from Environmental Commission
Stan
Omland, PE indicated that there is some changes that he feels needs to be made
to this revision. He talked with
Charles Perry on these issues in a conference call yesterday. Linda White indicated that she would put
this back on the agenda for 2-8-07.
$1,000 should be designated to deal with finalizing this at Stan Omland,
PE’s level. This amount was not
included into the budget since it was thought that Mr. Perry would have all
recommendations offered by Adrian Humbert, AICP and Stan Omland, PE
incorporated. Attorney review is also
needed to make sure that there it is in compliance and not in conflict with
zoning/ordinances. Ms. White indicated
that the Township Attorney will have to review this and since it was thought
this project was complete, would also have to develop it into ordinance
form. Mr. Lewis indicated he would want
the Board of Health’s report since this enforcement is under their level. Mr. Omland voiced concerns as to how it
would work when there was a development application involved. Required Reports, per Linda White, on
development applications involve Board of Health. Deborah Nielson: wants to
have this done since Environmental Commission wants it introduced.
Stan
Omland, PE: he would take the document
draft sent by Charles Perry, make and coordinate critical water resources
ordinance comments as well as recent stormwater management report just recently
adopted into his final draft. He will
take the document and prepare it for ordinance development. Motion:
recommended we allocate $1,000 for Wellhead protection ordinance under
OE for Stan Omland’s services. Mrs.
White will encumber in budget and advise Township Committee. Roll call vote: unanimous
Reschedule
to: 2-8-07
Amendment to R27D Zone – Child Care Use
Linda White summarized that this type of
activity is a not a permitted conditional use and that although we were hoping
to address changes along the Changebridge corridor, since the traffic study at
the county is still outstanding, and this change was something that years prior
Adrian Humbert, AICP felt would not be a problem considering as permitted, she
asked if the Planning Board would have a problem if we looked at these issues
outside an entire corridor review.
Rezoning request has escrow – Motion to authorize Joe Burgis to proceed to
review this made by Deborah Nielson, Seconded by: John Visco
Roll call vote: unanimous
Reschedule
to: 2-8-07
Towaco Center – Scheduling Discussions – Tentative scheduling set for first meeting
in March – 3/8/07
Height Ordinance
Linda White summarized. In the past we had a footnote that called
for one elevation to be no ‘higher’ than 40’.
This footnote still exists in the industrial zone, but has been
eliminated from the residential zones.
This happened sometime in l995.
She indicated she asked Mr. Burgis to review this ordinance again since
there have been some concerns about certain homes having excessive heights on
some elevations and still meeting grades.
Deborah Nielson: get estimate from planner. He indicated he would agree to cap
this review at 6 hours. Gary Lewis:
suggested this could be accomplished by changing this code to measure
the height at the highest point of the roof from grade plane and then consider
no more than 5’ any point higher than that elevation. There is some draft comments
already offered that was sent to Joe Burgis.
Motion to appropriate 6 hours $ 120 for this task made by: Deborah
Nielson, second Larry Hines – requested review report for 2-8-07 Roll call
vote: unanimous
Rezoning Discussion – Rt. 46/All Brand
Linda White summarized indicating that this
area is an area we had looked at for rezoning in the future. She indicated that she had spoke with the
owners hoping to meet with them on possible redevelopment with no success. Mr. Burgis to present a cost proposal for
this rezoning review. Reschedule for
2/8/07
Development of
Ordinance Regulating
placement of Detention Basins on individual lots
Stan Omland, PE
summarized indicating that there are several towns that do have ordinances and
that we should consider some policy decisions and controls that we would like
to see. Will need cost proposal from
Stan Omland, PE in order to proceed.
Reschedule for 2-8-07
Highlands –
Extension Resolution - reschedule in future in view of Highlands
granting 90 extension at this time.
WAIVERS
None
RESOLUTIONS
None
CORRESPONDENCE
Letter re: Rt. 80 Noise Barriers - Linda White indicated that she received
this letter from the Township Administrator and thought Planning Board should
be made aware. Mr. Daughtry summarized
the DOT meeting as it relates to this issue.
There are three locations in the immediate area, and those immediately
affecting is the property along Rt. 80 and Maple Avenue. As noted, there is an application in this
area for occupancy for an existing building for Hook Mtn. generating
noise. State is proposing this, but
their process takes several years, and there is no funding. There is 300-400’ along Maple in this area. There is a public meeting that is taking
place in Parsippany. No date set. The earliest construction date would be
2011. When additional information
becomes available, will pass along.
Linda White indicated information was faxed to Winebow. No additional information has been received
from Winebow since last meeting. They
will be proposing a 300’ long 15’ sound wall along Maple. They were hoping to be heard on Feb. 8th
agenda, but Linda White reminded board that we have other Carried Over hearings
promised due to their matters being taken off prior agenda schedules without
hearings due to time constraints. She
will put them if they have their notices and paperwork in order on but voiced
this concern with 2/8/07 schedule previously set.
MINUTES
Minutes of 1-11-07
– Roll call vote: Ladis Karkowsky, Marie Kull, Deborah Nielson, John Visco,
Gary Lewis, John Rosellini, Russ Lipari, Art Daughtry, Larry Hines, Anthony
Speciale and Leigh Witty
Subcommittee
minutes of 1-18-07 – Ladis Karkowsky, Deborah Nielson, John Rosellini, John
Visco
Motion made
by: Marie Kull
Seconded by: Tony Speciale
INVOICES
Omland Engineering – O/E for: $690; Trust for: $90; $780, $60, $360,
$150, $1,350
Adrian Humbert Assoc. – Trust for: $336
Johnson, Murphy – Trust for: $320
Motion made by:
John Visco
Seconded by: Marie
Kull
Roll call vote:
Unanimous
LOI/DEP NOTIFICATIONS
None
OLD BUSINESS
PSPP/F04-11 - GIANCATERINO, PAUL - Rt. 202/287 – B: 55, L: 1 – office
building - Notice acceptable – Carried from: 1-12-06 - Eligible: Ladis Karkowsky, John Visco, Mr. Rosellini,
Marie Kull, Deborah Nielson, Russ Lipari, Jim Glick, Gary Lewis, Alt#2 Leigh
Witty, Tony Speciale Tony Speciale $0 escrow deposit ACT BY: 3-08-07
Gary Lewis:
note on the agenda for Giancanterino indicates 0 funds on deposit. Michael Carroll, Esq.: explained about delaying applicant due to
monies not on deposit, and board will deal with it at the time of hearing,
secretary cannot take off schedule for this deficiency.
Rescheduled to: 3-8-07 w/notice - Applicant’s request
PMSP/F00-25-06-03 – BRIANNA ESTATES – Block: 125.05,
L: 13/14 – Horseneck Road – Preliminary and Final Major Subdivision – 6 lots
and detention lot - Notice Acceptable & Carried from hearing of
11-06-06. Eligible voters: Ladis Karkowsky, Marie Kull, Deborah
Nielson, John Visco, Gary Lewis, Jim Glick, Larry Hines, Leigh Witty, Art
Daughtry, Tony Speciale ACT BY: 3/09/07
Rescheduled to: 3-8-07 w/notice - Applicant’s request
NEW BUSINESS
PSPP/F98-13-06-17 – RAIA - 5 Changebridge
Rd. - B: 59.02, L: 27 – amended site plan w/ variance signage – Carried from
1-11-07 w/notice ACT
BY: 3/17/07
Tom DiPiazzi, Esq. – thanked the board for being extremely courteous to
the applicant, and understands sign applications are always sensitive. Tried to present the sign application in a
way where it would help customers and help applicant, and will agree it won’t
negatively impact viewscape. Will try
to prove this. Burgis report very
thorough, and will be used as guide.
Board professionals sworn by
Michael Carroll, Esq. The following
applicant’s professionals were also sworn by Michael Carroll, Esq.
William Paterson, Director of Real Estate
Kim Patton, Regional Manager
Paul Bauman, PE/PP – serving as planner
Ms. Patton: history given. Opened November 95. Operators receive comments and went to
corporate. Customers indicated that
they live in neighborhood, or travel past this area, and don’t realize that it
is self-storage since you can’t see the self-storage doors on the sides.
A1 dated 1-25-07 – Valpak coupon for RAIA –
marked into evidence
Testified that she feels lack of signage is affecting business,
explaining why, also noting there are 2 UHauls on this site and very often no
one knows this either. They use the
Valpak coupons for advertising. She
explored occupancy rates, noting right now there is 82% occupancy, and they
like to shoot for 93% occupancy.
The present sign has a logo with RAIA in large block letters in teal
with self-storage in smaller letters.
The color of the sign is the teal.
Ladis Karkowsky: the town worked
hard on the color theme. This
application took a long time with multiple variances and township bent over
backwards. Deborah Nielson: why not make the lettering larger for
self-storage.
Mr. DiPiazzi: there is a
problem with landscaping in front of the sign.
Coming off of Rt. 202, you can’t see the building and/or the sign at the
driveway. Linda White: landscaping was a requirement of the
Planning Board. You can’t remove but
you can maintain.
Marie Kull: if you are at 82%
occupancy, do you think new signage would increase occupancy to 93%. How would sign help? Ms. Patton:
When people come in, they knew this was self-storage. When first built, there was no
competition. Other site developed in
the area after this, and feels these have taken business away, especially
Parsippany. People driving by they see
self-storage; they remember this when they need this. Industry targets 93%.
Ms. Patton: this was fastest
rental facility, noting that they were up to 94% in March 2005. Deborah Nielson: was it just last year that it dropped and was it more in line
with the development of other similar facilities?
Mr. Burgis: Principal issue
appears to be getting message out that there is self-storage at this site. Asked of Mr. DiPiazzi: it appears owner indicates he needs to have
new sign flush with building then how would this location address visibility
differently?
Mr. Hines: percentage of
business from Montville Township? Ms.
Patton: around 25% total of Montville
residents. Mr. Hines: could drop in marketing be the marketing
program? Ms. Patton: no, have been consistent with
marketing. Only thing changed is
Independent News. Mr. Hines: any direct mail? Ms. Patton: only with
Neighbor News.
Mr. Daughtry: can’t understand
how a sign regardless of illumination that is perpendicular is going to change
anyone coming off Rt. 202 to see this structure regardless of type of sign
since it isn’t facing corridor.
Landscaping may need to be pruned but the landscaping on site is what
the Board required. Ms. Patton: when people drive by, first thing you look
at is the building.
Ms. Nielson: consider checking
with publisher of newspapers, but thinks these newspapers only reaches 60% of
the township residents noting the Montville Messenger reaches all residents.
Gary Lewis: need to have some
sense from applicant as to ‘branding’ ‘new business generation, and or
‘marketing’. Heard mentioned in same
context. Want to see this focused more.
Marie Kull: any customers from
Lincoln Park? Ms. Patton: yes, and they know self-storage are
here. Some come from yellow pages,
acknowledging they don’t get as much drive-by from other facilities.
Ladis Karkowsky: this seems
more like a marketing issue. Deborah
Nielson: in 2005, marketing was working
at some point in time, and customers know they are there.
Larry Hines: what is percentage
of business from drive-by facilities?
Ms. Patton: 30%.
Mahwah location is 50%.
Deborah Nielson: supplemental
signages in windows are a violation.
Bill Paterson: worked for 19
years in charge of property management and part of the process before this
board helping to design and construct building in Montville.
Designed sign was created as a partnership but feels they now need the
sign to ‘jump’ out. Other signs at
other locations are red/black, and would like to have this color on this
building to the sign face here and requested it to be backlit.
Ladis Karkowsky: board is not
in favor at that time. Linda White
summarized prior review process and colors and the amount of hearings
coordinated between this site and site across the street as it relates to the
green/color theme. Landscaping can be
maintained. Mr. Paterson indicated that
the trees constructed are ornamentals.
Following exhibits marked in:
A2 dated 1-25-07 – facing building from Changebridge
Road dated today
A3 dated 1-25-07 – this development across from
existing facility with project at closest building – tennis court
A4 dated 1-25-07 is across street from Changebridge at Montville at
their parallel in the middle of Changebridge Road.
A5 dated on Changebridge looking north – south of the
site dated 1-25-07
A6 dated 1-25-07 looking south from Changebridge about
150 yards from northern property line.
Tract 2
Marie Kull: going on left on
rt. 202, she sees no trouble seeing sign.
Mr. Patterson: tried to project
viewscape. Mr. Patterson: understand comments on making left, but
making right on 202, by the time you accelerate, you are on top of the
building.
Mr. Burgis: one issue is that
of identification. If they want to
identification, they can flip the sign and have RAIA smaller and outside
storage larger and that change would address this issue.
The other issue is the line of sight issue for the sign to enhance the
signage, and this is a matter of trimming the landscaping on the property. Have to show there are physical features on
inability to meet code, and planner has to address this issue as part of his
testimony. He must approach this in
testimony in view of bulk variances, there most be public benefit, and must
address negative criteria.
Opened to public…
Steve Samitt, Treasurer of Changebridge at Montville: people do not know it is self-storage, but
everyone knows RAIA and most all give directions that say when you pass RAIA’s,
you pass this condo development, noting he feels this sign is visible. Mr. Sammit - sworn by Michael Carroll, Esq.
Traffic past building, if you look at building, isn’t it true there is
an extra lane near RAIA and street is larger there? There is additional room there.
Height of the sign was agreed upon at this time. Don’t think this sign should be raised.
Discussed exhibits presented as to where they were taken and why. Noting:
Photos and elevation – some from parking lot from tennis court. Another one from basis to the left in
direction facing hill and was dead center.
These are two lowest points in condominium, and this can be seen as a
good part. Deborah Nielson: are you representing association. Mr. Sammit: no
Steven Etzi, President of Changebridge Montville Association. – Question on notice addressed by Linda
White. Notice is in order. Again indicated that they use RAIA as a
point for direction. Would like to
confirm the location of photo. Came in
Kayhart and is the lowest point in the development. There are opportunities that new signage can be proposed and
would like to see some ideas.
VP of Changebridge: Don’t feel
it is needed. Should work with sign you have and should remove paper signs in
window that are in violation. Ms. White
summarized the various variances granted to this site noting concessions made
by applicant at that time, as well as board.
Mr. Patterson: They are
requesting that the board allows them their logo colors noting that they want
black with red and illuminated signage.
Deborah Nielson: feels all
testimony from prior approval document should be copied and given to board
members since she feels the original approval documents would give information
to the members to help them in deciding this request.
Mr. Karkowsky indicated he felt we should look for a consensus of the
board on colors. General discussion
ensued. Mr. Daughtry indicated he wanted clarification since it appears that
according to the sign ordinance, there are certain allowances for colors. Applicant asked for a five-minute
recess. Gary Lewis: indicated that he is not sold on the
branding issue, but is not unsympathetic for people traveling, and not seeing
site: have they considered entrance
signs near driveway, and would prefer a safety related sign to serve at
entrance to slow down. Is not convinced
on marketing/branding
5 minute Recess
Tony Speciale: asked
homeowner’s association if they had a problem with another sign and/or the
colors if it were red and black. Mr.
Karkowsky indicated that the Board has approved this sign theme from prior
approval and that the Board would address this color theme as part of their
deliberations. Mrs. White summarized
the development of the adjacent Exxon property.
Applicant indicated that there were good suggestions and indicated that
they thought that perhaps new mushroom lighting for egress and ingress may
work, along with trimming trees and changing the lettering to make somewhat
larger under ordinance vs requesting it a variance. They would also like to outline their lettering with black and
darkening teal and switch position and enlarge existing letters across façade
per code requirements. Planning Board
would like to see these revisions. It
was decided to carry this to the March 8th meeting, and applicant
advised to get in these revisions no less than ten days prior to meeting,
asking for more than that as courtesy to condo association.
Motion made by: Deborah Nielson
Seconded by: Gary Lewis
Roll call vote: unanimous
Sworn by Michael Carroll, Esq.
– Bob Levchik, 9 Century Court, Garden State Parkway comes
northbound. If you are traveling
northbound, you can see it clear, especially at 4 to 6. Work at high school, and get into
conversations about approach, and as Mr. Sammit said, when described, people
indicate where and this place is used for locating. Appreciative of the board for the appearance of this building,
but take issue with Mr. Sammit as far as the good neighbor. There is a problem with alarm system, and solution
is to tell their central station not to report alarms to the police dept. Have gone off many times, and it is after
midnight. Does not feel they are a good
neighbor. The issue of the color of the
sign, the board did a great job with Commerce Bank, and this is not a normal
bank so know what the image is. Did a
great job in encouraging building the building shown. There business is terrific.
By changing this sign, they have not reached occupancy that they would
like to have so their solution is to brighten the area. Fear is that we commercialize it. Cannot see facility from unit. Do not want to commercialize the area. Ladis Karkowsky: have looked at this.
Appreciate that the prior colors/testimony should be established. Reason they are not red/black is due to this
board. Application rescheduled to March
8th
Motion to adjourn unanimously in a motion by
Gary Lewis, Seconded by: Deborah Nielson
Respectfully
submitted,
Linda M. White
|
