SEPTEMBER 19, 2006

A regularly scheduled meeting of the Wantage Township Land Use Board was held on Tuesday, September 26, 2006 at the Wantage Township Municipal Building. The meeting was held in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, Public Laws 1975, Chapter 231. It was properly advertised and noticed to the public.

ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Mssrs. Space, Slate, DeBoer, Bono, Hough, Cecchini, Grau. Mmes. Kanapinski, Gill, Mylecraine, Attorney Glenn Kienz, Engineer Harold Pellow.
EXCUSED: Mr. Smith.
In the absence of Chairman James Smith, Mr. Slate conducted the meeting.

L-33-2005 CJS INVESTMENTS, INC.
Attorney Dennis Collins appeared before the Board on behalf of the applicant.

Mr. Kienz stated that following the testimony already given by the applicant, the public portion on this application would be on the agenda tonight. He addressed the public and asked that they be brief and organized when giving their testimony. He noted some members of the public dressed in uniform and he suggested to the Board that, as a courtesy to them, they give their testimony first.

Mr. Doug Ricker, 91 Beemer Road, objected to this application being heard. He stated that he was on the township committee in 1985 when the agreement was made to zone the pieces of property ML.

Attorney Kienz indicated that the objection was noted on the record and if someone objected to the Board having jurisdiction on this application then they could so say.

Attorney Dave Rothstein from the Office of the Solicitor Department of the Interior, licensed in MA, was present with Edward Henry, Refuge Manager, to speak on behalf of the Walkill River National Wildlife Refuge. Mr. Rothstein indicated that he and Mr. Henry were authorized to speak on behalf of the Federal Government by Anthony Conte, Regional Solicitor of the Northeast Region and Rick Bennett, Deputy Regional Director for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Mr. Henry read a statement outlining their objections, as noted in prior testimony offered at past hearings on this application. A written version of this testimony was marked as Exhibit C1 and was entered into evidence.

Mr. Collins noted that an agency of the federal government was present for reasons he could not understand, as the federal government itself had chosen not to review this application.
Both attorneys understood that the adjoining property owner has a right to speak. However, Mr. Kienz stated that the Board would give as much or as little weight to their testimony as they felt they should.

Rob Decker, 54 L. Unionville Road, stated that this section of Wantage has been in a preservation mode for the last 15 yrs. He stated that state planning should encourage location and discourage development where it could disturb natural resources. He added that state planning should reduce sprawl and this development would destroy an area that is in a conservation mode. He asked the Board to reconsider and vote “no”. Marie Springer of Vernon had issues with water and ground absorption. Christine Feoranzo had comments on smart growth and COAH standards. John Stebal, 8 Judge Beach Road, agreed with Mr. Ricker about the legality of the application. He asked if Mayor Dunn at the time excused himself from the vote in 1988 when the issue was going on. Mr. Stebal expressed concerns with water and with the septic capacity. Art Jacobs, 38 Beemer Church Road, agreed with prior testimony from community. Mr. Jacobs expressed concerns with children and health, welfare and safety.

Craig Van Wyk said he likes open fields, he referred to the environmental expert’s testimony, he is concerned with cars, he referred to Mr. Litwornia’s testimony, he stated that Mr. Collins repeatedly said that it is the township’s responsibility. to improve the roads and that it has taken them 20 yrs to do so. John Baratta, 79 L. Unionville Road, said his residence is located approximately 200 ft. away from the proposed development. He is concerned with water resources and an overtaxed school system. Robert Kohle asked if he could read a statement from a resident who could not be here tonight. Mr. Kienz explained that it was not possible since the person was not present to be cross examined. Mr. Kohle agreed with Mr. Ricker and Mr. Stebal about the legality of this application. He expressed his concerns with traffic issues and the findings by the traffic report. He stated that the environmental expert was not questioned by the Board and the public. He made mention of the applicant’s attorney having issues with the testimony from the representative for the wildlife refuge. Mr. Kohle stated that he is concerned about the effects on the wildlife refuge. He read a letter regarding water testing on his property and he stated that his letter and some of the neighbors’ letters were not answered by Suburban Consulting. He requested that the developer be required to put up a bond for the well water, in case the community runs out of water.

The meeting was closed to public. The Board took a five-minute recess.

Attorney Collins empathized with the public’s concerns and addressed the Board regarding their difficult task in following ordinances that others write. He stated that he was not going to ask the Board to vote at this meeting. He stated that the reason for his request was that he would like to sum up the comments in writing following the articulate testimony of the public. Mr. Collins asked to have the application carried to the next meeting.

Attorney Kienz stated that it was the applicant’s prerogative to grant extension and if the agenda on the next meeting allowed it and if the Board agreed to carry it could be done.
The majority of the Board members agreed that they were ready to vote.

Mr. Collins in his closing statement said that this was an application process that started in August of 2005. He stressed the fact that there were no variances, no waivers being requested. He stated that the applicant stands ready to comply with reasonable requests. He stated to the Board that the members are not required to vote with their hearts as someone suggested. He said that they, however, are required to vote under the law. He added that zoning was imposed by people other than the Board members and other than counsel present tonight. Mr. Collins stated that the applicant discussed environmental impacts consistent with the EIS standards and that all the requirements have been met by the applicant. He added that water and sewer has nothing to do with this Board and that, that is the reason why this application is only for preliminary approval. He stated that all the issues raised by the community are all the things that the Board has no input on: state planning, applicability of an ordinance that is consistent with the COAH plan. He referred to the “lack of recreation” that the residents brought up, and he stated that the applicant had met, if applicable, any local ordinances as it relates to the provision of on-site recreation. He stated that the members of the Board cannot vote with their hearts, as a resident suggested. He stated that they have to vote based upon the law and based upon what the applicant has proven. He ended by saying that for some reason it appears that the Wildlife Refuge and the applicant not responding to it has somehow made this application deficient. He stressed the fact that the stormwater plan complies with the RSIS.

Ms. Mylecraine felt that environmental standards are in conflict with smart growth. Mr. DeBoer expressed concern with water discharge, well water, road safety, lack of recreation. Mr. Hough stated that he was worried with safety on the roads. Mr. Hough made a motion seconded by Mr. DeBoer to deny approval on this application.

ROLL CALL VOTE:
THOSE IN FAVOR: Space, Slate, DeBoer, Bono, Hough, Cecchini, Kanapinski, Mylecraine, Grau.
THOSE OPPOSED: None. Motion carried.

ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Cecchini made a motion seconded by Mr. Bono to adjourn this meeting. All agreed. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Stella Salazar
Assistant Secretary