Planning Board

MINUTES PLANNING BOARD OF THE BOROUGH OF MADISON REGULAR MEETING JUNE 5, 2018 A regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Borough of Madison was held on the 5th day of June 2018 at 7:30 P.M., in the Court Room, Hartley Dodge Memorial, 50 Kings Road, Madison, NJ. The meeting was called to order by Planning Board Chairman, Steve Tombalakian. Mr. Tombalakian requested the reading of the Public Meeting Notice. Ms. Boardman read the following statement in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act. “Let the minutes reflect that adequate notice of this meeting has been provided in the following manner: At the reorganization meeting of the Board held on January 16, 2018, the Board by Resolution adopted a schedule of meetings. On January 17, 2018, a copy of the schedule of meetings will be posted at the bulletin board at the entrance to the Hartley Dodge Memorial, sent to the Madison Eagle and the Daily Record, and filed with the Borough Clerk all in accordance with the “Open Public Meetings Act”. The following roll call was recorded: Present: Mayor Robert Conley, Astri Baillie, Peter Flemming, Steve Tombalakian, Rachel Ehrlich, Tom Lewis and George Limbach Excused: John Forte and Ann Huber Also Present: Frank Russo, Assistant Borough Engineer Susan Blickstein, Board Planner Vince Loughlin, Planning Board Attorney Frances Boardman, Board Secretary Approval of Minutes: Copies of the minutes of the May 15, 2018 regular meeting were distributed to all Board members for their review prior to this meeting. A motion to approve the regular minutes as presented was made by Mr. Lewis, seconded by Mr. Flemming. The following roll call was recorded: “Ayes” – Mr. Flemming, Ms. Ehrlich, Mr. Lewis and Mr. Limbach “Nays” – None “Absent” – Mayor Conley, Ms. Baillie and Mr. Tombalakian Comments by the Public: Mr. Tombalakian opened the floor to the public for anyone that wished to be heard on any matter not on this evening’s agenda. Seeing no one he closed that portion of the meeting. RESOLUTIONS FOR MEMORIALIZATION – None NEW BUSINESS – None OLD BUSINESS – CASE NO. P 18-003 Preliminary and Final Site Plan with Variances Fairleigh Dickinson University 285 Madison Avenue Block: 101, Lot: 6 A transcript of this evening’s meeting is being prepared by Candice Carucci of Laura Carucci, LLC Mr. Jason Tuvel, Attorney for the applicant advised the Board and members of the public present that this is a continued hearing for Fairleigh Dickinson University, 285 Madison Avenue, Block: 101, Lot: 6. Mr. Tuvel stated that his client heard the comments and suggestions that were presented at the last Board hearing and has taken them into consideration and these items will be addressed this evening. The witnesses here to testify this evening include the Landscape Architect, Mr. Sproles present at the last hearing, an FDU Representative and the Planner. 1 Planning Board June 5, 2018 Tonight’s first witness Mr. Richard Frick, Vice President of Operations at FDU was sworn in and accepted as an expert witness. Mr. Frick gave a brief overview of his duties at Fairleigh Dickinson. Mr. Frick stated that he will be overseeing the project if it is approved. Mr. Frick provided the Board with the intent of this project and how critical to the University this project is in order to compete with other Division III colleges. The proposed field will host Men and Women’s Lacrosse, Men and Women’s Soccer and Woman’s Field Hockey. The storm-water detention system proposed with this application will be a large improvement to the site. A new scoreboard is proposed with digital panels which will be a more modern scoreboard then what is presently at the site. The proposed fence and brick wall signage will re-enforce the existence of the campus along Madison Avenue. After the last hearing the University worked with the landscape architect to enhance the proposed berm area along Shadylawn Drive. Mr. Frick also informed the Board of the number of games that are anticipated for this field. During the fall there will be 20 home games for Men’s and Women’s Soccer, and 12 Field Hockey games. In the spring it is anticipated that the field will accommodate 16 Men’s and Women’s Field Hockey games. The current baseball field will have 11 home games. Mr. Frick stated that most games have a start time anywhere between 11:00am and 7:00pm. With the newly proposed track and field the school is anticipating 3 to 6 events per year. No lights are currently proposed for this application. Mr. Frick affirmed that they do not anticipate a change in the number of spectators and the current bleachers on the site will remain and be used. There is no parking changes and no change in the parking requirements for this proposal. The field will have Trash/Recycle containers which will be serviced 5 times a week. The field will be groomed on a regular basis. Mr. Flemming asked about a 7:00pm start time if there are no lights at the field. Mr. Frick asserted that there are no lights for this application. Ms. Baillie asked for clarification of an 8 lane track versus a 6 lane track for Division III schools. Mr. Frick stated that he could not answer this question. Mr. Limbach asked why there was no sprinkler system proposed for the berm. Mr. Frick stated that the Native plants being used will only need water for the first three years and FDU will handle the watering during this time. Mayor Conley asked about the parking situation for an event. Mr. Frick stated that most spectators at a game reside at the campus. If additional parking is needed there is adequate parking on their site in Florham Park and a shuttle service would be available if needed. Mr. Lewis asked if the proposed field can be rented. Mr. Frick stated that it was a possibility. Mr. Tombalakian asked if the Board or its Professionals had any further questions for Mr. Frick, seeing none he closed that portion of the hearing and opened the floor to the public. John Hicks, 61 Shadylawn Drive, Madison, questioned the position of the field relative the neighbors on Shadylawn Drive. He also answered the question raised earlier by Ms. Baillie regarding the clarification of 8 lanes versus 6 lanes for a Division III school sighting Section I, Article II that only a 6 lane track is required. He also wanted to address the adequacy of parking for a new sport and track facility. Mr. Loughlin asked if Mr. Hicks had been sworn in at the last meeting, since he had not he was sworn in at this time. Mr. Loughlin reminded Mr. Hicks that this was for questions of Mr. Frick only and that comments could be made at the end of the hearing. Mr. Hicks asked if Mr. Frick thought that there would be adequate parking for this proposed application. Mr. Frick replied that he believed that there would be more than ample parking. Virginia Hicks, 61 Shadylawn Drive, Madison, Mrs. Hicks asked Mr. Frick how during his testimony back in February 2018 he stated that parking was haphazard and pedestrian and vehicular traffic did not a suitable flow. She asked how that was going to change with this application if no parking is being added. Mr. Frick stated at this point there will be no change. Mr. Tuvel reminded the Board that this application does not have a parking variance associated with it. Allison Johansen, 63 Shadylawn Drive, Madison, was sworn in. Mrs. Johansen asked how the applicant did not consider this proposal a new field. Since Mr. Frick testified in February 2018 that no new fields were being constructed. Mr. Frick stated that Fairleigh Dickinson University is enhancing an existing field. Mrs. Johansen asked if there will be a significant increase in events at the proposed multipurpose field. Mr. Frick replied “yes”. Mrs. Johansen asked how parking would be handled if it became a problem. Mr. Frick stated that the University would start by addressing the issue programmatically, providing instructions on where to park and where not to park. 2 Planning Board June 5, 2018 Mrs. Johansen questioned the hours of practice for the new field. Mr. Frick stated that most practices would be held during the day. Mrs. Johansen asked who would be using this field for practice. Mr. Frick stated that all practices are scheduled for all fields. Mrs. Johansen asked if Fairleigh Dickinson has discussed a Mentorship with the Mayor of Madison allowing Madison athletes access to the new field. Mr. Frick stated he did not have the answer to that question. Mrs. Johansen asked if the field would be rented in the summer for camps and clinics. Mr. Frick stated that he had already said that most universities have the ability to rent their facilities. Mrs. Johansen asked if lights are being considered in this application or if there is a Phase II to include lights. Mr. Frick replied that lights are not a part of this application and a Phase II and its intention is to install lights at this field. Mr. Tuvel reminded the Board that if another application is to come before the Board in the future the Board as well as the public will get a chance to review that application and the application before the Board stands alone. Dr. Blickstein asked if there are any improvements in the current plans that are related to future lighting of the field. Mr. Frick stated that there was the intent during excavation to put conduits and pathways in for future expansion. Virginia Hicks, 63 Shadylawn Drive, Madison inquired if Mr. Frick was familiar with the parking requirements in Florham Park. Mr. Frick stated he was not. Jennifer Vasquez, 75 Shadylawn Drive, Madison inquired to the time an event could go if it had a start time of 7:00pm and there are no lights planned for this field. Mr. Frick responded that games usually last two hours. James Backman, 27 Shadylawn Drive, Madison reserved his question for the Engineer. Again Mr. Tombalakian informed the members of the public that their questions were to be directed to Mr. Frick’s testimony only. Mary Ann Vigotov, 73 Shadylawn Drive, Madison was sworn in. She inquired about off-site parking and the enforcement of parking. Mr. Tombalakian told Mrs. Vigotov that this was not really a question for this witness. Dr. Blickstein informed Mrs. Vigotov that the Planner for FDU would testify to parking in greater detail and she would have an opportunity to ask that professional how these issues have been handled in other communities. Jim Van Dyke, 65 Shadylawn Drive, Madison inquired if any other enhancements to the University were considered other than the enhancements to this field. Mr. Frick stated that the University has a need for more residential housing, a chemistry-biology lab and upgrades to the athletic fields. Since the field is already there and a permitted use the University felt that upgrading the field made the most sense. Debra Haverson, 62 Shadylawn Drive, Madison, asked if the University had any plans for generators or temporary lighting at this field prior to Phase II. Dr. Blickstein stated that the only way a recreation field can be lit is by following the Borough’s lighting codes and standards, which would be impossible to do with any temporary lighting. Alison Johansen, 63 Shadylawn Drive, Madison inquired as to the time line of construction for this project. Mr. Frick stated that presuming they received the approvals for the Planning Board they would like to have construction completed by the end of December. Mayor Conley asked how long the length of construction would be regardless of when it’s started. Mr. Frick stated that they are anticipating five months of construction. Mr. Tombalakian asked if there were any further questions of Mr. Frick, seeing none he closed that portion of the hearing. A short recess was taken at 8:37 pm and resumed at 8:49 pm with all Board members present. Mr. Tuvel called his next witness, Mr. Steven Sproles, Landscape Architect, who was previously sworn at the last meeting of May 15, 2018. 3 Planning Board June 5, 2018 Mr. Sproles stated that FDU had listened to the Planning Board and Public comments made at the last meeting regarding the berm. The following exhibits were marked into evidence: Exhibit A-14: Color Rendering Plant Material, dated June 5, 2018 Exhibit A-15: Neighboring Views of Track Exhibit A-16: Additional Neighboring Views of Track Exhibit A-17: Madison Avenue Improvements Exhibit A-18: Illustrative Sections – Section #1 Southern Property Line Mr. Sproles commented that based upon the feedback, comments and suggestions from the Board the buffer had been significantly enhanced. Additional deciduous trees and shrubs have been added to the plan as well as additional varieties of material. Mr. Sproles further stated that the additional plantings will shield the view from the neighboring properties. Mr. Tuvel indicated that Mr. Frick had been asked about irrigation to these plantings, he asked Mr. Sproles to comment on the irrigation that would be in place for these plantings. Mr. Sproles stated that once installed there would be a three-year guarantee on the watering. Water will be provided at the site, but also with the native and naturalized plant material being used this should not be an issue. Mr. Sproles affirmed that the buffer had been modified in a positive way to create a better separation between the adjacent neighbors and the purposed athletic fields. The purposed signage was discussed next. The purposed sign has been moved just under 24 feet further down Madison Avenue as shown on Exhibit A-17. Also additional plant material has been added to reduce and minimize views into the new sports facility. Mr. Sproles had no further testimony. Mr. Tombalakian inquired in the event of a sustained drought after the three year sustainability period how will the plantings get water if there is no fixed irrigation system. Mr. Sproles replied that it is in the best interest of FDU for the plantings to survive to avoid replacement costs, so supplemental watering will occur in the event of a sustained drought. Mr. Tombalakian asked the Board and its Professionals if they had questions for Mr. Sproles. Mr. Limbach asked again wouldn’t it make sense and cost effective to install an irrigation system. Mr. Sproles stated that they have done projects like this before without an irrigation system. Mr. Limbach asked for a landscape plan that was readable. He stated that the landscaping is very important. Dr. Blickstein asked if the proposed sign could be dropped to 8 feet, and if any other sign concepts were considered. Mr. Sproles stated that they were trying to work with the historic entry gate further down Madison Avenue and that no other concepts had been considered. Mr. Limbach inquired as to the water pressure for proposed bathrooms. Mr. Tuvel stated that would be a consideration in a future application. Mr. Limbach asked if the applicant would consider moving the berm, Mr. Sproles stated at this point the applicant would like to keep the track where it is. Ms. Baillie further noted that the applicant should consider an irrigation system in an effort to make the plantings work. An eight lane track versus a six lane track was also questioned. Mr. Sproles affirmed that if more lanes are created an event can be accomplished in a shorter period of time. He also stated that eight lane tracks are standard at the other institutions in the FDU conference. Mr. Tombalakian asked the Board if they had any further questions of Mr. Sproles, seeing none he opened the floor for questions from the public. Virginia Hicks, 61 Shadylawn Drive, Madison inquired if anyone from FDU has come out and stood on the Shadylawn properties. Mrs. Hicks showed photos to the Board and Professionals that were entered into evidence. Exhibit H-2: Rear yard photos taken from 63 Shadylawn Drive through 73 Shadylawn Drive Exhibit H-3: Madison Municipal Recreation Complex Netting Mrs. Hicks asked how the University plans on buffering sound and sights from the residential houses. Considerable discussion ensued with the landscape architect, Mr. Sproles and Mrs. Hicks. 4 Planning Board June 5, 2018 Alison Johansen, 63 Shadylawn Drive, Madison asked if changing or altering the athletic field requires a 50 foot setback wouldn’t landscaping be considered an alteration which would require an additional 50 foot setback. Mr. Tuvel stated that in his opinion it is absolutely not. She also asked if the applicant had considered leaving the natural vegetation. Virginia Hicks, 61 Shadylawn Drive, Madison asked Mr. Sproles if any consideration of the slope of the yards on Shadylawn had been taken into consideration when building the proposed berm. Mr. Sproles answered no. Debra Dias, 24 Shadylawn Drive, Madison asked Mr. Sproles to again state his qualifications. Mr. Sproles stated that his qualifications were provided at the last meeting but again restated them for Mrs. Dias. Curtis Merryweather, 71 Shadylawn Drive, Madison inquired to the stakes that were put at the FDU property. Mr. Sproles stated that in anticipation to the meeting with the neighbors that was held on Sunday, June 3, 2018 the University put stakes in the ground to represent the elevations of the mound and its approximate location when the construction is complete. Jennifer Vasquaz, 75 Shadylawn Drive, Madison asked how the location of the track was chosen. Mr. Tuvel stated that this topic was discussed at the last meeting by the Civil Engineer. Mr. Tuvel affirmed that many factors were taken into consideration. Alison Johansen, 63 Shadylawn Drive, Madison inquired on to why thriving invasive tree species, which are thriving along the backyards of Shadylawn need to be removed but the same thriving tree species on the left side of the property will be protected. Mr. Sproles affirmed that an assessment of the site was performed by Davey’s Landscaping which stated that over 50% of the plants that are being removed as part of this project are either in poor condition, invasive or dead material. Mrs. Johansen then recited a section from Chapter 195-24.7. Mrs. Johansen made a point of stating that existing vegetation within the buffer should be preserved. Mr. Sproles reiterated there cannot be grading over top of the roots of the existing plant materials without having a detrimental effect. Mary Ann Vigotov, 73 Shadylawn Drive, Madison asked about the elevation of the berm from start to finish. Mr. Sproles stated that the top of the berm is consistent but does slope down on either end. Mr. Tombalakian acknowledged that the Board and the applicant were hearing a lot of questions from the public finding the berm and the landscaping objectionable. Mr. Tombalakian asked Mr. Tuvel if screening is required under the Borough Ordinance. Mr. Tuvel replied that all that is required is a minimum 50-foot setback. Mr. Tuvel stated that the applicant is trying to do the best they can in order to work with the neighborhood and the Board on this issue. Ms. Ehrlich stated that perhaps the applicant could consider the best year round screening, so perhaps keeping the existing deciduous trees would be more favorable than a berm. Mr. Tombalakian again asked Mr. Tuvel if the buffering and screening being discussed is a requirement. Mr. Tuvel stated that it is not required and it is a substantial investment and that the goal of the applicant was to make sure that the screening for the neighbors was the best that it could be. A frank exchange of views took place with the Board members regarding working with what is presently at the site. Mr. Flemming asked if the report from Davey’s Landscaping was going to be submitted. Dr. Blickstein asked if the applicant was willing to share that report with the Board. Mr. Tuvel stated that he would need to speak with his client before answering this question. Substantial discussion regarding the berm and the plantings ensued. The neighbors provided their input on this subject so that the applicant could have some guidance. Mr. Tuvel stated that the personal preference of each neighbor/resident of Shadylawn Drive could not be achieved. The applicant felt that by providing the screening as proposed it would be a benefit to the neighbors. Mr. Tuvel acknowledged that the applicant is not going to address every single resident’s issue along Shadylawn Drive. The applicant has shown that the ball stopper netting and the scoreboard will not be visible to the residents by the advanced landscape plan that was submitted this evening. Mr. Tuvel again stated that the intent of the visuals and the exhibits and the landscaping plan was so there wouldn’t be any visuals of the scoreboard and the netting to the residents. Mr. Tuvel also confirmed to the Board and the public that in terms of the uses permitted on this property this proposed track and field are the least intense. Noise was addressed briefly and Mr. Tombalakian stated that FDU would have to comply with the State noise laws. A short recess was taken at 10:15 pm prior to discussing the next steps with this application. The meeting resumed at 10:20 pm with all members present. Dr. Blickstein informed Mr. Tuvel that 10 days prior to the next hearing a more detailed, refined version of the proposed berm/planting area would need to be submitted 5 Planning Board June 5, 2018 The Board would also like to see a clearer and detailed tabulation and illustration of the trees and vegetation that would be removed. Mr. Russo also stated that the Davey’s Landscaping report should be submitted. It was determined that at the next meeting Mr. Sproles will return for limited testimony on the landscape architecture and a Professional Planner will also be at the meeting to provide testimony. Ms. Boardman informed Mr. Tuvel that all revised plans would need to be submitted to the Board office no later than Friday, June 8, 2018 Mr. Tombalakian announced that the application of Fairleigh Dickinson University was being carried without further notice to the June 19, 2018 meeting of the Planning Board. PLANNING DISCUSSION –  Outdoor Dining  Residential Infill Development It was determined that these topics will be placed on the June 19, 2018 Planning Board agenda for continued discussion. CORRESPONDENCE –  Margaret Gilhooley Mr. Russo gave a brief explanation in regards to the correspondence that was received from Mrs. Gilhooley. Resolution to Permit Executive Discussion of Subjects in Closed Session: BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Board of the Borough of Madison, County of Morris, State of New Jersey, as follows: That pursuant to Sections 7 & 8 of the “Open Public Meetings Act”, NJSA 10:4-12 and 4-13, the following subjects are discussed in closed session. Affordable Housing Litigation Master Plan Proposal/Contract BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that those portions of the discussion not subject to attorney-client privilege may be disclosed to the public upon completion. A motion was made by Ms. Baillie for the Board to go into an Executive Session at 10:35pm. All members were present during the executive session. Since there was no further business to come before the Board in executive session, Mr. Tombalakian made a motion to adjourn the executive meeting at 10:43P.M.; seconded by Ms. Baillie. A voice vote of “aye” was heard by all members present and carried. The Planning Board meeting reconvened with all members present at 10:44pm in the Court Room of the Hartley Dodge Memorial Building. Since there was no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Tombalakian asked for a motion to adjourn the regular meeting at 10: 45pm.; motion was made by Mr. Lewis, seconded by Mayor Conley. A voice vote of “aye” was heard by all members present and carried. Respectfully submitted, Frances Boardman Board Secretary 6