ROBBINSVILLE TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD MEETING
ROBBINSVILLE TOWNSHIP, MERCER COUNTY, NJ
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2012 7:30 P.M. – SENIOR CENTER
MINUTES
Present:
Chairman Cettina, Mr. Barker, Mr. Kolibas, Mrs. Van Nest, Ms. Breyta,
Mrs. Goodwine, Mr. Witt, Mr. Silvestrov, Mr. Galluccio
Absent:
Mr. Harris
Also Present: Mr. McGough, Township Engineer; Mr. Dasti, Esq., Board Attorney;
Ms. Post, Board Secretary
ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Cettina. Roll call for the above members was called.
SUNSHINE STATEMENT
Chairman Cettina read the following statement: “Adequate notice of this meeting has been
provided as required under Chapter 231 P.L. 1975 specifying the time and place with such notice as
being sent to the Times of Trenton, Messenger Press and the Trentonian and posted on the Municipal
Building Public Notice Meeting Bulletin Board.”
FLAG SALUTE
The Board members present led the public in the salute to the flag.
CORRESPONDENCE
Chairman Cettina said there was a letter from NJDEP, which stated that the NJ Green Community
Achievement Awards recognized individuals, or groups whose outstanding efforts have greatly
contributed to the field of urban and community forestry. These awards are co-sponsored by the NJ
Forest Service, NJ Community Forestry Council, and the NJ Tree Foundation. Our community was
selected as a recipient for the 2012 Green Community Achievement Award under the local/county
government category. Mr. Dasti thought this should be posted on the town’s website. The award is
for the excellence of Robbinsville’s project work within the “NO Net Loss” tree planting initiative.
Mr. McGough mentioned that the award will be presented this Saturday evening. He and Mr.
Colarocco, Director of Public Works, will be attending on behalf of the Township.
Chairman Cettina noted an e-mail from Mr. Guididas, who has resigned from the Planning Board
because his work requires him to spend a majority of his time in Washington D.C, and he could no
longer fulfill the obligations of a Board member. Chairman Cettina stated this opened the positions
Mr. Guididas was serving as a member of the Town Center South Redevelopment Committee and
Town Center Subcommittee. There has been some interest to serve on the committee from a couple
of Board members. This matter would be covered later this evening. He added that in his response
e-mail, he thanked Mr. Guididas for his work as he did a great job as a Board member.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes of October 24, 2012
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENT
Chairman Cettina asked for a motion to open the meeting to the public for matters not related to the
items on the agenda. A motion was made by Mrs. Van Nest and seconded by Ms. Breyta to open the
meeting to the public. All in favor. Since no one from the public addressed the Board, a motion was
made by Mr. Witt and seconded by Mrs. Goodwine to close the public portion. All in favor.
REPORT OF OFFICERS & COMMITTEES
Ms. Breyta reported that a Town Center Subcommittee Meeting was held earlier this evening where
they heard their first request for a deviation for a rear deck that was slightly larger than what was
represented for a replacement and also slightly higher than what is allowed by ordinance. She
thinks that everyone agreed that the meeting went well. A remedy was proposed by the neighbor
so it worked out on both sides. Chairman Cettina remarked that was very good and they have their
first success under their belt.
BOARD COMMENTS
There were no Board comments at this time.
BUSINESS TO DISCUSS
1. Ordinance 2012-19 – Amendment to Chapter 142 of the Land Use Code, Section 142-33,
Entitled Accessory Structures and Uses – Review & Recommendation
Chairman Cettina noted the amendment redefines accessory structures and uses. The first sentence
in the proposal, which has not changed, states: “Structures such as garages, sheds and gazebos shall
not be located less than the minimum requirements for accessory buildings permitted in the zone
district.” The underlined sentence in the proposal defined the following: “The term other active
structures as used herein does not include recreational sports equipment such as portable and nonportable basketball system, (including poles, frames, and backboards), baseball/softball nets, and /or
screens of similar type intended for use in conjunction with driveways.” This is the only additional
language added to this proposal. He asked Mr. McGough for the background of the proposal.
Mr. McGough replied that he received a complaint from a resident about a basketball net installed in
a driveway. The resident indicated that the basketball lands in his property and the children come
into the yard to retrieve it. Structures such as gyms or play sets, play houses, or other active
structures can not be located less than 15 feet from the rear or side property lines. If you were to
characterize a basketball pole and net in a driveway as it is in this particular case, it is closer than 15
feet to the property line, which is the case in most neighborhoods. If he issued a violation, he would
have to issue violations to the other thousand or more homeowners. He spoke with the Council
President and the Township Attorney to clarify that they don’t mean those types of things if that is
what they don’t mean. This proposal is the result of what the Council President and Council came up
with and approved.
Mr. Witt said the amendment clarified that an active structure was not a basketball pole. Given the
likely occurrence that there were several thousand of these types of things throughout the town, they
all decided to clarify that an active structure does not refer to a basketball pole so that people can’t
put that into a complaint and use that as a leverage against the town or a neighbor. Mrs. Goodwine
asked if this applied to all zones. Mr. McGough answered that it did apply to all zones.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes of October 24, 2012
Page 3
Chairman Cettina had a question regarding trampolines as to whether that is something that still
should not be close. He liked the words, but just realized that it said “intended for use in conjunction
with driveways.” Mr. McGough said the key part is someone using their driveway as a court and that
is where the pole is located. If someone wanted to build a basketball court in their backyard as a
freestanding structure, they would have to comply with the 15 foot setback requirement.
Chairman Cettina asked for a motion to approve this proposal and recommend to Council that the
amendment is generally consistent with the Master Plan. A motion was made by Ms. Breyta and
seconded by Mr. Silvestrov to recommend the ordinance to Council.
ROLL CALL:
AYES:
Barker, Kolibas, Van Nest, Breyta, Goodwine, Witt, Silvestrov, Galluccio,
Cettina
NAYS:
None
ABSTAINS:
None
There being nine (9) aye votes and no nay or abstain votes, the motion passed.
2. Town Center Subcommittee Appointment
Chairman Cettina stated no one has volunteered to serve on the subcommittee. He will send another
e-mail to the Board asking for a volunteer and this will be on the agenda again for the next meeting.
3. Redevelopment Steering Committee Appointment
Chairman Cettina announced that he has two volunteers (Mrs. Van Nest, Mr. Barker) for this
committee. He asked Mr. Barker to take on this position. Mr. Barker confirmed that he would take
on this responsibility.
Ms. Breyta mentioned that a volunteer is needed for the Environmental Commission, who is still
operating without a Planning Board liaison. Chairman Cettina said that perhaps at the next meeting
they can get that resolved too.
4. Other Business
Mr. Dasti stated that for the next meeting on November 7, 2012, there will be two applications
on the agenda, which are the Walgreens Pharmacy project and Project X, a proposed warehouse
building in the Matrix Business Park. Both applications are important to the town and they
have requested that resolutions be prepared for the night of the hearings. The applications
should be relatively clean as a result of matters being addressed at the TRC Meeting.
Mr. McGough said the Board has previously seen the Walgreens project. The Council did an
ordinance to revise the redevelopment plan and that ordinance came before the Board for
review and recommendation. The Board noted that it was consistent with the Master Plan and
recommended its approval to Council. Council approved the changes to the redevelopment
plan, and adopted a resolution supporting the concept before it came before the Board. It is the
same project. Even though the project is redevelopment, it still has to go through the normal
application process and receive approval from the Board. Both projects are very important for
the economic development of the town.
Mr. Dasti mentioned that a few years ago the Board approved a one million square foot
warehouse building for Matrix, which has not been constructed yet. This is that application
with an adjoining property, which is the parking lot.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes of October 24, 2012
Page 4
McGough said Matrix received preliminary and final approval for a 1,039,000 square foot
building, which was not built because they did not have a perspective tenant, but now they do.
Matrix appeared before Council back in July to request approval of a pilot ordinance, which
Council did. Matrix indicated that the pilot made it feasible for them to construct the building
on spec because they believed they would have no problem finding a tenant. The Matrix park is
now ninety-five percent occupied. Matrix now has a potential tenant for the spec building,
which is why they are coming back to the Board with an application. There is an adjacent parcel
that was going to be a 200,062 square foot building that the Board has not seen yet because it
has not come in for final approval. That was in the works too because there was a potential
tenant for that too. The tenant for the one million square foot building wants that property for
parking only, but you can’t have parking as a principal use. Therefore, they have to do a major
subdivision to make it one big lot, whereas the parking can become an accessory use.
Chairman Cettina is aware that this is a building the Board has already seen that will have
relatively zero change except that it now becomes a major subdivision combining two
properties and having an accessory use. The Board will be reviewing parking, parking
circulation and storm drainage.
Mr. McGough mentioned that the spec building is now larger by 7,000 square feet. Originally,
loading docks were proposed on both sides of the building. Now the loading docks will be in the
back so the parking has changed. Car parking will be increased, but the truck parking will
decrease. All of this was handled administratively. The applicant is applying for two
deviations. One is an 8 foot high fence around the back of the truck loading area. The applicant
is also requesting a black vinyl link fence. This type of fence is usually discouraged where you
would see it. Here you won’t see it as there is a 15 foot berm. The other deviation is the access
road. The trip generation will show that traffic will be coming from north of Gordon Road
(down Route 130 and coming out Gordon Road). They will need to come down Gordon Road to
Old York Road, turn and go down the main driveway on Montgomery Way, which will become a
signalized intersection. That is part of an approval from long ago. What they have figured out is
that if they could get a driveway off Gordon Road just for employee cars to go in, they could get
them off quicker. The Fire and Police Officials like the idea because there is emergency access.
It would be configured in such a way that a truck can not make a turn in there.
Mr. Dasti reiterated that each of the applicants have requested that resolutions be prepared in
the event that the applications are approved. He will e-mail the resolutions to the Board before
the meeting so there would be an opportunity to review.
Mr. McGough said the presenter will be KTR not Matrix. KTR is a company similar to Matrix.
ADJOURNMENT
With no other business to discuss, a motion was made by Mr. Witt and seconded by Mr. Silvestrov
to adjourn the meeting. All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________________
Elide M. Post
Planning Board Secretary
ADOPTED: JANUARY 16, 2013