May 3, 2017

TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES May 3, 2017 The Township of West Orange Planning Board held a regular meeting on May 3, 2017 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber, 66 Main Street, West Orange, New Jersey. Chairman Bagoff called the meeting to order at approximately 7:30 P.M. He announced that notification of the meeting was given to the Township Clerk, and posted on the Township Bulletin Board, sent to the West Orange Chronicle and the Star Ledger, and posted on the Township’s website calendar. This meeting has been properly noticed to the public in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act. No new matters will start after 10:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Bagoff requested all persons stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next Planning Board regular meeting will be June 7, 2017 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chairman Robert Bagoff, John Cardoza, Jerome Eben, Vice Chairman Lee Klein, Michael Keigher, Councilwoman Susan McCartney, Andrew Trenk, Gary Wegner ABSENT: Tekeste Ghebremicael, Ron Weston, William Wilkes II ALSO PRESENT: Paul Grygiel, Township Planning Director Eric Keller, Township Consulting Engineer Patrick J. Dwyer, Esq., Board Attorney Robin Miller, Board Secretary Harvey Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate Swearing In Township Professionals: Paul Grygiel, AICP, PP, Township Planner and Eric Keller, PE, PP, Township Consulting Engineer. RESOLUTION PB-17-02/Valley Road Residential, LLC Block 9, Lots 1, 7, 44, 50 and 56 22-26 Central Avenue and 9-15 Mitchell Street Application for Extension of Approval PB-14-03 At the April 5, 2017 regular meeting, the Board approved Applicant’s request for extension of previous Final Site Plan approval by Resolution adopted on May 7, 2014.

Motion: Chairman Bagoff Second: Vice Chairman Klein Cardoza: : Eben: Yes Ghebremicael: Absent _| Klein: Yes Keigher: Yes McCartney: Yes Trenk: Yes Wegner: : Weston: Absent Wilkes: Absent | Bagoff: Yes Chairman Bagoff welcomed the Public. He stated there were three applications before the Board, a presentation on proposed State Senate Bill, No. 2788, and a discussion on the Master Plan Reexamination. For all those present regarding the Master Plan Reexamination Report, the discussion would be an administrative portion of the Board’s function; it was not for the Public to speak at any point during tonight's discussion. The Board is aware of the Public stakeholders. There will be several upcoming meetings for the Master Plan Reexamination Report, properly noticed in the newspapers and on the Township website; during those upcoming meetings the Public will have the opportunity to ask questions and make comments. Tonight's discussion is for the Township professionals to explain how best to proceed with the Master Plan Reexamination process. APPLICATION(S) PB-17-03/Crestmont Country Club by Scott Wlodychak Block: 174, Lots: 1 & 1.01, Zone: R-3 750 Eagle Rock Avenue Preliminary and Final Site Plan with “C” variance. EXHIBITS A-1 — Photographs of the Tennis Courts (two). A-2 — Existing Topographic Conditions, Sheet No. 1, prepared by Marucci Engineering Associates, LLC dated 4/25/17. DISCUSSION Savino J. Russoniello, Esq., Caruso Smith Picini, appeared on behalf of Co-Applicants, Crestmont Country Club by Scott Wlodychak, (Lessee). Applicants were seeking site plan approval and accessory use height variance for seasonal tennis “bubble” to be placed over the existing tennis courts. Mr. Wlodychak was sworn in under oath. He briefly stated his professional background including a couple of years on the pro tour, administrating the Fairfield Racquet Club programs for 20 years, coaching at the University of Maryland and Seton Hall University, and currently he was the Director of Tennis at the Orange Lawn Tennis Club, a position he had held for over 5 years. Mr. Wlodychak stated he had signed a long-term lease with Crestmont (up to 20 years); he had contracted with them to lease the tennis courts to construct a seasonal “bubble” to be put up about September 25" to be operational by October 1st, and taken down by April 15!, a total of seven months. He stated

ith them to lease the tennis courts to construct a seasonal “bubble” to be put up about September 25" to be operational by October 1st, and taken down by April 15!, a total of seven months. He stated that in addition to members, his business plan included opening the structure to the Public. Hours of operation would be weekdays from 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., and weekends from 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. A generator would inflate the facility. Patrons would be utilize existing restrooms in a building near the tennis courts that would be partially winterized. He stated the restrooms and the tennis courts were currently 2

handicap accessible. He stated the project was to install the seasonally “bubble” and store it in a container on-site during the off-season. He stated the structure would be 36-feet high and be built by Arizon Structutes. The height was essentially regulation for tournaments. It would be heated by propane; two gas tanks would be installed approximately 20 feet from the structure. The propane tanks and the generator would be enclosed by fencing and secured by locks. Chairman Bagoff asked if any members had questions for Mr. Wlodychak. Councilwoman McCartney asked for clarification regarding the regulation size for the height of the structure; was it necessary to request a variance for the height; Mr. Wlodychak said yes. Councilwoman McCartney asked him to discuss the noise from the generator that would run for seven months; would affect the residents in the area. He said his expert, Jan Ligas, would be able to discuss the issue. Captain Keigher stated the tennis courts backed up to several houses on Ferris Drive; he wanted to know the location of the generator and propane tanks and what would be the noise factor. Mr. Russoniello stated Mr. Ligas and Mr. Marucci would provide further testimony on the issues. Captain Keigher asked where storage container would be located; Mr. Wlodychak said he was still working that out; possibly in one of the garages on site. It was not large but it contained everything including the lighting. The only thing left outside during the summer months would be the generator. Mr. Eben asked when Mr. Wlodychak would know if the storage container could be located inside an existing structure; he was concerned about the number of storage structures on a property that was zoned residential. Mr. Wlodychak answered he could find out the next day. He said it was important that the structure was stored well; if not stored properly they get mold. It was important to him that the facility looks pristine for as many years as he has it. Mr. Wegner asked where the propane tanks would be located; Mr. Wlodychak said they would be located on a platform surrounded by a locked fence a certain distance from the facility. Mr. Wegner asked if the location was indicated on the drawings; Mr. Wlodychak said no, but they would be approximately 20 feet within the vicinity of the generator. Mr. Wegner asked the size of the tanks; Mr. Wlodychak said two

ation was indicated on the drawings; Mr. Wlodychak said no, but they would be approximately 20 feet within the vicinity of the generator. Mr. Wegner asked the size of the tanks; Mr. Wlodychak said two 1,000-gallon tanks, the estimated use would be 6,000-8,000 gallons per year. They would be refilled a couple of times during the winter by delivery trucks with access from a back road to the facility. Mr. Wegner voiced concern about the amount of propane or containment of the tanks relative to public safety; Mr. Wlodychak stated the company he was working with had assured him they did this work all the time. He stated a lot of the Crestmont facilities currently had propane tanks. Mr. Cardoza asked for clarification regarding the exterior appearance of the bubble and its maintenance. Mr. Wlodychak stated it had an all-white exterior; the interior was mostly white — it reflected indirect light off the ceiling using state-of-the art energy efficient LED

lighting. Mr. Cardoza asked if the bubble material required a lot of upkeep; Mr. Wlodychak said no, but when taken down, it must be entirely dried out before it can be stored in its airtight container. The bottom 15-feet interior perimeter is colored green, which is similar to the background of tennis court fencing. There is no actual fencing in the interior of the bubble; it is all outside. In the center, a curtain would be erected between the two separate sets of courts. Mr. Cardoza asked if there would be a buffer along the edges; Mr. Wlodychak said yes, there would be a little bit of a buffer and a blister area would be built — the entrance would be made a little bit wider for a 15’x20’ sitting/viewing area. Televisions would be installed in the restroom areas (the existing separate structure). Mr. Eben asked what would be the total combined maximum occupancy of facility including the viewing area and courts; Mr. Wlodychak stated up to 24 persons on court and maybe 5- 10 people viewing. Chairman Bagoff asked for clarification regarding the number of tennis courts the bubble would cover; Mr. Wlodychak answered four (4). Chairman Bagoff asked if the lighting would be seen from the outside; Mr. Wlodychak stated no. Chairman Bagoff asked if any music played on the inside would be heard by people on the outside; Mr. Wlodychak stated no. Chairman Bagoff asked if Mr. Wlodychak or one of his experts could testify to generator decibels, and did he know what the limits were per Township ordinance; Mr. Wlodychak stated his expert would testify. Mr. Grygiel stated the application materials made no mention the facility would to be open to the public; he asked if that was an oversight. Mr. Wlodychak stated it must have been an oversight because it was always intended to be open to the Public. Mr. Grygiel stated that having the business operation open to the public raised certain issues; he thought it was to be used as an accessory facility to the County Club, not a separate operation. Mr. Russoniello said the issue had been discussed during that meeting. Mr. Wlodychak stated the facility was never intended just for Crestmont members. Mr. Grygiel asked how business operations would be handled; how would the Public schedule lessons and make payments; he was unsure if public use was a permitted use. Chairman Bagoff asked if there would there be a counter area to book

rations would be handled; how would the Public schedule lessons and make payments; he was unsure if public use was a permitted use. Chairman Bagoff asked if there would there be a counter area to book court time and pay fees; Mr. Wlodychak said no, the operation was entirely separate from Crestmont. Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. Dwyer to research the statute. Mr. Grygiel stated that commercial recreation use is a conditional use in the R-2 Zone and there were prohibitions on multiple principle uses on the site. Mr. Grygiel stated the plans must indicate the location of the storage container; Chairman Bagoff agreed. Mr. Keller asked what types of events would be held at the facility; Mr. Wlodychak stated events for adults and children like evening Round Robins, and tournaments. All tennis related events; currently, none of the events were planned for large Public attendance. The main goal of the facility was for people to take lessons and get court time. Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. Wlodychak to discuss the parking accommodations. Mr. Wlodychak stated the parking lot was located adjacent the tennis courts. He stated lighting would be installed along the path to the courts. No new parking would be constructed.

Chairman Bagoff stated there was a swimming pool next to the tennis courts; he asked if that area would be fenced off from the Public. Mr. Wlodychak said yes, the pool area would be fenced off. Chairman Bagoff asked what arrangements had been made for snow plowing the tennis area and winterizing the structure with the wood-slat walking area leading to the courts. Mr. Wlodychak said he would probably hire someone to plow the area; he said he would install a non-slip material to the wood-slat area that was approximately 20 ft. long. Mr. Dwyer said he was researching permitted uses in the zone; Mr. Grygiel seemed to indicate the (tennis) structure was separate from the Country Club permitted use..Mr. Dwyer read Section 25-24.2(c) (Private Club): (1) Parking lot entrances and exits shall be clearly visible from the public street and shail not be located within 75 ft. of an intersection; (2) There shall be a 25 ft. wide buffer adjacent to all residential property lines, within the required setback, which shall consist of natural vegetation; (3) All structures shall be designed to be complementary to the neighborhood; and (4) There must be a landscape plan approved and kept on file (in the Planning Department). Mr. Russoniello asked how the recreational use facility differed from the Country Club. Mr. Dwyer answered that Mr. Wlodychak testified that the structure operated as its own entity separate from the Country Club, including its own revenue stream, own hours and own employees. Mr. Dwyer opined in that regard it was not so much a separate recreational facility as much as a private club leasing space from a private club. Mr. Dwyer stated he believed the use was accessory and permitted in the zone. Vice Chairman Klein asked the months of operation, would it be open year round, and was the County Club open year round; Mr. Wlodychak stated the structure would be operating from October 1 through April 15. He currently had no plans to run the business year round, he believed the Country Club closed for a month or so during the winter months. Mr. Dwyer advised the Board he had one other clarification under the definitions; he said a private recreation facility referred to a court or related structures provided as an accessory use on the same lot as a residence. He stated this use did not qualify as such; it was not a private recreational facility such as a

referred to a court or related structures provided as an accessory use on the same lot as a residence. He stated this use did not qualify as such; it was not a private recreational facility such as a tennis court behind a home. The Public had no questions for Mr. Wlodychak. Jan Ligas, Jr., was sworn in under oath. He stated he was President and one of the owners of Arizon Structures, a St. Louis, MO, based company; the supplier of the proposed temporary building structure. Mr. Ligas stated it was an air-supported structure; it was required by code to have a triple redundancy to maintain the air pressure under all conditions. There was a primary fan that ran consistently, a secondary electric fan with the same capability as primary fan; it sits on standby, and the back-up generator. The units were residential grade; the mechanical decibels would meet decibel levels at the property line. He stated the propane tanks met all required guidelines; the tank supplier could explain guidelines.

In response to question from Captain Keigher, Mr. Ligas stated propane or natural gas ran the generator. Mr. Eben asked what Mr. Ligas would consider the building code use of the building. Mr. Ligas stated that was determined by the applicant use of the building, not the building itself. Mr. Wegner asked if the building was required to have a fire suppression system. Mr. Ligas stated the structure materials had to conform to California NFPA 701; the structure was made of fire resistant non-flammable components. Chairman Bagoff asked if all systems failed; how long would it take occupants to exit before structure collapsed. Mr. Ligas stated it would take approximately fifteen minutes for the structure to deflate. There were three exits. Chairman Bagoff asked if the Public had questions for Mr. Ligas. Ricki Roth, 25 Ferris Drive, asked how often and for how long would the generator be tested. Mr. Ligas stated one a week for approximately ten minutes. Henry Sopher, 37 Ferris Drive, asked what were the propane risks associated with this type of structure. Mr. Ligas stated there would be a foundation to hold down the structure tied in to a cable system. Mr. Keller stated there were specific building code requirements associated the with propane tanks. The Applicant had testified the propane would be in a locked, fenced-in area. He stated that the laws and building codes were very clear about the matter, all tanks would be covered, there would be appropriate signage. Mr. Wlodychak stated there would be two 1,000-gallon tanks. Mr. Keller stated the structure was approximately 250 feet from the nearest property line. He asked Mr. Ligas to describe what neighbors would see at night when the structure was illuminated. Mr. Ligas stated the neighbors should not see anything; two-thirds of the structure was opaque. There would not be a light glow. Chairman Bagoff asked if snow would pile up on the outside of the structure. Mr. Ligas stated the structure would be heated to assist in snow shedding; also because of its natural shape, the snow tended to fall off the structure. Mr. Wlodychak stated maintenance people would remove the snow from the perimeter of the structure. The interior lights would be shut off at approximately 10; 15 P.M. and the structure would be locked at night. Anthony Marucci, PE, PE, Marucci Engineering Associates, LLC, was sworn in under