BY JANE MEGGITT
Staff Writer
UPPER FREEHOLD — The absence of the chairman, vice chairman and township planner created some difficulties at the Oct. 14 Planning Board meeting.
Under normal circumstances, the mayor would be next in line to chair the meeting, but Mayor John Mele recused himself from the first application, Hidden Lakes II.
The applicants, Edward and Robert Schaumloeffel, had been among the plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit against the mayor and township committee members in August when the committee discussed changing the township’s master plan to 6-acre zoning.
While the suit has since been dropped, Mele said at an earlier hearing that he had been advised by counsel to recuse himself from the application. Board member William Search, a former chairman, reluctantly agreed to chair the hearing on the Hidden Lakes II application.
Board member Barry Wright said that the absence of Township Planner Richard Coppola was “unfair to the board, the public and the applicants.” Planning Board Secretary Susan Babbitt said she had received a letter from Cindy Coppola, Richard Coppola’s wife and business partner, saying that her husband was ill.
After discussion among board members and attorney Frank Armenante, it was decided that the applications would be heard, with the board proceeding as far as it could without information from Coppola.
Wright disagreed and thought the application should not go forward without the planner, but the other members agreed to hear it.
Michael Geller, the applicant’s engineer, described the project as a 42-house subdivision on nearly 193 acres off Emley’s Hill and Davis Station roads. The site is currently a tree farm and is traversed by the headwaters of Miry Run, which drains into Crosswicks Creek.
Two existing dwellings on the site, occupied by the Schaumloeffels, will remain. Geller said all of the proposed houses conform to the township’s lot-averaging option, with the average lot size being more than 3.1 acres, and some in excess of 4 acres.
The development will be accessed from two roads off Emley’s Hill Road and will be widened to 18 feet from its centerline, according to Geller. The interior streets of the subdivision, he said, will be 24 feet wide, with no curbs or sidewalks.
Three different detention basins will be constructed, and they will be maintained by the owners of the lot. The township will be responsible for maintenance and repair of the actual drainage and outfall pipes.
The applicant, however, requested a waiver from the township’s requirement of planting 12 trees per acre in new subdivisions, since the property is a tree farm and the developer does not desire to clear the trees. Any areas of disturbance will be subject to the 12-trees-per-acre ordinance. There are no other design waivers or variances requested.
Township Engineer Glenn Gerken said the applicants will need a No Further Action (NFA) letter from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) because higher than permitted levels of dieldrin were found in two areas on the tract.
Dieldrin, an insecticide that was used from the 1950s to the 1970s, was banned in 1974, according to Robert Weatherford, the applicant’s pesticide expert. He testified that late last year, soil borings were conducted on the property in accordance with DEP guidelines. A total of 39 samples were taken, two of which contained levels of dieldrin that exceeded the DEP minimum.
Weatherford said the builders would remediate the property by removing the contaminated soil and burying it under the roadway. The two affected sites are not near each other. One is at the highest point of the acreage, said Weatherford, and the other is at one of the lowest points. Dieldrin was also found in other areas of the property, but levels were within acceptable DEP limits.
“It’s a fairly persistent pesticide that breaks down very slowly,” Weatherford said.
Former Mayor Robert Abrams, a retired engineer, said he was very concerned about the presence of dieldrin.
“If it’s been around since 1970, it’s not going away,” Abrams said. “Pesticides are a problem. The farming community used it, and all thought it was safe.”
Abrams said that the pesticide is a heavy metal, and he is concerned about its effect on the planned development’s wells.
Thomas Hall, the applicant’s attorney, said that the dieldrin question was under the jurisdiction of the DEP. Areas with high amounts of the pesticide will be put in the roadbed and covered with asphalt, he said. According to Gerken, the Board of Health must also review the application for a history of pesticide use on the property.
Abrams said that the property below the proposed development was once owned by Schering-Plough, and that there had been extensive, heavy contamination on the grounds. He wanted the developer to obtain a copy of the report detailing the remediation done on the site.
Bob Rosenshine, who said he had a proprietary interest in the land, said the report done by the state had previously been submitted to the Planning Board. Abrams said that the state had approved the remediation of the Schering site for industrial, not residential, standards. He stated that the sort of chemicals found there made it unsafe to build in that area. Board member Dianne Kelly asked what the township’s soil expert had said about the Schering study. Search stated that an NFA letter had been received from the DEP.
Gerken said that there was a difference between industrial and residential standards and that the matter should be looked into.
The public hearing on the Hidden Lakes II application will continue Oct. 26.