Docstoc

February 24_ 2000 - Township of Clinton_ New Jersey

Document Sample
February 24_ 2000 - Township of Clinton_ New Jersey Powered By Docstoc
					July 5, 2000



Robert C. Bogart Associates
RCBA
1325 Route 31
Annandale, NJ 08801

Reference: Windy Acres
           Block 7 Lot 18, 18.01 and 31
           Clinton Township, NJ

Dear Mr. Bogart:

The following is our response to your review letter dated 2/24/00. Our response is based on
meetings held in your offices on March 10, 2000 and March 14, 2000 and following Planning
Board Meetings. We have copied your original letter and provided our response for each item in
a different script, for easy reference.


February 24, 2000



Clinton Township Planning Board
1370 Route 31 North
Annandale, New Jersey 08801


Reference:          P&H Clinton Partnership (Windy Acres) –
                           Preliminary Subdivision and Site Plan Application
                    Block 7, Lots 18, 18.01 and 31
                    Clinton Township, Hunterdon County, New Jersey


Dear Board Members:

On October 11, 1999, November 11, 1999 and February 1, 2000, this office received
submissions associated with the preliminary subdivision and site plan application for the above
referenced property. These documents include the following:

D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 2




    A set of plans (consisting of 65 sheets) entitled “Windy Acres Preliminary Major Subdivision
     and Site Plan” prepared by John S. Hunt, P.E. of Najarian Associates, dated October 24,
     1999, latest revision January 26, 2000;

    A set of plans (consisting of 27 sheets) numbered C1 to C27 prepared by John S. Hunt, P.E.,
     of Najarian Associates, dated January 31, 2000. These plans contain the cross sections for
     Road “A” to Court “Y”;

    A set of plans (consisting of 15 sheets including the cover sheet) entitled “Windy Acres
     Landscape Plans” prepared by Samuel T. Melillo of Melillo and Bauer, dated October 4,
     1999;

    A set of plans (consisting of five sheets) entitled “Intersection Improvements New Jersey
     State Highway 22 and Main Street” prepared by Orth-Rodgers and Associates, Inc., dated
     September 26, 1999;

    An “Environmental Impact Statement for Windy Acres” prepared by Omni Environmental
     Corporation, dated February 13, 1995;

    A “Fiscal Report” prepared by Richard B. Reading Associates, dated September 1999;

    A “Flora and Fauna Study for Windy Acres” prepared by Amy S. Greene Environmental
     Consultants, Inc., dated October 1, 1999;

    A “Stormwater Management Report” (Volume I and II) prepared by Najarian Associates,
     dated October 1999;

    A “Traffic Impact Analysis for Windy Acres” prepared by Robert M. Rodgers, P.E., and
     Scott T. Kennel of Orth-Rodgers Associates, Inc., dated October 1999;

    An architectural plan entitled “Club Facility” prepared by Minno and Wasko Architects and
     Planners, dated October 1, 1999;

    An architectural plan entitled “Affordable Housing” prepared by Minno and Wasko
     Architects and Planners, dated October 1, 1999;




D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 3



    A set of architectural plans (consisting of two sheets) prepared by David W. Griffiths of Pulte
     Mid-Atlantic, dated September 29, 1999 presenting the architectural plans for the A, B and C
     townhouse units;

    A set of architectural plans (consisting of two sheets) prepared by David W. Griffiths of Pulte
     Mid-Atlantic, dated September 28, 1999 presenting the architectural plans for the Deerfield,
     Shannon, Jamison and Rosefield townhouse units.

Upon review of the above-referenced documents versus the Clinton Township Land Use
Ordinance and the Amended General Development Plan Approval (corrected resolution #32-98),
this office provides the following for the Board’s consideration:


ZONING:

A.        Description of Property and Proposal:

          1. The subject property formally known as Block 7, Lots 18, 18.01 and 31 consists of
             approximately 292 acres located in the AH-1 Affordable Housing Zone. The
             property has frontage on Main Street just east of the Lebanon Borough/Clinton
             Township municipal boundary. The property is bounded on the south by the New
             Jersey Transit rail lines. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property to
             construct 958 units consisting of 255 single-family homes, 558 multifamily
             townhouses, and 145 multifamily apartments (low to moderate housing units).

          2. The topography of the property is such that the ground elevations range over 100 feet
             and there are several locations of steep slope (greater than 15%). In addition, the
             South Branch of the Rockaway Creek traverses the property and there are over four
             ravines, which convey surface water to the South Branch of the Rockaway Creek and
             one that conveys surface water offsite. As such there are several environmental
             constraints on the property with respect to stormwater discharge, wetland buffer and
             stream encroachment, which must be considered by the applicant during the design.

B.        Area and Dimensional Requirements:

          1. Planner Michael Bolan should comment with respect to the proposed application as it
             relates to the zoning criteria.

          2. Section 40-115.B.2.c of the Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance restricts
             individual dwelling units from accessing directly onto public streets. Based on the
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 4



               proposed lot configuration, only Road A can be a public road in accordance with the
               ordinance.

               We propose that all roadways directly serving townhouses will be private. All
               others will be public roadways.

          3. Section 40-115.B.7.e of the Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance requires that at
             least 20% of the site be dedicated to common open space and recreation facilities.
             The applicant should confirm compliance with this requirement.

               A plan will be provided describing open space by lot and block.

          4. Section 40-226.D. of the Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance allows for a
             maximum building coverage of 15% of the gross tract area for principal structures
             and a maximum building coverage of 20% of the gross tract area for principal
             structures, open porches, decks and accessory structures combined. Sheet 2 of 65
             indicates a maximum building coverage of 11.6%. The applicant should provide
             testimony regarding the calculation of this maximum building coverage and the
             single-family floor area used in the calculation. The applicant should also provide
             information regarding possible limitations, which should be imposed on the lots for
             accessory structures, porches, and decks to ensure the 20% maximum building
             coverage is not exceeded in the future. These development limitations should be
             defined in sales literature and on the plans.

               The building coverage is calculated using a standard box size for each unit, as
               follows:

               Large Single Family 55x50 = 2,750 SF
               Small Single Family 50 x40 = 2,000 SF

               2 Car Garage Townhome
                  Interior Unit 58x30 = 1,740 SF
                  Exterior Unit 62x36 = 2,232 SF

               1 Car Garage Townhome 60x24         = 1,440 SF
               Recreation Building                 =5,000 SF
               Mt. Laurel 16 unit Building 142x47 = 6,674 SF

               The total building coverage is as follows:


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 5



               Large Singles                      117 x 2,750         321,750
               Small Singles                      138 x 2,000         276,000
               2 Car Garage TH
                  Interior                        145 x 1,740         252,300
                  Exterior                        108 x 2,232         241,056
               1 Car Garage TH                    305 x 1,440         439,200
               M.L. Buildings                     9 x 6,674            60,066
               Recreational Building                                    5,000 SF
                                                                   1,595,372
               or 36.6 acres (12.6%)

               The Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance allows for 15% coverage by principal
               structures. The allowed coverage is 43.73 acres. Coverage limitations will allow an
               average of 320 SF per unit additional cover. An additional 5% is allowed for
               accessory structures which will amount to an additional 660 SF per unit. Pulte
               Homes will advise each homeowner as to principal and accessory building coverage
               in the Public Offering Statement and will set a maximum coverage in the Deed of
               Conveyance.

C.        History:

          1. The Township of Clinton has three affordable housing districts, which satisfy a
             portion of the Township’s COAH requirement. The AH-1 and AH-2 Affordable
             Housing Zones were created in 1987 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 352-87 and
             AH-3 in 1990 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 436-90. The subject property
             (Block 7, Lots 18, 18.01 and 31) is contained within the AH-1 Affordable Housing
             Zone.

          2. The Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance (Section 40-226) defines zoning
             standards for the development of the AH-1 zone. These standards include maximum
             number of dwelling units, maximum building coverage, maximum building height,
             and bulk standards for the various unit types. Section 40-115.B.7 of the Clinton Land
             Use Ordinance defines the distribution standards for the various dwelling types in the
             AH-1 zone.

          3. On December 3, 1996, the Clinton Township Planning Board adopted resolution No.
             20-96 approving a General Development Plan for the above referenced property.
             This General Development Plan called for the construction of 1140 dwelling units on
             the above referenced property. (This quantity complies with the maximum number of


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 6



               units permitted in the AH-1 Affordable Housing Zone per Section 40-226.A.2 of the
               Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance.)

          4. On June 7, 1999, the Clinton Township Planning Board adopted corrected resolution
             No. 32-98 approving an Amended General Development Plan. This amendment
             called for the construction of 1019 dwelling units (maximum) and gave the applicant
             an option to substitute 37 market multi-family townhouse units for 37 low to
             moderate income units subject to a cash contribution of $6,700 per unit to be
             deposited into the Township housing trust fund. This substitution option creates the
             following possible mix of the various dwelling units:

                     Single-family houses (maximum)                              296           296
                     Multi-family townhouses (maximum)                           541           578
                     Low to moderate income apartments (maximum)                 182           145 (a)
                               Total number of dwelling units to be constructed 1019          1019

                    (a) A cash contribution of $6,700 per unit ($247,900) to be deposited into the
                    Township housing trust fund.


POLICY:

          1. Based on the applicant’s intention to substitute 37 “market” multi-family townhouses
             for 37 “low to moderate income” apartments, the applicant is subject to a cash
             contribution of $247,900. The developer may pay 50% of the contribution at the
             issuance of a building permit and the remainder at the issuance of a certificate of
             occupancy according to Section 40-228 of the Clinton Township Land Use
             Ordinance. The contribution does not need to be paid until the 145 low and moderate
             income units are constructed. The Board and the applicant should define which
             building permit and which certificate of occupancy will trigger the payment of the
             contribution.

               To be resolved with Mr. Bolan.

          2. The proposed layout requires that several large areas be cut or filled in excess of 18 to
             20 feet both for road construction and lot development. Excessive road cuts and fills
             occur on Road B from station 6+50 to station 13+50 (sheet 40); Road U from station
             7+00 to 12+50 (sheet 46); Road A from station 7+00 to 15+00 (sheet 35); and Road
             A from station 64+00 to 76+00 (sheets 38 and 39). The Board should determine
             whether the extent of proposed grading is contrary to the intent of Section 40-
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 7



               115.B.1.c of the Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance. This section requires that
               “the proposed development will not have an unreasonably adverse impact upon the
               area in which it is proposed to be established.”

               Cuts and fills will be minimized to the extent possible but are required for utility
               installation and the permitted density.

          3. The applicant should apply to the Road Naming Committee for road names. Upon
             approval by the Road Naming Committee, the road names should be added to the
             preliminary site plan and subdivision plans. This will avoid later confusion between a
             new selected final name and designations Road “A”, etc.

               The applicant has submitted proposed road names and has received no response.

          4. The plans should contain shading or a legend as to which roads will be public and
             which private.

               All roads other than townhouse areas will have a public R.O.W. and will be shaded
               on the revised plans.

          5. The conditions of the amended General Development Plan should be carried over to
             any preliminary approval, and the Board should consider these conditions during the
             review of the preliminary application.

               The conditions of the amended GDP will be carried over to the Preliminary
               Approval.

TECHNICAL:

A.        Plat Details:

          1. The Clinton Township Council has entered into a franchise agreement with Applied
             Wastewater Management for the construction, operation and maintenance of the
             wastewater treatment plant associated with the development of this property.
             Therefore, the notes on Sheet 2 of 65 should be revised to indicate that “a
             professional engineer on behalf of Applied Wastewater Management” not the
             “C.T.S.A” or “authority’s engineer” will be responsible for plan and deed description
             review, inspection and approvals.



D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 8



               The notes on sheet 2 of 65 will be revised to read “a professional engineer on
               behalf of Applied Water Management will be responsible for plan and deed
               description review, inspection and approvals.

          2. Note 5 of the Wetlands/Flood Plain on Sheet 2 of 65 indicates that “the stream
             crossings will be designed prior to final approval and will meet all requirements of
             the N.J.D.E.P and Hunterdon County Engineer’s Office.” This note and all other
             notes throughout the plans should be revised. Hunterdon County Engineer’s Office
             and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection approval should be a
             condition of the preliminary approval, not final approval. These issues must be
             resolved and approved prior to the commencement of construction.

               Note 5 of the Wetlands/Flood Plain Notes on sheet 2 of 65 will be revised to read
               “The stream crossings will be designed to meet all requirements of the NJDEP and
               Hunterdon County Engineers Office and shall be a condition of Preliminary
               Approval.

          3. Note 2 of the Miscellaneous Notes on Sheet 2 of 65 should be deleted. GPU Energy-
             type luminaire, light poles and standard light spacing is not in accordance with the
             Clinton Township Lighting Ordinance. This note should be removed and any other
             reference to GPU Energy defining type, quantity, height or location of lights should
             be deleted from the plans.

               Note 2 of the Miscellaneous Notes on sheet 2 of 65 and all other references to GPU
               designed lights will be deleted. We will provide a lighting plan designed to meet the
               Township’s Ordinance adopted subsequent to submission of the pending
               Preliminary Subdivision and Site Plans..

          4. Note 4 of the Miscellaneous Notes on Sheet 2 of 65 should be revised to read “all
             street and parking area construction methods and materials shall be in compliance
             with the New Jersey Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road
             and Bridge Construction (latest version).”

               Note 4 of the Miscellaneous Notes on sheet 2 of 65 will be revised to read. “All
               street and parking area construction methods and materials shall be in compliance
               with the NJDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction.

          5. Elizabethtown Water Company and Applied Wastewater Management should be
             added to the list of Additional Approvals on Sheet 2 of 65.


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 9



               Elizabethtown Water Company and Applied Water Management will be added to
               the list of necessary approvals.

          6. Note 4 of the Utility Installation Notes on Sheet 2 of 65 should be revised to read
             “Appropriate easements shall be granted to the applicable utility companies and
             recorded on the Final Plat upon approval by the applicable utility companies.”

               Note 4 of the Utility Installation Notes on sheet 2 of 65 will be revised to read
               “Appropriate easements shall be granted to the applicable utility company and
               recorded on the Final Plat upon approval by the applicable utility company”.

          7. There are a few typos within the Water Distribution Notes on Sheet 2 of 65. The
             word “thrust” is misspelled in Note 6 and the word “shall” is missing in Note 8.

               The typos on the Water Distribution Notes on sheet 2 of 65 shall be corrected.

          8. A note should be added to Sheet 2 of 65 indicating that “all pavement shall be core
             sampled in accordance with the NJDOT requirements. Asphalt shall be accepted if it
             falls within the NJDOT average allowable thickness tolerance and each sample meets
             the NJDOT allowable void ratio.”

               The applicant agrees to perform core sampling in compliance with NJDOT
               Standards and a note shall be added to sheet 2 of 65 stating this.

          9. A note should be added to Sheet 2 of 65 indicating that “the Township Engineer must
             be notified at least 48 hours (two business days) prior to any construction activity
             occurring on site.”

               A note will be added to sheet 2 of 65 stating “The Township Engineer must be
               notified 48 hours (two business days) prior to any construction activity occurring
               on site.

          10. A note should be added to Sheet 2 of 65 indicating that “the contractor must call the
              New Jersey “One Call System” for utility markout prior to any excavation activities.”

               A note will be added to sheet 2 of 65 stating “The contractor must call the New
               Jersey One Call System for utility mark out prior to any construction.

          11. A note should be added to Sheet 2 of 65 and any grading sheets indicating that “a
              minimum slope of 2% must be provided in all lawn areas including the swales.”
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 10




               A note will be added stating “A minimum slope of 2% must be provided in all lawn
               areas including the swales”.

          12. A note should be added to Sheet 2 of 65 indicating that “the maximum grade of all
              slopes shall be 3:1. The preferred slope is 4:1 or flatter.”

               A note will be added stating “The maximum slope shall be 3:1 with 4:1 preferred”.

          13. Text appears to be missing on Sheet 3 of 65 with respect to “Block Limit and Sheet
              Limit Lines.” The dashed line between Sheet 5 and 10 and between Sheet 8 and 10
              should indicate “Block Limit and Sheet Limit Line.”

               Text will be added to sheet 3 of 65 to clearly indicate Block Limit Lines and Sheet
               Limit Lines.

          14. Between Sheets 3 and 4 there are three different types of lines separating the
              property; sheet limits, block limits and section limits. This may cause some
              confusion during review and discussion. The section limit lines should be removed
              from the plans and any accounting of the different sections should be by Block. This
              should be possible since the tax assessor created the Block lines in accordance with
              the State Law and the applicant’s interest in keeping the different sections separate.

               Sheet 3 of 65 has been revised to show the Block Limit Lines.

          15. Notes should be added to sheet 4 of 65 outlining the phasing of the excavation, land
              disturbance, soil erosion and sediment control, construction of detention basins and
              completion of site improvements. The phasing should consider the drainage areas,
              site access and circulation, required staging areas and sources of fill material.

               A construction phasing plan will be submitted to the Township Engineer as a
               condition of Preliminary Approval.

          16. Sheet 6 of 65 clearly indicates several existing structures on site. The plan set should
              address which structures are to remain and which are to be removed. Those to remain
              are to be protected by what means?

               A note will be added to sheet 2 of 65 stating that “The Gitlow home will remain and
               all other structures will be removed on both the Gitlow and Mellos property after a
               HABS study of the residence on the Mellos Property”.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 11




          17. Curb return radii should be added to sheets 8, 9, and 10 of 65 at all intersections.

               Curb return radii will be dimensioned on sheet 8,9, and 10 of 65 at all intersections.

          18. The open space list on Sheet 7A of 65 totals approximately 4,411,929 square feet,
              which is equivalent to approximately 35% of the 292-acre tract. The list appears to
              be missing the open space area associated with the townhouse properties (Blocks
              7.08, 7.09, 7.11, 7.12, 7.13, 7.14, 7.15, 7.16, 7.17, 7.18, 7.19, 7.23, and 7.24.) This
              table should be revised to define all open space areas.

               Sheet 7A of 65, “Lot Area Plan”, will be revised to show open space totals by Lot
               and Block.

          19. Section 40-115.B.6.c of the Clinton Township Land Use Ordinance requires that “all
              trash and garbage shall be stored at all times in covered containers which shall be
              kept in centrally located, concealed areas.” The plans do not provide for any such
              centrally located, concealed areas. These areas should be defined on the plans or an
              alternate means of trash collection should be defined by the applicant for the Board’s
              consideration.

               Garbage dumpster locations will be shown for the COAH units and a detail will be
               added showing the dumpster enclosures. No other common garbage collection
               areas are proposed. Curbside garbage collection is proposed for all other units.

          20. All easements should be dimensioned and shown on the plans. For example, sheet 26
              of 65 should show the New Jersey Power and Light easement, which extends through
              the townhouses. New Jersey Power and Light must approve any improvements
              installed within its easement. This approval or comment must be obtained at this time
              to be sure the layout is viable.

               The existing New Jersey Power and Light poles will be clearly labeled on sheet 26
               of 65 and the proposed relocation will be shown. The applicant has received
               written confirmation from NJP&L (GPU) that the proposed relocation is
               acceptable.

          21. There are several proposed tot lots located throughout the development. Whenever
              possible these tot lots should not be located along Road A due to the extent of traffic
              anticipated for this road. In addition, the applicant should provide details on the
              preliminary plans as to the construction, contents and grading of the tot lots.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 12




               The applicants planner will comment on the relocation of tot lots. Details of tot lot
               equipment will be added to the plans.

          22. An emergency access lane is provided between Court D and Court Y. Construction
              details should be provided for this emergency access lane including the type of
              construction material, limits and type of curb, and means of restricting non-
              emergency vehicle access. The access lane must be capable of being serviceable in
              all weather.

               The emergency access lane between Court D and Court Y will be constructed of 6”
               of clean stone surrounded with filter fabric. The access lane will then be covered
               with 4” of topsoil, seed and mulch. A winding bike path will be provided.
               Retractable bollards will be placed at each end along with depressed curb.

          23. Construction details should be added to the plans for the road extending between the
              two parking lots in the vicinity of the proposed water tank. In addition, the means of
              barricade should also be defined.

               We propose a 15 ft. wide driveway constructed of 6” of clean stone over a layer of
               filter fabric. The driveway will be subject to approval of Elizabethtown Water Co.

          24. The proposed tot lot on Block 7.18 should be moved further from Road S for safety
              reasons.

               See item 21.

          25. The applicant’s engineer should confirm the need for and location of guiderail
              throughout the property. For example, the inside curve of Road A from station 50+50
              to station 55+50; along Road A from station 11+00 to station 17+00; end of Court D
              adjacent to the proposed retaining wall; and along recreation parking lot adjacent to
              the proposed retaining wall. The guiderail should be aesthetically pleasing but must
              also meet acceptable standards.

               The guide-rail will be core-ton steel and shall meet NJDOT Standards. NJDOT
               guide-rail warrants will be used for placing guide-rail.

          26. The plans should be checked for consistency between sheets. For example, sheet 11
              of 65 defines a top-of-wall elevation of 220 at station 11+00 on Road A while sheet
              22 of 65 defines a top-of-wall elevation of 210 at station 11+00 on Road A.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 13




               The plans will be checked for consistency between sheets and revised where
               necessary..

          27. The road profiles should provide detail with respect to the water lines as well as the
              sanitary sewer and drainage lines so conflicts can be defined. In addition, details
              should be provided on the profiles as to the Rockaway Creek and other stream
              crossings for the same reason.

               The roadway profile plans will have added detail as directed by the Township
               Engineer.

          28. Based on the past use of the property and the extent of wetlands on the property, the
              topsoil may extend to significant depth. All topsoil must be removed before fill is
              placed. A note should be added to the plans.

               A note will be added to the Miscellaneous Notes on sheet 2 of 65 stating that “All
               topsoil shall be stripped and stockpiled prior to placement of fill”.

          29. A note must be added to every sheet that “all backfill within the road right-of-way
              must be with select fill compacted in 6” lifts.”

               A note will be added to the Miscellaneous Notes sheet 2 of 65 stating “All backfill
               within the roadway R.O.W. will be select fill or suitable native material, subject to
               approval by the Township Engineer”. Roadway fill will be placed in compliance
               with NJDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction.

          30. The note at the top of sheet 61 of 65 should be revised to read “all precast structures
              will be designed to meet HS-20 loading and must be approved by the design engineer
              and provided to the Township engineer prior to installation. No modifications shall
              be permitted to precast structures in the field.”

               A note will be added to sheet 61 of 65 stating “All precast structures will be
               designed to meet HS-20 loading” and shop drawings will be submitted to the
               Township Engineer prior to installation. No modifications will be permitted to pre-
               cast structures without the approval of the Township Engineer.

          31. The Typical Storm Sewer Trench detail on sheet 61 of 65 should be revised to require
              “select fill or suitable excavated material approved by the Township Engineer in 6”
              compacted lifts.”
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 14




               The typical storm sewer trench detail on sheet 61 of 65 will be revised to read
               “trench backfill shall comply with RSIS Standards.

          32. A note should be added to the plans that “all site improvements, including surface
              course and landscaping, must be completed in a section before the final certificate of
              occupancy is issued for the section.”

               The applicant proposes to bond for Landscaping and Surface Course for a period
               of time if the future extension of a road or time of year prohibit timely installation.

          33. If surface course is not to be installed on Road A until a majority of the construction
              is completed, a note should be added to the plans requiring the installation of 10” curb
              pieces on all catch basins along Road A. The base course will then be installed flush
              with the catch basin grates so the collection system functions as designed. Then
              when the surface course is installed, risers will be used at the catch basins to make the
              10” curb pieces into 8” curb pieces.

               The applicant agrees to construct the catch basin grates as described by the
               Township Engineer when surface course has not yet been installed.

          34. The following revisions should be made to the typical road cross sections on sheet 62
              of 65:

                   “Public Roadways” should be deleted from the “50’ wide roadway” detail;
                   list the roads to be constructed in accordance with the 50’ wide roadway detail
                    under the detail;
                   revise the title of the “private road” detail to clarify that the cross section is
                    provided for 24’ wide roads at parking locations;
                   provide a typical road cross section for the 24’ wide roads;
                   list the roads to be constructed in accordance with the “private road at parking”
                    and “private road not at parking” details under the detail; and
                   list all roads which will contain an island under the “roadway with island” detail.

               We will provide the details and notes as described by the Township Engineer for the
               Typical Cross-Sections on sheet 62 of 65.

          35. A note should be added to sheet 63 of 65 that the “structural design engineer must be
              present on site during retaining wall construction to approve the construction and

D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 15



               perform soil testing as needed to confirm design parameters comply with actual
               conditions.” A certification will be needed from the design engineer following
               construction.

               The applicant will provide a certification from a Professional Engineer that all
               walls over 4 feet high were constructed as per specifications. A note will be added
               to the Miscellaneous Notes on sheet 2 of 65 stating this.

          36. The proposed tree line should be shown on all grading plans (sheets 11 to 22).

               The proposed tree line will be shown on all grading plans.

          37. Sheet 14 of 65 shows a utility pole being relocated. The Clinton Township Land Use
              Ordinance requires that all utilities be located below grade. The plans should be
              revised accordingly.

               All new utilities will be located below ground. The NJP&L poles which are
               presently located above ground will be relocated, above ground, along the rear of
               Townhouse Section 4.

          38. The wetlands, wetlands buffer limits, state open waters, and floodplains must be
              clearly identified on the grading plans (sheets 11 to 22).

               We will show and clearly label all wetlands, wetlands buffers, floodplains, and state
               open waters on the Grading Plans, sheet 11 to 22 of 65.

          39. All sight triangles should be dimensioned. Are AASHTO standards met?

               All sight triangles will be dimensioned. The traffic engineers will give testimony
               regarding AASHTO Standards.

          40. Road Q is inaccurately labeled as Road G on sheet 21 of 65.

               We will correctly label road Q on sheet 21 of 65.

          41. Existing contours are shown at one-foot intervals while proposed contours are shown
              at two foot intervals. Plans should be consistent. We recommend one foot intervals,
              except for slopes greater than 10%.



D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 16



               We will provide 1 foot contour intervals for existing conditions and 2 foot intervals
               for proposed.

          42. Sheet 7 of 65 shows that the New Jersey Power and Light Company easement on the
              property is in the approximate location of Road V townhouse section (sheet 26). It
              appears as though the New Jersey Power and Light lines are represented on Sheet 26
              by several solid small dots in a line. These solid small dots should be labeled on the
              plan. However, if these dots represent utility poles for the power line, relocation of
              the poles and or units must be addressed by the applicant. Some of the solid small
              dots are located within townhouse units (unit 12, 28 and 29) and the cul-de-sac of
              Court X. The New Jersey Power and Light Company should review and approve any
              improvements within its easement and any proposed relocation of its lines.

               The NJPL utility poles to be relocated will be labeled on the plans. The relocation
               of the poles around Townhouse Section 4, sheet 26 of 65, will be shown after
               agreements have been reached with NJP&L.

          43. Centerline stations and elevations should be added to the road profiles for all
              intersections.

               We will add centerline stations and elevations for all intersections to the profiles.

          44. Clarification should be provided on the construction details for the precast sanitary
              sewer manhole as to when the different types of sections (A through G) are to be used
              (sheet 61).

               Clarification will be added to the sanitary sewer details. The sanitary sewer
               manhole details will be approved by Applied Water Management.

          45. Safety platforms may be required for some of the manholes due to the excessive
              depths. Construction details should be provided for the safety platforms and notes
              should be added to the plans as to when safety platforms are required. Do these
              manholes have to be so deep?

               Safety platforms will be provided in deep manholes as required by Applied Water
               Management and the Township Engineer. The deepest manholes are located at the
               Road A/Ct. Q intersection. This sanitary line will be rerouted along the back of
               detention basin #6 and will significantly reduce the depth of manholes in this area.
               Several manholes in the 20-24 ft. range will be required in the vicinity of the Road
               L/Road A intersection in order to avoid a fourth pump station. The trade-off
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 17



               between several deep manholes and a fourth pump station has been discussed with
               Applied Water Management.

          46. Width of the low flow channel should be revised from 3 feet to 4 feet (sheet 61). An
              underdrain should also be provided.

               The low flow channels will be four feet wide and provided with an underdrain.

          47. The location of any modified inlets must be noted on the plan and profiles.

               All modified inlets will be noted on the Utility Plans and Profiles.

          48. A pavement detail is required for the transition to Main Street.

               A pavement transition detail will be provided.

          49. Construction signs are shown on Sheet 62 of 65. The use of these signs should be
              addressed. A separate traffic control plan is appropriate.

               A separate plan will be provided showing the use of the construction and traffic
               control signs.

          50. The striping detail and the parking space detail on sheet 62 of 65 do not match. The
              applicant’s engineer should clarify whether there will be double lines or not
              surrounding the handicapped parking space. In addition, the handicapped parking
              space and loading should be dimensioned.

               The handicap parking space detail will be clarified and the spaces dimensioned on
               sheet 62 of 65.

          51. There are several typographical errors within the notes to the left of the pavement
              details on sheet 62 of 65.

               The typos in the notes on sheet 62 of 65 will be corrected.

          52. A tennis court detail with fencing should be provided. Details required.

               We will provide details for tennis court construction and fencing.



D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 18



          53. A split rail fence (and a board-on-board fence) detail should be provided. Please refer
              to comment E.1 regarding board-on-board fence.

               We will provide a detail for split rail fence with vinyl coated mesh.

          54. All trash racks should be specified as aluminum (sheet 64).

               All detention basin outlet structure trash racks will be specified as aluminum.

          55. A transition detail is required from the low flow channel to the orifice headwall and
              flared end section.

               A transition detail for the low flow channel will be added.

          56. The location of anti-seep collars must be shown on the plan view.

               The location of the anti-seep collars will be shown on the utility plans.

          57. The sidewalk detail should provide for 4” of clean stone to be placed before the
              concrete is poured.

               The sidewalk detail shall comply with the RSIS; They will be 4” thick except at
               vehicular crossings where they will be 6” thick. A note will be added that sidewalks
               will be placed on firmly compacted sub-base, free of water and ice or 4” of clean
               stone must be placed.

          58. The plan view of the recreation facility shows a covered porch on the front of the
              building which is not shown on the architectural drawings for the building. Either the
              architectural plan or preliminary plans need to be revised for consistency.

               The preliminary plan will be made consistent with the architecturals.

          59. The pump stations are located in very prominent locations on the property.
              Therefore, the construction of the structures should be as unobtrusive as possible. In
              addition, appropriate screening and vegetation may be needed to both hide and soften
              the structure depending on the proposed architecture. Need architectural details i.e.
              colors, type of material, etc.

               We will provide typical details of the pump stations and appropriate landscaping.


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 19



          60. The street index provided on the plans should be revised to specify the road profiles
              which are being provided on each road profile sheet. For example, Road A, Road B,
              etc.

               The road profile sheets will be indexed to indicate which roads are shown on each
               profile sheet.

          61. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection pipeline should be located
              on the plans within the right-of-way easement. In addition, the applicant’s surveyor
              should explain why right-of-way monumentation was not held.

               Easements were established from deed calls referencing the railroad R.O.W.
               Survey shows all physical monumentation used to establish railroad R.O.W.
               easement monuments were referenced to railroad R.O.W. as established by this
               survey.

               The NJDEP pipeline will be shown on the plans as per plans supplied by the
               NJDEP.

B.        Survey Details:

          1. Sheet 2 of 65 should define the existing acreage of the lots proposed for development,
             not just the total acreage of 292 acres. In addition, the bearing and distances should
             be added to sheets 5, 6, and 7 for the existing individual lots.

               The line separating existing lot 18 and 31 will have bearings and distances added
               and the areas will be shown, although this line will be ultimately eliminated.

          2. The existing road right-of-way widths on the adjoining roads should be added to the
             plans (i.e., Main Street and Blossom Hill Road).

               The existing R.O.W. widths will be added.

          3. Sheet 5 of 65 defines a 30’ wide access right of ingress and egress (deed book 720,
             page 670). The access right-of-way on Lot 25 for the use of Lot 18 should be vacated
             as part of this application.

               Pulte Homes sees no reason to vacate the existing easement.



D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 20



          4. Whenever subtotal distances are utilized in the boundary survey the plan should
             clearly indicate which distance, if any, is the “total”. For example, the boundary line
             extending from the northwest corner of the property to the east shows two distances,
             32.84’ and 592.47’. The plan should indicate whether 592.47’ is the total distance or
             if both values are subtotals (sheet 5). This office recommends that the word “tie” be
             used for sub-distances along the boundary.

               32.84’ is an offset distance from R.O.W. to P. K Nail.

          5. A P.K. nail was found at the intersection of Blossom Hill Road and Main Street. The
             applicant’s surveyor should indicate whether the P.K. nail is part of the original
             boundary survey.

               All physical evidence found is taken into consideration and tied to survey. P.K..
               Nail is from prior, unknown survey showing centerline of roadway.

          6. Sheet 5 of 65 shows that the original title line is located on the southern right-of-way
             line of Main Street, thus indicating a fee taking for the creation of Main Street. If this
             was not a fee taking, the boundary line should extend into Main Street and there
             should be a breakdown of the gross and net area of the property.

               All deeds call to southerly line of Main Street.

          7. Sheet 5 of 65 indicates that Main Street is a County road. This was the case at one
             time, but Main Street is now a Township road. The plan should be revised
             accordingly.

               The plan will be revised to remove the “County Road” assignation in Main Street.

          8. A tag arrow should be added to the bearing and distance of N 79° 58’32” E 30.02 feet
             at the north end of the 30’ wide strip of land located between Block 7, Lots 26 and 29.

               Tag arrow will be added.

          9. Note 2 on Sheet 5 of 65 shows that the plan was drawn using 1927 State Plane
             Coordinate System. The plan should be revised to comply with Hunterdon County
             mapping requirements.

               The plan will be augmented to comply with Hunterdon County requirements..


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 21



          10. The applicant should provide this office with copies of the filed deeds used to prepare
              the boundary survey as well as applicable easement and right-of-way deeds.

               We will provide the Township Engineer with copies of the filed deeds as requested.

          11. Corner markers should be set on actual corners where previously set corners no
              longer exist. There are several corners where corner markers may need to be set since
              the monumentation was not found at the actual corner of the property.

               All corners were set or were referenced to corner markers found.

          12. Curve data shown along the existing access easement for Lot 18.01 (sheet 5) should
              have chord bearing and distance shown in addition to radius and arc length.

               The curve data will be added to the access easement for Lot 18.01.

          13. Title block for sheet 5 indicates Block 7, Lots 18, and 31. If Lot 18.01 is part of the
              application, it should be added to the cover sheet and all other references to the
              original lots.

               The title sheet shall be revised to show Lot 18.01.

          14. Some of the bearings are shown with and without direction arrows. The plan should
              be consistent, either provide direction arrows or do not show direction arrows.

               Directional arrows will be shown.

          15. Chord bearings and chord distances should be provided for all curves. Curve data is
              missing on sheets 6, 8, 9, and 10.

               Chord bearings and distances will be added to the curve data.

          16. The applicant should provide this office and the Planning Board with a copy of the
              deeds and defined restrictions for the following easements and right-of-ways:

                        16.5’ wide unobstructed right-of-way (deed book 449, page 103);
                        easement to New Jersey Power and Light Co. (deed book 346, page 487) – no
                         right-of-way width given;
                        easement to New Jersey Power and Light Co. (deed book 492, page 431 and
                         deed book 495, page 255); and
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 22



                        New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection – Pipeline right-of-way
                         easement (deed book 844, page 212).

               We have provided the Township Engineer and Board with copies of the requested
               Deeds.

          17. All wetlands, state open waters, wetlands buffers and floodplains shall be contained
              within a conservation easement described by metes and bounds.

               All wetlands, state open waters, buffers and floodplains will be described with metes
               and bounds on the Final Plats and will be within a conservation easement to the
               extent required by the NJDEP.

          18. A storm water drainage easement should be added to Block 7.01, Lot 12 to ensure
              access to the pipe run from inlet #13-2 to inlet #13-1 (sheet 11 and 23).

               A stormwater drainage easement will be shown on sheet 11 and 23 of 65 as
               directed.

          19. Any proposed utility easements for water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer should be
              added to the Utility Plans. The proposed utility easements should also be added to the
              Grading Plans.

               Any proposed utility easements will be shown on the grading and utility plans.

          20. The appropriate authorities must review and approve the location and dimensions of
              all easements. For example, the 20’ wide drainage easement between Block 7.22,
              Lots 4 and 5 is insufficient for the parallel storm sewer and sanitary sewer lines. An
              easement of at least 40’ should be provided.

               All utility easements will be designed to meet the RSIS Standards.

C.        Residential Site Improvement Standards:

          1. The plans call for the utilization of High Density Polyethylene Pipe for stormwater
             management. The Township of Clinton prefers Reinforced Concrete Pipe for
             stormwater management conveyance and would prefer to see the plans revised. In
             accordance with the Residential Site Improvement Standards, if the applicant intends
             to use High Density Polyethylene Pipe the manufacturer’s installation specifications


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 23



               must be submitted to the Planning Board for confirmation that sufficient cover is
               provided. Special backfill and bedding may be required – see Township Engineer.

               The applicant agrees to use reinforced concrete pipe for all stormwater lines.

          2. The plans provide a cartway turning radius of 45 feet on all the proposed cul-de-sacs.
             This is 5 feet greater than the 40 feet defined in the Residential Site Improvement
             Standards, but is 15 feet less than the minimum of 60 feet defined by the Clinton
             Township Fire Department. The applicant should be aware that the limited turning
             radius could cause problems during emergencies or inhibit emergency response.

               We will provide cul-de-sacs with a cartway radius of 45 feet. The islands shown in
               the townhouse area cul-de-sacs will be removed or made mountable at the direction
               of the Township Engineer and Planning Board.

          3. The Residential Site Improvements allow parking along the 28 feet wide roads
             proposed for the single-family units. The roads include Courts A, B, C, D, G, H, J,
             and K and Roads B, C, D, E, L, M, N. These roads will not be publicly-owned and
             will not be maintained by the Township of Clinton. However, the applicant is
             advised that parking along these roads may interfere with or inhibit emergency
             response.

               We will provide roadways that meet the RSIS Standards. The applicant proposes
               that all streets serving single family lots will be public roadways.

          4. The Residential Site Improvement Standards define Road A as a “major collector”
             (medium intensity). The road width of 24 feet with curb complies with Township of
             Clinton minimum road width. Roads within developments in the Township of
             Clinton range from 24 feet to 30 feet. The Board’s Traffic Engineer should provide
             direction to the Board with respect to the required road width on Road A based on the
             anticipated traffic. If Road A is to be accepted by the Township of Clinton, parking is
             not permitted.

               We will provide a 28 ft. cartway for the collector road (Road A). The roadway will
               be signed for “no parking”.

          5. This office has some concerns with respect to the amount of traffic anticipated on
             Road V as a result of the number of townhouses and the recreation facility. The
             Board’s Traffic Engineer should advise the Board of any traffic congestion issues and
             any recommended means of alleviating congestion.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 24




               The Board’s Traffic Engineer recommended against a boulevard at this location.

          6. A boulevard may be appropriate at the entrance of Road W to comply with the cul-
             de-sac requirements of the Residential Site Improvement Standards. The Board’s
             Traffic Engineer should advise the Board.

               The Board’s Traffic Engineer recommended against a boulevard at this location.

          7. In accordance with the Residential Site Improvement Standards parking requirements,
             additional parking spaces are required in the following sections of the project:

                                                                              Required    Spaces    Additional
                                                                               Spaces    Provided    Needed
                        Along Road W and Court W                                 30         27          3
                        Within apartment units                                  324        299         25
                        Along Road S                                             42         35          7
                        Along Road G                                             16         15          1
                        Along Road P                                             23         19          4

                We will provide parking that meets the requirements of the RSIS. We agree to
               calculate parking assuming that all units will have 3 bedrooms with the exception
               of the COAH units where the bedroom counts are set. We also agree to add
               additional free parking where possible.

          8. The pavement cross section for Road A should be revised to 6” of granular base, 7 ½”
             of base course and 1 ½” of surface course (collector street, poor subgrade). The
             pavement cross section for all other roads should be revised to 6” granular base, 5”
             base course and 1 ½” of surface course (local streets, poor subgrade).

               We will change the pavement cross section shown on sheet 62 of 65 to reflect the
               “poor subgrade condition” in the RSIS specifications. A note will be added that the
               applicant can reduce the pavement cross section to the medium subgrade condition
               or good subgrade condition upon Township Engineer approval of CBR testing. We
               agree that in no case the pavement section will be less than 5” of stabilized base
               and 2” of surface course for the collector and 4” of stabilized base and 2” of
               surface course for all other roads.




D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 25



          9. Although the Residential Site Improvement Standards allow for a wearing course of 1
             ½”, the Township of Clinton recommends a 2” wearing course (surface course) based
             on industry limitations and standards.

          See response for item 8.

D.        Site Circulation and Traffic:

          1. The Board’s Traffic Engineer, Ken Mackiewicz, should comment with respect to the
             on-site and off-site circulation and traffic impacts.

          2. The applicant should respond to the November 18, 1999 memorandum from TRC
             Raymond Keyes regarding the review of the Traffic Impact Analysis.

          3. The plans entitled “Intersection Improvements New Jersey State Highway 22 and
             Main Street” present the proposed improvements along Main Street and Route 22.
             Submission of construction plans to the New Jersey Department of Transportation
             and the Board’s Traffic Engineer for review and approval should be a condition of
             preliminary approval. The Board’s Traffic Engineer should advise the Board as to
             what stage of the project the construction plans must be approved. Does the schedule
             agreed to at amended GDP approval still work?

               Orth-Rodgers has submitted a highway access permit to NJDOT and has provided
               copies to the Board’s Traffic Engineer.

          4. The configuration of Road R and Road T should be revised. The roads should have a
             consistent road width (sheet 18).

               Road R and Road T are a different use than the roadways aligned on the opposite
               side of Road A. The township Traffic Engineer did not consider this a problem.

          5. The boulevard in the middle of Road L should be tapered from station 11+00 to
             station 11+30 (sheet 19).

               The island at station 11+00 to 11+30 on Road L will be removed.

E.        Site Grading:

          1. The applicant has proposed a 4’ split-rail fence on the top of a majority of the
             retaining walls. This provides some safety while leaving a rural appearance to the
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 26



               property. However, on the top of retaining walls behind single-family homes it
               would be advisable for the applicant to consider 4’ board-on-board fence, which a
               child playing in the limited backyard could not slip through. Board-on-board fence
               may be appropriate behind Block 7.01, Lots 16 to 26 for example. The Board may
               wish to impose other fencing-landscaping standards in these areas.

               We will provide a detail for split rail fence with vinyl coated mesh.

          2. There is insufficient grading information provided in the vicinity of the recreation
             facility. The plans should be revised to provide the grading in this area so proper
             review of the drainage can be made.

               More detail will be provided in this area.

          3. Two tennis courts are proposed on Blocks 7.15 and 7.17 within the New Jersey
             Environmental Protection Pipeline ROW easement. Grading and construction
             information must be added to the plans and provided to the New Jersey Department
             of Environmental Protection to ensure that the improvements are not restricted from
             the easement.

               The applicant has requested NJDEP’s determination of what is allowed in the
               easement. Final site plans will reflect DEP’s decision and may eliminate tennis
               courts in NJDEP’s easement.

          4. Structural calculations from a licensed professional engineer (specializing in
             structural design) must be submitted to the Board and the Board’s experts for review
             for all the proposed retaining walls. The design calculations must consider the flow
             of surface water over and around the retaining walls, the extent of fill beneath the
             retaining walls, and the overall height of the retaining walls, as well as all normal
             design parameters.

               Structural calculations for all retaining walls over 4’ high, signed and sealed by a
               structural engineer, will be submitted to the Township Engineer.

          5. Fence should be installed at the top of all retaining walls over 4’ high particularly in
             the vicinity of pedestrian traffic. For example, Block 7.12, Lots 20 and 22 (sheet 14);
             Block 7.19, Lot 75 (sheet 18); and at the intersection of Road N and Road L (sheet
             19). As mentioned previously, 4’ board-on-board fence may be more appropriate in
             some instances than split rail when small children may frequent an area. For example,
             Block 7.22, Lots 8, 9, and 10 (sheet 18) and Block 7.22, Lots 11 to 16 (sheet 19).
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 27




               Fence will be installed along the top of all retaining walls over 48” in height.

          6. The plans should indicate where on site the cut material is to be utilized and fill is
             obtained. The entire property should not be used as a staging, storage or quarry
             during the construction of a single section. Movement distances should be minimized
             for dust and noise control.

               Construction drawings will identify cut and fill areas along with stockpile locations
               for the phases of construction.

          7. Additional information should be provided along Main Street regarding the proposed
             grading and drainage for the proposed improvements.

               Orth-Rogers Associates has submitted a highway access permit to NJDOT.
               NJDOT will determine final grading and drainage.

          8. A significant amount of fill is required to drain Court A to detention basin 7. Portions
             of the Court A are in as much as 18 feet of fill with house basements on as much as
             15 feet of fill. Other areas where significant cuts and fills are proposed occur
             throughout the site. The northeast corner of the property adjacent to Main Street
             appears to be a more suitable location for a detention basin than the current location.
             The northeast corner is in a natural depression at a lower elevation.

               We will consider relocation of detention basin #7 as requested or provide
               alternative methods to lower the Court A cul-de-sac to significantly reduce the fill
               on Lots 7 and 8 Block 7.01.

          9. It appears that grading of the single-family houses will require the use of window
             wells for basement windows. Foundations are exposed for only 8 inches in most
             cases. Use of window wells should be eliminated to the greatest extent possible.

               The applicant will remove window wells where possible.

          10. A stabilized and driveable (year round) access must be provided to each detention
              basin for maintenance purposes.

               A stabilized driveable access will be provided at each detention basin consisting of
               6” of stone, filter fabric, topsoil, seed and mulch.


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 28



          11. Grading at the rear of Block 7.19, Lot 79 should be clarified (sheet 18).

               The grading at the rear of Lot 79 Block 7.19 will be clarified..

          12. It appears that several road profiles can be designed to better reflect the existing
              topography of the site and minimize the cut and fills. The maximum road grade
              proposed is 6 percent, while the maximum permitted is 12 percent. The
              environmental impact of the project may be reduced by a decrease in the cut and fill
              activities.

               The road profiles will be increased to as much as 8% ( the maximum allowed by
               RSIS for a collector road) to reduce cuts and fills in accordance with the Boards
               and applicants traffic engineers.

          13. The sanitary sewer has sections which are as much as 32 feet deep. Grading of the
              site to better reflect the existing topography may reduce the pipe depths.

               The 32 ft. deep manhole will be removed and the line relocated in the Court A/Road
               A area. Several manholes in excess of 20 ft. will remain in the Road L/Road A area
               to avoid the need for a fourth pump station.

          14. The grade of the emergency access between Court D and Road Y is too steep for
              emergency vehicles (sheet 53). The access road must be appropriately graded to
              ensure usability by emergency vehicles.

               The grades of the emergency access road between Court D and Road Y will be
               revised.

F.        Stormwater Management:

          1. Time of concentration paths should be shown on the drainage area plans.

               The path for the time of concentration will be shown on the drainage area plans for
               Tc greater than 10 minutes.

          2. Stormwater management is studied to Main Street and the South Branch of the
             Rockaway Creek. However, drainage area map and calculations are unclear as to
             which of the subdrainage areas contribute to the overall watersheds. The drainage
             areas should be studied at points where runoff leaves the site as well as locations
             along the Rockaway Creek to ensure that sections of the creek will not experience
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 29



               post-development runoff rates greater than pre-development. For example,
               predeveloped area UD-L drains to the southeast property corner through adjacent
               properties prior to reaching the Rockaway Creek.

               Stormwater will be studied at points on site and where runoff leaves the site to the
               satisfaction of the NJDEP Township Engineer and Hunterdon County Engineers
               Office.

          3. Calculation of the travel times (Tt) used in TR-20 calculations should be provided.

               Calculation of travel times will be provided.

          4. Main Street has a high point between existing areas UD-M and UD-A. Separate
             studies are required.

               We will separate the studied area on Main Street on either side of the high point.

          5. This office disagrees with the method of calculating composite C values on a system
             basis. Each inlet drainage area should be calculated independently. Pipe calculations
             indicate that the piping has been designed for the 100 year storm. However, an
             adjustment factor for the 25 year storm was applied to the C value.

               We will check individual inlets at the top of the drainage systems and provide
               information to the Township Engineer.

          6. Lawn inlets should be installed to collect surface water from lawn areas before the
             surface water enters the road and subsequently the surface water collection system in
             the roadway. For example, lawn inlets should be installed behind the proposed type
             “B” inlet on Road E in the vicinity of Block 7.01, Lots 43 and 44 (sheet 13); behind
             Block 7.13, Lot 42 (sheet 15); beside Block 7.13, Lot 16 (sheet 15); and behind Block
             7.17, Lot 82 (sheet 20).

               We will provide lawn inlets where concentrated flow will cross sidewalks and cause
               icing.

          7. Lawn inlets should be installed in areas where grades are extremely flat to ensure
             proper drainage around dwellings. For example, lawn inlets should be installed
             behind Block 7.03, Lots 2, 3, 5, and 6 (sheet 12); between Block 7.17, Lots 89, 90
             and 92 (sheet 20); and behind Block 7.23, Lot 105 (sheet 21).


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 30



               We will provide swales with 2% minimum slopes and provide additional inlets
               where needed to achieve 2% slopes.

          8. Sheet 48 of 65 presents a standard swale and channel for the conveyance of surface
             water. There is no indication that sufficient capacity is available in either the channel
             or the swale for the amount of surface water anticipated. The plans also do not
             indicate where the swale or channel is to be installed.

               Calculations will be provided for the stable channel and the location will be
               specified.

          9. The plans should clearly define when each detention basin is to be constructed based
             on areas of disturbance.

               A plan for each phase of the project will designate the detention basins needed to
               construct that phase and will be submitted to the Township Engineer prior to
               construction..

          10. A substantial quantity of the runoff from Road A discharges directly into the South
              Branch of the Rockaway Creek. Treatment of the runoff for water quality must be
              addressed.

               We will comply with all requirements of the NJDEP for water quality during the
               Individual Permit (I.P.) and stream encroachment permit process.

          11. Slopes of the low flow channels must be added to the detention basin grading.

               All low flow channels will have a minimum slope of ½ %..

          12. The connection to the existing contours on the eastern end of detention basin 7 (sheet
              11) appears to be inaccurate. The grading should be revised.

               The contour lines at detention basin 7 will be corrected as requested.

          13. The emergency spillway for detention basin 7 is set at an elevation of 239 feet which
              is lower than the existing down stream grade (sheet 11).

               Details and calculations for all emergency spillways will be subject to approval of
               the NJDEP, Hunterdon County, Hunterdon SCD and will be provided to the
               Township Engineer.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 31




          14. All detention basins should have a top of berm labeled and dimensioned to provide a
              minimum 10 feet wide top of berm.

               All detention basins will have a 10 ft. wide top of berm.

          15. A stormwater easement is shown on sheet 12 of 65 between Block 7.01, Lots 20 and
              21. The applicant’s engineer should identify the purpose of this easement.

               The easement between Lots 20 and 21 Block 7.01 will be removed.

          16. The double “B” inlet at station 4+50 on Road C (sheet 12 of 65) should be replaced
              with a standard “B” inlet with an additional inlet and pipe installed up-hill. The
              additional inlet should be located to pick up half of the runoff.

               We will provide the additional inlet as requested.

          17. Additional inlets should be provided at each of the following intersections to intercept
              runoff prior to entering the intersection:

                   West intersection of Road A and Road C;
                   Intersection of Road B and Court G;
                   Intersection of Road B and Court J;
                   Intersection of Road B and Court K; and
                   Intersection of Road C and Court B.

               Inlets will be added to the following intersections: Road A/Road C, Road B/Court
               G, Road C/Court B. An inlet at the Road B/Court K intersection will be moved to a
               more advantageous location.

          18. Detailed grading should be provided for each intersection to demonstrate positive
              drainage and smooth transitions.

               We will provide more spot elevations in the intersections to show positive drainage.
               We will provide an intersection detail at a larger scale for any intersection the
               Township Engineer considers questionable.




D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 32



          19. A type “E” inlet should be provided uphill of the retaining wall to the rear of Block
              7.07, Lots 22, 23 and 29 (sheet 17). Adequate drainage must be provided
              immediately uphill of all retaining walls.

               An additional inlet will be placed where requested.

          20. A swale should be provided along the rear of Block 7.02, Lots 21 to 29 to direct
              surface water into an “E” inlet which would then discharge to inlet #9-2A3 (sheet 17).

               We will provide the swale and additional inlet along the rear of Lots 21 to 20 Block
               7.02 as requested.

          21. All cul-de-sacs should be graded to drain to the curbline. Grading such as shown in
              Court G and Court H (sheet 17) should be revised.

               All cul-de-sacs will be graded to drain to the curb line.

          22. Grading of the Road A and Road T intersection does not provide adequate drainage
              (sheet 18).

               See item 18.

          23. The emergency spillway for detention basin 5 is not shown on sheet 22 of 65.

               The spillway details will be provided on sheet 22 of 65.

          24. Double “E” inlet #13-71 should be replaced with a headwall.

               The double E inlet #13-71 will be replaced with a flared end section.

          25. The rip rap apron associated with the detention basin 4 outfall is located outside the
              tract boundary (sheet 12).

               All rip-rap will be located within the property lines. After discussions with the
               Hunterdon County SCD we will replace the rip-rap aprons with rip-rap scour holes,
               subject to approval of the Township Engineer.

          26. The outfall from detention basin 4 discharges to a very steep offsite swale (greater
              than 3 to 1). Stability calculations are required. Stability calculations should be
              provided for all detention basin outfalls.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 33




               The outfall from Detention Basin #4 will be split to discharge to the two separate
               state open waters on sheet 12 of 65 and will be designed to NJDEP and Hunterdon
               SCD standards.

          27. All surface flows exceeding 5 cfs must be “picked up.”

               All swales drainaging more than 5 CFS will be collected in an inlet.

G.        Environmental Issues:

          1. Sheet 2 of 65 refers to a plan entitled “Wetlands Delineation Plan” prepared by
             Donald H. Stires Associates dated April 9, 1990, revised July 22, 1994. The latest
             revision of this plan submitted to the Planning Board was dated July 14, 1992. The
             latest version of the “Wetlands Delineation Plan” utilized in the development of the
             Preliminary Major Subdivision and Site Plan should be submitted to the Planning
             Board.

               We will provide the Township Engineer with copies of the “Donald H. Stires
               Association, Wetlands Delineation Plan”.

          2. The applicant should provide testimony to the Planning Board with respect to the
             status of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection review and
             approval of the proposed wetlands averaging plan. Any correspondence regarding the
             wetlands averaging plan should be submitted to the Planning Board and Board
             professionals for utilization during the review of the application.

               The applicant has agreed to provide the Board with copies of correspondence with
               respect to the NJDEP application.

          3. There are several locations in which construction is proposed in very close proximity
             to the average wetlands buffer limit. Since no earth and vegetation disturbance is to
             occur within the wetlands buffer limit at any time and no construction equipment is to
             enter the wetlands buffer limit, the applicant may need to move some of the grading
             limits and retaining walls further from the wetlands buffer limit. For example, along
             Road A from station 7+00 to 10+00 (sheet 11); behind Block 7.01, Lots 41, 42 and 47
             (sheet 13); behind Block 7.01, Lots 5 and 6 (sheet 14); and behind Block 7.02, Lots
             39 to 41 (sheet 17).



D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 34



               We will revise the plans to provide more room to construct retaining walls where
               possible and will respect NJDEP construction requirements.

          4. The State Open Waters should be more clearly defined on the plans. In particular the
             crossings of the State Open Waters should be specified to ensure proper review. For
             example, there is no indication on the plans that the emergency access road between
             Court D and Court Y or Road L cross State Open Waters.

               State Open Waters and Flood Plains will be clearly marked on the plans.

          5. Perhaps the wetlands and wetlands buffer areas should be shaded for clarification
             during review and construction. With the number of lines on the plans there may be
             some confusion as to the location of the wetlands and wetlands buffer limits.

               The wetland and buffer areas will be shaded on the grading plans following
               NJDEP Wetland Permit and Transition Area Waiver approval.

          6. The retaining wall behind Block 7.22, Lots 11 and 12 (sheet 19) appears to be
             constructed within the State Open Waters. The applicant’s engineer should confirm
             the retaining wall and State Open Waters location. The New Jersey Department of
             Environmental Protection must approve such an intrusion into the State Open Waters.

               The intrusion into the State Open Water on sheet 19 of 65 behind Block 7.22 Lots
               11 and 12 will be removed.

          7. The extent of fill proposed within the wetlands and floodplain limits for the
             construction of Road A from station 7+00 to station 15+00 and from station 64+00 to
             station 75+00 can be reduced by increasing the slope of Road A. The extent of the
             proposed grading within the wetlands and 100 year floodplain for the construction of
             Road A should be shown on the plans (sheet 22). Traffic concerns and environmental
             concerns must be considered together to ensure proper construction of Road A for
             safety with as little impact to the wetlands and floodplain as possible.

               The profile of the collector road (Road A) will be revised to the extent permitted by
               NJDEP up to the maximum slope permitted by the RSIS (8%).

          8. Based on the extent of disturbance to the wetlands, an individual wetland permit will
             be required from New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

               An “Individual Permit” (I.P.) is being requested from the NJDEP.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 35




          9. Stream crossings should be designed and detailed during preliminary design and
             review.

               Stream crossing design will is governed by NJDEP wetlands and stream
               encroachment rules and will be a condition of Preliminary approval..

          10. The Environmental Impact Statement indicates that several of the soil types on site
              have severe limitations for building foundations for dwellings due to shallow depth to
              seasonal high water table, shallow depth to bedrock, and steep slopes. There is no
              indication in the report as to the location and depth of these soils with respect to the
              proposed building, detention basin and road locations and excessive areas of cut. The
              Environmental Impact Statement should be expanded.

               We will submit the 1997 Mellick & Tully Report with this letter.

          11. The Environmental Impact Statement indicates that due to shallow depth of the
              bedrock blasting may be necessary. The Environmental Impact Statement should
              indicate if any of the excessive cuts are proposed in areas of shallow bedrock. The
              applicant’s engineer should provide testimony as to whether roads are within shallow
              bedrock or placed to avoid shallow bedrock.

               See item 10.

          12. As a condition of the amended general development plan approval, the Environmental
              Impact Statement must be expanded as to the pollution in the surface water, the
              impacts on the South Branch of the Rockaway Creek, and provisions being made to
              protect the South Branch of the Rockaway Creek from any adverse impacts. There is
              a large portion of Road A which drains directly into the creek without any water
              quality measures. This must be addressed as well as the extent of water quality being
              provided in the detention basin.

               Omni Environmental will address impact to surface waters.

          13. The Environmental Impact Statement indicates that the total capacity of the proposed
              Clinton East facility is 550,000 gallons per day and Windy Acres will generate
              315,000 gallons per day. In accordance with the Wastewater Capacity Agreement,
              the Clinton East facility is to have a capacity of up to 450,000 gallons per day with
              300,000 gallons per day reserved for the subject property. The Environmental Impact
              Statement must be revised accordingly.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 36




               Omni will respond.

          14. The Environmental Impact Statement still references 1,140 dwelling units, while the
              plans have been reduced to 958 dwelling units. The Environmental Impact Statement
              should be revised to more accurately reflect the environmental impacts of the
              proposed development as before the Board at this time. The Environmental Impact
              Statement also refers to water supply and distribution being provided by an expansion
              of the Town of Clinton Water system; this is no longer the case.

               Omni will respond.

H.        Lighting:

          1. The Board’s lighting expert should review the lighting plan (sheets 59 and 60) for
             compliance with the intent of the proposed Clinton Township Lighting Ordinance.
             The proposed plan shows 230 lights being installed within the developed portion of
             the property (approximately 150 acres), which equals 2 lights for every acre and a
             half of developed land.

          2. The proposed lighting plan provides for lighting throughout the development
             including the single-family lots. The Township of Clinton does not provide street
             lighting in any of the existing single-family developments. The Board should discuss
             whether street lighting is appropriate in the single-family portion of the property.

          3. The Board’s Traffic Engineer should provide direction to the Board with respect to
             any areas which require lighting for safety. The lighting proposed along Road A may
             be different than that provided on the other roads.

          4. The first note at the bottom of sheet 59 of 65 should be revised to read “location and
             type of luminaries and poles are subject to review by GPU with final approval by the
             Planning Board.”

          5. The second note at the bottom of sheet 59 of 65 should be deleted. The spacing and
             luminaire will be defined by the Planning Board during preliminary review. Spacing
             of lighting every 150 feet is in excess of the intent of the Clinton Township Lighting
             Ordinance.




D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 37



          6. The information provided on sheet 59 of 65 should be revised to provide the average
             illuminance (initial and maintained), average luminance (initial and maintained),
             illuminance ratio (average to minimum) and luminance ratio (average to minimum).

          7. The location of each individual light should be clearly presented on the plan view
             with the height, type of light fixture, and photometric shown.

               Lighting revisions will address the township’s new Lighting Ordinance. The plan
               will show a level of detail as requested by the Township Engineer.

I.        Landscaping:

          1. The proposed landscape plan provides a hearty mix of species with a variety of
             growing rates, vegetation and mature size. In addition, there are two plant sizes
             proposed for initial planting of each species, which will also aid in the desired
             naturalized appearance.

          2. The landscape plan should provide all road names for easy reference. Road A is
             mislabeled as Road B on sheet L-2 and Court W and Road W are not labeled on sheet
             L-5.

          3. Red Sunset Maples (2” – 2 ½” caliper) are proposed as street trees along Road A
             throughout the site. However, there are 18 Red Sunset Maples (2 ½” – 3” caliper)
             proposed along the west side of Road A at the boulevard entrance (sheet L-1). Why
             the change in size?

          4. On the proposed landscape plan, Red Sunset Maples (2” – 2 ½” caliper) are missing
             from certain sections of Road A. The plans should be revised to provide a consistent
             street tree row along Road A whenever possible. The sections of Road A missing
             Red Sunset Maples are section 22+00 to section 25+00 (sheet L-3), section 62+00 to
             section 65+00 (sheet L-7), and station 11+00 to station 16+00 and station 65+00 to
             station 72+00 (sheet L-12).

          5. Green Mountain Linden and Red Oak have a mature spread (under optimum
             conditions) of approximately 70 to 80 feet. Therefore, these trees may be too large to
             be utilized as street trees. The applicant’s landscape architect should provide
             testimony as to the anticipated growth of these trees in the proposed planting
             conditions. Green Mountain Linden and Red Oak are proposed as street trees on
             Court A (sheet L-1), Court B (sheet L-2), Road E (sheet L-3), Road V (sheet L-4 and


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 38



               L-5), Road W and Court W (sheet L-5), Court V (sheet L-6), Road B and Court K
               (sheet L-7), and Road S and Court R (sheet L-10).

          6. Babylon Weeping Willows are proposed for several locations near the detention
             basins. This species is susceptible to canker. The applicant may want to consider
             replacing the Babylon Weeping Willow with a Golden Weeping Willow (Salix
             Chrysocoma).

          7. The plant list on sheet L-4 calls for 13 Eastern White Pine (5’ – 6’ high) and 9
             Eastern White Pine (6’ – 8’ high). However, 17 Eastern White Pine (5’ – 6’ high)
             and 12 Eastern White Pine (6’ – 8’ high) are shown on the plan. The plant list should
             be revised to coincide with the plan.

          8. The plant list on sheet L-5 calls for 72 Eastern White Pine (5’ – 6’ high) and 51
             Eastern White Pine (6’ – 8’ high). However, 53 Eastern White Pine (5’ – 6’ high)
             and 65 Eastern White Pine (6’ – 8’ high) are shown on the plan. The plant list should
             be revised to coincide with the plan.

          9. The plant list on sheet L-5 calls for 60 Douglas Fir (5’ – 6’ high) and 43 Douglas Fir
             (6’ – 8’ high). However, 63 Douglas Fir (5’ – 6’ high) and 45 Douglas Fir (6’ – 8’
             high) are shown on the plan. The plant list should be revised to coincide with the
             plan.

          10. Four Eastern White Pine (5’ – 6’ high) and three Eastern White Pine (6’ – 8’ high) are
              proposed on the northeast corner of the intersection of Road A and Road T (sheet L-
              8). Based on the architectural plans for the townhouses on Road T, more dense
              evergreen vegetation may be needed in this location to obscure the townhouses from
              headlights of vehicles entering Road A from Road S. Perhaps Norway Spruce or
              Douglas Fir can be proposed.

          11. The plant list on sheet L-9 calls for 11 Red Sunset Maples (2” – 2 ½” caliper) and 6
              Red Sunset Maples (2 ½” – 3” caliper). However, 9 Red Sunset Maples (2” – 2 ½”
              caliper) and 7 Red Sunset Maples (2 ½” – 3” caliper) are shown on the plan. The
              plant list should be revised to coincide with the plan.

          12. There is a cluster of five evergreen trees shown at station 51+00 on Road A (sheet L-
              10) which is not labeled. Based on the plant list, this cluster should be labeled three
              PX1 and two PX2.



D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 39



          13. The number of Downy Shadblow and Siberian Crab shown on the plan does not
              comply with the number defined on the plant list on sheet L-11. It appears as though
              the three Downy Shadblow located at station 83+00 on Road A should actually be
              Siberian Crab. The plan or plant list should be revised as needed.

          14. The notes on the deciduous tree staking detail and evergreen tree staking detail (sheet
              L-13) should be revised to read “remove all rope from trunk and top of ball. Fold
              burlap below grade and remove any and all wire cages.”

          15. The deciduous tree staking detail, evergreen tree staking detail, and shrub and
              groundcover planting detail (sheet L-13), should be revised to show that the mulch
              does not get installed up against the tree or shrub trunk.

          16. The note on the deciduous tree staking detail (sheet L-13) should be revised to
              indicate that rather than “burlap wrap” a “deer protection mesh wrap” should be
              installed around the tree trunk after it is planted.

          17. The second note on the evergreen tree staking detail (sheet L-13) has a typographical
              error. The word “from” is misspelled.

          18. The notes on sheet L-13 should be revised to indicate that all acceptance of the
              landscaping shall be subject to “Township Engineer” approval, since the Township
              Engineer’s office reviews all landscaping issues.

          19. An addition should be made to Note 4 on sheet L-13 that “Snow fence shall be
              installed to the drip line of the tree to remain.”

               To be addressed in landscape testimony.


J.        Utilities (Sanitary Sewer and Water):

          1. The Township of Clinton granted Elizabethtown Water Company a utility franchise
             for the subject property and surrounding area via Ordinance #694-99 (effective
             October 5, 1999). As a result of the utility franchise, Elizabethtown Water Company
             “shall own, operate and maintain a potable water production, storage, and distribution
             system, including but not limited to facilities such as distribution mains, storage
             tanks, valves, meters, pipes, driveways and other appurtenances and equipment in
             order to provide service to the franchise area.” Therefore, Elizabethtown Water


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 40



               Company must review and approve any and all designs associated with the water
               production, storage and distribution system.

               Elizabethtown Water Company will review and approve all designs associated with
               water production, storage and distribution.

          2. The Township of Clinton granted Applied Wastewater Management a utility
             franchise for the subject property and surrounding area via Ordinance #697-99
             (effective October 5, 1999). As a result of the utility franchise, Applied Wastewater
             Management shall own, operate, and maintain a sewage collection and treatment
             system, including but not limited to facilities such as collection main, treatment
             plants, pumping stations, force mains, disposal beds, driveways, and other
             appurtenances and equipment in order to provide service to the franchise area.
             Therefore, Applied Wastewater Management must review and approve any and all
             designs associated with the sewage collection and treatment system.

               Applied Water Management Company will review and approve all designs related
               to the sanitary sewer system.

          3. The Township of Clinton entered into Developer’s Agreements and Wastewater
             Capacity Agreements with P&H Clinton Partnership and Clinton Hills Corporate
             Center in December 1999 in order to ensure capacity in the future Clinton East
             sewage treatment plant proposed for Block 7, Lot 3. In accordance with the
             agreement, Clinton Township (through Applied Wastewater Management) shall
             secure approval of a NJPDES permit from New Jersey Department of Environmental
             Protection authorizing discharge of at least 375,000 gallons per day and up to 450,000
             gallons per day. The treatment plant is to be constructed in phases with 300,000
             gallons per day reserved for P&H Clinton Partnership and 75,000 gallons per day
             reserved for Clinton Hills Corporate Center. Applied Wastewater Management on
             behalf of the Township of Clinton is presently in the process of obtaining a NJPDES
             permit for the Clinton East sewerage treatment plant. THIS OFFICE DOES NOT
             HAVE AN EXECUTED COPY OF THE AGREEMENTS.

               The agreement is on file with the Township Clerk.

          4. Utility easements must be provided for access to all sanitary sewer and water lines.
             The appropriate review agency (Elizabethtown Water and Applied Wastewater
             Management) must approve the location and dimension of all utility easements.



D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 41



               All easements will be provided and are subject to approval by the applicable utility
               authority.

          5. To assist in the review of the utilities, a sheet should be provided which shows the
             entire property and all proposed utility lines. The type of pipe, pipe slope and pipe
             length are not needed on this plan. However, structure numbers should be provided.

               An overall plan for the utilities will be provided to the Township Engineer after
               revisions to the site plans.

          6. Sanitary sewer laterals should be shown on the Utility Plans.

               The sanitary sewer laterals will be added to the utility plans.

          7. Some of the sanitary sewer sections are as deep as 32 feet. Applied Wastewater
             Management should review the sanitary sewer sections and provide comments on the
             design not limited to location, depth, access, and construction of the system.

               We will revise the plans in consultation with Applied Water Management Company
               to minimize depth of manholes.

          8. The applicant had requested and received a completeness waiver to allow the water
             distribution system to be added to the plans once the site layout has been approved.
             The Board should require that prior to the Board Chairman and Secretary signing any
             plans that Elizabethtown Water review and approve the water distribution system and
             the approved design be added to the plans for signature.

               The water distribution system is shown on the plans and may be subject to revisions
               after review by Elizabethtown Water Co.

          9. The sanitary sewer run from MH A1-36 to MH A1-35 is labeled as having a slope of
             0.004 (sheet 41). However, the slope calculates to 0.0853 based on the proposed
             inverts. This drives the downstream sewer to an excessive depth. The applicant’s
             engineer should confirm the slope and depth of the line.

               The slope and depth of the sanitary sewer run in question will be revised to a
               shallower depth.

          10. The sanitary sewer trench detail (sheet 60) indicates that class 52 D.I.P is to be used
              for depths greater than 20 feet. However, all of the pipe on the plans are P.V.C,
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 42



               including areas of greater than 20 foot depth. The plans should be appropriately
               revised.

               All plans will be revised to show any sanitary sewer line deeper than 20 ft. to be
               D.I.P. sanitary sewer line.

K.        Soil Erosion and Sediment Control:

          The following are general comments from this office regarding the Soil Erosion and
          Sediment Control Plan submitted. Any and all comments from the Hunterdon County
          Soil Conservation District must also be addressed.

          1. The extent of detail provided on the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (sheets
             55 to 58) is insufficient. Individual soil erosion and sediment control plans should be
             provided for each phase of construction as they are anticipated to occur. For
             example, if the townhouses on Road W are not anticipated to be under construction at
             the same time as the townhouses on Road R, then a soil erosion and sediment control
             plan should be provided for just the townhouses on Road R. Additional silt fence and
             other controls may be required between sections.

          2. Calculations of the swale capacity and stability must be provided. In addition, the
             limits of the swale stabilization should be shown on the grading plans.

          3. Limits of tree protection should be added to the plans.

          4. All of the grading activities are not contained within the limits of disturbance as
             shown on the plans.

          5. The sequence of construction should be section or phase specific including
             demolition of existing structures, phasing of detention basins, soil erosion controls,
             and earthmoving operations.

          6. The location of the temporary perforated riser should be shown in plan view. The
             dimension table for the temporary riser needs to be completed.

          7. The location of where the stable channel detail is used must be shown on the plans.
             Calculations are required.




D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 43



               We agree to comply with the Township Engineer’s comments 1-7. We will provide
               more detailed soil erosion plans to the Township Engineer and Hunterdon County
               SCD when the revisions to address cut and fill concerns are completed.

MISCELLANEOUS:

          1. Upon approval of the preliminary major subdivision and site plan application by the
             Clinton Township Planning Board, an engineer’s estimate must be submitted by the
             applicant’s engineer for review and approval by the Township Engineer for the
             determination of the inspection fee and performance bond amounts.

          2. Before plans can be signed by the Planning Board Chairman and Secretary, written
             approval of the preliminary major subdivision and site plan documents for
             construction must be received from:

                        Hunterdon County Soil Conservation District;
                        Hunterdon County Planning Board;
                        Elizabethtown Water Company;
                        Applied Wastewater Management; and
                        Owners of easements by deed (for improvements within easement)
                             -      New Jersey Power and Light; and
                             -      New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

          3. Before plans can be signed by the Planning Board Chairman and Secretary,

                        Elizabethtown Water must approve the transmission line and distribution
                         system design and confirm availability of required capacity (the approved
                         design must be added to the plans to be signed);
                        The water franchise granted to Elizabethtown Water and the sewer franchise
                         granted to Applied Water Management must be approved by the Board of
                         Public Utilities and confirmation that the New Jersey Department of
                         Environmental Protection was notified of the franchises must be submitted to
                         the Planning Board;
                        New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection must approve the
                         wetlands and Stream Encroachment requirements; and
                        New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the Hunterdon
                         County Engineer’s office must approve construction plans for the two major
                         wetlands crossings (Road A).


D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 44



          4. A pre-construction conference must be held with the contractor (and subcontractors),
             Township Engineer, Hunterdon County Engineer’s office, Hunterdon County Soil
             Conservation, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Elizabethtown
             Water Company, and Applied Wastewater Management before any construction may
             occur on the property. Before the pre-construction conference can be held, the
             following must be completed:

                        Plans must be signed by the Planning Board Chairman and Secretary;
                        New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Permits must be
                         approved;
                        inspection fee must be posted with the Township of Clinton; and
                        all required fees and bonds must be paid to Hunterdon County Engineer’s
                         Office and Hunterdon County Soil Conservation District, as required.

                    The applicant agrees to miscellaneous items 1 through 4.

COORDINATION:

          1. The Township of Clinton will not be responsible for maintenance and repair of
             sanitary sewer lines, pump stations, water lines or the water tower located on site or
             any portion of the drainage system located outside the right-of-way of Road A. As
             such, the applicant should ensure that the responsible parties have appropriate access
             easements to perform any required repairs and maintenance. For example, the pipe
             run between inlet #13-5 and inlet #13-4 (sheet 23); inlet #9-2A2 and inlet #9-2A1
             (sheet 24 and 29); and inlet #9-2A52 and inlet #9-2A51 (sheet 24 and 29) are not
             within the right-of-way or easement. All proposed easements should be shown on the
             Utility Plans and Grading Plans.

               The Township will not be responsible to maintain water facilities or sanitary sewer
               lines or any storm drainage not located in a public R.O.W. We otherwise agree.

          2. The only stream crossing that the Township of Clinton will be responsible for
             maintaining is the 15” pipe at station 62+00 on Road A (sheet 29). The Hunterdon
             County Engineer’s Office will most likely be responsible for the maintenance of the
             two stream crossings yet to be approved by the New Jersey Department of
             Environmental Protection and the Hunterdon County Engineer’s Office. Therefore,
             the applicant is responsible for ensuring maintenance of all other stream crossings on
             the property, including the 60” pipe crossing at station 9+50 on Road L which the
             Hunterdon County Engineer’s Office indicated in their January 27, 2000
             correspondence would not be the responsibility of the County.
D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 45




               The Township will be responsible for storm drainage facilities in a public R.O.W.

          3. All private roads not to be taken over by the Township of Clinton must be contained
             within access rights-of-way or easements.

               Private roads will be owned and maintained by a homeowners association.

          4. It may be prudent for the Township to set up a “monitoring-coordinating” committee
             to meet on a regular basis with the developer during construction to address problems
             as they occur.

Please note that since this office anticipates revisions to the drainage, road profiles, and layout as
a result of our above comments, this office did not perform a detailed review of all aspects of the
drainage, grading, sanitary sewer, and road design. A more detailed review will be performed at
the next submission.


If you should have any questions or comments regarding this correspondence, please contact this
office at your earliest convenience.

Very truly yours,



Robert C. Bogart, P.E.
Clinton Township Engineer

RCB/MHR/cdd

cc:       Jonathan Drill, Esquire, Alternate Planning Board Attorney
          Dan Bernstein, Esquire, Planning Board Attorney
          Michael Bolan, Planning Board Planner
          (continued on next page)




D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011
Clinton Township Planning Board
February 24, 2000
Page 46




          John Coley, Esquire, Township Attorney
          Kenneth Mackiewicz, P.E., Planning Board Traffic Engineer
          John Sarkioglu, Planning Board Lighting Expert
          John Gromack, Environmental Commission
          P & H Clinton Partnership, Applicant
          Lloyd Tubman, Esquire, Applicant’s Attorney
          Ray Papa, P.E., Applicant’s Engineer
          Minno & Wasko, Applicant’s Planner
          Orth-Rodgers Associates, Applicant’s Traffic Expert
          Richard B. Reading Associates, Applicant’s Fiscal Analysis Expert
          Amy S. Greene Environmental Consultants, Inc., Applicant’s Environmental Expert
          Omni Environmental, Applicant’s Environmental Expert
          Hunterdon County Soil Conservation District
          Hunterdon County Planning Board
          Elizabethtown Water Company
          Applied Wastewater Management
          New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection




          7/30/2011-F:\JOB\6098\Letters\Response to RCBA letter 3-29-00.doc




D:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\d51355f4-9ec0-4b10-87bf-d6142deaa4e8.doc / 7/30/2011

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:11
posted:7/30/2011
language:English
pages:46