Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Docket 685 Aux Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mahwah board reviews Bergen County Law & Public Safety Institute’s 6,000‑sq‑ft auxiliary storage building, asks for reduced lighting
Summary
At a May 11 work session the Planning Board acknowledged receipt of a courtesy review for a 6,000‑square‑foot auxiliary storage building at 281 Campgaw Road; applicants agreed to downlighting, timed fixtures and said the project would not change traffic or remove trees.
Get email alerts on the Docket 685 Aux Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Mahwah Planning Board reviewed a courtesy submission for an auxiliary storage building proposed for the Bergen County Law & Public Safety Institute at 281 Campgaw Road during its May 11 work session.
Engineer Zahid Siddiqui, accepted as an expert, said the proposed structure would measure 60 by 120 feet (6,000 square feet), would result in 0.79 acre of total disturbance and 0.059 acre of net new improved coverage, and would be used to enclose existing equipment and materials. Siddiqui testified the project would not change traffic circulation or volume and that the structure would not be heated.
Architect Dan Dressel described the wooden frame, concrete pads at doorways, the size of aluminum doors and proposed lighting. The design team and board agreed that exterior lighting would be downfacing and that lights over the man‑doors would be timed to turn off when not necessary. The applicant confirmed no tree removal was proposed and that any stormwater would be routed to the existing drainage system. Captain Matthew Tiedman, the Bergen County coordinator, and consultant witnesses were accepted as experts by the board.
After discussion about minimizing lighting impacts on neighboring residential areas, the board voted to acknowledge receipt, presentation and review of the proposed plan and to document board recommendations. The motion, made by Ms. Jankowski and seconded by Mr. Miller, passed on a roll call of six ayes; Ms. Miceli was recused.
Next steps: because this was a courtesy review, the board’s action memorializes recommendations and requests for revised lighting details and clarifications on site plans; the applicant will respond in subsequent submissions.
