Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board presses applicant on road width, variances and stormwater at 93 Old Pan Road hearing
Summary
At a continued hearing on a proposed two-lot subdivision at 93 Old Pan Road, the borough planning board pressed the applicant on requested RSIS waivers, a narrow 4-foot strip affecting an adjacent lot, and long-term maintenance of a bioretention basin; the board asked for revised plans and signaled it would require a 50-foot right-of-way.
The Borough of Old Tappan Planning Board continued a public hearing on a proposed two-lot subdivision at 93 Old Pan Road, pressing the applicant for revised plans after members flagged concerns about street width, variances and stormwater management.
The applicant’s attorney, Richard Abrahamson, told the board the revised submission reduced the earlier proposal to two single-family lots and would include a publicly dedicated road. "We propose 2 single family residences," Abrahamson said, adding the applicant is prepared to dedicate the road and include maintenance covenants if the board prefers homeowner responsibility.
Board professionals and members focused questions on multiple technical and legal points. Dean Stamos, counsel for adjacent property owners, raised notice and variance concerns and said certain bulk relief in the application appeared mischaracterized: "I think it's incorrect," he told the board, urging the applicants’ witnesses to support the variance claims in testimony.
The applicant’s engineering witness described changes from the earlier three-lot plan, the proposed right-of-way geometry, and stormwater measures. He said the plan used a narrower local street type and asked for RSIS waivers on right-of-way width and sidewalks, explaining, "We designed it as a low intensity minor collector with 1 parking lane." He also presented a bioretention basin intended to meet state stormwater reduction targets and noted some infrastructure would require county or state approval.
Members expressed repeated concerns about public-safety and long-term maintenance. One member said the proposed 4-foot strip along Old Pan Road "is problematic" because it creates a narrow frontage for an adjacent lot, can trigger additional variance requirements and invites long-term maintenance questions. Board members and the planning consultant flagged the potential for the narrower right-of-way and cartway to reduce buildable area and to conflict with local standards for emergency access.
Planner Edward Snikas and the board’s engineer asked the applicant to provide clarified exhibits that explicitly show how the houses would face the road, an updated list of variances and waivers, detailed stormwater calculations (including downstream capacity checks), and a revised tree-replacement/landscape plan consistent with the borough’s new ordinance. The planner also recommended redesigning the basin edge treatment to appear more natural and to include a fence and maintenance plan.
Following discussion, board members signaled a position on street geometry: they asked the applicant to revise the plan in light of comments and, by consensus, indicated they would require a 50-foot right-of-way standard rather than the 40-foot width currently shown.
Next steps: the applicant said it would amend the plans and return; the board opened the hearing to public questions limited to the engineering testimony while its professionals continue their review. The board did not make a final decision on the application at this meeting.
Sources: Planning board hearing transcript; sworn testimony and professional reports submitted at the hearing.
