Page 6 THE VILLADOM TIMES I • October 15, 2014 Franklin Lakes Information sought on Cinnamon Lane subdivision by Frank J. McMahon The Franklin Lakes Planning Board has refused to deem an application for the major subdivision of a 3.4-acre Cinnamon Lane property as complete. The board requested the applicant, William Smith Jr., who is no relation the borough attorney, to provide more infor- mation about the contours of the property before scheduling a public hearing on the application. Until an application is certified as com- plete a public hearing cannot be scheduled and, according to the state’s land use law, the 120-day time limit for the board to act on the application does not begin until the application is deemed and certified com- plete and a public hearing is scheduled. Smith lives in a dwelling on the exist- ing 138,897 square foot lot on Cinnamon Lane. The property is in the A-40 residen- tial zone and is accessed from the Cinna- mon Lane cul-de-sac. Golf course hearing awaits developer’s input The public hearing on the Toll Broth- ers, Inc. application for the development of the High Mountain Golf Club in Franklin Lakes is awaiting additional information from the developer’s engineer. Toll Brothers of Horsham, Pennsylva- nia plans to develop the 131-acre property, which was sold to the developer in March 2012 by the Galenkamp Brothers Partner- ship and the High Mountain Club, Inc., which includes about 75 shareholders, some of whom are members of the area’s McBride family. The property is currently zoned for one- acre, single-family residential use, but the developer intends to build a total of 275 dwellings on the site, including 60 single- family detached homes on half-acre lots, 160 carriage homes with garages, and 55 affordable housing units without garages. Several residents attended a recent planning board meeting thinking the Toll Brothers application would be heard that evening. John Spizziri, the board’s attor- ney, advised the residents that, when the borough engineer is comfortable with the plan, a letter will be sent by the applicant to all property owners within 200 feet of the golf course property advising them of the scheduled date for the start of the public hearing. The board deemed the application to develop the property to be complete in August on the condition that additional information would be provided to the (continued on page 8) According to the borough engineer’s report about the application, the prop- erty is bordered on all sides by residential property in the same zone with light tree coverage, extensive wetlands, and a wet- lands buffer at the southern portion of the existing lot. The dwelling and driveway are located on the northern portion of the property. Smith is seeking to subdivide the prop- erty into two lots. The existing dwelling would be on a 40,686 square foot lot, and the new lot would be 98,211 square feet in size. An extension of the cul-de-sac would be necessary to provide for the two lots in the subdivision, but no variances would be required. No improvements on the larger lot are part of this application, but it is expected that a single-family dwelling with a drive- way and a septic system would eventually be constructed on that lot. A water line that traverses the property would have to be moved. The engineer’s report states that the lot coverage on the smaller lot would remain in conformance with borough standards, but the extension of Cinnamon Lane would need the approval of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. The planning board held a lengthy dis- cussion with Smith’s engineer, George James, about the information needed by the borough engineer, and the applicant’s request not to provide an environmental impact study. Board member Jay Lazerowitz said he thought “it would be insane not to require an environmental impact study.” He made the motion to declare the application incomplete, and all the board members agreed. Board member and Councilman Charles Kahwaty then moved to have Planning Board Attorney John Spizziri prepare a summary of the history of previ- ous applications for this property and any litigation involved for the board’s informa- tion, and at the applicant’s expense. Ben Cascio, the attorney for Smith, opposed that motion, saying this is a new applica- tion. He objected to the admissibility of that information and its cost. “What went on before has nothing to do with this application,” Cascio said. “The board has no authority to have a history on this property. It can only act on testimony before the board on this application. The board must educate itself.” Spizziri countered that the fill on the property has a bearing on this application and the board should review the contours of the land. “It’s important for the board to review the contours of the site,” Spizziri explained, to which Cascio responded that his client will show the original contours that were approved and trace them up to the present. It was then suggested that the borough might pay for Spizziri’s short history of the litigation about this property, but Mayor Frank Bivona, who is a member of the planning board, objected saying the borough’s taxpayers should not have to (continued on page 13)