Residents Fight Twp. Committee on Easement Rules

Residents of Shadow Hill Way Wednesday protested the Township Council’s decision to launch an effort to get homeowners to remove illegal structures like sheds, swimming polls and fences from conservation easements and let the land return to a state of natural  vegetation.

Mayor Kenneth Short said the effort began with a July inspection tour of the Hidden Hills subdivision with township engineer Leon Hall.

Hall’s letter to Short following that tour said that of the 12 lots examined in the walking inspection, six had conservation easement violations.

Short said the violations included the removal of seven of the conservation easement markers, which he said were installed by the township at a cost of $1,500 each because the markers were set in a three-foot deep concrete pilings; placement of sheds and other structures inside the easement; vegetation removal, including trees, fences placed within the easement, and removal of native vegetation.

Short said the easements were established by the state Department of Environmental Protection and reinforced by township ordinances to protect stream banks, steep slopes, woods and forests and watershed areas.

He said there were three or four subdivisions where this was an issue, and 300 property owners would eventually get a notice.

The council, after an hour-long debate, agreed that property owners will relocate the sheds, fences and other structures outside the conservation easement and they will allow the native plants to overtake lawn areas created inside the conservation easements. The homeowners will have 180 days after notification to remediate the easements.

Committeeman David Kennedy was allowed to take part in the discussion even though he was one of the homeowners who received a township letter about the easements. It was decided that he had no financial interest in the issues of a neighboring property, and thus had no conflict of interest.

But he at first led the argument against taking action, questioning whether or not all homeowners with conservation easements received letters of notice and questioning the cost of the inspections, enforcement and the cost to homeowners to remedy the violations. He wondered if it would be cost-effective to enforce the local ordinances.

Short said, “The township planning board, environmental commission, council and professionals have spent hours examining plans that came before them to support these ordinances.”

It is the responsibility of the township council to see that local ordinances are followed, Short said. He said the inspections had little cost and initial future examinations of properties could be done with Google Earth.

Kennedy said he wanted to be sure of the township was going to begin this enforcement effort that it be done consistently and continuously. He said he didn’t want the effort to falter because the township had no funds to pay for the effort.

Committeeman James Harmon suggested that the notice of this effort be as widely disseminated as possible, including notices sent with tax bills and an item placed on the township’s website.

Michael Flammer, whose property according to the report filed by Short and Hall, had a fence inside the conservation easement, one missing marker and vegetation removed inside the easement, and said the fence adds to the security and privacy of his yard.

“People walk off Patriot’s Path into our yard and hunters with weapons have been on our property,” he said.

Township attorney James Jansen said Flammer could post his property against hunting, and that is a violation to have a loaded weapon within 450 feet of a dwelling.

“You could tell them to get off your property,” Jansen said, “or if it’s a hunter, call the police.”

Flammer said there would be considerable cost to moving the shed and the fence, but Short first disputed his estimate and said that it might be possible to agree that the shed must be moved before Flammer sells the property.

“These are DEP rules,” Short said. “We are trying to keep you from having to deal with the DEP.”

Osher Hoberman, whose property was noted by Short and Hall for a structure and fence inside the conservation easement and for the removal of native vegetation, said those items were on the property when he bought it and were among the reasons his family found the property so attractive. He said the value of his property would be diminished if the enforcement effort was continued. He said he and his neighbors might not have purchased the homes had they been aware of the conservation easements.

He said the township had inspectors on the property at the time of the sale and did not point out the violations.

Homeowner Jonathan Nally, whose property was cited for structures in the easement and removal of native vegetation, challenged Short on the issue of tree removal, saying he never cut down any trees.

Regardless, Short said, “we found stumps.”

Flammer said moving the fence would reduce the useable areas of his yard by 40 percent. Nally said if he stopped mowing that piece of his yard, he would eventually lose the use if it.

Short said that the conditions of their property resulted from an agreement with the developer that was part of a deal that spared the township from the construction of 1,500 homes on the local golf course.

“Your lots are smaller because we did what we thought was best for the township,” Short said.