CAPE MAY POINT — Commissioners are discussing the code regarding the borough’s right of way along private properties and potential future options.
The board is attempting to clarify what is and what is not allowable in the strip of land parallel to streets in the borough, favoring a natural, pervious surface over pavers.
“I just want to put a disclaimer — this is not to be misinterpreted by anyone that we are considering redoing current rights of way; this is a forward-thinking discussion of where we go in the future,” Deputy Mayor Geiger said July 28.
Geiger said she wanted to review the current code to frame the discussion and situation, with options to consider.
“I hope today that we have some agreement that we do have an issue and we do need to do something; maybe even define a course of action,” she said. “But I don’t expect that we’re going to resolve it today. It’s not an easy situation; there’s some complexities to it.”
Cape May Point has a specific zoning regulation on driveways/curb cuts that cross the right of way. The goal is consistent with the Master Plan, which is to keep Cape May Point green.
— For a property with less than 100 feet of frontage, there’s a 10-foot minimum and 12-foot maximum for a curb cut.
— Driveway size is regulated: 60 percent of the lot should be in natural state or covered with vegetation.
“We’re very, very specific on that curb cut,” Geiger said, adding that several sections in the codebook touch on right of way, including poles and permitting, the tree ordinance, certain activities on corner lots and sidewalks.
The borrow owns the right of way; it is not an easement but a fee simple ownership.
“The majority of the homeowners are unaware of this,” Geiger said, adding that the right of way is measured from the middle of the street and can differ in width.
While driveways are regulated, Geiger noted the borough does not follow through on homeowners putting in pavers, gravel, curbing, etc. in the right of way.
“There was a meeting of the Planning Board and this came up again,” she said. “The Planning Board is of the opinion that they would like the commissioners to create some clarity around this issue, as to what is and isn’t allowed in the right of way.”
Geiger referenced an example ordinance regarding right of way in Branchburg Township, Somerset County.
“I started thinking if we’re going to consider applications, we should probably start to think about guidelines,” Geiger said. “Although the right of way belongs to the borough, we would somehow maybe consider it a moratorium on requiring any kind of remediation.”
Solicitor John Amenhauser said it was in the borough’s discretion to allow existing conditions to continue.
“In 2008, the governing body was recommending the entire right of way on both sides of the road to be gravel and I was so against that. I’d pretty much dug in saying, ‘No, we should not require that,’” Mayor Anita VanHeeswyk said. “That’s why this is refreshing to look at in a different way.”
She noted that she was not comfortable with irrigation lines being right along the road in the right of way because cars can run over and break them.
Commissioners also discussed placement of vegetation and raised garden beds.
“The key here is also not just having a little more room to park on the street, but things like emergency equipment to get down the road,” VanHeeswyk said. “If there were a two-inch raised bed, a fire truck could get right over that.”
Commissioner Suzanne Yunghans asked if the county controls the right of way on its roads. Amenhauser said he would have to find out.
“We need clarity on that because two of our main roads are county roads,” Yunghans said. “From a Public Works standpoint, one thing we should be super conscious of is that the homeowner would be responsible for what’s in that right of way, understanding it could be damaged by a snowplow, from line-of-sight trimming [and] water, sewer, piping stuff that has to be dug up.”
Yunghans added that it would not be the borough’s responsibility to fix the damage.
Another consideration Yunghans brought up was mulching at the edge of a property that goes down storm drains when it rains.
Geiger asked if the commission would be comfortable moving forward with a two-step process of changing the wording and refining what permission looks like.
“To Suzanne’s point, it’s going to matter what you allow anyone to do in the right of way area,” Amenhauser said. “I think that it’s important that there be a uniform application process, because I do think you’d want that waiver of liability, that indemnification language to apply to anybody utilizing that right of way for really any reason.”
Amenhauser added that the only time he would not recommend it would be if someone were taking out sidewalks and making it completely vegetative, such as planting grass.
“If it’s vegetative, I don’t see the need for approval,” he said, adding that anything other than completely vegetative would require approval.
VanHeeswyk said she was comfortable with where the discussion was going.
“One of the things I’ve worried about is architects have said what gives Cape May Point our character is the diversity of architecture, diversity of our streets, and I’ve always worried that we would formalize the right of way in a way that made everything cookie-cutter,” VanHeeswyk said. “I think where we’re going with this does not do that.”
Public Works Supervisor Bill Gibson said one of his concerns was utilities that run underground through the right of way.
“I found out a person on the corner of Alexander [Avenue] had a water main in his front yard when it broke,” Gibson said, adding that it was 8 feet into the yard and the water was coming out of the sidewalk.
Amenhauser said he would revise section 130 of the code and send it to the commissioners to follow up and have a further discussion before anything is introduced.
“I think people will enjoy the clarity,” Geiger said.
By RACHEL SHUBIN/Special to the Star and Wave
