BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT                                                      

MINUTES

NOVEMBER 13, 2002

 

REGULAR MEETING

 

Salute to the Flag:

 

This is a Regular Meeting of the Wanaque Board of Adjustment and adequate notice has been duly advertised by the mailing of a notice to the Suburban Trends and the Herald & News on the 15th day of January, 2002 and a notice thereof has been posted on the bulletin board in the Municipal Building and a copy thereof is on file with the Borough Clerk.

 

ROLL CALL: Chairman Jack Dunning, William Grygus, Peter Hoffman, Don Ludwig, Robert Ricca (came in at 8:13 P.M.), Ted Roberto, Frank Covelli (came in at 8:40 P.M.), Ihor Kardasz, Lee Smith, Attorney Ralph Faasse and Engineer William Gregor.

 

APPLICATION #10-02 Ridwan Shabsigh, 673 Ringwood Ave., Block 243 Lot 5, Bulk & Use Variance:

Attorney Nancy E. Saccente came forward on behalf of applicant and Mr. Arfan Biokua the applicant’s cousin and managing agent for the property.  Attorney Faasse swore in Mr. Biokua. Mr. Biokua stated he lives at 146 Barbour St., Haledon, N.J. 07548.

 

Atty. Saccente told the Board what exists currently at 673 Ringwood Ave. is a partial two story-one story structure. The first floor has a vacant retail space in front and a residential apartment in back, and a second residential apartment on the second floor. Atty. Saccente apologized and said the original plans submitted were inaccurate. Atty. Saccente said they are requesting Use & Bulk Variances to allow the retail space that’s in the front of the first floor to be converted to a residential apartment and that would make this structure basically a three family dwelling in an R-10 Zone which is not permitted.

 

The plan the Board Members had in front of them was dated July 25, 2002 and revised October 7, 2002 prepared by Evans Architect. Atty. Faasse asked Atty. Saccente if the applicant was planning on making any exterior changes to the structure and Atty. Saccente said no. Atty. Faasse then said, all the Bulk conditions are pre-existing and Atty. Saccente said correct.

 

Mr. Biokua testified that the property was purchased sometime last October, 2001 with the existing vacant retail store and two residential apartments. Mr. Biokua said since the purchase of the building, he has been trying to rent the retail space but to no avail. He had two calls for the retail space but the prospective renters decided against it because of the parking situation. Mr. Biokua thought they could rent parking space from either the gas station across the street or the church next door. Mr. Biokua also had calls from people who wanted to rent the retail space as an apartment to live in and he told them that was not possible. Mr. Biokua told the

Board he had gone to an architect and was told he could have two bedrooms, bathroom, kitchen, living room, and change the windows in the front. The square footage of this proposed apartment would be 1,035 sq. ft.  Mr. Biokua said if this space could be converted to an apartment, he would have no problem in renting it.

Eng. Gregor asked, if the only changes to the exterior of the building, according to the drawing, are four new windows. Atty. Saccente said that was correct; two windows in the front and two on the side. Atty. Saccente said, on the site plan, in the rear it shows a location of four parking spaces. Atty. Saccente asked Mr. Biokua about the typography in the rear and Mr. Biokua said some of it is flat but not much. Atty. Saccente said, in the rear where the four parking spaces are, there is also an adjacent parking area for another lot and there is no differentiation between the two parking lots. Atty. Saccente said they were hoping to get permission from the adjacent property owner that is Lot 6, however it was not fruitful, and they were hoping to obtain at least access from that property into those parking spaces. Therefore, Mr. Biokua spoke to other neighbors in the area to see if there was an ability to obtain other parking spaces that the tenants in his building could use if needed for parking. Mr. Biokua said one of his tenants is an older lady who doesn’t have a car and the other tenant doesn’t have a car either. Mr. Biokua was told by the pastor of the church that the church has 45 spaces and Mr. Biokua’s tenants could use the church’s parking lot and he signed a letter to that effect. (copy of this letter from the Wanaque Reformed Church is in the file) Mr. Biokua also has a letter from the Mobil Gas Station giving him permission to use the gas station’s lot. (copy of this letter from the gas station proprietor is in the file). Atty. Saccente added, there is a need for residential dwellings and doesn’t believe there would be any impact at all on the neighborhood and this apartment would be an esthetic upgrade of the dwelling by removing an empty vacant store which is an eyesore at the present time.

 

Eng. Gregor asked if the applicant has anything to submit to show the Board the adjacent uses. Atty. Saccente said they don’t have anything shown on the architect’s plan and said she just walked around the neighborhood with Mr. Biokua and made note of the three or four lots on Ringwood Ave. across from the Mobil Station. To the right of the building, there is the Dentist and the Board of Education with four parking spaces in front, and behind that, there is a vacant house that is being fixed. Atty. Saccente said they don’t have anything as far as formal plans showing what’s in the neighborhood. Eng. Gregor referred to Item #8 in his report dated November 4, 2002, in which he requested the Site Plan be resubmitted providing information as required in accordance with Section 114-33 of the Borough Code. Eng. Gregor at this point went through the Borough Code of Section 114-33 and skipped to Section B items (1) through (5) and said this information is basically what the applicant needs to provide on the drawing. Eng. Gregor mentioned item (6), Zone district in which property in question falls and zone district of adjoining properties, and this

has not been provided on the Site Plan. Eng. Gregor said, based on his site inspection, it appears the rear of that parking and driveway also appears to be a loading area for the adjacent property. Atty. Saccente said that area is a parking area that the Board of Education uses for their equipment and Mr. Biokua added the Board of Education uses this area for their snowplow equipment in the winter. Eng. Gregor also mentioned the property to the rear on Lines Ave., appears to be a dwelling unit with multiple parking spaces which are not shown on the plan.

Member Grygus asked if the applicant approached any of the adjacent property owners in order to purchase some land for the parking problem. Atty. Saccente said they did approach one of the property owners and they didn’t have any available space to sell to the applicant. Member Grygus also asked the applicant if he tried to market the retail space with a realtor and Mr. Biokua said no but he did place ads in the paper but doesn’t have any copies of these ads. Mr. Biokua said he couldn’t get anyone to rent this retail space, the people who did call wanted it for residential space only. Member Grygus brought up the point about “Pulte Lifestyle Communities” coming in and there would be over 700 housing units going in within walking distance of this retail space. Atty. Saccente and Mr. Biokua knew nothing of this project being built off of Highland Ave.

 

Eng. Gregor mentioned, for the R-10 Zone, for a two family house, the code requires 20,000 sq. ft. of area so that the occupants have adequate open space; this lot has a total square footage of 6,569 sq. ft. which is less than one third that is required for a two family. Member Roberto wanted to know where would the customer’s park if the retail store was rented. Atty. Saccente said on the street and Mr. Biokua said,   that is why they would have more of a parking problem with it being rented as a store vs. an apartment.

 

Atty. Faasse said what everyone is trying to is trying to ascertain is; is the applicant coming in with an application where they’re saying the Board is giving four spaces or do they want to keep an area open for their neighbor’s use? Atty. Saccente answered by saying, they are coming in with an application for four proposed parking spaces.

 

Chairman Dunning asked Eng. Gregor what the buffers are on parking spaces to the property lines and Eng. Gregor said a minimum of 5 ft. Chairman Dunning then said, this does not comply with that and Eng. Gregor agreed.  The parking spaces right now are 9 X 18 which is substandard and actually represents two parking spaces even though they show four spaces on the plan, and the Borough Code calls for 10 X 20 spaces. Chairman Dunning said to Atty. Saccente, the property slopes up hill, the two parking spaces closest to the rise in the property, could you get out of a car and walk through there without impacting the little grade that goes up? In other words Chairman Dunning said, you don’t have any detail as to how this is suppose to work. He went on to say, looking at a flat-line drawing, and trying to guess where the property elevates, you can’t tell if this thing can actually allow people to exit a car and walk away from the car to get back to the apartment. Atty.

Saccente said, the area where it slopes down now and goes to the pavement, needs some cleaning up, and once that area is cleaned up, there would be adequate space for someone to pull a car in and get out of the car. Atty. Saccente added, the proposal is, the four parking spaces with sufficient width, which they believe is 9 ft., although the ordinance calls for 10 feet width which is sufficient for someone to pull in and get out of the car.

 

Chairman Dunning said the applicant hasn’t been able to come up with any alternate methods of dealing with the parking and the signed letters from persons from the Mobil Gas Station and Church giving the applicant permission to park aren’t legally bound to sign those letters. Chairman Dunning also said, Eng. Gregor eluded that it would have to be adjoining property for off-site parking.

 

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

 

RECESSED AT 9:00 P.M.:

 

RECONVENED AT 9:14 P.M.:  All present as before.

 

Atty. Saccente addressed the Board and said her client has spent a lot of time, energy and expense and her client doesn’t want to spend anymore on additional engineering and revisions of plans. Atty. Saccente asked if the Board would consider a straw-vote and Chairman Dunning said the Board can’t do that.  Atty. Faasse 

answered by saying, Atty. Saccente would like to know is, would the Board be so inclined to grant a Use Variance if some more sufficient parking be provided. Chairman Dunning said the only thing they could do is bifurcate the application and work on the use and if the use flies then they come back and address the site plan problems. Atty. Saccente asked about the adult village that will be coming in and would they be having hair salons etc. within the complex or what. Atty. Saccente said she learned a lot this evening that she wasn’t aware of before and would like to request a 30-day continuance so her client can consider revising the plans or whatever.    

 

MOTION TO CARRY THE APPLICATION AT THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST TO THE DECEMBER 11TH MEETING, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IF THEY WERE TO FILE ANY REVISED PLANS OR ANY SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE DECEMBER 11TH MEETING, THE PLANS WILL HAVE TO BE IN MORE THAN 10 DAYS BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING: motion made by Member Roberto, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Ricca, Roberto, Kardasz and Smith.  Member Covelli not qualified.

 

APPLICATION #15-02 Jan Sudol & Barbara Kulaszynska, 66 Doty Rd., Block 418 Lot 23, Bulk Variance:

 

Jan Sudol & Barbara Kulaszynska came forward and were sworn in by Atty. Faasse.

 

Ms. Kulaszynska explained she wants to do a kitchen addition because her existing kitchen is too small. Chairman Dunning said there are three surveys done in three different directions along with some rough architectures and the layout of the house and elevations of the property. Chairman Dunning asked Ms. Kulaszynska how she determined the proposed measurements. Ms. Kulaszynska told Chairman Dunning she is a mathematician and had no trouble with the measurements and it was very easy for her to do. Chairman Dunning wanted to know how she determined where the property line was. Ms. Kulaszynska said she scaled it off the survey. Eng. Gregor said there’s no dimension from the rear of the existing structure to the rear property line and no dimensions on the house itself. Eng. Gregor asked if she knew if the existing dwelling is drawn to scale and was it checked and Ms. Kulaszynska said yes. Eng. Gregor said the Board is going to need some additional information such as: the size of the house and size of the wooden deck haven’t been provided on the survey. Ms. Kulaszynska said this information was given. The Board Members had this information, but Eng. Gregor said he didn’t have it. Chairman Dunning wanted to know who owns the property to the right and Ms. Kulaszynska said an elderly woman owns it and she lives in New York State. Chairman Dunning said, typically you need two off-street parking spaces and it appears the applicants park one car in the drive way and one on the lot next door and Ms. Kulaszynska agreed. Chairman Dunning added, the measurements just don’t add up and to grant the variances the Board needs some hard evidences as to what variances the Board is talking about as far as actual footage to the side yard and to the rear yard. Eng. Gregor added, the only sure way of getting the dimensions is to have it prepared by a licensed professional. Eng. Gregor said another problem is the dimension from the rear of the proposed addition to the rear property line, that dimension is shown parallel with the side of the house. However, Eng. Gregor said, that dimension that is showing is not the closest dimension from the proposed addition to the property line. The closest point would be a line perpendicular from the property line to the corner of the house would be closer and that would be the variance that is needed. Therefore, the applicant would have to modify the drawing and find out what that dimension is and provide that as part of the application. Also, Eng. Gregor said, most likely the applicants will need a variance for lot coverage, and wanted to know if the applicants attempted to purchase any additional land. Ms. Kulaszynska said yes they did consider this because the property next door supposedly is going up for sale but she doesn’t know when this is going to happen and doesn’t want to approach the property owner now and rather wait until it is up for sale. Eng. Gregor explained the Board must consider in whether they can grant a variance or not, is whether there is additional property available and whether you can purchase that property to minimize the extent of the variance. Eng. Gregor went on to say, if the applicants choose not to purchase any additional property or attempt to, that may be sufficient reason to deny the application.  Ms. Kulaszynska said she is not

going to because she doesn’t have the money right now to purchase the property. Atty. Faasse explained to Ms. Kulaszynska if there is vacant land on any side that abuts her property they have to demonstrate their willingness to attempt to purchase it.

 

Eng. Gregor told the applicants they will have to provide the Board with a revised dimensional plan with proper setbacks. Chairman Dunning asked Ms. Kulaszynska about the proposed first floor plan, it shows the addition coming out 9’ 5” but on the site plan it shows the addition coming out 9’ 10”. Ms. Kulaszynska said she was using the 9’ 10” measurements, but someone else did the floor plan for her. Eng. Gregor asked Ms. Kulaszynska if she was going to use the site plan as the governing plan and Ms. Kulaszynska said yes and will resubmit it with the proper dimensions.

Chairman Dunning said the town requirement for a parking space is 10’ X 20’ so if you came back from where the new addition starts they’ll only have 28’ instead of 40’. The applicants will have to show on the new plan the dimensions at the closest point as discussed earlier, parking for two vehicles 10’ X 20’ parking spaces and calculate the area of the dwelling including the wood deck as compared to the area of the lot and that ratio is going to be the percentage coverage. Eng. Gregor said the applicants will have to show on their new plan; the dimensions as discussed, parking for two vehicles 10’ X 20’ parking spaces, calculate the area of the dwelling including the wood deck as compared to the area of the lot and that ratio is going to be the percentage coverage and allowed is 25% coverage which they are going to exceed and they will have to ask for another variance for lot coverage, therefore, they will be asking for setback variances and coverage variances.

 

MOTION TO CARRY APPLICATION TO THE DECEMBER 11TH MEETING AND ANY NEW PLANS HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED MORE THAN 10 DAYS BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING:  made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Covelli, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Ricca, Roberto, Covelli, Kardasz and Smith.

 

ENGINEER’S REPORT: Engineer Gregor went over his report dated November 4, 2002 for Application #14-02 Mounir Zikra (passed out to all members). Eng. Gregor said there is insufficient information provided for the Board to determine what variances are needed. Eng. Gregor said he spoke to Attorney A. Michael Rubin, who is representing Mr. Zikra, a number of times already. Eng. Gregor mentioned to Atty. Rubin the Board’s concern on the site as it exists now and is not being built in accordance with the approved site plan. Atty. Rubin told Eng. Gregor he doesn’t have an answer for that yet and will have an answer shortly and will let Eng. Gregor know. As far as engineering on the site, Atty. Rubin has turned that over to Eng. Gerald Gardner. Eng. Gregor told Atty. Rubin if they change the use to the use they’re proposing, it’s going to require additional parking, and if so, they will have

 to provide additional parking or ask for an increase variance for parking. Member Grygus asked Eng. Gregor if he ever got in touch with the County in regards to the storm water management on this site and Eng. Gregor said he did not. Member Grygus said there had been allegations at prior meetings that the County signed off on it and Member Grygus thought Eng. Gregor was going to try contact Mr. Rogers, Planning Director. Eng. Gregor said he didn’t see any benefit in calling the County, because he doesn’t have the criteria and therefore doesn’t think the County has it either. Eng. Gregor said you don’t want to call someone on a mistake, especially a governmental agency, unless you have a benefit that you can offer. Chairman Dunning told Eng. Gregor to find out what the County approved. Chairman Dunning said, right now this application hinges on the applicant providing the Board with the information as to what the application is all about and unless that information arrives at least 10 days before the next meeting the Board won’t be listening to any testimony at the next meeting. 

 

Engineer Gregor left the meeting at 10:05 P.M.

 

PUBLIC DISCUSSION:  None/Closed

 

RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #09-02 Michael & Irene Vitale, 4 Fourth Ave., Block 417 Lot 3, Bulk Variance:

 

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Roberto, seconded by Member Covelli, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Roberto, Covelli and Smith.  Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Ricca and Kardasz were not qualified.

 

RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #11-02 Joseph & Danielle Diaz, 3 Mountain Lakes Drive, Block 200 Lot 8.01, Bulk Variance:

 

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Roberto, seconded by Member Covelli, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Ricca, Roberto, Covelli and Smith.  Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig and Kardasz were not qualified.

 

CORRESPONDENCE: No questions asked.

 

VOUCHERS: submitted by Atty. Faasse for Resolutions on Application #09-02 Vitale $115.00 and Application #11-02 Diaz $115.00 for a Grand Total of $230.00.

 

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Covelli, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Ricca, Roberto, Covelli, Kardasz and Smith.

 

VOUCHERS: submitted by Eng. Gregor for Engineer Services on Application #09-02 Vitale $220.00, Application #10-02 Shabsigh  $165.00, Application #13-02 Pishko  $165.00, Application #11-02 Diaz $440.00, for a Grand Total of $990.00.

 

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Covelli, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Ricca, Roberto, Covelli, Kardasz and Smith.

 

MINUTES:  Chairman Dunning explained the Board Secretary was out sick and had the minutes from the October 9, 2002 Meeting done by an outside professional transcript company who were unprofessional on how they did the minutes. Chairman Dunning said there are a tremendous amount of mix-ups and missing information in the minutes and it was a long full- blown three hour meeting.

Atty. Faasse said the only alternative is to have the Board Secretary do the minutes again at her leisure.

 

MINUTES WERE NOT APPROVED:

 

DISCUSSION: Member Grygus wanted to know what options does the Board have if it were made aware that a Building Permit was issued on a property that requires variances. Atty. Faasse said the Board has no jurisdiction over something like that, other than write a letter to the appropriate official and cc: the Mayor and you can do it as a citizen and appeal and then it would come to the Board.

 

Chairman Dunning said he would prefer to change the meeting date back to the first Wednesday of the month and the Board Members agreed. Chairman Dunning said it was changed originally so the Building Inspector could attend the meetings. Since that is no longer the case, changing the meeting date would benefit the Board Secretary so she wouldn’t have two meetings one week apart from each other. The Board Secretary will ask Mary Ann Brindisi, Recreation Commissioner to see if the Recreation Board would be willing to change back to the second Wednesday of the month.

 

MOTION TO ADJOURN AT 10:30 P.M.: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Roberto, carried by a voice vote.

 

 

___________________________

Gerri Marotta

Secretary to Board of Adjustment