BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

MINUTES

MARCH 12, 2003

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 13^th day of January, 2003 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, Members William Grygus, Peter Hoffman, Don Ludwig, Robert Ricca, Ted Roberto, Frank Covelli (came in at 8:30 P.M.), Lee Smith, Attorney Ralph Faasse and Engineer William Gregor.

MEMBERS ABSENT: John Shutte

Application #10-02 Ridwan Shabsigh, 673 Ringwood Ave., Block 243 Lot 5, Bulk Variance & Use Variance. Authorized Agent is Nancy E. Saccente, Esq.:

Atty. Faasse announced that Members Ricca and Ludwig listened to the tape of last month’s meeting, February 12, 2003 and signed the necessary affidavits for the file that qualifies the two members to vote on this application when and if it comes up for a vote. Atty. Saccente’s secretary called the Board Secretary today and said that Atty. Saccente forgot about the meeting and made previous plans and would be faxing a letter asking to be carried to the next meeting of April 9, 2003.

MOTION TO CARRY TO THE APRIL 9, 2003 MEETING: made by Member Roberto, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Ricca Roberto and Smith.

APPLICATION #19-02 Joan Sheppard, Fernando & Barbara Paz, 52 Smith Ave., Block 310 Lot 14, Bulk Variance:

Atty. Faasse swore in Fernando Paz, Joan Sheppard’s son-in-law.

Chairman Dunning said there was a new survey submitted with a revised date of February 20, 2003 and a revised architecture with a date of February 24, 2003.

Ms. Sheppard explained on the new survey, the pool will be moved and will be 10 ft. from the addition and back closer to the back property and side property. Therefore, they will need a variance for the side yard and back yard. Ms. Sheppard said, the new architecture plans have been done by the applicants and the previous set of architecture plans were done by an engineer and not an architect which is not permitted on a residential residence. On the new set of plans they incorporated the new bathroom, the floor plan for upstairs and downstairs, and the side addition, with the lower roof, is also on the new set of plans and now looks like their house.

Atty. Faasse wanted to know why the addition has to be as large as the plan shows. Ms. Sheppard explained their trying to get enough room on the first floor for herself and her sister who is moving in with them because neither one of them can utilize the second floor because Ms. Sheppard has MS and her sister has arthritis. They also need more closet space on the first floor and her daughter and husband will be using the upstairs. The bathroom is large because it will have to accommodate a whirlpool tub because her sister has arthritis.

Member Grygus went over the variances required for this application as follows;

A side yard variance of 9.7 ft., total side yard variance of 3. 1 ft., rear yard variance of 7.9 ft., lot coverage of 26.2%, variance for side yard setback of 5 ft. for the pool and a variance for rear yard setback for the pool of 5 ft., for a total of 6 variances.

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

MOTION TO APPROVE APPLICATION WITH A SIDE YARD VARIANCE OF 9.7 FT., A TOTAL SIDE YARD VARIANCE OF 3.1 FT., A REAR YARD VARIANCE OF 7.9 FT., A LOT COVERAGE OF 26.2% WHICH IS A 1.2% VARIANCE, A 5 FT. SIDE YARD VARIANCE FOR THE POOL AND A 5 FT. VARIANCE FOR THE REAR YARD FOR THE POOL FOR THE PURPOSE OF PERMITTING A ONE STORY ADDITION WITH THE DIMENSIONS OF 17 FT. X 20 FT. AND CONDITIONED UPON THE RELOCATION OF THE POOL AS STATED: made by Member Grygus, seconded by Member Roberto, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto and Smith. Member Ricca was not qualified.

APPLICATION #02-03 David & Jill Szanto, 4 First St., Block 218 Lot 4, Bulk Variance: Mr. & Mrs. Szanto were sworn in by Atty. Faasse.

Mr. Szanto told the Board they are seeking to put on a two-car garage with some storage inside of it, a third bedroom, and a basement and eventually turn it into a playroom. Mr. Grygus asked Mr. Szanto if he plans on black topping the proposed driveway and Mr. Szanto said yes. Atty. Faasse asked the Szanto’s if they saw the suggestion in Eng. Gregor’s report dated March 7, 2003, Item #7 “The plans show a 20’ wide driveway to service the new garage space. This driveway should be paved and the existing gravel driveway should be removed and re-established as lawn”, and they said yes. Eng. Gregor asked if there were any connections between the proposed garage and the new basement and Mr. Szanto said no. Chairman Dunning asked Eng. Gregor about the covered stairwell on the side, doesn’t it change the side yard measurements? Eng. Gregor said yes it does but does not create a variance situation because the total side yard is 42.1 ft. with 35 ft. permitted and the width of that is under 4 ft. in width which brings it back down to 38 ft. therefore, its still not a variance for side yard. The remainder of the side yard is well above the 15 ft. minimum so it doesn’t effect any of the variances; it just affects the overall dimension of 42.1 ft. that will now change to 38.3 ft. The only variance is for the rear

yard which 5.4 ft. Atty. Faasse mentioned Item #6 in Eng. Gregor’s report of March 7, 2003, in regards to sizes of the existing water & sewer mains servicing the dwelling should be added to the drawing. Mr. Szanto said he just bought the house about a year and a half to two years ago and about six months before that, the previous owners gutted the house and the house has new plumbing from the street and its all 4” sewer and brand new PVC throughout the house and Mr. Szanto put a new water main in from the street and there is brand new plumbing all the way through. Mr. Szanto testified he knows where the utilities are located and if he goes over them with the new edition he realizes he will be responsible.

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

MOTION TO APPROVE REAR YARD VARIANCE OF 5.4 FT.: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Ricca, Roberto and Smith.

RECESSED AT 8:40 P.M.

RECONVENED AT 8:55 P.M. All present as before with the exception of Member Ricca.

APPLICATION #01-03 A.G.D. Inc. – Rita’s Italian Ice, 519 Ringwood Ave., Block 220 Lot 11, Site Plan, Bulk & Use Variance:

Attorney Ira E. Weiner of Azrak & Associates, L.L.C., 627 Newark Pompton Tpke., Pompton Plains, N.J. came forward on behalf of his clients.

Atty. Weiner told the Chairman, that before he gets started he wanted to place one thing on the record. “I wanted to publicly thank Gerri, the Board Secretary, who is incredibly cooperative. I appear before a lot of boards and a lot of places and I don’t know that I ever got more cooperation and help and I think good work needs to be noticed and I think she did a tremendous job in protecting the town and helping the applicant. As you know, there was an issue about what Board this application should be before and she was very helpful”.

Atty. Weiner said he believes this application is a very exciting and unique use for the Borough of Wanaque. This business is a little bit different from the normal business; it’s a seasonal business selling a product that’s in incredible demand and people just love what Rita’s presents and creates a wonderful type of use for a downtown center. It attracts a family crowd and people love to go there and have Italian ice and custard. Rita’s has 85 stores in New Jersey and 260 overall. A.G.D. Inc. spent a fair amount of time researching what kind of business they wanted and they selected Rita’s. Rita’s is generally a dessert place that sells Italian ices, ice cream and is a seasonal business that closes down during certain months of the year. Rita’s operates during certain times of the day that is generally off peak hours.

Atty. Faasse asked who the owner of the property is and Atty. Weiner said it is MNP Mannar, L.L.C. and A.G.D. Inc. is renting the property.

The first witness called was one of the partners Dominick DeSenzo, 8 Abbey Lane, Pompton Plains, N.J. Mr. DeSenzo said the other two partners are Albert DiSteso and George Serventi who are both here this evening. Mr. DeSenzo said he and his partners are already in the food retail business and were looking for another type of investment. Mr. DeSenzo said he’s about a year and half away from retiring from his full time job which is a Police Office for the Township of Pequannock. Mr. DeSenzo explained he became very friendly with the Rita’s location in Pequannock and was very impressed. Mr. DeSenzo and his partners met with Corporate and became approved and found out they did qualify for a franchise. The next thing they did was to go out and look for a location and spent days looking for a Pequannock type of community because they saw how well the Pequannock location was doing. Mr. DeSenzo who is a licensed realtor, saw the ad for the 519 Ringwood Ave. location and came to look at the building and signed the lease. Mr. DeSenzo told the Board that his partners and himself just recently opened “Deli Works” at 519 Ringwood Ave. and have two other stores, one in Oakridge and one in Pompton Plains. Atty. Weiner asked if they were planning on employing local people from the area and Mr. DeSenzo said they’re planning on hiring teenagers to work at the store. Mr. DeSenzo explained that Rita’s is a seasonal business and the stores are allowed to open up as of March 7^th and basically run until the middle of October and close the end of October, November, December, January and February. Hours of operation are usually about 11:00 A.M. until 10:00 or 11:00 P.M. and busiest times are in the afternoon when the kids get out of school and then there is a lull during dinner time and the bulk of business is done around 6:00 or 7:00 P.M. after dinner time. The concept of Rita’s are walk up windows and the whole store revolves around people being able to walk up to the windows. No one is allowed in the store other than employees and it is not a come in and sit down business. Atty. Weiner asked Mr. DeSenzo to talk about the parking. Mr. DeSenzo said one of the reasons they picked this particular site was because it has ample parking and they noticed in the downtown area not a lot of businesses have the parking that 519 Ringwood Ave. has to offer. Also, with such a large parking lot, it would be able to support Rita’s as well as the Deli Works. The Deli does a big morning breakfast and the busiest part of the day is lunchtime and at night the Deli tapers off and that’s when Rita’s will pick up and become its busiest. Atty. Weiner asked Mr. DeSenzo to describe the product line of what Rita’s sells. Mr. DeSenzo said Rita’s sells water ice in many flavors, custard, Galati’s, soft pretzels and bottled water. Mr. DeSenzo added, that even though Rita’s is closed 4 ½ months of the year, with the Deli being next door, either himself or one of his partners will be on site 365 days of the year.

Mr. DeSenzo hopes to open Rita’s sometime in mid May with a Grand Opening for Memorial Day weekend.

Member Grygus asked if all the Rita’s stores were the same as far as no interior seating and Mr. DeSenzo said that’s correct. Chairman Dunning asked how many walk up windows would there be and was told four (4) walk up windows.

Member Grygus asked about the bathroom in the back of the store being accessible to the patrons and Mr. DeSenzo said no it would not be accessible to the patrons, only the employees. Mr. DeSenzo said there are bathrooms at the Deli for the Deli patrons. Chairman Dunning asked about there being no rear door and how are they receiving deliveries and Mr. DeSenzo said through the front door. Member Grygus wanted to know what the secondary means of egress is in case there’s a fire in the building. Atty. Weiner said that question can be dealt with the professionals who are here tonight representing the applicants.

Atty. Weiner asked the Rita’s representatives to come forward and were sworn in by Atty. Faasse and they were Steven Beagelman, Vice President of Franchising, 1525 Ford Rd., Bensalem, PA and Jo Ann Hoyer, Director of Franchise Development, 1525 Ford Rd., Bensalem, PA.

Mr. Beagelman said his responsibilities are overseeing all franchise sales, real estate and construction development and has been with Rita’s a little less than three (3) years. Mr. Beagelman said the company has been around over 18 years and started down in the Philadelphia area by Bob Tumolo and his mom and started the original store back in 1984. By 1987 they had three company owned units and didn’t start franchising the concept until 1989 and grew throughout Philadelphia, Delaware Valley, Maryland, South Jersey and Central Jersey and today they have 260 units, 85 of which are located in New Jersey. Mr. Beagelman said quality is number one importance and the product has a shelf life of 36 hours on all the Italian ice and after that it has to be discarded or given away to Churches in the community or hospitals. Mr. Beagelman said the reason for their success is that they keep the product simple and others have tried to duplicate it but without success. Another reason for their success is that they keep the stores close to their home base so they can keep an eye on the stores and making sure their keeping the quality and consistency the company requires. Mr. Beagelman said they have a 97% success rate in the northeast and have achieved the goal in almost every market they’ve gone into. Ms. Hoyer spoke up and said another reason for their success is the franchisees are involved in the community and get out there and sponsor little leagues, take ice to the schools for after prom parties etc. Mr. Beagelman said they receive over 3,000 inquiries from potential franchisees, and Rita’s doesn’t advertise, its all people who are customers and see the great business they do. Out of about 3,000 applications that inquire about a franchise, they bring in about 150 people into the office and award about 40 to 50 stores a year. Ms. Hoyer told the Board she’s been with Rita’s since 1984 and her current responsibilities include real estate, franchise development from the time they sign the franchise agreement until they open their door and then are turned over to the operations department. Each store is assigned a Franchise Service Manager who will come out and do training with the franchisee as well as a self-evaluation. The company also makes unannounced visits to the franchisee to make sure everything is being run correctly and up to the standards of the company. Mr. Beagelman added that cleanliness is very important

to the company and the outside perimeter of the store, in regards to cleanliness, is just as important as the inside. Mr. Beagelman brought some pictures of other Rita’s locations. These pictures were marked Exhibit A-1, A-2 & A-3.

Member Grygus asked if the franchisee gets a territorial exclusive and Mr. Beagelman said they do get a protected territory and it’s a maximum of 2 ½ miles

and is based upon the population and other studies. Member Grygus also asked what happens if the business owner defaults. Ms. Hoyer said, obviously the company doesn’t want this to happen, but the company would come in and take over the location because they don’t want to lose the location. Chairman Dunning wanted to know how the site gets supplied. Mr. Beagelman said they have two companies that distribute the mixes for the ices and custards on a weekly basis. Chairman Dunning wanted to know how big are the delivery trucks? Mr. Beagelman said they have box trucks that can make deliveries because they realize not all locations can accommodate tractor-trailers. Chairman Dunning also wanted to know how will the customers get rid of their containers and Ms. Hoyer said there will be two trash cans up front and more if people tend to linger on the side of the building. Ms. Hoyer said there is also guidelines that require the franchisee to check trash cans levels and changing bags at 6:00 P.M. `before the rush hour starts.

Member Ludwig said his concern is when the little league kids start coming in after a game, there isn’t much room up front and what he sees is a driveway going right through where kids are going to be running. The rear of the building has a curb cut almost right in the middle where Furnace Ave. is written on the plan. Mr. Beagelman said most of the stores are drive-up traffic and not a lot of foot traffic. Member Ludwig said looking at drive-up traffic you’re going to have kids running across a driveway. Member Ludwig said it appears to him that the curb cut is right immediately behind the building by the third row parking. Mr. Beagelman said on the Ringwood Ave. side there is more space (25 ft.) than they have in other locations; most stores have 8 to 10 ft.

Member Roberto asked what does it take to have a franchise taken away. Ms. Hoyer said they have a COS (Critical Operating Standards Form). If they get issued a COS the Franchise Service Manager goes back to the location within a week to do a follow up visit. The main issues that would create this to happen would be health or safety. Mr. Beagelman added, that if after several times the franchisee hasn’t cured the problem and hasn’t been able to sell their rights to the store, then Rita’s takes over the store cleans it up and flips it over. Sometimes, in real horrible cases, they just shut the location down.

At this time, Atty. Weiner called Paul Darmofalski, Engineer & Planner, 86 Newark Pompton Tpke., Riverdale, N.J. and was sworn in by Atty. Faasse. Eng. Darmofalski told the Board he is a licensed Engineer & Planner in the State of N.J.

and also is a graduate of Newark College of Engineering 30 years this year, licensed engineer for 25 years, licensed as a planner since 1990, in his own business designing site serving municipalities for the last 18 years, serves as the Borough of Riverdale’s Engineer, Planning Board Engineer and Planner, serves as the Borough of Butler’s

Engineer and Planning Board Engineer and also their Water and Sewer Engineer, serves as the Borough of Kinnelon’s Engineer and Planning Board Engineer and serves Bloomingdale’s Board of Adjustment as their Engineer. Eng. Darmofalski stated that the Proposed Site Plan for Rita’s Water Ice was submitted and the Drawing Number is 02-32 with a date of January 30, 2003 with one revision of February 10, 2003. Eng. Darmofalski went on to say, the property presently has a three story structure located on the south portion of the property with an existing paved parking lot with two driveways, one on the County Road of Ringwood Ave. with a two way driveway and one on Furnace Ave. which is a two way driveway. The parking is paved and in good condition with an area to be repaired and his inspection today indicates its already been repaired. The property is approximately 125 X 225 ft. deep. Eng. Darmofalski went through the Zoning Table on the plan; there is no change to the lighting for the parking lot, no proposed changes to the stripping of the parking lot as it exists right now, no proposed changes to the drainage patterns, utilities are underground and will remain that way, they meet the lot area requirements 10,000 sq. ft. required and existing is 27,888 ft., minimum lot width required is 80 ft. and existing is 125 ft., minimum lot depth is 100 ft. and existing is 223.61 ft., minimum front yard is 20 ft. and because their on a corner lot the two front yards that apply here are on Ringwood Ave. there is a distance of 24.97 ft. and that’s remaining the same, and on Furnace Ave. there is a distance of 6.29 ft. and have indicated on the Zoning Table and ask for a variance for the front yard to release that to 2. 5 ft. because they have considered a handicap ramp as part of the building, the minimum rear yard required is 25 ft. and existing is 148 ft., side yard requirement is 10 ft. and they indicated on Furnace Ave. they have 6.29 ft. which is an existing non-conformity and again to the handicap ramp they have considered Furnace Ave. as a side yard also of 2.5 ft. and both yards requirement is 25 ft. and when you total them both up they have 60.94 ft. and probably no change to that but it might be a variance that doesn’t exist but the 60.94 ft. might be reduced by approximately 4 ft., the maximum building height is 35 ft. and when you refer to the architect you see that they have a building height that is 35 ft. and some inches and believe they have an existing condition in that they have a building that is higher than what’s required in the zone, and the maximum building lot coverage is 30% and existing is 11.4% and with the canopy and stairways there 11.5% well below the requirements. Eng. Darmofalski went over the parking calculations as follows; presently they have under the Residential Site Improvement Standards for the apartments and the one-bedroom apartments require 1. 8 spaces per bedroom which equates the four spaces, the two bedrooms require 2 spaces, therefore the apartments require 6 spaces, the Deli Works has 12 seats in the existing Deli, our ordinance requires one for every four seats and that equates the three spaces for the Deli Works seating portion, the retail portion of the Deli is a requirement of one for every 180 sq. ft. and they have a 700 sq. ft. retail area of Deli Works and that

equates the 4 spaces. For Rita’s, they’ve taken the 800 sq. ft. that Rita’s is occupying and have used the strictest parking requirement in the ordinance which is a “Coffee Shop”. Therefore, Eng. Darmofalski when doing the math he comes up with the requirement under the most difficult situations with the ordinance is 45 and they show 47 on the site and three of those are handicap spaces. The improvements to the site are very minor. There’s a handicap ramp to be in accordance with ADA requirements and creates a variance to Furnace Ave. The canopies that are going to be added to dress up the building indicate that it would create a larger platform in front of the windows on Rita’s because the architect has indicated that Rita’s requires that the platform be extended. The stairs on the building are going to get covered over with additional platform and new stairs are going to be extended. Indicated also on the plan is an approximate 500 sq. ft. sidewalk area and the bollards are outside of that for the area that people are going to congregate before they go up the stairs or up the ramp to be served by the windows. Eng. Darmofalski told the Board there is a detailed free-standing sign on the site plan and will be relocated and is in compliance with the property set back of 10 ft. off the property. The Rita’s dome on the free-standing sign is 10 ft. wide and the height of the dome is 5 ft. and the message part of the sign measures 18 sq. ft. and because there is a second use on the property they put a Deli Works sign underneath which is 26 sq. ft. Therefore, when you do all that addition on the free-standing sign you end up with 94 sq. ft. because they counted the entire dome as part of the square footage and 50 sq. ft. is the maximum. Eng. Gregor mentioned in his report that the maximum width of a free-standing is 8 ft. and they are requesting 10 ft. and the actual message signs are not 8 ft. wide. Eng. Darmofalski also said, they are proposing an awning for Rita’s that is their traditional 3 ft. diameter. At this point, the sheets showing the RWIF Awning Specifications for Rita’s was marked Exhibit A-4 and these sheets came out of a 73 page manual prepared by Rita’s corporate office for the Wanaque facility. This awning is a stripped awning and is approximately 3 ft. high and is the typical sign for Rita’s that is part of the awning. Eng. Darmofalski said their asking for nine (9) signs altogether, and according to ordinance, their only allowed one (1) building mounted sign. Eng. Darmofalski said, if he adds up the signs, for Deli Works he has two (2), the dome is another two (2), and nine (9) building mounted signs for a total of thirteen (13). Mr. Beagelman came back up to the microphone and said they probably wouldn’t be able to do this site if they weren’t allowed to do the signage because the product shots are how people know what the product is all about. Member Covelli said, since the business is closed four months out of the year would the applicant consider the product signs being removed during the prolonged period of time the business is closed? The representatives from Rita’s both said that could be done and during the winter months when the business is closed and actually those signs are often taken down due to the inclement weather.

RECESSED AT 10:20 P.M.

RECONVENED AT 10:30 P.M.: All members present as before.

Atty. Weiner asked Eng. Darmofalski if he had any issues with Eng. Gregor’s letter of March 7, 2003. Eng. Darmofalski said he has no problem with complying with the issues and has attempted to answer some of the questions that were raised and has no problems modifying the map to take care of the dimension that maybe improperly noted or lot number that was incorrect on the Zoning Table and some of the dimensions like the overall height of the signs. Eng. Darmofalski added, that he has no problem with the twelve (12) items in Eng. Gregor’s letter or having the client fix the stop sign and taking care of the dumpster in the proper enclosure. Eng. Darmofalski said he would like to address Member Ludwig’s concern about the driveway. Eng. Darmofalski said its an existing facility that has functioned, not necessarily with a use that encouraged a lot of outside activity; and in answer to the question, they can add signs that indicate that there are pedestrians crossing in that area. Eng. Darmofalski added, if the Board feels that the site would be better served by relocating the drop curb to the left and a little bit further down on Furnace Ave., it can be done.

Chairman Dunning brought up the question about the whole canopy being backlit and wanted to know if that creates more of an impact on the sign variance. Eng. Gregor said, according to the sign variance, the only backlit sign that’s permitted under the new ordinance is the freestanding sign. Eng. Darmofalski said, the awning is not lit, its backlit but the backlit is actually serving two purposes; it’s lighting up the back of the sign and also lighting up the service area. Eng. Darmofalski then said, he would respectfully request a variance for allowing the back lighting of the awning.

Member Covelli addressed Chairman Dunning and said, it’s a few minutes to ll:00 P.M. and he believes the Board closes business at ll:00, and he would like to recommend to put forth a motion that the meeting be extended in an attempt to complete this application. Member Covelli said the applicant has an extraordinary circumstance since they have a time restraint with regard to seasonality of the business.

Member Grygus asked the applicant’s professionals if they felt confident that between themselves and the architect that they could nail down the variance for the landing. Atty. Weiner looked over at the architect and the architect indicated it could be done.

Member Smith brought up the point about green on the site. Member Smith said one thing he noticed, since this is part of a site plan approval, a planner hasn’t been brought in for the Board to have a discussion about the site.

MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION: made by Member Covelli, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto and Covelli. Member Smith voted no.

Atty. Weiner asked Eng. Darmofalski, from an engineering point of view as to whether this site works for safety and all the normal engineering issues that he

would be concerned with when doing a site plan. Eng. Darmofalski answered yes and believes it is a safe site and can accommodate the uses. Eng. Darmofalski said, from the planning end of things, they can certainly modify the site as requested and if they want to get together to create a better pedestrian safe site, by modifying the driveways, modifying the dumpster location and eliminating the aisle that’s parallel

to Furnace Ave. and adding some greenery, that’s certainly good planning. Eng. Darmofalski said they will be improving the aesthetics of the property and the building itself, make improvements for some safety issues in the building by bringing it up to code, an improvement for ADA compliance for the building which it doesn’t have, let the retail uses be part of what is allowed in the business zone and make use of vacant property and upgrade it. They feel the variances can be granted because there is no detriment to the zoning plan for Wanaque and no detrimental effects on the public health and safety for the Borough Wanaque and the State of N.J. Eng. Gregor asked Eng. Darmofalski to clarify Item 4 in Eng. Gregor’s report by clarifying the width of the canopy. Eng. Darmofalski said, right now there is a metal façade coming across the front of the Deli and the intention is to carry that through and is about a 3 ft. extension on the façade and then the canopy would be added on to it. Therefore, the scaled dimensions off the architects are correct and the dimensions that are indicated in Item 4 of Eng. Gregor’s report are correct.

Eng. Gregor also mentioned the free standing sign and said the sign was 15’4”high and wanted Eng. Darmofalski to verify that which he did.

Eng. Gregor said Item 9 in his report which says a variance for 23 wall, awning & window mounted signs will now be 15 and Eng. Darmofalski agreed.

Eng. Gregor said on sheet 33 of Front Elevation for Typical Rita’s Location, 7 signs listed at 16”x20” and 2 signs 12”x12” and said they appear to be different size signs and Atty. Weiner said that’s correct.

Eng. Gregor mentioned Item 10 of his report with regards to not knowing the height of the lettering and doesn’t know how to address this issue. Eng. Darmofalski said he doesn’t have the size of the letters for the canopy. Eng. Gregor said he needs this information to see if another variance will be needed.

Mr. Beagelman decided to try and get the construction manager on the phone to see if he knows the size of the letters for the sign.

Eng. Gregor said it should be clearly noted which signs are internally illuminated or backlit and which signs will not be. Also, a note should be added to the drawing indicating that all existing signage will be removed with the proposed signage.

Atty. Weiner told the Board, he was informed that the large Rita’s lettering on the awning sign, that the R is 18” which is the largest and the smaller lettering is 4”. Eng. Gregor said the size of the lettering on the awning is not regulated. Atty. Weiner then said, he doesn’t understand what the issue is? Eng. Darmofalski said the issue that Eng. Gregor is raising is the Deli Works sign in compliance with the width. Atty. Weiner then said the Deli Works is not before the Board. Atty. Weiner asked what seems to be the specific issue with the signs? Atty. Faasse said, is to how these particular signs are varying from what you are permitted to have under the Borough Ordinance.

Atty. Faasse suggested the Board give Atty. Weiner and his experts 10 minutes and come back to the Board specifically with a full list of everything they want tonight. Atty. Weiner agreed and the Board went on with the rest of their business in the meantime.

RECESSED AT 11:25 P.M.

RECONVEND AT 11:35 P.M.: All members present as before.

MOTION TO TABLE THE APPLICATION TO LATER THIS EVENING: made by Member Covelli, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto, Covelli and Smith.

PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #20-02 Daniel & Martha Pizzani, 147 Greenwood Ave., Block 461 Lot 15, Bulk Variance:

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

CORRESPONDENCE: No questions asked.

VOUCHERS: submitted by Atty. Faasse for General Expenditures for Jan., Feb., & Mar. for $750.00, Resolution for Application #20-02 Pizzani for $115.00, for a Grand Total of $865.00.

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

VOUCHERS: submitted by Eng. Gregor for Engineering Services for Jan., Feb., & Mar. for $750.00, Application #19-02 Sheppard for $171.00, Application #20-02 Pizzani for $165.00, for a Grand Total of $1,086.00.

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

MINUTES: from the February 12, 2003 Meeting.

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

ENGINEER’S REPORT: One new application for next month, Application #03-03 Roland Wattenbach for a garage.

DISCUSSION: Atty. Faasse said the only discussion he has is a report on the Kreloff Application. The sale for public lands is scheduled for March 24, 2003 and Judge Riva has scheduled a hearing for April 11, 2003.

Member Grygus brought up the subject of Mr. Zikra’s property being up for Tax Sale. Member Grygus asked if the Board’s Engineer should be proceeding with anything until we know the taxes are paid on this property. Chairman Dunning corrected Member Grygus and said it is not a Tax Sale and is a bankruptcy issue because of a default on his mortgage.

MOTION TO RE-OPEN APPLICATION #01-03 A.G.D., INC. – RITA’S ITALIAN ICE: made by Member Grygus, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto, Covelli and Smith.

Eng. Darmofalski addressed the main variance first which is the turn-around area for the handicap ramp and will make the request that it be 1 ft. The variances for the freestanding sign are size and 50 sq. ft. maximum is required and are asking for 94 sq. ft., their ok with the height because their allowed 16 ft. and they don’t need a variance for that, the width of the sign allowed is 8 ft. maximum and are asking for 10 ft., you need 10 ft. clear from the bottom of the sign and they are 3 ft. clear, and are in compliance with everything else in the ordinance. The building mounted signs two (2) are allowed and they’re requesting fifteen (15). The awning sign, 24 sq. ft. is the maximum allowed and they’re requesting 32 sq. ft. They’re going to request a variance for the size of the window sign because the menu sign for the window is 30% coverage of the window and 15% maximum is allowed, and there are two (2) windows. Eng. Darmofalski said, if you add all the point of purchase signs across the front, the total width is 13.67 ft. and if he does his 15% calculation of the façade of the building, the maximum width allowed would be 9.75 ft. and he added up all those signs together he has a width of 13.67 ft., therefore they will be requesting that variance if you were to add up all those signs together and the difference would be 3.92 ft. Eng. Gregor asked Eng. Darmofalski if he included the two (2) Deli Works signs in the calculations and Eng. Darmofalski said yes he did for the calculations for the number of building mounted signs and not the awning signs and they are in compliance with the letter heights and the width of those signs. Eng. Gregor asked if he included the building mounted signs in the total of 13.67 ft. and Eng. Darmofalski

said he did not. Eng. Gregor said that should be included since they are building mounted signs. Atty. Weiner spoke up and said only one (1) should be included and Eng. Gregor agreed. Therefore, Eng. Darmofalski said he would modify his variance request for the total width of signs. If he added up all the signs on the front, it comes to 21.67 ft. where 9.75 ft. is allowed as a maximum. A variance would also be requested for the backlighting of the awnings where none is permitted.

Charles E. Knapp, AIA, Architect, 31 Post Lane, Riverdale, N.J. came forward and was sworn in by Atty. Faasse. Mr. Knapp said he graduated from the N.J. Institute of Technology in 1989 and has been licensed since 1992 and currently works for a firm in Manhattan and has a private practice and does work under his own seal and license. Mr. Knapp said, based on franchise requirements on the exterior, he carried the canopy around faced to the building and the canopy is based on franchise requirements. In addition to the canopy, there is an existing standing mansard roof that is on the Deli Works side and was also carried around to make the front of the building look uniformed. The ramp is for handicap accessibility both to the serving windows and also to the handicap bathroom that’s in the facility and only for employees not the general public. The occupancies in the building were not properly separated as an existing condition and are currently planning to being properly separated. The storage room in the back is over 100 sq. ft. and under this occupancy, which is “B” Occupancy, they are proposing to sprinkler that space off the domestic water line and there are five (5) heads back there, so they have the sprinkling and the two hour construction based on gypsum wallboard. The interior layouts are based on the Rita’s franchise requirements as well as the equipment. Structurally, they have beefed up the structure for two reasons: the floor was beefed up because of the equipment for Rita’s, and also because of the way the building was used over the years. The structure in and around Rita’s will be properly repaired and reinforced. The building meets BOCA Code Section 1010.3 buildings are allowed one exit in Use Group “B” as long as you have an occupancy of less than 50 and a travel distance less than 75 ft., your allowed to have one exit.

Member Grygus brought up the issue about if ever a fire should break out in this building and someone is in the bathroom they have to be more than 75 ft. from the front door. Member Grygus said, mentioned earlier in the evening, about the deliveries being brought in through only one entry/exit and would they consider putting an additional doorway at the rear that could be used for deliveries without having to come in from the front and to also serve as an alternate egress from the building. Atty. Weiner said that’s definitely feasible and as long as it’s feasible architecturally and the Board requires it, they would have no objection.

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION:

Bob Ferdon, 34 Fredericks St., and is also the Treasurer of the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Ferdon said he appreciates the effort tonight in trying to get this application approved. Mr. Ferdon spends a lot of time outside of Philadelphia and

knows Rita’s very well and know that the signage is very important to them just as 7 Eleven is to them. Mr. Ferdon said, this business will replace the Milk Barn and is the type of place you take the kids afterwards for ice cream. Mr. Ferdon thinks the signage that’s under the porch is being considered excessive, but from a personal standpoint, he lives 100 ft. away from this property and doesn’t think its going to violate what he thinks the new ordinance was trying to do. The signage will be under the canopy and porch and is not something that’s going to be stuck out in front of the street and offensive to the people going by.

CLOSE PUBLIC DISCUSSION:

MOTION TO APPROVE APPLICATION WITH THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES AND CONDITIONS:

Bulk:

1. A front yard setback variance of 19.0’ as the applicant is requesting 1.0’ where 20.0’ is required.

Signage:

1. Free standing sign:

*A total square footage variance of 44 SF as the applicant is requesting 94 SF where 50 SF is permitted.

*A width variance of 2.0’as the applicant is requesting 10.0’ where 8.0’ is permitted.

*A clearance to grade variance of 7.0’ as the applicant is requesting 3.0’ where 10.0’ is required.

2. Building signage:

*A total building mounted sign variance of 13 as the applicant is requesting 15 where 2 are permitted.

*A total width variance of 18.3% (11.92’) as the applicant is requesting a total width of 33.3% (21.67’) of the building façade where 15.0% (9.75’) is permitted.

*A variance to permit the backlighting of the two (2) existing Deli Works signs where none is permitted.

3. Window signage:

*Two variances for window mounted signs of 15% of window area as applicant is requesting 30% coverage where 15% is permitted.

4. Awning signage:

*A variance to permit the backlighting of the awnings where none is permitted.

*A variance for total SF of awning signage of 8.0 SF as the applicant is requesting 32.0 SF where 24.0 SF is permitted.

Use Variance:

*A use variance, to permit the expansion of use and structure in a building with three (3) apartments over stores in a “B” Zone where 2 are permitted.

In addition, the motion to approve is also subject to the following conditions:

*The applicant must obtain approval from the County of Passaic.

*The applicant must address the items of the Board of Engineer’s report dated 3/7/2003 to the satisfaction of the Board Engineer.

*The applicant will add an additional door to the west (rear) of the structure to facilitate the receipt of deliveries to the rear of the structure.

*The applicant will install parking bumpers along the east side of the parking lot to prevent vehicles from impacting the west (rear) side of the structure.

*The applicant agrees to remove the nine (9) “Point of Purchase” signs on the front of the façade during their seasonal (closed) period.

The applicant will satisfy the following conditions with the Board Engineer:

*The applicant will remove the existing curb cut on Furnace Ave. and relocate it to the west side of the parking lot exiting again on to Furnace Ave.

*The applicant will eliminate the current traffic aisle that travels east to west, at the south side of the parking lot. This will be accomplished by relocating one of the current handicap parking stalls to the southeast middle parking lanes along with adding a vegetative area to the southwest middle parking lane area.

*The applicant will relocate a second handicap parking space to the parking space at the southeast corner of the parking lot directly adjacent to the foot of the handicap ramp.

*The applicant will relocate the current dumpster to the northwest corner of the parking lot. This will be done by eliminating one parking space to incorporate the current dumpster and the addition of recycling equipment. It shall be protected with bollards and screened as per the existing on site screening.

The applicant must incorporate all of the requested changes to the plans and have them on file at the Borough Hall at least 10 days prior to the meeting of April 9, 2003.

Motion made by Member Grygus, seconded by Member Covelli, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto, Covelli and Smith.

MOTION TO ADJOURN AT 12:20 P.M.: Carried by a voice vote

______________________________

Gerri Marotta

Secretary to Board of Adjustment