Salute to 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 12th
day of January 2005 and a notice 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, Frank Covelli, Peter Hoffman, Don Ludwig (came in at 8:05 P.M.), Ted
Roberto, John Shutte, Attorney Ralph Faasse and Engineer William Gregor.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Chris Demetriou and Lee Smith.
Bulk & Use Variance:
Mr. Tokarz came forward and told the Board he is amending his application and is going to make his house a one family instead of a two family, therefore, a Use Variance is no longer required. Chairman Dunning told Mr. Tokarz he needs to submit plans to Engineer Gregor so he can verify that the footprint agrees to what he already submitted on his grading and site plan which shows all the Bulk Variances that are required. Chairman Dunning told Mr. Tokarz that six copies of the plans would be sufficient. Engineer Gregor read his report dated February 28, 2005. Eng. Gregor said during his review, he noted two additional discrepancies that need to be corrected on the engineering plan. Eng. Gregor asked Mr. Tokarz about the rear cellar entrance that will be enclosed, is that correct? Mr. Tokarz answered yes. The architectural plans do show it as enclosed and the engineering plans need to be revised. Eng. Gregor asked about the existing second floor deck and will it be removed? Mr. Tokarz answered yes. The architectures are correct and the engineering plan needs to be revised. Eng. Gregor also asked about the front door that was on the new addition, is no longer there and no longer need the steps, correct?
Mr. Tokarz agreed. The architectural is correct and the
engineering plan needs to be revised. These architectural plans have a date of
February 2005.
Eng. Gregor told the Board from an engineering point of
view, other than drawing revisions and drawing corrections, and he doesn’t
believe there is any missing information; he has no problem recommending that
the Board act subject to.
OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed
MOTION TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO FOUR VARIANCES; VARIANCE
FOR FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 7 FEET FOR FRONT COVERED PORCH, VARIANCE FOR 2.9 FEET
FOR FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR BUILDING ADDITION, VARIANCE FOR 1.25 FEET FOR SIDE
YARD SETBACK FOR BUILDING ADDITION, VARIANCE FOR 13.35 FEET FOR TOTAL SIDE YARD
SETBACK FOR BUILDING ADDITION, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR REAR DOWNSPOUTS BE PIPED INTO THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM,
ENGINEERING PLANS CHANGED TO CONFORM TO THE ARCHITECT URALS AND SUBJECT TO
REVIEW BY THE BOARD ENGINEER: made by Member Roberto, seconded by Member
Covelli, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Covelli, Hoffman,
Ludwig, Roberto and Shutte.
Application #01-05 Ringwood Park Plaza Realty, LLC
(CVS Pharmacy), 1104 Ringwood Ave., Block 438 Lot 1.01. Bulk Variance
(Commercial) for an electronic sign:
The Board Secretary received a letter dated February 18,
2005 from Attorney Ryan A. Marrone who is representing the applicant. Mr. Marrone in his letter is asking for the
Board to carry this application to the April 6th Meeting, due to the
fact that his client and expert are unable to appear at the March Meeting.
MOTION TO CARRY TO THE APRIL 6TH MEETING:
made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Shutte, voting yes were Chairman
Dunning, Members Grygus, Covelli, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto and Shutte.
APPLICATION #15-04 “MKR” Enterprises/Tree Tavern, 17 Park
St., Block 240 Lot 3, Bulk & Use Variance: Attorney
William Bartel came forward with his client Mr. Mike Ryan who is the applicant.
Atty. Bartel said they were not proceeding with the application tonight, but
understood that the Board needed additional information.
Atty.
Bartel said his client was contemplating paying for a “Special Meeting” because
the architect could not be available for the April Meeting, but now, the
architect is saying he might be available. Atty. Bartel wanted to know if they
could apply tentatively for a “Special Meeting”. Atty. Faasse said there is a problem with that because things
cannot be done tentatively because notice has to be given for a certain meeting
date. Mr. Ryan decided not to schedule a “Special Meeting”.
At
this point in the meeting the applicant, Mr. Ryan was sworn in by Atty. Faasse.
Member
Grygus asked what is the intended use of the building where the proposed
addition is going? Mr. Ryan said he is recently divorced and getting married in
June and he has four children and his fiancé has 2 children and is looking to
increase the space he has for his own personal use which will include
increasing the bedrooms. Right now, Mr. Ryan is living in the front house that
has three small bedrooms
and was in built 1906. There is a current apartment above
the back part of the second building where one of his daughter’s live and
basically he wants to take that whole
apartment and bring it across and be able to spread out
and give his family all the room they want.
The lower section of the structure will be left as is which is a
restaurant and bar and is used occasionally for private parties and Mr. Ryan
owns a liquor license. Mr. Ryan stated that the front house is a single family.
Eng. Gregor stated that one of Wanaque’s Ordinances is that the parking should
be by number of seats in the restaurant, number of stools in the bar and also
because it is a Use Variance, Eng. Gregor would like the square footage of each
of the uses that the applicant is proposing. Eng. Gregor also said, there are
four office rooms shown on the first floor and would like to know what the
intended use of those rooms is, if that use is ancillary or accessory to the
restaurant/bar use or whether it’s a separate use and needs to know the square
footage.
Atty. Bartel stated, as far as the expansion of the
commercial use and when the time comes, the applicant is willing to make a
representation that he will never add a stool or a chair or in any way expand
that use to the restaurant/bar area. Atty. Bartel also added, that when the
roof is redone and just for good construction principles it’s going to add a
little interior space in the ceiling in the existing restaurant, therefore,
technically that is also an expansion of the size.
Chairman Dunning asked Eng. Gregor about the parking
requirements. Eng. Gregor said first he has to find out what it is and once he
has that information, such as how many seats and stools, he can figure it out.
Mr. Ryan said he has 50 seats in the restaurant and there’re 16 stools around
the bar. Atty. Faasse mentioned that the engineer notes that the entire
property is in the Highlands Preservation Area. Atty. Bartel said they are half
way through the application process with the Highlands Council. Mr. Ryan said
he has applied for the exemption and has to wait to see what happens. Mr. Ryan
also addressed Eng. Gregor’s Item 10 in his report dated February 28th
in which he states, “both the existing and proposed driveways and parking areas
are shown as gravel and he recommends all parking and access areas should be
paved”. Mr. Ryan said when he read all the stuff on Highlands, they want less
impervious and Mr. Ryan will pave it if that’s what the Board wants, but it
seems like there is something that might be troublesome because of the
Highlands saying no more pavement or concrete but the Board wants him to do it.
Atty. Bartel said the applicant is piped into a catch basin and there will not
be any run-off problems because all the gutters and leaders go into catch
basins. Eng. Gregor’s recommendation to the Board is to follow the Borough’s
Ordinances and have paved parking areas.
Eng. Gregor suggested that the applicant clarify what the
proposed use for the commercial structure is and also justify the trash
enclosure or storage for that use. Eng. Gregor also said they have to deal with
a lighting plan; landscaping and privacy protection for the adjacent
residential uses and noise consideration.
Eng. Gregor said due to the current layout of the new garage the
existing driveway to the rear, encroaches on the adjacent property and this
encroachment should be removed. Atty. Bartel said both of the driveways exist
and one of the driveways does encroach on one of the neighbors and the neighbor
on the other side of the applicant encroaches an
equal amount on Mr. Ryan. If Mr. Ryan were ever to
deprive that neighbor of the use of it the neighbor wouldn’t have a driveway,
therefore, Mr. Ryan is going to leave that alone and take care of the other
side and get rid of his encroachment as the Board wishes and leave the other
encroachment.
Atty.Faasse told the applicant that any revised plans
have to be submitted more than 10 days before the next meeting, which is April
6, 2005.
OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
John Maiello, 26 Rhinesmith Avenue came forward:
Mr. Maiello wanted the Board to know that anything with the “DEP” such as
impervious surfaces supercedes town ordinances.
CLOSE PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
MOTION TO CARRY APPLICATION TO THE APRIL 6TH
MEETING: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were
Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Covelli, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto and Shutte.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed
RESOLUTIONS:
None
CORRESPONDENCE: No questions asked.
VOUCHERS:
submitted by Atty. Faasse for Professional Services for Jan., Feb. &
March for $750.00.
MOTION TO APPROVE:
made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman
Dunning, Members Grygus, Covelli, Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto and Shutte.
VOUCHERS:
submitted by Eng. Gregor for Engineering Services for Application #02-04
Tokarz for $372.50, Application #08-04 Sheehan for $221.50, Application #15-04
“MKR” Enterprises for $443.00, Engineering Services for Jan., Feb. & March
for $750.00, for a Grand Total of $1,787.00.
MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Ludwig, seconded
by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Covelli,
Hoffman, Ludwig, Roberto and Shutte.
MINUTES: from the February 2, 2005 Meeting.
MOTION TO APPROVE:
made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Shutte, voting yes were Chairman
Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig and Shutte.
Members Covelli and Roberto abstained.
ENGINEER’S REPORT: Eng. Gregor said “CVS” Pharmacy
will be coming and another application on Fourth Avenue.
MOTION TO ADJOURN AT 9:30 P.M.: made by Member
Ludwig, seconded by Member Grygus, carried by a voice vote.
_____________________________
Gerri Marotta
Secretary to Board of Adjustment