BOARD
OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
MINUTES
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 8th
day of January 2004 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 Frank Covelli, Peter Hoffman, Don Ludwig
(came in at 9:00 P.M.), John Shutte, Lee Smith, Attorney Ralph Faasse and
Engineer William Gregor.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Members William Grygus, Chris
Demetriou and Ted Roberto.
APPLICATION #09-03 Wanaque Manor Associates, Portion of Properties along Jefferson St. & Boulevard, Block 457 Lot 1 & Block 479 Lots 1 & 2, Amended Preliminary & Final Site Plan & Conditional Use Variance. Authorized Agent is Peter A. Buchsbaum. This application has been carried to the September 1, 2004 Meeting.
Attorney Faasse said he received a letter from Borough Attorney Fiorello giving an update on the purchase of the Wanaque Manor Property at Jefferson St. & Boulevard.
Attorney Faasse announced that the Tokarz, Montanye and Sheehan/Biggs Applications, all involve Use Variances. In order for the Board to favorably approve a Use Variance it takes five (5) affirmative votes. The Board has 5 (five) members present at this time. Attorney Faasse added, that it is easier to get five (5) out of 7 (seven) votes. One member might be coming later on in the evening and the best the applicants can expect are 6 (six) members voting tonight. Therefore, the applicants may wish to request an adjournment to the September Meeting.
Eng. Boswell who is representing the Montanye Application
spoke up and said they would like to wait and see if the sixth member shows up.
Mr. Tokarz asked to be carried to the September 1, 2004
Meeting.
MOTION TO CARRY APPLICATION #02-04 TOKARZ TO THE
SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 MEETING: made by Member Covelli, seconded by Member
Shutte, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Covelli, Hoffman, Shutte and
Smith.
Chairman Dunning asked Mr. Tokarz to sign a 90-Day
Extension Letter.
Angelique Biggs came forward and told the Board she and
Donald Sheehan will wait for the sixth member to show up.
APPLICATION #15-03 David Brett, 11 Mullen Ave., Block 239 Lot 1, Bulk Variance:
Mr. Brett came forward and was sworn in by Atty. Faasse.
Mr. Brett told the Board he would have to downsize his
existing shed to bring it down to under 200 sq. ft. and remove the garage door
and replace it with a shed door. He would like to keep the garage door and
shorten the shed but he doesn’t know if that will be a problem. The main
concern with this shed was the fact people were saying it is a garage and not a
shed but Mr. Brett said it isn’t big enough to be a garage. The drawing shows a
structure of 18’ X 12’ on a concrete patio.
Chairman Dunning told Eng. Gregor, that this property is
a corner lot and therefore has two front yards, so technically the shed needs a
variance just to be in a front yard. Eng. Gregor said there is a new section in
the ordinance that addresses that issue which Eng. Gregor mentions in Item 7 of
his report dated July 2, 2004 which reads as follows: “The proposed accessory
structure will require a variance for setback to a side street lot line of 11.1
feet instead of the minimum of 15 feet required by ordinance”. Atty. Faasse
asked the height of the shed and Mr. Brett said it is 10’4”. Member Covelli
asked the width of the current garage door and Mr. Brett said its 8’ X 7’. Mr.
Brett also told the Board he no longer keeps his Bobcat on his property and his
other equipment and has moved it to a yard. Eng. Gregor wanted to know how Mr.
Brett would be accessing this shed and Mr. Brett said by way of the concrete
patio. A man door will be used in place of the garage overhead door.
Member Hoffman wanted to know how Mr. Brett is going to
make the shed smaller and Mr. Brett said he would be taking it off the garage
side, which is closest to the street.
Atty. Faasse summed up by saying the application is
allowing Mr. Brett to erect a shed without a garage door and less than 200 sq.
ft., height is 10’ 5” where the ordinance allows 10 ft. high, and to allow the
erection of the shed 13.75 feet from the property line and E. Prospect St.
side.
OPEN TO PUBLIC: None/Closed
MOTION TO APPROVE WHICH WILL INCLUDE THE ERECTION OF A SHED IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AT 10.5 FEET HEIGHT WHERE 10 FEET IS ALLOWED WITH NO GARAGE DOOR AND WITH A SETBACK OF 13.75 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE SIDE STREET KNOWN AS E. PROSPECT ST. TO BE USED FOR STORAGE ONLY AND WILL BE BROUGHT DOWN TO LESS THAN 200 SQ. FT. IN SIZE, AND SUBJECT TO
ANY ACTION BY THE BOARD ON REVISED DRAWINGS INCLUDING ALL
NEW INFORMATION WITHIN 30 DAYS: made by Member Covelli, seconded by
Member
Shutte, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Covelli, Hoffman Shutte and
Smith.
APPLICATION #09-04 John F. Hulahan, 51 Rhinesmith Ave., Block 242 Lot 13, Bulk Variance:
Mr.
Hulahan came forward and was sworn in by Atty. Faasse.
Mr.
Hulahan said he is seeking a second floor addition and a two-car garage.
Chairman Dunning asked Mr. Hulahan who prepared the plans and Mr. Hulahan said
he did. A Site & Grading Plan prepared by Donald Meserlain, P.E. dated June
18, 2004, a Property Survey prepared by George Anderson, LS dated October 27,
2003 and Architectural Plans, Elevations & Photographs dated May 14, 2004
submitted by Mr. Hulahan, and Field Survey by John P. Miceli, Land Surveyor and
Gene N. Rotonda, P.E. dated July 15, 2004 were all submitted.
Member
Covelli wanted it to be known on record that he resides on Rhinesmith Ave. and
at the last meeting Engineer Gregor verified that Member Covelli is outside the
200 ft. radius.
Atty.
Faasse said the applicant needs 3 (three) variances, covered front porch will
require a variance for front yard setback of 19.7 feet instead of the minimum
30 feet required by ordinance, the second floor addition will require a
variance for side yard setback of 10.6 feet instead of the minimum 15 feet
required by ordinance, and the second floor addition will require a variance
for total side yard setback of 30.9 feet instead of the minimum 35 feet
required by ordinance.
Eng.
Gregor added that a new paved driveway and curb cut are proposed on the south
side of the dwelling. It is also recommended that the second driveway curb cut
and parking area located on the north side of the dwelling be removed and
additional lawn area be provided. The size and location of the existing
municipal drainage system located in Rhinesmith Ave. has not been shown on the
drawings. The drawing should be revised to include this information. A
stormwater management plan should be provided to address how the increase in
stormwater runoff will be handled.
Chairman
Dunning asked Mr. Hulahan why he wants to expand his house and Mr. Hulahan said
his family is expanding and needs more space. Member Covelli asked if Mr.
Hulahan approached any of his neighbors in order to purchase more property and
Mr. Hulahan said he did not.
Eng.
Gregor added that he noted in Items 2 & 3 in his report that the existing
structure is non-conforming in front yard setback and side yard setback and the
existing shed is non-conforming in rear yard setback. The reason Eng. Gregor is
mentioning this is because 10.6 feet is the setback of the existing structure
to the side lot line and because he’s going up we’re extending that variance
and a new variance is required.
OPEN TO PUBLIC: None/Closed
MOTION TO APPROVE WITH A VARIANCE FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK
OF 10.3 FEET, VARIANCE FOR A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 4.4 FEET, VARIANCE FOR A
TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 4.1 FEET, REVISED PLANS SHOWING REMOVAL OF THE
EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND NEW PAVED DRIVEWAY AND CURB CUT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE
DWELLING, DRAINAGE SYSTEM SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE DRAWING AND A STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN BE PROVIDED: made by Member Smith, seconded by Member Covelli, voting yes were
Chairman Dunning, Members Covelli, Hoffman, Shutte and Smith.
RECESSED AT 9:00 P.M.
RECONVENED AT 9:10 P.M. All members
present as before the break and Member Ludwig came in.
APPLICATION #23-03 Grace Montanye, 13 Orchard St., Block 308 Lot 7 Use Variance:
Eng.
Kevin Boswell came forward on behalf of Ms. Montanye. Eng. Boswell explained to
the Board this is the fourth time he is appearing before the Board. He was here
in May, June & July and carried. Three sets of parking plans have been
submitted, a Key Map identifying the uses of properties within 200 feet of the
subject property, provided photographs of the property, floor plans for both the
first and second floors showing that this is essentially an existing condition
which was utilized by Ms. Montanye’s son. What was created was a legal
mother/daughter with the full knowledge and consent of the Borough
approximately 10 years ago. A separate cooking facility was put upstairs for
Ms. Montanye’s son and was well intentioned and upon the moving out of Ms.
Montanye’s son the situation became an unworkable situation. Historically there
has never been any difficulty with the parking as it currently exists,
nonetheless, the applicant has proposed relocating the fence substantially,
removing the pool in the rear yard to create side by side spaces which have
very adequate areas to circulate on the property. Ms. Montanye is merely trying
to straighten the property out. The problem Ms. Montanye has is that this is an
undersized lot just like many other properties in the area. There are fifteen
(15) properties within 200 feet of this property and of those fifteen (15)
properties only 9 (nine) of them are single family homes, 4 (four) two family
homes also on undersized lots, 2 (two) single family homes on a single property
and there are 4 (four) garden apartments on a single family property. What his
client is proposing is not out of character with that existing neighborhood.
Part of the difficulty is that Ms. Montanye is adjacent to the former New York
and Greenwood Lake Railroad right-of-way. Ms. Montanye would be happy to
restrict any type of access in from
that
area. She’s also attempted to purchase
additional property from the only neighbor she can do it from. A copy of this letter had been submitted to
the
Board
signed by the neighbor indicating she was not interested in selling any portion
of her property to Ms. Montanye. Eng. Boswell mentioned the fact that not a
single neighbor has come to any of the four meetings to speak out against this
application. The proposed two-family home will fully comply with all
appropriate fire and safety codes. The parking situation has been addressed in
detail on the site plan that was submitted on July 17, 2004 following the last
carried meeting.
The
benefits the Borough will derive from this application are as follows: the
access can be restricted from the railroad right-of-way, will be taking a
non-workable property that can be improved to create a working legal two-family
home, a second sanitary sewer connection consistent with the requirements of
the Wanaque Municipal Utilities Authority and this would include the separation
of the sanitary sewer lateral facilities coming out of the home and the payment
of a fee of approximately $7200 which Ms. Montanye would be willing to make to
the Borough as part of legalizing this, the intent and purposes of the
Borough’s Master Plan will not be negatively impacted and in fact this
difficulty/harship that Ms. Montanye has is not self created it is a uniquely
shaped property in both its size and its geometry and its location to the
adjacent former railroad right-of-way. The presence of numerous two-family
homes in the neighborhood also clearly indicates that this property would not
be out of character.
Eng.
Gregor mentioned the plan dated July 7, 2004 and said he reviewed the plan and
he didn’t think it warranted a thorough review and report letter and he decided
to offer to the Board a verbal report. In his opinion, that does function very
adequately for 4 (four) parking units that are required under the ordinance for
a two-family dwelling.
Atty.
Faasse asked Eng. Boswell if he checked with the Wanaque Borough Sewer
Authority with regard to the capacity. Eng. Boswell said he has knowledge of
the capacity only because his firm is doing the engineering for the new
development over there. Member Covelli, who is a member of the Sewer Authority,
said they have no problem with things of this size with regard to Ms.
Montanye’s application and that they only have problems with things of a bigger
nature.
OPEN TO PUBLIC: None/Closed
MOTION TO APPROVE TO A TWO FAMILY STATUS PROVIDING THAT
THE PARKING MEET SPECIFICATIONS ON THE REVISED PARKING LAYOUT OF JULY 7, 2004 AND COMPLY WITH THE WANAQUE
BOROUGH SEWER AUTHORITY REQUIREMENTS: made by Member Covelli, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting
yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Covelli, Hoffman, Ludwig and Shutte. Member
Smith voted no.
APPLICATION #08-04 Donald J. Sheehan & Angelique Biggs, 4 Maple Ave., Block 308 Lot 6, Use & Bulk Variances:
Donald
J. Sheehan & Angelique Biggs came forward and were sworn in by Atty.
Faasse.
A
Variance plan prepared by John Miceli, LS and Gene Rotonda, PE, dated July 15,
2004 was submitted. Also submitted was Proposed Additions and Alterations by
Christopher Greimel, PE, RA, PP dated July 16, 2004 (sheet #1) and April 26,
2004 (sheets 2-6).
Eng.
Gregor went over his report dated July 30, 2004. (All members have copies)
The
applicant proposes to construct a two-story addition and a covered front porch
onto an existing non-conforming two-family structure on a non-conforming lot.
Chairman
Dunning asked the applicant how space 4 gets out of the proposed driveway. Mr.
Sheehan doesn’t think he ever received a revision for that from Mr. Miceli.
Eng. Gregor said there is a note on the drawing that says parking spaces 1 and
2 are in the garage its not labeled on the drawing. Eng. Gregor discussed this
with Mr. Miceli and told him it is permissible to have four (4) parking spaces
with two in the garage and two directly behind it. On the opposite side of the
house, there are two additional parking spaces along the existing concrete
driveway and that is the area Eng. Gregor is recommending be removed and
additional lawn area be provided. Ms. Biggs commented and said the parking on
the west side of the dwelling is for the tenant because if they let the tenant
park on the other side and use the garage they could get access to the
applicants home.
Eng.
Gregor told the applicants to have their engineer show the location of the
seepage tanks that the applicant installed to control the water runoff. Eng.
Gregor asked the applicant about the access from the garage to the house. Mr.
Sheehan explained that his existing backdoor would be inside the garage area
and then someone would be able to get into his house. Member Ludwig asked if
there were two existing driveways because it’s not shown as to what exists on
the plans. Atty. Faasse said before the Board can act on this application they
need more details on the plans. Member Ludwig also wanted to know how much
macadam is being added. Eng. Gregor said on the plans it says driveway to be
extended and paved and Eng. Gregor asked the applicant if he was going to have
concrete with additional paving next to it or is he going to expand the
concrete? Mr. Sheehan said he’s probably going to expand the concrete. Eng.
Gregor said that’s not what the drawing says. Mr. Sheehan was told if you put
concrete on the plans, you have to go with concrete but if you put paving you
can always put concrete down later.
Chairman
Dunning said the tenants are going to park on the west driveway, and the
applicants are going to use the garage and the driveway on the east side.
Chairman Dunning said the drawing has to be straightened out to show the
parking for four parking spaces.
Atty.
Faasse said more importantly is the problem with the existing seepage pit that
is
not shown on the plans and calculations on the proposed seepage pit.
Atty.
Faasse also said he thinks this application will have to be carried to next
month.
Member
Ludwig told the applicants the parking spaces have to be shown in detail and
seepage pits with calculations.
MOTION TO CARRY APPLICATION TO THE SEPTEMBER 1, 2004
MEETING: made by Member
Smith, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members
Covelli, Hoffman, Ludwig, Shutte and Smith.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None
RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #06-04 “Catlas Construction, LLC” K. Douglas Smith, 17 Makemoney Ave., Block 403 Lot 86, Bulk Variance:
MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Covelli,
voting yes were Members Covelli, Ludwig and Shutte. Chairman Dunning voted no,
Members Hoffman and Smith not qualified.
RESOLUTION DENYING APPLICATON #07-04 “Catlas Construction, LLC” K. Douglas Smith, 20 Makemoney Ave., Block 402 Lot 94, Bulk Variance:
MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION DENYING APPLICATION: made by Member Ludwig,
seconded by Member Covelli, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Covelli,
Ludwig. Members Hoffman, Shutte and Smith not qualified.
VOUCHERS: submitted by Atty. Faasse for Resolutions on Application #06-04 “Catlas
Construction, LL.” and Application #07-04 “Catlas Construction, LLC” for a
Grand Total of $250.00.
MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Covelli, voting
yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Covelli, Hoffman, Ludwig, Shutte and
Smith.
VOUCHERS: submitted by Eng. Gregor for Engineering Services rendered on
Application #15-03 Brett for $220.00, Application #06-04 Catlas Construction,
LLC for $275.00, Application #07-04 Catlas Construction, LLC for $110.00,
Application #08-04 Sheehan for $220.00, Application #09-04 Hulahan for $385.00,
for a Grand Total of $1,210.00.
MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member
Ludwig, seconded by Member Shutte, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members
Covelli, Hoffman, Ludwig, Shutte and Smith.
MINUTES: from the July 7, 2004 Meeting:
MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Covelli, voting
yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Covelli, Ludwig, Shutte and Smith. Member Hoffman not qualified.
ENGINEER’S REPORT: Eng. Gregor said he has one new application for “Lakeland
Health Care”. The Board Secretary said this application has not been deemed
complete. Mr. Brusco, the Building Inspector, sent a memo to the Board dated
July 7, 2004 asking the Board to review the application and advise accordingly.
Eng. Gregor mentioned the fact that the survey is not a current survey and
shows a structure on the property that is not there and hasn’t been there for
many years. The Board Secretary asked Eng. Gregor to send a completeness letter
to Mr. Brusco informing him of what is needed to deem this application complete.
Chairman Dunning also asked Eng. Gregor to do a review and tell Mr. Brusco
what’s missing and an idea of the escrow amount due.
DISCUSSION: None
MOTION TO ADJOURN AT 10:45 P.M.: made by Member Ludwig, carried by a voice vote.
______________________________
Gerri
Marotta
Secretary
to Board of Adjustment