BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT                                                                                  MINUTES

SEPTEMBER 12, 2001                                                                                 

 

REGULAR MEETING

 

OPENING STATEMENT:

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 February, 2001 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 Bruce Grygus, Peter Hoffman, Ihor Kardasz, Don Ludwig, Robert Ricca (Member Ricca came in at 8:25 P.M.), Ted Roberto, Frank Covelli, Attorney Ralph Faasse, Engineer William Gregor (Eng. Gregor came in at 9:00 P.M.) and Building Inspector Jeffrey Brusco.

 

MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Michael Wallace

 

Chairman Dunning asked for a moment of silence with respect to what happened at the World Trade Center on September 11th.

 

Chairman Dunning announced that Eng. Gregor will be arriving late, therefore, the agenda will proceed out of order.

 

PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

 

RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #9-01 Robert & Dorothea Ricca, 33 Mountain Ave., Block 240 Lot 26, Bulk & Use Variance:

 

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

 

CORRESPONDENCE:

Discussed was a letter from Attorney Ralph Faasse, dated August 9, 2001 to Borough Attorney Fiorello in regards to subdividing property located on Humbert Road. (All Members received copies). Also, a letter from Attorney Ralph Faasse, dated August 9, 2001 to Attorney Menelaos Toskos in regards to installing a propane tank on the premises of “Sierra Landscape Design & Garden Center”. (All Members received copies). Chairman Dunning discussed the revised set of  drawings dropped off  by Mr. Zikra (C-Town). Chairman Dunning asked Eng. Gregor, if he could tonight, verify that the drawings dropped off, match the set that Eng. Gregor approved.  Member Grygus added, that Mr. Zikra is taking part of the mountain down, ripping curb islands up in the parking lot and still has no Building Permits. Inspector Brusco said, he doesn’t need Building Permits for that.  Inspector Brusco went on to say, that Mr. Zikra was suppose to be 

working all the site work out with Eng. Gregor. Mr. Zikra told Inspector Brusco, that he called Eng. Gregor four or five times, and an inspection was to be scheduled. Chairman Dunning added, that Eng. Gregor told Mr. Zikra, that the drawings haven’t been approved yet and there were no Building Permits issued. Member Ludwig asked if he needed a permit for the drainage pits. Building Inspector Brusco said he feels this should be Eng. Gregor’s job, which includes all site work.  Inspector Brusco added, that he was hoping tonight the plans could be signed, if everything is in order. Inspector Brusco also said, apparently there’s a problem with what Mr. Zikra tells him and what’s going on as far as site inspections, which Inspector Brusco has nothing to do with.

 

ENGINEER/BUILDING INSPECTOR’S REPORT:

Building Inspector Brusco said he’s working on three new applications: Anthony Fagan, 33 Rockridge Rd., addition, Bill Boesenberg, 1 Green Rd., shed in front yard, and Ruth Kreloff, 17 Skyland Ave., rebuild fire damaged house. Inspector Brusco also told the Board, that people have been inquiring about residential building on the rest of the rock behind C-Town. Mr. Zikra wants to subdivide the property and sell. Chairman Dunning said that the application would be for a Use Variance and would have to come to this Board. Chairman Dunning said he doesn’t think the County would ever permit this.

 

VOUCHERS: submitted by Atty. Faasse for General Expenditures for July, August & Sept. for $750.00, and Resolution on Application #9-01 Ricca for $115.00, for a Grand Total of  $865.00.

 

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

 

MINUTES: from August 8, 2001 Meeting.

 

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

 

RECESSED AT 8:35 P.M.

 

RECONVENED AT 9:00 P.M.: All members present as before.

 

Eng. Gregor came in at 9:00 P.M.

 

APPLICATION #14-01 Ronald Gallo, 2-4 Railroad Ave., Block 236.01 Lot 18, Site Plan, Multi-Family & Use:

Atty. Faasse wanted the record to reflect that there is an Extension Letter good through January 11, 2002, and a letter from Atty. Saunders stating that it’s the applicant’s desire to bifurcate this application.

 

Atty. Richard Saunders stepped forward on behalf of the applicant. Atty. Saunders explained, they will proceed with the Use Variance portion of the application first, and then ask the Board to make a determination at that point, and then depending obviously if passed favorably, then they will proceed with Site Plan issues and Bulk Variance issues.

Atty. Saunders told the Board he did some research on Villa Place, were there is a portion that is not a public street and is owned by the Golden Agers. The Board had asked that the applicant obtain an easement if they were going to use Villa Place for access. Atty. Saunders did speak with the officials of the Golden Age Club and they have sent a letter indicating that they are in favor of granting the applicant the easement and have no objections to using the existing driveway on Villa Place. They just don’t want any additional driveways constructed and also not to use the Golden Agers parking lot or their dumpster. This letter was marked Exhibit A-3.

 

Steven M. Coppa, Registered Architect in the State of N.J., 97 Lackawanna Ave., Totowa, N.J., came forward and was sworn in by Atty. Faasse. Mr. Coppa described the site as it presently exists. Mr. Coppa told the Board, that this was the second time he has appeared before the Board on this application, and his testimony is consistent with the previous application back in 1999. The owner intends on taking the existing building, without any additions or extensions into the existing site or surrounding sites, and convert the lower floor of the existing three-story building, to a residential use. The previous use was a bar/restaurant on the first floor, and on the second and third floors residential units.

Drawings A1 & A2 represent the existing building, plus a proposed floor plan showing the proposed new, two residential units which would be the renovation of the lower floor, and the other two floors remain the same in their current state. The plans also show what exists on the site today and formalize parking spaces, an area for a dumpster, some fencing, boundary perimeters essentially as it exists, along with gas and water lines. The third floor has 13 units, second floor 12 units and are proposing 2 new units on the first floor. Atty. Saunders asked Mr. Coppa if there will be any changes to the footprint of the structure itself, and Mr. Coppa said no. Mr. Coppa proceeded to describe Units 1 and 2 on the first floor. They will have all the accommodations of a standard residence, such as a kitchen, dinning room, bathroom and bedrooms. These units are rather large in size due to the existing area of the building as it is now. There also is an additional space called the landlord’s quarters, but is essentially a rental office. The testimony about this office was given at the last meeting by the owner of the building. Unit 1 has three bedrooms and unit 2 has two bedrooms, and both units have kitchen and dinning room facilities. Both of these units are completely independent of the Boarding House, and there is a common corridor, which leads to the second and third floors. Atty. Saunders asked about fire codes and entrances, and especially the blocking up of the door at the rear of the structure. Mr. Coppa answered, that it is in full compliance, and of course, since this is a 

zoning application, any plans that would go before the Building Department, would have to be approved by the Building Official.  Mr. Coppa added, that he has provided a landscaped area, a dumpster which will be fenced in, and marked out parking areas on paved space. Mr. Coppa also said, of course there would have to be some provision for lighting etc., but this application hasn’t gone that far yet. Atty. Saunders asked about any changes to ingress and egress of the site, and Mr. Coppa said no. They will be coming in off of the area by the Golden Agers Club, which was discussed earlier. The plan calls for 26 parking spaces and a provision for one handicap space.

 

Chairman Dunning questioned the office space on the first floor. It was cleared up by Atty. Saunders that this office space known as the landlord’s quarters, will be similar in nature to the rooms upstairs, and will be occupied only by someone who will be an employee of Mr. Gallo, acting as a superintendent/landlord agent on the premises.

Member Ludwig asked where would the children play, since there is no recreation area planned out, and there is a unit with three bedrooms on the first floor. Mr. Coppa said there is no recreation area planned on the site and is strictly landscaped only for beautification. Member Hoffman asked if there was only one handicap space provided, and Mr. Coppa said yes and that space is Number 26. Member Hoffman also asked about handicap accessibility to the second and third floors and Mr. Coppa said no and there will be no provisions for one. The first floor has no handicap accessibility either, but Mr. Coppa said it could be done with a lift. Atty. Saunders added, that if the ADA requires it, the applicant would have to do it.

 

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION:  None/Closed

 

Michael F. Kauker, Licensed Professional Planner in the State of N.J.,  356 Franklin Ave., Wyckoff, N.J., was sworn in by Atty. Faasse. Mr. Kauker proceeded to describe the existing conditions on the site. Mr. Kauker said the site has an established multi-family/boarding house in addition to an adjacent single family home on the westerly side of the site. The site is located near Railroad Ave. and the right-of-way which is the senior citizen’s building, and is located in the B-Business District.  The use that is now on the site, has been there for a great number of years and pre-dates the Zoning Ordinance, and has existing non-conforming use rights. This particular commercial portion of Wanaque is located in the Midvale section. Mr. Kauker went on to say that Railroad Ave. is very unique because it happens to be the only side street for the entire reach of the B-Business District that has commercial zoning and/or commercial uses beyond the frontage of properties that front on either side of Ringwood Ave. The first floor on this site has been vacant for a period of 2 to3 years. The applicant has conveyed to Mr. Kauker that he has made serious attempts to market the property and tried to rent it for retail purposes. The site is relatively flat, has a paved parking area, which accommodates 26 spaces and does not meet the ordinance which requires 2 spaces per unit.  Atty. Saunders asked Mr. Kauker to describe the existing conditions surrounding the site.  Mr. Kauker said the dominant use surrounding the site is Residential. There are one and two family homes to the north that front on Erie Ave., a single family home across the street, the rear portion of the single family lot which is a garden, is immediately across the street from the subject property. Adjacent from the one family non-conforming residence on the subject property is a two family home and adjacent to that is Flip’s Bar, and there’s another single-family residence between Flip’s Bar and Shippee’s Pharmacy, which also has an apartment above the pharmacy. In a westerly direction towards Ringwood Ave., with the exception of the new Bagel/Fried Chicken Deli which is being constructed in the old bank building and with the exception of the Tanning Salon across the street, to the North and South there are solid examples of existing long standing residential development starting to the South of the Bagel/Fried Chicken Deli is a Town Home Development. On the opposite side of the street are four one and two family residences and adjacent to that to the south is a two to four unit Garden Apartments. Mr. Kauker said the long-standing land use characteristics are such that it is dominantly residential with the exception of the three commercial uses that he mentioned. Mr. Kauker is aware of what the applicant is proposing the addition of three living units, two of which would be larger than the single room. The specific square footage of the two-bedroom unit is 980 sq. ft., which is 30 sq. ft. more than the minimum, and the square footage of the three-bedroom unit is 962 sq. ft. which is also in excess of the ordinance. The single bedroom unit which will be occupied by the manager is 237 sq. ft., which is not consistent with the ordinance, even though the ordinance, for all intense and purposes, is silent as it relates to the rooming house single unit occupancy type room. The 950 sq. ft. standard by ordinance, relates more to established apartment type activities. Obviously, Mr. Kauker said, its not specifically permitted in this zone in the form and/or the location that the applicant is requesting. In the B-Business District, Mr. Kauker went on to say, there are permitted apartments above stores, as long as they are 950 sq. ft. in area. This application is deviating from that, but the application meets the intent of that section and allowable provisions of that section because apartments in fact are permitted generically in business zones. This one bedroom unit is on the first floor, so in effect the applicant is not in accord with that particular regulation. Even though, when you look at the extent of which this application would be deviating from the Master Plan and the Zone Plan, it is very little, because the nature of the deviation is that the unit is on the first floor and not above a store as contemplated in the ordinance. Atty. Saunders asked Mr. Kauker if he reviewed the documents in the Master Plan/Zoning Ordinance, and Mr. Kauker said yes. Atty. Saunders then asked Mr. Kauker if it was his opinion that this application is consistent with those documents, and Mr. Kauker said the application is substantially consistent with the intent of the B-Business designation in the Master Plan and the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to the introduction of residential apartment type activities in the B-Business Zone. The only area where the application deviates from that, and indeed is more regulatory than generic, is the fact they’re on the first floor and not the second floor. Mr. Kauker added, that given the nature of this dwelling, rooming/house/multiple dwelling, it is a unique foundation or frame work within which to apply or ask for the Board’s consideration for additional apartment units. Mr. Kauker said the two are certainly compatible and would compliment one another and bring the building into a singular use rather than a particular kind of a retail or service commercial use which indeed is a permitted use. Mr. Kauker added that trading three apartments for a permitted commercial use, in many respects, particularly for parking, is a lesser intensive use. This would bring the parking, as the applicant proposes, in closer conformity to the ordinance. Mr. Kauker believes that the existing non-conforming status of the parking and the particular variance that they are asking for the Board’s consideration, is reasonable and appropriate as it relates to the nature of the rooming house use. Mr. Kauker said taking the whole building and making it commercial is not practical because the rooming house is kind of unique in the region, its been there a great number of years. The difficulty in marketing this kind of a rental space in Wanaque in this location on Railroad Ave. as oppose to Ringwood Ave., is noticeable because it’s not on the main street. Mr. Kauker said he took a survey and along Ringwood Ave. from Union Ave. all the way up to the top of Midvale, there were 13 storefronts vacant. Mr. Kauker added, that this location is a better location for residential than commercial, and the bar over the years was not a bad use, but the good old bars in Wanaque are slightly on a down trend in terms of the number.  Atty. Saunders asked Mr. Kauker what are the negative criteria and how this application conforms with that. Mr. Kauker believes the application meets the tests, because first of all, the site will be improved with new paving and landscaping. The building is in pretty good condition and the building is not being changed in any way and no one will even know as they drive around the property that the new apartments are even there. Atty. Saunders asked Mr. Kauker if he thought this application would cause any substantial detriment to the public good and Mr. Kauker said no because of the negative criteria and the addition of affordable rental units, which are reasonably needed within the Borough. Atty. Saunders also asked if Mr. Kauker thought this application would cause any substantial detriment or impairment to the intent and purpose of the Zoning Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the Borough of Wanaque. Mr. Kauker said it would not, because the extent of deviation from the Zone Plan and Master Plan are given that apartments are generically permitted is very minimal. Mr. Kauker doesn’t think there is a negative impact created by having apartments on the first floor versus second floor.

 

Eng. Gregor asked Mr. Kauker is it appropriate to provide useable open space for dwelling units that have multiple bedrooms and could very easily be occupied by families with children? Mr. Kauker answered by saying, typically yes, but maybe in his view respectfully not for this small number of apartments. Mr. Kauker said he doesn’t think the need rises to the level of expecting that kind of activity in that kind of or yard area would be necessary for apartment environments on a limited basis. If it were an apartment complex, certainly open space ratio requirements are obviously built into the ordinance. Mr. Kauker said he doesn’t have useable open space for this site, and he doesn’t think it’s

a negative part of this application, because he doesn’t think that the need is that critical.

If there were a great number of units, he would absolutely agree.

 

Member Ludwig said it is unrealistic to think that with a three- bedroom apartment and a two- bedroom apartment that there are not going to be any children and no place for them to play or store bikes etc.

 

Chairman Dunning asked Mr. Kauker, how does the new apartments on the first floor, brings this application into conformity when your giving up its conformity which is retail and putting in residential. Mr. Kauker said if they were proposing a Use Variance for the first floor such as a machine shop that would be introducing a use that’s clearly not contemplated in a B-Business District. Mr. Kauker said, what he has here is a site that is totally non-conforming, because rooming houses are not permitted and the single family home is not permitted. However, by removing the commercial use and adding a residential use that’s permitted, in a slightly different location, they are reducing the degree of non-conformity by a third. Chairman Dunning disagreed and said he thinks they are increasing the non-conformity. Eng. Gregor asked how many rooming house units are currently on the site, and Mr. Kauker said 25. Eng. Gregor continued by asking, that after this application, how many single family dwelling units and how many rooming house units will they have? Atty. Saunders said 2 apartments, 26 rooming house units and plus the house. Eng. Gregor said, they are increasing the non-conformity with an additional rooming house unit, and also going further from the intent of purpose of the ordinance Master Plan by removing a business on the first floor. Eng. Gregor can’t understand how they can say they are reducing the intensity of the use, and he believes they are increasing the intensity. Mr. Kauker said, when you look at the parking implications and realties of the commercial parking demand versus this demand, it is a reduced intensity, because the parking is an intrical part of the nature of activity generated on a given site parking demand.  So from that point of view, they’re reducing the intensity, because the demand for parking is less.

 

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

 

Member Grygus asked Mr. Gallo if he had the documentation he mentioned to the Board at the last meeting, in regards to their attempts to renting the space. Atty. Saunders spoke up and said that Mr. Gallo’s father resides most of the time in Florida and was scheduled to come to New Jersey the day before this meeting, but due to the crisis in the City, he couldn’t get here. Atty. Saunders said, as an officer of the court, he spoke to Mr. Gallo, Sr. this morning and he had an appointment scheduled with Blue Realty this morning as a follow up to the testimony he had given the last time he was here. Blue Realty told Mr. Gallo again, that this property is just not rentable as a commercial space. Atty. Faasse told Atty. Saunders that Member Grygus was referring to Mr. Gallo, Sr. saying that there was advertisement placed. Mr. Gallo, Jr. spoke up and said they were looking for this documentation and the realtor said it might be on some micro- film. Mr. Gallo also said,

they went on the Internet to find it and couldn’t.  Mr. Gallo said they also had advertised

in the Trends.  Member Ludwig said at the last meeting, he wrote down what Mr. Gallo had said about advertising the space.  Member Ludwig said the Board asked Mr. Gallo if

they had listed the space with a realtor and the answer was no and have they advertised for commercial space, and the answer was no. Chairman Dunning said he remembers the

only answered given was that they hung a “For Rent” sign on the building. Mr. Gallo said he thought his father had said they did advertise. Atty. Faasse added, that Mr. Gallo testified that he thought they did advertise and one of the Board Members asked Mr. Gallo if he did, please submit the documentation to the Board.

 

Atty. Saunders summed up by saying, the Board heard Mr. Kauker’s testimony, which Atty. Saunders thinks is the most important testimony with respect to this part of the application which is asking for the Use Variance. Atty. Saunders said, he believes that based upon Mr. Kauker’s testimony and the other testimony heard they meet the criteria for a Use Variance, which in essence is an expansion of a non-conforming use. Atty. Saunders added, that the courts have recognized that these types of variances have also been granted on the basis of hardship, and obvious cases being where a denial of the proposed use would be tantamount to a taking of the property. Where there is an existing building for example, which has in the past been devoted to a non-conforming use and not adaptable to a permitted use in the district; the denial of all the use of the building would be tantamount to a taking of the property. A denial of this type of Use Variance, especially in light of the Board’s previous denial for the expansion of the rooming house, is in fact tantamount to taking this first floor away from the owner of this property. The property has been vacant for 2 ˝ going on 3 years and obviously if there could be a tenant there, it would be in the owner’s best interest to have it occupied. Atty. Saunders said its sitting vacant for a reason and that is simply because its not rentable as a commercial space. Atty. Saunders added, that he believes they have met their burdens of proof with respect to both the positive and negative criteria and asks that the Board look favorable upon this portion of the application.

 

MOTION TO APPROVE THE USE VARIANCE WHICH INCLUDES AN ANCILLARY VARIANCE FROM THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, TO PERMIT THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE STRUCTURE TO BE USED FOR RESIDENTIAL TWO APARTMENT TYPE UNITS AS TESTIFIED TO, ONE TWO BEDROOM ,ONE THREE BEDROOM AND ONE UNIT TO BE USED FOR SLEEPING QUARTERS, SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE GOLDEN AGERS TO ALLOW THAT ENTRANCE OFF OF VILLA PLACE AND IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO RECEIVING SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND THE BOARD WOULD RETAIN JURISDICTION OVER THE SITE PLAN WHICH INCLUDES LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING  AND DRAINAGE: made by Member Covelli. No one made a second. Motion dies for lack of a second.

 

MOTION TO DENY DUE TO APPLICANT HAS FAILED TO CARRY HIS BURDEN WITH RESPECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE USE VARIANCE, THE SPECIAL REASONS AND THE NEGATIVE CRITERIA, ETC.: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Kardasz, Ludwig, Ricca and Covelli.  Member Hoffman voted no and Member Roberto not qualified.

 

VOUCHERS: submitted by Eng. William Gregor for Engineering Services for July, August and September 2001 for $750.00, Application #17-01 Fagan for $150.00, Application #7-00 Zikra for $256.00, for a Grand Total of $1156.00.

 

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

 

Engineer Gregor told the Board he spoke with Mr. Fagan, Application #17-01. Mr. Fagan told Eng. Gregor he couldn’t get in touch with his surveyor to get information on the front yard setback for a pre-existing structure. Mr. Fagan finally got in touch with his surveyor and has the information, which he will forward to Eng. Gregor.

 

MOTION TO ADJOURN: at 11:00 P.M.

 

                                               

                                                                                    ____________________________

                                                                                    Gerri Marotta

                                                                                    Secretary to Board of Adjustment