BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING

BOROUGH OF WANAQUE

MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING

May 3, 2006

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 6^th day of January 2006 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, Peter Hoffman, Don Ludwig, Ed Leonard, Art Koning, Eric Willse, Attorney Ralph Faasse and Engineer William Gregor.

MEMBERS ABSENT: Members Frank Covelli and Ted Roberto.

Application #19-05 Biggio Brothers, Inc., 835 Ringwood Ave., Block 306 Lot 7, Site Plan, Commercial & Use Variance on an In-Active Application Status.

Application #21-05 Mary Frances Fennelly & William Fennelly, 6 Oak St., Block 425 Lots 13 & 14, Bulk Variance. Mr. Fennelly came forward and said he knows a continuance was granted and the paperwork was submitted late and said he wants to stay where he is on the docket for next month. Atty. Faasse said he will stay on the agenda in the same order as tonight.

MOTION TO CARRY APPLICATION TO THE JUNE 7, 2006 MEETING: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Willse, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Application #03-06 Robert Barrett, One Decker Rd., Block 413 Lot 29, Bulk Variance: A letter was received from the Barrett’s requesting the application be carried to the June Meeting due to the fact that the engineer for the contractor has not yet provided his updated license information.

MOTION TO CARRY TO THE JUNE 7, 2006 MEETING: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Willse, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Application #04-06 Ringwood Park Plaza Realty, LLC, (CVS Pharmacy), 1102 Ringwood Avenue, Block 438 Lot 1.01, Commercial Variance:

A letter was received from the applicant’s attorney informing the Board they are withdrawing their application.

MOTION TO DISMISS APPLICATION WITHOUT PREJUDICE: made by Member Grygus, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Application #07-06 Eric J. & Kathleen Miceli, 20 Stephens Lake Road, Bulk Variance: The Board Secretary received a letter from the applicants asking to be carried to the June 7, 2006 Meeting.

MOTION TO CARRY TO THE JUNE 7, 2006 MEETING: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Koning, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Application #09-06 Edward & Gail Marsh Sr., 12 Greenwood Ave., Block 428 Lot 1, Bulk Variance: Eng. Gregor said the survey received was incorrect and did receive a revised survey on April 28^th and didn’t have enough time to review it and recommended that the application be carried to the June 7^th Meeting.

MOTION TO CARRY TO THE JUNE 7, 2006 MEETING: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Willse, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Application #10-06 Nicholas Miuccio, 106 Monroe St., Block 439 Lot 11, Bulk & Use Variances: Eng. Gregor said that the survey was missing and received it on April 28^th and hasn’t had time to review it and there were also some site plan errors and recommended that the application be carried to June 7^th Meeting.

MOTION TO CARRY TO THE JUNE 7^TH MEETING: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Leonard, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse

Application #12-06 Antonino & Maria Staropoli, 1283 Ringwood Ave., Block 464 Lot 27, Use Variance: Eng. Gregor said the survey submitted was incorrect and he did receive a revised survey on April 28^th and also asked the applicant’s engineer to dimension the parking area and hasn’t been done as of yet and recommended that the application be carried to the June 7^th Meeting. Atty. Faasse mentioned to Mrs. Staropoli, since this is a Use Variance she might want to consult with an attorney.

MOTION TO CARRY TO THE JUNE 7^TH MEETING: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Willse, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Application #06-06 Paul Puccio, 45 Grove Street, Block 240 Lots 15 & 18, Minor Subdivision & Bulk Variance:

There was a discussion about whether or not this application is a Minor Subdivision with a Bulk Variance or with a Use Variance. Atty. Faasse said if the application comes under density, which is does, then it becomes a Use Variance because they’ll be creating a sub-standard lot. Attorney Joseph J. Rotolo, 50 Summit Avenue, Hackensack, N.J. came forward on behalf of the applicant who is on his honeymoon.

This property is known as 47-49 Grove Street in Wanaque. The property currently has two structures on it and at one time this property was two separate and distinctive lots, but was merged because of common ownership. What the applicant wants to do is to re-divide the property back into two separate lots. The typography of the property is very difficult it’s a lot of rock and the grade is difficult. The reason that they need the variances is as a result of the re-creation of these lot lines, it will create one undersized lot and there will be Bulk Variances on one of the lots. The other lot will remain conforming and on Lot 15 the structure has been recently renovated and the other structure has not. A review letter was received from Eng. Gregor and Eng. Palus has submitted a revised drawing dated April 21, 2006 and addresses all of the concerns.

Atty. Faasse mentioned that this application is a Minor Subdivision with Bulk Variances and a Use Variance because of the density.

Eng. Mark Palus, 170 Kinnelon Road, Suite 36, Kinnelon, N.J. Licensed P.E. & P.P.

came forward and was sworn in by Atty. Faasse. The revised plan dated April 21, 2006 was marked Exhibit A-1. The plan shows the two structures on the property; to the North is 45 Grove St. and to the South is 49 Grove St. Originally they were two separates lots; Lots 15 & 18. Prior to the merge of the two properties, there were two single-family homes on one lot and no homes on the other lot and Lot 18 having no frontage or access to Grove St. They are proposing a lot line between the two dwellings that would create Lot 15 to the North and Lot 18 to the South. There is no proposed construction as part of this subdivision. This is a single-family zone and there will be a single-family home on each lot.

Atty. Rotolo asked Eng. Palus, as a result of the proposed subdivision if it’s approved, what non-conformities would be created? Eng. Palus said with regard to Lot 18 the proposed conditions are shown on the last column of Zoning Table on the plan; a 20,546 sq. ft. lot area which exceeds the 15,00 sq. ft. requirement, a lot width of 92.06’ where 100 sq. ft. is required with a deficiency of 7.94’ on lot width. The only other variance associated with Lot 18 is the proposed side-yard set back that is 10’ where 20’ is required and therefore are 10’ deficient. With regard to Lot 15 the lot area is 11,229 sq. ft. where 15,000 sq. ft. is proposed and the only way to capture additional area for Lot 15 is to move the proposed dividing line to the south. Lot 15 has a front yard variance of 20.8’ existing non-conforming, the other variance is for lot depth that is 100.59’ where 150’ is required. Eng. Palus added that the location where they chose to put the lot line does not make a significant difference.

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

MOTION TO APPROVE SUBDIVISION, BULK VARIANCE & USE VARIANCE AS DRAWN: made by Member Leonard, seconded by Member Willse, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Hoffman, Leonard, Koning and Willse. Members Grygus and Ludwig voted no.

RECESSED AT 9:07 P.M.

RECONVENED AT 9:19 P.M.

Application #11-05 Cosimo & Teresa Santoro, 1185 Ringwood Ave., Block 448 Lot 8.01, Bulk Variance & Use Variance:

Attorney Carlo J. Coppa, 1167 McBride Ave., Suite 5, West Paterson, N.J. came forward on behalf of the applicants. The applicants wish to construct two additions to the existing structure and convert an existing auto repair to retail space with an additional two dwellings above. Atty. Coppa said the main issue with this application is the parking. Eng. Gerald Gardner, 1141 Greenwood Lake Tpke., Ringwood, N.J. came forward and was sworn in by Atty. Faasse. Eng. Gardner stated that he is a Licensed Professional Engineer.

Atty. Coppa asked Eng. Gardner, based upon his review of Eng. Gregor’s report, what does he see as far as this plan is concerned. Eng. Gardner described the site as commercial property on Ringwood Ave. and on the site plan Eng. Gardner provided is showing the property on the corner of Ringwood Ave. & Laurie Street (a street that doesn’t exist) and is actually the driveway to the ball-field behind the applicant’s property. The proposed parking arrangement whereby all ingress to this property would be through Laurie Street and the egress would be through a curb drop in the front of the building; this parking arrangement was turned down by the County. They didn’t want cars coming in through Laurie Street and exiting from the front without being able to get into the rear. One of Eng. Gregor’s comments was to separate the commercial from the residential parking. There will be residents above the building and the method of doing that was to keep the commercial in the front and let the residents use the rear parking; all exiting through the same curb drop. Using the existing layout, Eng. Gardner provided a parking arrangement and it doesn’t meet any standard. In the rear of the building, there is a short retaining wall with a fence on top separating the ball-field from the parking area. The plan presented tonight, uses Laurie Street which they don’t have permission to use or not and doesn’t know if its on the deed or if its written anywhere that the Mayor & Council ever gave permission to use Laurie Street to access this building; without it, you can’t access the building. Secondly, this application needs 37 parking spaces and they have only provided 27 on this plan. If Eng. Gardner makes the aisles wider, which they may have to do, they will end up with fewer spaces, like 25 or 23. Eng. Gardner said he is here tonight to discuss this situation and see if the Board thinks this is a practical approach before he proceeds with this application. There are apartments upstairs and commercial downstairs and there are many benefits to what they want to do. The commercial properties downstairs have a drainage problem and sometimes water runs right through the buildings. All of this will be addressed along with improving the lighting and the pavement, but the parking is still limited as it has always been and the access on Laurie Street is needed. Eng. Gardner said he really doesn’t know what to do to get permission to use it. Atty. Faasse said the biggest question is, what’s the legal status of Laurie Street? Eng. Gardner said, essentially it’s a flag lot and is the driveway to the ball-field. Eng. Gregor asked Eng. Gardner to add a Key Map with lot numbers that correspond to the property owners within 200 feet to his drawing because it would help for future discussions. Eng. Gregor said he has no problem with the applicant using this street, as long as they have rights to use it. Attorney Coppa is going to check this out because he represented the applicants when they bought this property and they may already have an easement. Eng. Gregor brought up Item #11 in his report dated March 28^th, the vehicle movements within the proposed parking area should be reviewed and revised. Consideration should also be given to vehicle movements for trash vehicles and delivery vehicles. Eng. Gregor went on to say, when they are looking at the overall layout, please take that into consideration. Eng. Gardner said they did already, and the County said they can’t; Eng. Gardner especially wanted the trash pick up to be in from Laurie St. and the County said no.

Chairman Dunning mentioned, if you draw the parking lines correctly and even if it was 9 X 18 (and their not even close at that), the handicap spots have to be 20 feet deep on the far northern end, their not even close to the 25 foot requirement for the driveways. Eng. Gardner responded by saying, it already exists and that’s the issue.

Chairman Dunning said the site doesn’t work the way they have the parking and is non-conforming now and they’re going to add more retail to it, more dwelling units and intensify the parking requirement and delivery requirements and the traffic plan is no where and it doesn’t fly. Eng. Gardner asked if there were any other major concerns from the Board and said he addressed everything in Eng. Gregor’s report except the parking situation.

Member Ludwig asked what the hardship is and what the benefits are to getting two more apartments and one more commercial in this building? Attorney Coppa said he would address that at the next meeting. Member Grygus would also like to see what they’re proposing for signage.

MOTION TO CARRY TO THE JUNE 7^TH MEETING: made by Member Grygus, seconded by Member Willse, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Attorney Coppa signed a 90-Day Extension Letter for the Board.

Application #08-06 William & Peggy Craig, 26 Bergen Ave., Block 312 Lot 14, Bulk Variance:

Scott Heck, son-in-law to the Craig’s came forward on their behalf.

Atty. Faasse advised Mr. Heck that he can’t be the authorized agent because he is not an attorney. Mr. Heck went and called his in-laws to see if they can come to the meeting tonight.

PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #15-05 Theodore Di Laura, 10 Whistler Place, Block 458 Lot 20, Bulk & Use Variance:

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Koning, voting yes were Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse. Chairman Dunning and Member Grygus did not qualify.

RESOLUTION ON APPLICATION #10-05 David Donus, 1019 Ringwood Ave., Block 408 Lot 13, Site Plan, Use Variance & Bulk Variance:

Eng. Gregor asked if any comments or concerns were received from the Fire Department with regard to this application. Atty. Faasse said if he were a Board Member, he would not look to kindly on any comments made by the Fire Department at this late date.

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Grygus, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

Atty. Faasse had a draft of a proposed resolution from Atty. Jerome Vogel for Application #02-06 “Wanaque Landscaping & Garden Supply”. A transcript of that meeting was ordered by Atty. Vogel and hasn’t been received by his office yet. Atty. Faasse informed Atty. Vogel’s office that as soon as the transcript is received the Board would like a copy of it so that it can be sent out to all the members.

APPLICATION #08-06 William & Peggy Craig, 26 Bergen Ave., Block 312 Lot 14, Bulk Variance:

Mr. & Mrs. William Craig arrived and testified they were authorizing their son-in-law to represent them on this application. Scott Heck lives at 10 Apache Trail, Ringwood, N.J. 07456. Mr. Heck said his in-laws would like to put a open covered front porch on their house as some of the other homes in the neighborhood have done. It does require a variance for side yard and front yard according to Eng. Gregor. There is an existing porch with a 4’ overhang and they would like to have a 6’ overhang and 18’ long. Seven photos were submitted and marked Exhibit A-1 and photo #34 is what their porch will look like. This application will need a variance for front yard setback of 21 feet instead of the minimum setback of 30 feet required by ordinance; a variance of 9 feet, and a variance for total side yard setback of 20.47 feet instead of the minimum setback of 35 feet required by ordinance; a variance of 14.53 feet. Mr. Heck said there are some things in Eng. Gregor’s report dated May 3, 2006 that will have to be addressed; storm water management, if he absolutely has to, he would put in a small seepage pit. Atty. Faasse wanted the applicant’s to be aware that their water, gas and sewer lines are under the front porch and if something goes wrong they will have a problem. Eng. Gregor said if they put the down spouts to the left or north onto the lawn that would be a much better situation than dumping on the driveway. Mr. Heck said he would rather put in a trench filled with stone instead of a 6’ seepage pit, which will not work and Eng. Gregor agreed.

OPEN TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None/Closed

MOTION TO APPROVE WITH TWO BULK VARIANCES ONE WILL BE FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK WHERE AS THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING 21 FEET WHERE 30 FEET IS REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE FOR A VARIANCE OF 9 FEET, FOR A TOTAL SIDE YARD SETBACK THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING 20.47 FEET WHERE 35 FEET IS REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE FOR A VARIANCE OF 14.53 FEET WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT WILL INSTALL A TRENCH DRAIN AS TESTIFIED: made by Member Grygus, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

CORRESPONDENCE: Attorney Faasse discussed the letter dated May 3, 2006 from Attorneys Masessa & Cluff’s office who represent Biggio Brothers, Inc. (New Century Gunite) who are in litigation with Henry Platt & Anita Platt. In this letter it stated that Judge Margaret Mary McVeigh would be doing a physical inspection on Thursday, May 11, 2006 at 11:00 A.M. weather permitting and will require that all parties noticed herein be present. Atty. Faasse sent a letter to Judge McVeigh dated May 5, 2006 (all members have a copy) informing her that he and the Board must respectfully decline the request to be present at the physical view of the property on May 11^th. Atty. Faasse explained to Judge McVeigh that the Board is not a party to the within litigation and has not held any public hearings with respect to the Application for Development, as previously filed by Biggio Brothers for this particular property. Atty. Faasse advised Atty. Kates, in a letter dated May 9, 2006 (all members have a copy), that prior to the matter being reactivated and hearings held, the applicant will have to re-notice in accordance with statutory requirements. Atty. Faasse discussed correspondence received from Tom Carroll, Borough Administrator with regard to “Fair and Open” process in selecting professionals, in accordance with N.J.S.A. 19:44A-20.5 et.seq. In this memo, Tom Carroll said he wouldn’t want to change what the Board did back in January 2006 by appointing Atty. Faasse & Eng. Gregor. On February 2, 2006 the Wanaque Board of Adjustment announced through its official Municipal Website that it was soliciting proposals for various professional services under the “Fair and Open” provisions of N.J.S.A. 19:44 A-20.4 et seq; The proposals were received on February 13, 2006 by the Borough Administrator who opened them and read them aloud. Upon review by the Board of Adjustment, it is agreed to make certain appointments under the “Fair and Open” provisions of the law. The professional appointments were made for the year 2006 in accordance with N.J.S.A. 40A:11-5 et seq. and N.J.S.A. 19:44A-20.4 et seq; Board Engineer William Gregor, P.E. & Board Attorney Ralph Faasse, Esq. this resolution will be published in the Suburban Trends as required by law and this Resolution supersedes the Resolution adopted on January 4, 2006 for the appointments.

Atty. Faasse mentioned that the annual retainer has not been adjusted for many years and an increase is well past due. The charge for regular resolutions will be $135.00 and more complicated resolutions will be billed at an hourly rate of $150.00. Atty. Faasse also said an increase of $50.00 a month for meeting attendance, which is now $250.00, would be greatly appreciated. Eng. Gregor added that he agrees with Atty. Faasse that he would appreciate the Board considering raising the monthly retainer and that other Boards do so annually.

MOTION TO ACCEPT RESOLUTION WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT THE RETAINERS WILL B E INCREASED BY $50.00 EACH PER MONTH: made by Member Grygus, seconded by Member Leonard, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse

VOUCHERS: submitted by Atty. Faasse for Resolutions on Applications #10-05 Donus and #15-05 Di Laura for $410.00.

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Ludwig and seconded by Member Koning, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

VOUCHERS: submitted by Eng. Gregor for Engineering Services for Application #21-05 Fennelly for $334.00, Application #08-06 Craig for $187.50, Application #09-06 Marsh for $187.50, Application #10-06 Miuccio for $187.50, Application #12-06 Staropoli for $187.50, for a Grand Total of $1,084.00

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Leonard, seconded by Member Ludwig, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Members Grygus, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse.

MINUTES: from the “Special Meeting” of March 29, 2006 and Regular Meeting of April 5, 2006:

MOTION TO APPROVE: made by Member Ludwig, seconded by Member Willse, voting yes were Chairman Dunning, Hoffman, Ludwig, Leonard, Koning and Willse. Member Grygus did not qualify.

ENGINEER’S REPORT: No new applications to report on.

DISCUSSION: Member Leonard brought up the issue going on with the “Wanaque Manor” Restaurant and the signs that are being on display. Chairman Dunning said the Board has no police powers over that. Atty. Faasse said, as a Board, they do not have any formal position on that situation.

MOTION TO ADJOURN: at 10:49: P.M. with a voice vote.

______________________________

Gerri Marotta

Board of Adjustment Secretary